Loading...
01-05-21 Agenda and PacketAGENDA  CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2021, 7:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD ELECTRONIC MEETING Due to the COVID­19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of the Planning Commission will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.021, rather than in person at the Planning Commission’s regular meeting place in the Chanhassen City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The Public Hearings portion of the Planning Commission agenda allows for the public to provide comments on those agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for the public to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of two options: EMAIL your comments to the Planning Commission at pccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us.All comments received by 6:00 p.m.on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the Planning Commission meeting. This is the Planning Commission’s preferred method of public participation. WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom Cable Channel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952­227­1630 when the Chairman opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Chairman will take each call in the order received. For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record. A.CALL TO ORDER B.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Consider a Request for a Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­Unit Apartment Building for Senior Living Located at 1361 Lake Drive West (Powers Ridge Apartments) 2.Consider a Request for Setback Variances for the Construction of a Deck on Property Located at 3616 Red Cedar Point 3.Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range on Property Located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) 4.Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Excavation of Existing Wetland Along with Excavated Borrow Being Placed on a Location within the Parcel 5.Consider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non­Conforming Structure by Adding a Second Story to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSIONTUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2021, 7:00 PMCITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDELECTRONIC MEETINGDue to the COVID­19 pandemic, for the next few weeks it is anticipated that some or all members of thePlanning Commission will participate in meetings by telephone and/or web conference pursuant to MinnesotaStatutes, Section 13D.021, rather than in person at the Planning Commission’s regular meeting place in theChanhassen City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, Minnesota.The Public Hearings portion of the Planning Commission agenda allows for the public to provide commentson those agenda items. To help ensure an open public process, we have made accommodations for thepublic to continue to view and participate in public hearings by selecting one of two options:EMAIL your comments to the Planning Commission at pccomments@ci.chanhassen.mn.us.Allcomments received by 6:00 p.m.on the day of the meeting will be included as a part of the PlanningCommission meeting. This is the Planning Commission’s preferred method of public participation.WATCH the meeting live online at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/agendas or on Mediacom CableChannel 107.2. The meeting begins at 7:00 pm. PHONE in your comments at 952­227­1630 whenthe Chairman opens the desired public hearing for comment. The Chairman will take each call in theorderreceived.For all options, you must provide your name and address for the record.A.CALL TO ORDERB.PUBLIC HEARINGS1.Consider a Request for a Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­Unit ApartmentBuilding for Senior Living Located at 1361 Lake Drive West (Powers RidgeApartments)2.Consider a Request for Setback Variances for the Construction of a Deck onProperty Located at 3616 Red Cedar Point3.Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range onProperty Located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone)4.Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Excavation of Existing WetlandAlong with Excavated Borrow Being Placed on a Location within the Parcel5.Consider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non­Conforming Structure by Adding a Second Story to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard C.APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Approval of Planning Commission Minutes dated December 1, 2020 D.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1.City Council Action Update E.ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m. as outlined in the official by­laws.  We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda.  If, however, this does not appear to be possible, the Chairperson will notify those present and offer rescheduling options.  Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. If a constituent or resident sends an email to staff or the Planning Commission, it must be made part of the public record based on State Statute. If a constituent or resident sends an email to the Mayor and City Council, it is up to each individual City Council member and Mayor if they want it to be made part of the public record or not. There is no State Statute that forces the Mayor or City Council to share that information with the public or be made part of the public record. Under State Statute, staff cannot remove comments or letters provided as part of the public input process. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Consider a Request for a Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­Unit Apartment Building for Senior Living Located at 1361 Lake Drive West (Powers Ridge Apartments) Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.1. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­04 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan for a 110­unit, three­story apartment building with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof subject to the Conditions of Approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­unit apartment building for senior living (Lake Place). APPLICANT TPS Holding LLC, 350 Highway 7, Suite 218, Excelsior, MN 55331 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:  Planned Unit Development ­ Residential (PUD­R) LAND USE:Residential High Density ACREAGE:  3.68 acres  DENSITY:  29.89 units per acre (17.15 units per acre over the entire multi­family development)  APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article VIII, Planned Unit Developments Chapter 20, Article XV, High Density Residential Districts, Division 1, “R­12” District Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 9, Design Standards for Multifamily Developments Lake Susan Hills PUD Agreement Standards PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for a Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­Unit Apartment Building forSenior Living Located at 1361 Lake Drive West (Powers Ridge Apartments)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.1.Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­04PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan for a 110­unit, three­story apartmentbuilding with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof subject to the Conditionsof Approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant is requesting Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110­unit apartment building for senior living (LakePlace).APPLICANTTPS Holding LLC, 350 Highway 7, Suite 218, Excelsior, MN 55331SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  Planned Unit Development ­ Residential (PUD­R)LAND USE:Residential High DensityACREAGE:  3.68 acres DENSITY:  29.89 units per acre (17.15 units per acre over the entire multi­family development) APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 20, Article II, Division 3, VariancesChapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan ReviewChapter 20, Article VIII, Planned Unit DevelopmentsChapter 20, Article XV, High Density Residential Districts, Division 1, “R­12” District Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 9, Design Standards for Multifamily Developments Lake Susan Hills PUD Agreement Standards BACKGROUND In 1987, the city approved a PUD agreement for Lake Susan Hills. On March 13, 2000, City Council approved the preliminary plat of 21.34 acres into four lots (SUB­99­14) and Site Plan Review #99­19, approval of Phase I (Building A), 100 units. City Council approved a PUD amendment to allow a 35% hard surface coverage of the multi­family site.On April 10, 2000, City Council approved the Final Plat for Subdivision #99­14 to replat 21.34 acres into one lot and one outlot for Powers Ridge Apartment Homes. On June 26, 2000, City Council granted site plan approval for the construction of the three remaining phases of Powers Ridge Apartment Homes.  The total number of units including Phase I was 344.  Phase I, which included 100 units, was approved on March 13, 2000.  The remaining 244 units and community space constitute the remaining phases. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the site plan for a 110­unit, three­story apartment building with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof subject to the Conditions of Approval of the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation Application for Development Review Variance Narrative Plan Sheets ­ Cover, Removals, Site Plan, Grading, Utilities Plan Sheets ­ Utilities, Civil, Landscaping, SWPPP Plan Sheets ­ SWPPP, Site Context, Context Aerials Plan Sheets­ Site Plan Rendering, Lighting, Floor Plans, Elevations, Renderings, Perspectives, 3rd Flood Deck Option Resident Comment Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 5, 2021 CC DATE: January 25, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021 CASE #: 2021-04 BY: RG, EH, DN, JS, ET, MU SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110-unit apartment building for senior living (Lake Place). LOCATION: Lot 2, Block 1, Powers Ridge Apartment Homes 2nd Addition (PID 25.360020) 1361 Lake Drive West APPLICANT: TPS Holding LLC 350 Highway 7, Suite 218 Excelsior, MN 55331 todd@ador-homes.com PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD-R) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential High Density ACREAGE: 3.68 acres DENSITY: 29.89 units per acre (17.15 units per acre over the entire multi-family development) PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan for a 110-unit, three-story apartment building with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof subject to the Conditions of Approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 2 of 26 LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: 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’s discretion in approving or denying a Variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY Site Plan Review and Variance for a 110-unit, three-story apartment building for senior living (Lake Place). Initially, it was anticipated that a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment would be required. However, the project complies with all the requirements of the PUD Agreement so no amendment is required. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article VIII, Planned Unit Developments Chapter 20, Article XV, High Density Residential Districts, Division 1, “R-12” District Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 9, Design Standards for Multi-family Developments Lake Susan Hills PUD Agreement standards. BACKGROUND In 1987, the city approved a PUD agreement for Lake Susan Hills. The PUD permitted up to 411 single-family units, created three outlots for medium density units and one outlot for high density units. The single-family lots have been platted in nine additions continuously since PUD approval. One of the outlots (Outlot C) designated for medium density units was platted in April 1993 for 24 units. The second outlot (Outlot B), also designated for medium density units was platted on April 10, 1995 for 48 units. The third outlot (Outlot D) was platted in May of 1995 for 48 units. The fourth outlot (Outlot A), designated for high density was platted on April 4, 2000. Outlot A was designated as Multi-Family (High Density Residential). The PUD agreement stated that the development shall provide a minimum of 21.5 acres of high density, multi-family residential units. The total number of dwelling units of high density, multi-family residential property shall not exceed 375, or a density greater than 17.4 units/acre. Except as modified within Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 3 of 26 the agreement, the development of the high density, multi-family residential shall be in accordance with the uses, standards, and requirements of the R-12 Zoning District. On March 13, 2000, City Council approved the preliminary plat of 21.34 acres into 4 lots (SUB-99- 14) and Site Plan Review #99-19, approval of Phase I (Building A), 100 units. City Council approved a PUD amendment to allow a 35% hard surface coverage of the multi-family site. On April 10, 2000, City Council approved the Final Plat for Subdivision #99-14 to replat 21.34 acres into one lot and one outlot for Powers Ridge Apartment Homes. On June 26, 2000, City Council granted site plan approval for the construction of the three remaining phases of Powers Ridge Apartment Homes. The total number of units including Phase I was 344. Phase I, which included 100 units, was approved on March 13, 2000. The remaining 244 units and community space constitute the remaining phases. DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting site plan approval for a 110-unit, three-story apartment building with a variance for a building height of 42 feet. A previous site plan for the parcel was approved for a three-story, 88-unit apartment building. Due to the limitation of the building to seniors, the parking requirements are reduced. This site plan will supersede and replace the previous site plan for this parcel. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 4 of 26 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates this parcel for residential high density use which permits a net density of 8 – 16 units per acre. This density would permit a maximum of 59 units on the site. The city may increase the density permitted with the development through approval of a bonus density. The “bonus” units must meet affordable housing criteria as defined by the city. Developers shall be required to enter into an agreement ensuring the affordability of the units. In a discussion with the City Council last fall, the applicant requested consideration of tax increment financing for the density bonus/affordability for senior housing. In this case, a minimum of 51 of the 110 units must meet the affordable housing criteria of 60% Area Median Income (AMI). The proposed development meets the following Comprehensive Plan policies and goals: Land Use The Comprehensive Plan encourages development within the MUSA, and supports the planned and efficient expansion of urban services to increase the amount of developable land. Designate sufficient land to provide for a wide spectrum of housing. Adequate land should be set aside for medium and high-density land uses. The city will discourage the conversion of these areas to lower density uses in order to ensure that city’s goals of providing a variety of housing options can be met. Development should be commensurate with the ability of the city to provide services. Areas where services are available should be developed before services are extended to new areas. Housing Provide housing opportunities for all residents, consistent with the identified community goals: • Balanced housing supply with housing available for people of all income levels. • Accommodation of all racial and ethnic groups in the purchase, sale, rental and location of housing within the community. • A variety of housing types for all people in all stages of the life cycle. The city will continue to encourage the development of affordable housing; the city may increase the permitted net density of a project by 25 percent. The “bonus” units must meet affordable housing criteria as defined by the city. Developers shall be required to enter into an agreement ensuring the affordability of the units. Subsidized housing should be given equal site and planning considerations to non-subsidized housing units and should not be placed in inferior locations or in areas that do not provide necessary urban services including transit and commercial services. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 5 of 26 The city will continue to provide alternative types of homes including smaller lot homes, townhouses, etc. that will supplement the conventional single-family homes. SITE PLAN Site Constraints Wetland Protection There are no wetlands on the site. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs present on the site. Bluff Creek Primary Zone The property is not located within the Bluff Creek corridor. Shoreland Management The property does not lie within a shoreland overlay district. Floodplain Overlay Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 6 of 26 This property does not lie within a federally designated floodplain. EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY The applicant provided an existing conditions survey which is used to supplement construction plans and site design. Based on review of the existing conditions survey, it appears that the entire extents of the site were not surveyed nor was the area abutting the site. This information is important as it can impact design considerations such as emergency overflow (EOF) paths and the effects of stormwater drainage, e.g. there is a proposed low point just north of the Powers Ridge HOA’s clubhouse that may have an EOF path directed towards it, however it is difficult to discern without adequate survey information. Additionally, public utility lines were not located and surveyed, but were taken from “plans” which were not identified on the survey. Other general requirements of existing conditions survey’s that were not provided are: location of buildings and easements to a distance 150 feet beyond the site’s boundaries; topographic data 150 feet beyond the property boundary, with associated contours; the public right-of-way and the utilities to an extent of at least 150 feet beyond the property line, etc. In order to show the proper extents, the scale of the survey may need to be increased. The applicant shall submit an updated survey upon submittal of final construction plans illustrating these missing features, which are enumerated in the proposed conditions. ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Unit Types and Sizes Unit Type Number Sizes (sq. ft.) Small one bedroom 12 686 - 744 One bedroom 29 747 - 817 One bedroom plus den 27 917 – 1,002 Two bedroom 36 965 – 1,072 Two bedroom plus den 6 985 – 1,157 Total 110 Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 7 of 26 Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 8 of 26 Size Portion Placement The main entry is located on the south side of the building. The main entrance is highlighted with a bronze colored, metal canopy. A pedestrian area with bicycle racks are to the side of the entrance. A one-way drop off area accesses the entrance. Material, Color and Detail The applicant is proposing multiple building materials and is providing a significant amount of building articulation with recessed and projecting building facades, changes in building angles, patios, decks and varied building heights to provide an interesting architectural view. The building materials consist of masonry, either Black Hills Velour brick or cultured stone (grey in either Ashlar Fresco or Winter); three types of horizontal lap siding fiber cement in expresso, gray slate and Artic white; vertical board and batten in artic white; architectural asphalt shingles in Georgetown gray; standing seam metal canopy in dark bronze; and either dark bronze or white window and entrance framing. Height and Roof Design The building height is 42 feet to the midpoint of the highest gable. The roof includes both gable and shed roof elements. The gable roof elements tie this building in with the rest of the Powers Ridge roof architectural scheme. Loading Areas, Refuse Area, etc. A pedestrian drop-off area is provided at the main entrance on the south side of the building. Trash and recycling containers are located within the parking lot level of the building. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 9 of 26 Lighting The applicant is proposing 20 wall-pack units around the building. LED lighting is proposed. All lighting shall be shielded and have 90 degree cut-off angles pursuant to City Code. The applicant is proposing decorative string lighting over the deck area on the north side of the building City Code, section 20-123, requires that parking lot areas be lighted. Sufficient lighting shall be provided to illuminate all areas of the parking lot to provide adequate levels of safety. For parking lot areas, an absolute minimum light level of one-foot candlelight throughout the entire area is recommended. A revised lighting plan with photometrics shall be submitted for city review and approval. Signage The applicant is proposing a four-foot tall by six-foot wide monument sign. The maximum sign display area is 24 square feet. Monument signage may not be located within drainage and utility easements and will need to be moved outside of the easement. A separate sign permit must be submitted for the monument sign. Site Furnishings They are providing patios for outdoor seating/picnic area in the northeast and southwest corners of the building as well as a deck area in the northeast. A pickle ball court is proposed adjacent to the northeast patio area. The developer is connecting the building to the sidewalk system within the Powers Ridge developments as well as providing a sidewalk connection to Lake Drive on the western side of the building. An optional common area recessed deck is shown on the third floor of the building. Construction of the deck is contingent on cost estimate for the alternative and final acceptance by the owner. Bicycle racks are being installed at the main building entrance. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 10 of 26 Landscaping Landscaping requirements for the proposed development include foundation plantings, parking lot plantings, boulevard, and buffer yard plantings. Minimum requirements for vehicular use area landscaping at the proposed development include 4,080 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, three landscaped islands or peninsulas, and 16 trees for the parking lot. The applicant’s proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and plantings is shown in the following table: Required Proposed Vehicular use landscape area 4,080 sq. ft. >4,080 sq. ft. Trees/vehicular use area 16 trees 8 trees Islands or peninsulas/parking lot 6 islands/peninsulas 6 islands/peninsulas Boulevard trees, Lake Drive West 8 trees 0 trees Buffer yard B, Lake Drive West, 490’ 9 over story trees 19 understory trees 29 shrubs 9 over story trees 18 understory trees 29 shrubs The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for landscaping. Additional trees are needed along the approach drives and if space allows, within the parking area. Screening of the lower apartments on the east end of the building is needed. Groupings of shrubs that are large at maturity would provide a buffer from oncoming cars and additional Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 11 of 26 privacy. Boulevard trees are required along Lake Drive West every 30 feet. The applicant will need to add the required trees. More species diversity is needed in the proposed landscape plant schedule. Currently, all of the evergreens proposed are of the same genus, spruce. One of the spruce types proposed is not on the approved tree list for the city. Colorado spruce is highly susceptible to disfiguring needle blights and a poor record of long-term health in Minnesota. The applicant shall revise the allotment of evergreen to reflect the city’s ordinance for tree diversity. The Northwoods Red maple must also be replaced with a more appropriate species for our area. The Red maples have poor growth rates and overall poor health due to alkaline soils in Chanhassen. The PUD agreement states that the applicant shall provide a minimum of $500.00 of landscaping per multi-family unit. This would translate to $55,000. Staff is requiring the applicant provide the city with a cost estimate for the required landscaping at the time of building permit approval. Access, Lot Frontage and Parking Location The city constructed the street and utility improvements for Lake Drive West in 1999. Lake Drive West is listed as a collector street on the city’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan and is also a Municipal State Aid Route. A preliminary traffic study/investigation was performed in conjunction with the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Redmond site (Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th, recorded in 1999) that is located directly north of this proposal. According to the EAW’s preliminary traffic study, development of this area would generate traffic numbers to support the need for a future traffic signal at Lake Drive West and Powers Boulevard. The city’s feasibility report for the Lake Drive West improvements did not take into account the cost of a traffic signal along Powers Boulevard. The city and county will have to coordinate the installation of a traffic signal to accommodate trip generations from the area. While currently there are no capital projects anticipated as of yet for this installation, it was approved with the PUD for this development (#87-3 PUD and #99-19 SPR) that each lot escrow with the city a financial guarantee for a share of the local cost participation for the traffic signal. The amount determined by the county and city at that time was $20/unit. As the current “Lake Place” proposal is for a 110-unit apartment complex, the applicant shall escrow $2,200.00 with the city for the installation of the future traffic signal. Vehicular access to the site was provided from Lake Drive West during the construction of the original build-out of the four-lot subdivision known as “Powers Ridge Apartment Homes” and “Powers Ridge Apartment Homes 2nd Addition” in 2000. The internal, private drives, were designed and built to meet city ordinances for a 7-ton road section, in which cross-access easements were prepared and recorded by the developer over the lots in favor of the property owners. The applicant for “Lake Place”, which is the final phase (Phase 4), is proposing to utilize three of the four constructed access points to the site built out during Phase 1 and 2, as seen below. Access “1” will be removed and the curb line restored, accesses “2” and “4” will be used for accessing above-ground parking and the main entrance to the building, and access “3” Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 12 of 26 will be used for accessing underground parking. It is recommended that the developer re-assess the locations of accesses and traffic circulation in association with the site plan layout. For example, as drivers exit the underground parking (access 3), users will be required to look back and to the left for oncoming traffic which would be traveling down the private serpentine street. This could be resolved with an alternative site design that takes into account traffic circulation for all users (vehicular, pedestrian, bicyclists, etc.) within the site and the entire PUD. During the review of this subdivision in 2000, it was approved that the trail system would extend from Powers Boulevard to the parking lot for Sunset Ridge Park. As such, the developer of Phase 1 extended the bituminous trail along the southerly right-of-way of Lake Drive West from Powers Boulevard to the western property line of Lot 1 (approximately 1000 feet). In order to continue the planned trail route, the applicant will be required to construct the portion of trail along and abutting their northern property line. This would result in the extension of another approximately 415 feet of trail towards Sunset Ridge Park. The lot fronts on Lake Drive West and accesses via shared driveways with the rest of the Powers Ridge development. The internal street system will be privately owned and maintained. The proposed drive aisle widths meet the city’s ordinances. The drive aisles shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide and 26 feet wide when adjacent to parking stalls and built to seven-ton per axle weight pursuant to Ordinance 18-57 o. and 20-1101. Parking lots shall be designed and constructed in accordance with section 20-1118. Cross-access easements will need to be prepared and recorded by the developer over the lots in favor of the property owners. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 13 of 26 The developer shall connect the sidewalks on the eastern side of the building to the sidewalk to Lake Drive and on the western sides of the building to Lake Drive. Sidewalk construction includes the construction of appropriate pedestrian ramps. The applicant provides a drop-off and pick-up area at the main entrance to the building. GRADING The applicant is proposing to construct an at-grade filtration basin on the north portion of the site and an underground filtration system at the southeast portion of the site under drive aisles and parking areas. Through the proposed grading plan, it appears the southern portion of drainage will be routed away from buildings into a series of catch basins and stormwater pipe located in parking areas and directed to the underground filtration basin. The northern portion of the site will be routed via overland flow (sheet flow) away from buildings and directed to the at-grade filtration basin. Roof drains are also proposed which will capture runoff from the roof and route the stormwater to the proposed stormwater BMPs. However, drainage arrows and emergency overflow routes were not provided on the preliminary construction plans and will be required upon submittal of final construction plans for review and approval by staff. A geotechnical report prepared by Paul Gionfriddo, P.E. (license number 23093) with Haugo GeoTechnical Services dated November 23, 2020 was provided by the applicant with the submittal. The report utilized eight soil borings throughout the site to make determinations and provide recommendations for the proposed construction, site grading, pavement design, etc. All recommendations from the geotechnical report must be adhered to, and a geotechnical engineering firm shall be on-site during grading operations. Groundwater was encountered at three of the boring sites with a range of depth from 906.5 feet to 921.5 feet. This is approximately 10.5 feet below the proposed underground parking elevation (GFE of 932.0), however if groundwater is encountered during grading the grades shall be adjusted to maintain a 3 foot separation from the bottom floor elevations and adhering to the commendations of the soil engineer on site. Changes to grades shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. Based on the provided grading plan and narrative it is unclear whether or not the site grading will balance the volume of earthwork necessary to achieve the proposed finished elevations. Should earthwork quantities not balance on site and materials need to be imported or exported, the developer will need to supply the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff. In addition, if material is proposed to be exported to another location in Chanhassen, it should be noted that the properties would be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. Also, if during the course of grading and/or construction any drain tile is discovered, the developer shall notify the City Engineer and will be required to relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed. As currently proposed, the grading plan will require the construction of two retaining walls at the north and south side of the property. The northern retaining wall does not provide call-outs for Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 14 of 26 total height, however it appears to be less than four feet. Updated plans shall call-out the height of this retaining wall; the height of any retaining wall is measured from the top of the wall to the bottom of the footing (not to the bottom of the wall at the top of grade). The southern retaining wall does reach a height of four feet, and therefore shall be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer and shall be constructed of a durable material (smooth face concrete, masonry/mortared, railroad ties and timber are prohibited). Lastly, grading is being proposed within the southerly portion of Lake Drive West right-of-way, which is to the north of the property. While the current grading plan does not appear to have any extraordinary or adverse impacts on the public right-of-way’s drainage, ultimately approval of any work within the public right-of-way is subject to review and approval by the city. Any grading approved within the public right-of-way will require a temporary construction easement be entered into between the applicant and the city. EROSION CONTROL The proposed development will exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). The applicant has provided an ESCP along with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and while overall the plan appears feasible, it is deficient as it does not include all the requirements listed under Sec. 19-145.(a)(2) such as the location of stockpiled materials. As such, the applicant shall update the ESCP and resubmit for review and approval with the submission of the final construction plans. An approved NPDES Construction Permit shall be submitted to the city and all erosion control shall be installed and inspected prior to initiation of site grading activities. To guarantee compliance with the plans, and related remedial work, a cash escrow or letter of credit, satisfactory to the city, shall be furnished to the city before a Notice to Proceed is issued for the development. The escrow amount shall be 110% of the estimated costs of construction for grading, erosion control and stormwater improvements associated with the development. The city may use the escrow or draw upon the letter of credit to reimburse the city for any labor or material costs it incurs in securing compliance with the plan or in implementing the plan. The city shall endeavor to give notice to the owner or developer before proceeding, but such notice shall not be required in an emergency as determined by the city. The assurance shall be maintained until final stabilization and removal of erosion and sediment controls and acceptance of dedicated public streets and public utilities. WETLANDS One wetland exists on site and was delineated in November 2020. This wetland was identified as Type 3, PEM1C shallow marsh wetland located in the western portion of the property. This wetland covered 0.12 acres within the property boundaries. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 15 of 26 In the wetland delineation report, the applicant has stated that the wetland is functionally a stormwater pond and appears to have intentionally or incidentally been created. The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) does not regulate impacts to incidental wetlands. According to the WCA, "Incidental wetlands are wetland areas that the landowner can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the local government unit (LGU), were created in nonwetland areas solely by actions, the purpose of which was not to create the wetland. Incidental wetlands include drainage ditches, impoundments, or excavations constructed in nonwetlands solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, containment of waste material, stormwater retention or detention, drainage, soil and water conservation practices, and water quality improvements and not as part of a wetland replacement process that may, over time, take on wetland characteristics.” The applicant, in the wetland delineation report, provided some cursory evidence that this wetland should be considered incidental, and thus not regulated by WCA. However, the amount of the evidence is insufficient at this time, and the applicant has been made aware that a No-Loss Application that includes more detailed evidence will be required to be submitted to the WCA LGU. This will need to go through the WCA process, which includes a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) review of the No-Loss application. If it is determined that this wetland is in fact incidental, then it would not be regulated by the WCA and would not require mitigation. If it is determined that the wetland is not incidental but in fact a WCA jurisdictional wetland, then a wetland replacement plan may be required if the wetland is proposed to be impacted. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Article VII, Chapter 19 of City Code describes the required stormwater management development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site plans, subdivisions and water management features.” These standards include abstraction of runoff and water quality treatment resulting in the removal of 90% total suspended solids (TSS) and 60% total phosphorous (TP). The applicant has submitted a Stormwater Management Report (SMR) prepared by Matthew R. Pavek, P.E. (license number 44263) with Civil Site Group, dated December 4, 2020. The applicant proposes meeting stormwater requirements through the use of an at-grade filtration system and an underground filtration system near the northwest corner and southeast corner of the site, respectively (see image below). Based on the information provided within the SMR, this appears to be an acceptable approach given the poor draining soils in the area and justifications provided in the SMR. However, as the two filtration systems are being proposed to tie in to public systems, downstream public stormwater BMPs must be analyzed to ensure the increase in stormwater volume can be adequately handled in both the existing conveyance systems and the downstream ponds. The applicant shall update the SMR to include these systems in their modeling and analysis. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 16 of 26 The northwest, at-grade, filtration system is partially located within a public drainage and utility easement and is being proposed to be connected to the public storm system at a catch basin located north of the subject property, within Lake Drive West. The applicant shall adjust the stormwater BMP to be wholly outside any public easements and will be required to upgrade the existing catch basin to a catch basin manhole in order to properly facilitate the connection to city standards. Additionally, the drain tile located within the northwest filtration system will be required to have tracer wire to facilitate proper locating practices of the underground plastic pipe. The southeast, underground, filtration system is being proposed to be connected to the public system at an existing catch basin manhole located south of the subject property, within the private street. City records and as-builts indicate that an existing stub was provided to the site at this catch basin manhole, however the plans do not indicate that the existing stub will be utilized or abandoned. Plans shall be updated accordingly. Additionally, no clean-outs or access manholes were shown on the plans for the underground systems; final construction plans will need to be adjusted accordingly to illustrate their locations. The applicant has indicated that stormwater runoff will be captured via a trench drain prior to entering the underground parking garage. The call-out on the plan states “trench drain shall be pumped into building and interior system.” The applicant shall update the SMR to include narrative regarding this system and indicate the discharge point of stormwater being pumped into the building. Per Sec. 19-44 of City Ordinances, no stormwater shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. In addition, the following comments shall be addressed as the project moves forward: Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 17 of 26 General 1. An approved Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) permit shall be required prior to the start of construction. 2. The plans show an existing wetland on site. Applicant shall confirm all applicable wetland permitting and/or mitigation has been completed prior to commencement of grading operations. 3. Work is shown outside of the property limits. Applicant shall have permission for all work outside of the property limits prior to construction activities. 4. Applicant shall submit rational-method calculations to confirm that the storm sewer is adequately sized for the 10-year rainfall event. This shall also include all downstream public systems that are being proposed to be tied into. Rate Control 1. Proposed peak runoff rates do not exceed existing runoff rates in the 2-, 10-, and 100- year storm events. However, the applicant is showing a slight increase in the runoff rates to Lake Drive West during the snowmelt event. The applicant shall confirm proposed rates are less than existing for all storm events. Water Quality 1. The stormwater narrative notes the system removes greater than 60% TP and 90% TSS while decreasing TP and TSS loading from the proposed site compared to existing conditions, which would indicate water quality requirements are met. Applicant shall submit electronic, native copies of the existing and proposed P8 models for review to confirm. Volume Control 1. Soil borings show HSG D soils which are not suitable for infiltration per RPBCWD requirements. RPBCWD abstraction sequencing for restricted sites must be followed since infiltration is being proposed as prohibited onsite. a. Note that only volume below the drain tile may be counted towards abstraction requirements in the underground filtration basin. 2. Section 3.1 of the Stormwater Management Report states “The total proposed site imperious area is 72,724 SF. The total impervious area directed to the filtration systems is 74,404.” The applicant shall clarify the total existing impervious area, total proposed impervious area, and the amount of impervious area directed to the filtration system. a. The existing and proposed impervious areas noted in the stormwater narrative do not correspond with the impervious areas listed on the SWPPP. This discrepancy shall also be clarified. Plans 1. Upstream inverts into the underground filtration basin are at the same elevation as the outlet (935.25). It is recommended the inlets be higher than the outlet to avoid water backing up into the inlet pipes. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 18 of 26 2. It is unclear where the 6” drain tile from the underground filtration basin will outlet based on the utility plan. The applicant shall clarify and update plans accordingly. 3. The utility plans show a 6” PVC pipe coming into the above-ground filtration system at an elevation (930.0) below the ground elevation of the filtration basin listed on the utility plans (933.0 and below the drain tile invert elevation (931.5). Applicant shall clarify and update the elevations accordingly. a. Note that the grading plans show the basin graded down to a 930. Applicant shall confirm elevations for the basin and confirm HydroCAD modeling is representative of the plans. 4. The utility plan and HydroCAD model show 24” storage pipes being utilized for the underground filtration system however the detail shows 36” pipes. Plans shall be updated to be consistent. 5. A cross section for the proposed above-ground filtration basin shall be provided on updated construction plans. 6. All connections methodologies to existing storm structures shall be noted and provided on updated construction plans. 7. Inlet protection shall be shown for the existing catch basins just east of the construction entrance. Modeling 1. For the larger drainage areas, time of concentration should be calculated rather than using a direct entry of six minutes, or further justification for the use of six minutes in the SMR should be provided. Staff requests that the applicant address each of the comments above and provide a written response by restating each comment and stating how each comment was addressed and include supporting documentation. SANITARY SEWER AND WATER Public sanitary sewer and water are available to adequately serve the site. The public utilities were built-out during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the subdivision and are encumbered by public drainage and utility easements. The applicant is proposing to wet tap an 8-inch combined domestic/fire water service from the municipal 8-inch PVC water main located within the private drive and core-drill into a municipal sewer manhole located within a public drainage and utility easement on Lot 2. The applicant has elected to abandon the existing 8-inch water service lateral installed during the original installation of the public utilities and proposes a new connection via a wet tap. The wet tap method is not approved as a cut and section method (installation of a tee and sleeve) will be required if the applicant ultimately elects to abandon existing water laterals and install a new one. The installation of a tee has become standard city policy when connecting two same size Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 19 of 26 public water main sections together. The method of wet tapping cuts a coupon (section of pipe) the diameter of the pipe. When cutting a pipe of the same diameter into another it leaves less pipe structure to support the connection and can have a higher potential for failure compared to the cut and section method. Updated plans reflecting these changes will be required and shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to issuance of a notice to proceed. Depending on the tap location, this may require coordination with Public Works Utility Department for the isolation of the main along with the applicant’s contractor coordinating with impacted residents for the water main shutdown. Sanitary sewer is proposed to be had from an existing manhole located within a drainage and utility easement within the property to be developed. The method of core-drilling into the manhole is acceptable, however it will also be required to be a booted connection per the city’s standards. All utility installations and connections to public utilities shall be in accordance with the latest edition of the city’s Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Lastly, the proposed location of the development’s monument sign is currently directly over the public sanitary sewer main and within the public drainage and utility easement. The sanitary sewer in this location is approximately 16 feet deep. OSHA can require a 1.5H:1V slope depending on soil types, in which a 24-foot wide trench would be required to repair/replace this section of sanitary sewer. In order to efficiently and effectively maintain this public utility, the applicant shall relocate the proposed monument sign wholly outside the public drainage utility easement and public right-of-way. Miscellaneous A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. The building is required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems. Structure proximity to property lines (and other buildings) will have an impact on the Code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to: allowable size, protected openings and fire-resistive construction. These requirements will be addressed when complete building and site plans are submitted. Building plans must include a Code analysis that contains the following information: Key Plan, Occupancy group, Type of construction, Allowable height and area, Fire sprinklers, Separated or non-separated, Fire resistive elements (Exterior walls, Bearing walls - exterior or interior, Shaft, Incidental use), Occupant load, Exits required (Common path, Travel distance), Minimum plumbing fixture count. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before building permits will be issued. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 20 of 26 All egress doors on all sides should have a hard surface path that leads from the egress door to the public right-of-way. PARKS & RECREATION The developer shall be responsible for construction of the Lake Drive West trail along the northwest portion of the property traveling approximately 505 feet from the eastern driveway entrance to western driveway entrance. The developer/applicant shall provide design, engineering, construction and testing required of the Lake Drive West trail. All construction documents, including material costs, shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of construction. The trail shall be eight feet or to the current width to match the existing trail, surfaced with asphalt and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed by the city for the cost of the aggregate base and trail surfacing. 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 noted. Labor and installation, design, engineering and testing services are not reimbursable expenses. The PUD for this site requires no trail fees and ½ park fees based on previous agreements for this site. The current rate is $3,800 per dwelling for multi-family/apartment unit and half is credited due to parkland dedication. $1,900 per unit X 110 units = $209,000.00 Total Park Dedication Fees The development paid $166.67 per unit X 88 units = $14,666.96 at the time of subdivision and previous site plan approval. In 2000, at the time of subdivision, 22 units were not included in the park fee calculation and paid for so they will pay the full $1,900 per unit. The developer shall pay a total of $194,333.04 in Park fees prior to the issuance of a building permit. Compliance Table Code Project (Lake Place) Building Height 3 stories 3 stories 35 feet 42 feet (to midpoint of highest gable) Building Setback N - 50' E - 10' N - 59' E - 48' W - 10' S - 25' W - 118' S – 77’ Parking Stalls 128 stalls 155 stalls (One stall per unit enclosed, plus visitor parking of one stall per four units) Includes ten stalls for the community building. Parking Setback N - 50' E - 0' N - na E - 0 W - 0' S - 0' W - 50' S - 3' Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 21 of 26 Hard Surface Coverage 35% @ 58% @ over the 21.34 acre multi-family development total hard cover is 7.5 acres Lot Area 3.68 acres 3.68 acres RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the site plan for a 110-unit, three-story apartment building with a variance for the building height to allow 42 feet to the midpoint of the roof subject to the following conditions: Building 1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 2. Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 3. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review 4. The building is required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems. 5. Structure proximity to property lines (and other buildings) will have an impact on the Code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to allowable size, protected openings and fire-resistive construction. These requirements will be addressed when complete building and site plans are submitted. 6. Building plans must include a code analysis that contains the following information: Key Plan, Occupancy group, Type of construction, Allowable height and area, Fire sprinklers, Separated or non-separated, Fire resistive elements (Exterior walls, Bearing walls - exterior or interior, Shaft, Incidental use), Occupant load, Exits required (Common path, Travel distance), Minimum plumbing fixture count. 7. Retaining walls more than four-feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 8. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before building permits will be issued. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 22 of 26 Engineering and Water Resources 1. The applicant shall submit an updated existing conditions survey upon submittal of final construction plans with the following updates: a. The location of a second benchmark (top nut of second hydrant); b. Utility locations primarily based off GSOC locates and/or any as-built information available (clarify “Per Plans” or the “source information”); c. Existing sanitary manholes shall utilize city nomenclature; d. Show extents up to 150 feet beyond site’s boundary which are to include utility lines, easements, right-of-way, spot elevations, contours, etc.; 2. The applicant shall escrow $2,200.00 with the city as a financial guarantee for a share of the local cost participation based on traffic generated from the site for a future traffic signal at the intersection of Lake Drive West and Powers Boulevard. The cost of the traffic signal is based upon a figure of $20 per unit. 3. Drainage arrows and emergency overflow routes shall be illustrated on updated construction plans for review and approval by the city prior to issuance of a Notice to Proceed. 4. A geotechnical engineering shall be on-site during grading operations. If groundwater is encountered during grading, grades shall be adjusted to maintain a three foot separation from the bottom floor elevation and adhering to the recommendations of the soil engineer on site. Changes to grades shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. 5. The applicant shall supply the city with a detailed haul route for review and approval by staff for materials imported to or exported from the site. If the material is proposed to be removed off site to another location in Chanhassen, that property owner will be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the city. 6. During the course of grading and/or construction if any drain tile is discovered, the developer shall notify the City Engineer and shall relocate or abandon the drain tile as directed. 7. All retaining walls exceeding four feet in height shall have plans and details prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect prior to issuance of building permits. 8. Any grading approved within the public right-of-way shall require the execution of a temporary construction easement between the applicant and the city. 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, Carver County, Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 23 of 26 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers, etc. and comply with their conditions of approval. 10. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of site plan approval. This shall include, but is not limited to, 110% of the estimated costs of construction for grading, erosion control and stormwater improvements associated with the development. 11. The Stormwater Management Report and modeling shall be updated to include analysis of downstream public conveyance and stormwater BMPs that are being proposed to be connected to in order to ensure they will adequately function with the increase in stormwater volumes. 12. The applicant shall adjust stormwater basins to be wholly outside any public easements. 13. The existing catch basin proposed to be connected to within Lake Drive West shall be removed and a new catch basin manhole constructed in order to properly facilitate the connection to city standards. A temporary traffic control plan will be required in association with this work. 14. Drain tile located within the northwest filtration system are required to have tracer wire, plans shall be updated accordingly. 15. The applicant shall update the Stormwater Management Report to include narrative regarding the trench drain system near the underground parking entrance and indicate the discharge point of stormwater being pumped into the building. Per Sec. 19-44 of City Ordinances, no stormwater shall be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. 16. The applicant shall confirm all applicable wetland permitting and/or mitigation has been completed prior to commencement of grading operations. 17. The applicant shall obtain all required permission for work outside of the property limits prior to construction activities. 18. The applicant shall submit rational-method calculations to confirm that the storm sewer is adequately sized for the 10-year rainfall event. This shall also include all downstream public systems that are being proposed to be tied into. 20. The applicant shall confirm proposed rates are less than existing for all storm events, including but not limited to the 10-day snow melt. 21. The applicant shall submit electronic, native copies of the existing and proposed P8 models for review and approval. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 24 of 26 22. The applicant shall clarify the total existing impervious area, total proposed impervious area, and the amount of impervious area directed to the filtration system as the existing and proposed impervious areas noted in the stormwater narrative do not correspond with the impervious areas listed on the SWPPP. 23. The applicant shall clarify where the 6” drain tile from the underground filtration basin will outlet and update plans accordingly. 24. The applicant shall clarify the elevation of the 6” PVC pipe coming into the above- ground filtration system and update the plans accordingly. Note that the grading plans show the basin graded down to a 930. Applicant shall confirm elevations for the basin and confirm HydroCAD modeling is representative of the plans. 25. The utility plan and HydroCAD model show 24” storage pipes being utilized for the underground filtration system however the detail shows 36” pipes. Plans shall be updated to be consistent. 26. A cross section for the proposed above-ground filtration basin shall be provided on updated construction plans. 27. All connections methodologies to existing storm structures shall be noted and provided on updated construction plans. 28. Inlet protection shall be shown for the existing catch basins just east of the construction entrance. 29. The applicant and their engineer shall work with city staff on amending the preliminary construction plans, dated December 4, 2020, prepared by Matthew R. Pavek, PE with CivilSite Group, to fully satisfy staff concerns. Final construction plans will be subject to review and approval by staff. 30. The applicant shall relocate the proposed monument sign wholly outside the public drainage utility easement and public right-of-way. Environmental Resources 1. A total of 16 over story trees shall be located around the parking lot and driveways. 2. Screening through the use of shrubs shall be added to the south side of the building at the west side along the entry drive. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 25 of 26 3. The applicant shall remove Colorado spruce and Northwoods Red maple from the plant schedule. Alternative selection of trees shall meet city ordinance for diversity (30-20-10) and be appropriate for clay, compacted soils. 4. A total of eight over story boulevard trees shall be planted along Lake Drive West outside of the right-of-way. 5. Applicant shall increase understory trees in bufferyard along Lake Drive West to meet minimum requirements. 6. The PUD agreement states that the applicant shall provide a minimum of $500.00 of landscaping per multi-family unit. The applicant shall provide the city with a cost estimate for the required landscaping at the time of building permit approval showing compliance with this requirement. Fire 1. All egress doors on all sides should have a hard surface path that leads from the egress door to the public right-of-way. Parks 1. The developer shall pay $194,333.04 in Park fees with the building permit. 2. The developer shall be responsible for construction of the Lake Drive West trail along the northwest portion of the property. Planning 1. The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement and provide the security required by it prior to receiving a building permit. 2. The developer shall be required to enter into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement ensuring the affordability of the units. 3. A separate sign permit application, review and approval shall be required prior to site sign installation. 4. The developer shall connect the sidewalks on the eastern side of the building to the sidewalk to Lake Drive and on the western sides of the building to Lake Drive. 5. A revised lighting plan with photo metrics shall be submitted for city review and approval. Planning Commission 1361 Lake Drive West – Lake Place January 5, 2021 Page 26 of 26 ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Application for Development Review 3. Variance Narrative 4. Plan Sheets 5. Resident Comment 6. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-04 1361 lake drive w. lake place (powers ridge apt, bldg c)\staff report lake place final.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of TPS Holding LLC for Site Plan approval for a 110-unit, three-story apartment building (Lake Place) with a variance for building height. On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of TPS Holding LLC for site plan approval with a variance to permit a 42-foot building height. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed 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 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development – Residential, PUD-R. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential High Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 2, Block 1, Powers Ridge Apartment Homes 2nd Addition, Carver County, Minnesota 4. Site Plan Review: a. Is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the Comprehensive Plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; Finding: The proposed development complies with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides and the zoning requirements for the site contingent on approval of the height variance. b. Is consistent with site plan division; Finding: The proposed development complies with the Site Plan review requirements of the Chanhassen City Code. c. Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; Finding: The site has been significantly altered by previous uses on the surrounding 2 parcel. The proposed development design is in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed areas. d. Creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; Finding: The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with site features and with existing buildings having a visual relationship to the development. The development will complete some internal pedestrian facilities tying the project together. e. Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; 2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and arrangement and amount of parking. Finding: The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, subject to compliance with the conditions of approval. The proposed development improves pedestrian access throughout the area. The proposed building improves the architectural appearance of the area. e. Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and traffic circulation. 5. Variance. Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: 3 a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The proposed variance for the building will be in harmony with the building heights in the rest of the Powers Ridge development. Additionally, this building is located on the north side of the project so it will not impact solar access for the rest of the site. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The property owner is proposing a three-story apartment building similar to the existing development, but updated to be equivalent and competitive with current design, construction and energy standards. The building uses 10-foot first floor and nine-foot second and third floor ceiling heights rather than eight-foot ceilings and provides one- foot six-inch floor trusses for efficient mechanical design. The roof design also adds approximately four feet to the overall building height. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The proposed variance is not due to economic considerations, but due to the existing configuration of the parking lot for the multiple commercial buildings in this area. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The existing parking lot configuration is due to the cross parking and cross access easements in place for this commercial area. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The variance would continue the configuration of the parking lot that is tied in to the adjacent parking lot. f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This condition is not applicable. 6. The planning report #2021-04, dated January 5, 2021, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. 4 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan with a variance for the building height for Lake Place Independent Living apartments subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval contained within the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-04 1361 lake drive w. lake place (powers ridge apt, bldg c)\findings of fact lake place.doc CruMCIINIIASSXI{ APPLICATION FOR OEVELOPMENT REVIEW Submittal Date rt o ""*,"llst5t "" or",,s 6G0ay Review Date rJl+r (Retet lo lhe apptwriato Adicdion Chocklis, lor Dquitg<t subnittdl intormatbn that mud e.rnpany this dpplicatioa) fl Comprehensive Plan Amendment s600 D Subdivision (SUB) E Create 3 lots or lessE Minor MUSA line for tailing on-site sewers..... $100 fl Conditional Use Permit (CUP) ..........$300 Dtr Single-Family Residence $325 M25 E Create over 3 |ots.......................$600 + $15 per lot [_ tots) ! Metes & Bounds (2 lots).................................. $300 E Consolidate Lots..............................................9150 ! Lot Line Adjustnent.........................................$150 E Final P1at......... ..................$700 (lncludes 5450 escrow for attomey costs)' 'Additional escruw may be rcqul€d toa otlrer applicatbns through *le deve{opm€nt contract. D Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 (Addruoml recording fees rnay apply) All Others............................. E lnterim Use Permit (lUP) D ln conjunction with Single.Family Rosidence.. S325n ett ottrers................$425 Rezoning (REZ) A 2lanned Unit El'Minor Amend ! Att omers...... Development (PUD)$750 $100 $500 ment to existing PUD (arianceUen)920O E Sign Plan Review....................... E S e Plan Review (SPR) s1s0 ! Wetland Alteration Permit (wAP) E Administrative.......s100 trtr s150 s275 $100 $500 E CommsrciaUlndustrial Districts*...................... $500 Plus 010 per l,ooo square reet oi uuiioiil;;' -- Ll zoning App€al ( thousand square feet) 'lnclude number of glqlEg emplo!€€s: _D Zoning Ordinance Arnendment (ZOA)................ a 'lnclude number of &q eandoyees: ffi:i*f l?lxmC;;;-:f I/mr",;mrlg*igff ffi'?ffi #'ffi :*'' $200 El Property Owners' List within 500' (city to gene.at€ 6ller Ee-appllcatbn meeting)$tD ...... $3 per address . $50 per document Agreement dloep E-scrow for Recording Documents (check a .tfieondition at Use Perm it Ll Vacation E Metes & Bounds SuMivision (3 docs.) ll that apply)!tr lnterim Use Pormit Variance Easements L easements) E wetand Alteration Permit *'Kli., z33otr Description of Poposal: 1 10 Unit Apartment Building for Affordable and Market rate Senior Prop€rty Address or Location Parcel #: 25636@20 1361 Lake Drive West Total Acreaga:3.68 Present Zoning:Planned Unit Developrnent (PUD)Requested Zoning Planned Unil Developrnent (PUD) Present Land Use Designation . Residential High Densit) Existing Use of Property:Land is currently vacant Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Section 2: Required lnformation lcheck box if saparate narrative is attached. Requested Land Use Desig nation. Residential High Density CO,II UI{ITY DEVELOP ENT DEPART ENT Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (952) 227-1110 E Notification Sign (city to instal and lemove) ................... Site Legal Description: Wetlands Present? E ves Z No Section 3: Properly Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorjzation from the property ownsr to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during th6 appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I havs attached separate documentation of lull legal capacity to file the application. 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 will koep mysetf 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, faasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I cortify that the information and exhibits submitted ars true and conect. Name: TPS Holding LLC Contact: Todd l/. Simning Address 350 Hwy 7, Suite 218 Phone (612) 590-8099 Signature Todd M. Simning Otrrrry rlmd t ldr, M SrmirE Od6: 2@0.10 l,a 13:54 57 SS' PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subiecl only to the right to obiecl at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand hat additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an ostimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. lcertify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and consct. Name: Cell: Fax: Contact: Phone: Cell: Fax: gon164 Matl Pavek Phone: (612) 615-0060 Cell: Fax: Address: City/Statefzip: Email: Signature This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all infomation and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer lo the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specilic ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A detsrmination of completeness of the application shall b€ made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailad to the applicant within l5 business da)€ of application. PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Name: Civil Site Group Address:4931 W 35th Street city/state/zip:St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Mpavek@ civilsitegroup.comEmail Section4: Notification lnformation Who should rrcoivo coples of staff reports? I Property Owner Via: D Email ! tvtaited Paper Copy 'Otter Contact lnfomation: Name: Peter Jesh E appticant Via:E Engineer Via:E Otref Via: Address: City/State/Zip:! Maiteo Paper Copi Email:oeter.iesh@ silve rseekeouitu.mm copy to the city for processing. PRINT FORTI SUBMIT FORi,l Email Email Email tru Mailed Paper Copy Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip: Excelsior, MN 55331 E."11. todd@ ador-homes.mm Dajc. 1ol't4l2o Date: _ INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLIGANT: Complete all nocessary form fi6lds, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with roquired documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital SAVE FORM 7645 Lyndole Avenue Soulh, Suife 100 Minneqpolis, MN 55423 612.86r.9636 Chonhossen lndependent Senior 1361 Loke Drive w, Chonhossen, MN Height Vorionce Description (5) Wdtten descriplion of vorionce requesl. Apprrcont nesponse: Projec, leom hos been odvise d the ollowoble height for the Noject 35' meosured from the firsl floor lo the overoge height of the tollest goble roof . Curently, the proposed building hos o totol height of 1l '-9" when rneosure d in this monner. We ore requesting o voionce lo exceed rhe ollowoble height for this proiect ossocioted with fhe Powers Rrdge Plonned Unit Development. (6) Wdtlen Justlficolion of how requesl complles wlth lhe ffndlngs for gronling o vorlonce (pursuont lo Sectlon 20-58) os follows: o. Vorlonces sholl only be permllled when they ore ln hormony willr lhe generol purpose3 ond lnlent of thls Chopler ond when lhe vorionces ore conslslent wllh lhe comprehenslve plon. Apprrcont Response: 7he vononce request tot oddilionol height is rn homony with the other consrrucled buildings rn lhe previoudy opproved Plonned Unit Developrnenl ond consislen, wilh ,he cornprehensive plon. Ihe proposed srrucrure ris ,hree sron'es toll, with o pitched roof , over on underground potking goroge, which is consislent with the olreody conslructed multi-fomily sfrucrures included in the PUD. b. When lhere ore procticol dlfficultles In complylng wllh lte zoning ordinonce. "Procllcol dltrlcullles," os used ln conneclion wilh lhe grontlng of o vodonce, meons lhotlhe property otvner proposes to use the property in o reosonoble monner not permltled by this Chopter. Proclicol dfficullles include, but ore not llmlled to, inodequote occess to dlrect sunllghl tor solor energy systems. Appricont Response: lhe proctcol difficulties to be considered ore pdmoily reloted to providing o new multi-unit residenliol bu/ding which is equivolent and competitive with cunent design, construction ond energy stondords while olso ochieving City Guidelines. The following notes provide odditionol commentory on ,he regues, for odditional height. o. As lh,s prol'ect is o pad of o PUD, we ore proposing o lhree-story, pitched roof structure, consistent wifh lhe mossing ond roof style of the other l struclures within the PUD. wilh the vorying grodes ond retoining wolls sunounding lhe orher properl,'es, our mossing ond height will be compolible with the other PUD structures. The odded height will not olter the exisling chorocter ot the PUD. b. Chonhossen Potdng dimensiono, stondords req uie o 26' dive lone ond 18' porking slol,t which is 2-4' wider thon other locol munic,po,iries. Ihe odded building wlCfh increoses lhe totol height of the pitched roof by l -2' . c. Our firms Best Practices for energy efficiency include providing on 18" Energy Heel ot pirched roofs,n our climote. Ihis lS" heel exceeds typlbol code minimums bul increoses totol height of pitched roof by 8-12". d. Ihe proposed structure hos o pimory roof pitch of 6:12, with shed roof feotures at o 4:12 pirch. As we do nol design below o 1:12 pitch in ,his climofe. fo ochieve the desired roof Poge 1 ond foeode oi'tculdtion the pimory roof is best des,gned with o 6:12 pitch, which increoses totol height of the pitched root by 3'-0' of height over o 4:12 roof . e. The proiect intends to utilize 18" floor ,russes which ore besl proclice for rnechonicol des,gn, which increoses totol height by 14" over smoller slructure. f . Ceiling Heighh: Ihr3 prolecl infe nds to provide I0' cei,r,ngs of ,he first floor, ond 9' ce,lrngs on levels 2 ond 3. Ihe 9' ceilings ore lorgely considered stondord with new consrruction of fhr's product type. 7he fi'st Floor is des,gned ot l0' due to rhe srgnificont omount of communily omenity spoce on level l. Ihese f,n,shed ceilrng heights, stondord for new construction, increose the totol height by 1', over o proiecl with 8'ceilrngs. Appltcont Response: Ihe vorionce regues, b nol reloled lo economic considerofions. Ihe odditionol building height will octuolly increose the ,orol cost of conslruction bu, is necessory for lhe reosons sfored obove. d. The pllght ot the londowner is due lo clrcumslronces unlque to lfie property nol creoted by the londowner. Apprrcont Response: The vorionce requesf ,! nol creoted by the londowner but rother by the necessity to de,iver o product thot is comporoble ond competitive to other similor product being constructed in the morket, while olso deliveing o thoughtf ul orchitecluro, design which willimprove upon the existing condifions. e. The vorlonce, ll gronled, wlll nol oller lhe essenliol chorocler ol lhe locollty. App,icon, Response: Ihe proposed building is consisfenl wilh lhe exisling slructures ond will not o,ler lhe essenliol chorocter of the locolity. t. Vorlonces rholl be gronled tor eodh shellered conslruclion os defined in Mlnnesolo Stofuler Secllon 216C.06. subdlvbion 14, when ln hormony wllh lhls Chopter. Appriconl Response: Noi Applicoble Poge 2 c. Ihol the purpose of the voriolion is nol bosed upon economic conslderolion3 olone. TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |PROJECT INFO 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 01 Project narrative Site info Project team Project info Address 1361 Lake Drive West Chanhassen, MN 55317 Site Location Developer Architect Tushie Montgomery Architects 7645 Lyndale Avenue South Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55423 Evan Jacobsen, Architect evanj@tmiarchitects.com Building Information Site Regulations Zoning Plate Zoning Current Zoning: PUD Site Area 160,637 S.F (3.68 Acres) Pervious/Impervious Area Total Site Area 160,637 SF Total Building Footprint 41,506 SF Total Non-Building Site Area 119,131 SF Total Impervious Non-Building Area 51,016 SF Total Impervious Area 92,440 SF Total Pervious 61,996 SF Total Landscape Area 61,996 SF Building SF 1st Floor 41,506 SF 2nd Floor 41,506 SF 3rd Floor 41,506 SF Total Building Area 124, 518 SF Lower Level Garage 41,506 SF Total Garage Area 41,506 SF Grand Total 166,024 SF Parking Lower Level Garage 110 Spaces Surface Parking 35 Spaces Total New Parking 145 Spaces Rooms per floor 1st Floor 34 Units 2nd Floor 39 Units 3rd Floor 37 Units Total 110 Units Room Mix Small One Bed 12 Units One Bed 29 Units One Bed Den 27 Units Two Bed 36 Units Two Bed Den 6 Units Total 110 Units Units Site TPS Holding LLC 350 Hwy 7, Suite 218 Excelsior, MN 55331 Todd Simning, President todd@ADOR-HOMES.com Fire Protection System NFPA 13 The developer is proposing an exciting new 3 story independent living apartment building in the city of Chanhassen. The building will be located in a neighborhood that has residential and offices nearby. The building would include 110 apartments of both market rate and affordable. There would also be one level of underground parking totaling 110 spaces. The structure would consist of three levels of wood construction above grade. The proposed exterior materials are brick/stone, lap siding, board and batten siding, and glass. Content Index Civil Sheets C0.0 Title Sheet V1.0 Site Survey C1.0 Removals Plan C2.0 Site Plan C3.0 Grading Plan C4.0 Utility Plan - Water and Sewer C4.1 Utility Plan - Storm Sewer C5.0 Civil Details C5.1 Civil Details C5.2 Civil Details L1.0 Landscape Plan L1.1 Landscape Plan Notes & Details SW1.0 SWPPP - Existing Conditions SW1.1 SWPPP - Proposed Conditions SW1.2 SWPPP - Details SW1.3 SWPPP - Narrative SW1.4 SWPPP - Attachments SW1.5 SWPPP - Attachments Architectural Sheets 01 Project Info 02 Site Context 03 Context Aerials 04 Site Plan 05 Lighting Plan 06 Floor Plan - Garage & 1st 07 Floor Plan - 2nd, 3rd, Roof 08 Elevations 09 Renderings 10 Perspectives 11 3rd Floor - Deck Option Civil Engineer Civil Site Group, PC 4931 W. 35th St, Suite 200 St Loius Park, MN 55416 Matt Pavek, Civil engineer mpavek@civilsitegroup.com Project info Submittal List 2020 12-04 City Submittal PUD Ammendment Room Sizes Range Small One Bed 686 - 744 One Bed 747 - 817 One Bed Den 917 - 1002 Two Bed 965 - 1072 Two Bed Den 985 - 1157 Legal Descriptions Lot 2, Block 1, Powers Ridge Apartment Homes 2nd Addition, Carver County, Minnesota Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:25:54 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET............LAKE PLACECHANHASSEN, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC0.0TITLE SHEETSITE LOCATIONSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE SURVEYV1.0UTILITY PLAN - WATER AND SEWERC4.0ISSUED FOR: CITY SUBMITTALDEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:TPS HOLDING LLC350 HWY 7SUITE 218EXCELSIOR, MN 55331CONTACT: TODD SIMNINGENGINEER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CONTACT: MATT PAVEK612-615-0060SURVEYOR:GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:SWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0C5.0C5.1L1.0CIVIL DETAILSLANDSCAPE PLANSWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0SITE PLANSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3CIVIL DETAILSC1.0REMOVALS PLANC5.2CIVIL DETAILSKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.5HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES2825 CEDAR AVEMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55407CONTACT: JESSE MILLERL1.1LANDSCAPE PLAN NOTES & DETAILSARCHITECT:TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS7645 LYNDALE AVE S, #100MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55423CONTACT: EVAN JACOBSEN612-389-9489ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING, CO.17917 HIGHWAY NO. 7MINNETONKA, MN 55345CONTACT: WAYNE PREUHS952-474-7964ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AREAPPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS,48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIESTHAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.UTILITY PLAN - STORM SEWERC4.1 REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONV1.0SITE SURVEY............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSREMOVE EXISTINGCURB ANDGUTTER, TYP.ALL UNUSED EXISTING WATER SERVICESWITHIN THE PROPOSED LIMITS SHALL BEREMOVED AND ABANDONED BACK TO THEMAIN PER CITY OF CHANHASSEN STANDARDSREMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSPROTECT EXISTINGSIGN AND FENCEREMOVE EXISTINGCURB ANDGUTTER, TYP.REMOVE EX. CATCH BASINAND BULKHEAD LINE.ADJUST CASTING TO FIT INNEW CURB. IF NOT,REMOVE AND REINSTALLPER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING WETLANDREMOVE EXISTINGPAVEMENT AND BASEMATERIAL, TYP.PROTECT EXISTING CATCH BASINPROTECTEXISTING CURBAND WALKREMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASINAND ABANDON LINES, PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASINAND ABANDON LINES, PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGCULVERT AND FLAREDEND, PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.EXISTING HYDRANT TOREMAIN. PROTECT FROMDAMAGEPROTECT EXISTING CATCHBASINSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-3CBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 REMOVALS LEGEND:TREE PROTECTIONREMOVAL OF PAVEMENT AND ALL BASE MATERIAL,INCLUDING BIT., CONC., AND GRAVEL PVMTS.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALLFOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS.TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING ROOTS AND STUMPSCivil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:18 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/2001" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.0REMOVALS PLAN............Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALREMOVE CURB AND GUTTER. IF IN RIGHT-OF-WAY,COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT.REMOVAL NOTES:1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACEANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.2.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN.3.REMOVAL OF MATERIALS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT, STATE AND LOCALREGULATIONS.4.REMOVAL OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.5.EXISTING PAVEMENTS SHALL BE SAWCUT IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR THE NEAREST JOINT FORPROPOSED PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS.6.REMOVED MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF TO A LEGAL OFF-SITE LOCATION AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCALREGULATIONS.7.ABANDON, REMOVAL, CONNECTION, AND PROTECTION NOTES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE. COORDINATEWITH PROPOSED PLANS.8.EXISTING ON-SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THECONTRACT.9.PROPERTY LINES SHALL BE CONSIDERED GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.WORK WITHIN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL INCLUDE STAGING, DEMOLITION AND CLEAN-UP OPERATIONS ASWELL AS CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.10.MINOR WORK OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND PER CITYREQUIREMENTS.11.DAMAGE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LIMITS CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE REPAIRED IN A MANNER APPROVEDBY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.12.PROPOSED WORK (BUILDING AND CIVIL) SHALL NOT DISTURB EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THEDRAWINGS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.13.SITE SECURITY MAY BE NECESSARY AND PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO PROHIBIT VANDALISM, AND THEFT, DURING AND AFTERNORMAL WORK HOURS, THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. SECURITY MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCEWITH THE CITY.14.VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR DELIVERY AND INSPECTION ACCESS DURING NORMAL OPERATINGHOURS. AT NO POINT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT SHALL CIRCULATION OF ADJACENT STREETS BEBLOCKED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.15.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ONUNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, SIGNAGE,BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL REMAIN OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NOROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.16.SHORING FOR BUILDING EXCAVATION MAY BE USED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR AND AS APPROVED BY THEOWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.17.STAGING, DEMOLITION, AND CLEAN-UP AREAS SHALL BE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ANDMAINTAINED IN A MANNER AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.18.ALL EXISTING SITE TRAFFIC/REGULATORY SIGNAGE TO BE INVENTORIED AND IF REMOVED FOR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BERETURNED TO LGU.19.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACEANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.CITY OF CHANHASSEN REMOVAL NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC REMOVAL NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES: B612 C&G, TYP.REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTIONPVMT.STRIPING, TYPACCESSIBLE ROUTEARROW. DO NOT PAINT, FORCODE REVIEW ONLY, TYP.50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK5 STALLS @ 9 ' = 45 .0 '8 STALLS @ 9 ' = 72 .0 '26.0'26.0'NOPARKING PICKLEBALLCOURT, TYP.10' BLACK CHAIN LINK FENCEPLACED 4" OUTSIDE OF PAVINGAREA. COORDINATE INSTALLATIONW/ FENCE MANUFACTURER30.0'60.0 'FILTRATION BASINBOT= 933.00100 YR HWL = 932.25EOF=935.505.0 '5.0 '18.0 '27.0 '5.0'DRIVE ENTRANCE, PERCITY STANDARDS, TYP.4 STALLS = 36.0'8 STALLS @ 9 '= 72.0'8 STALLS @ 9' = 72.0'PED RAMP, SEEDETAILS, TYP.PAVEMENT SAWCUT LINEHEAVYDUTY BIT.PVMT., TYPCROSSWALKSTRIPING, TYPACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPSOVERHANGINGDECK, SEE ARCHFOR DETAILSMATCH EXISTING, TYP.MATCH EXISTING, TYP.MATCH EXISTING, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.MATCH EXISTING, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.MATCH EXISTING, TYP.CONCRETESIDEWALK, TYP.CONCRETE SIDEWALK, TYP.CONCRETE SIDEWALK, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.4' HT. 6' WIDE MONUMENTSIGN, TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILSCONCRETEWALK, TYP.PVMT. STRIPING, TYP.CONCRETESIDEWALK, TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.PVMT. STRIPING, TYP.LIGHT DUTY BIT.PVMT., TYP.MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK, TYP.CONCRETESIDEWALK, TYP.LIGHT DUTY PVMT., TYP.HEAVYDUTY BIT.PVMT., TYPHEAVYDUTY BIT.PVMT., TYPLIGHT DUTYPVMT., TYP.18.0'26.0'26.0'9.0 '9.0 '9.0 '9.0 '18.0'26.0' R5.0'R20.0'R25.0'R63.0'R62.0'R25.0' R20.0' R 4 2 . 9 ' R 2 0 . 7 'R3.0'R3. 0 'R3.0'R231.0'R 3 . 0 'R3.0'R6.0'R5.0'4" WIDE PAVEMENTSTRIPING FOR PICKLEBALL COURT, TYP.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSDECK ON FIRST FLOOR,TYP. SEE ARCH. PLANFOR DETAILSSTEPS FROM DECK DOWNTO GARAGE LEVEL TOPATIO, TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILSCONCRETE PATIO, TYP.ADA PEDSTRIANRAMP, TYP.CROSSWALKSTRIPING, TYP.CROSSWALKSTRIPING, TYPADA PEDSTRIANRAMP, TYP.CONCRETEPATIO, TYP.24" HT. RAISED CEDARPLANTERS, TYP.SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALL,TYP. PROVIDE STND. COLOR,SAMPLES. COORD. WITH ARCH.LANDSCAPE PLANTINGBED, TYP. SEE LANDSCAPEPLAN FOR DETAILSLANDSCAPE PLANTINGBED, TYP. SEE LANDSCAPEPLAN FOR DETAILSREMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTIONR113.0'R113.0'5.0'18.0'26.0'23.0'6.0 '4.4'CONCRETE TRANSFORMER PAD, TYP.21.0'31.0'23.2'16.0'R27.2' R32 . 0 'R30.0'R3.0'R3.0'47.6 '81.4'20.7 '10.0'58.6'117.8'77.0'GARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVEL1ST FLOOR PATIOS,TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILS1ST FLOOR PATIOS,TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILS1ST FLOOR PATIOS,TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILS1ST FLOOR PATIOS,TYP. SEE ARCH.PLANS FOR DETAILS(8) "HITCHING POST" STYLE BIKERACKS (19 SPACES), SURFACEMOUNT PER MANUF. SPECS.BUILDINGCANOPY, TYP.(1) BENCH, INSTALL PERMANUF. SPECS., SHOPDRAWINGS REQUIRED.(3) TABLES, INSTALL PERMANUF. SPECS., SHOPDRAWINGS REQUIRED.VALLEY GUTTER, TYP.NOPARKINGACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPS21.0'6.0'2.0'6.5'33.0 '10.0'14.0'SEGMENTAL RETAINING WALL,TYP. PROVIDE STND. COLOR,SAMPLES. COORD. WITH ARCH.SB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-3CBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:21 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN............SITE AREA TABLE:1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTINGAND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTSFOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION, DUE TO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOOWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVEPRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.6.LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, PRIOR TOINSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.7.CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO BUILDING FOUNDATION ANDSHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATIONFOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS, BENCHES, FLAGPOLES,LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.9.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEE DETAIL.10.CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE.ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES.11.SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND GUTTER TYPE. TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.12.ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.14.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.15.PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.16.ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.17.BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS.18.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.19.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:SITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGS(IF APPLICABLE)CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY (IF APPLICABLE).SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"N1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCONCRETE PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) ASSPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETEDEPTHS, SEE DETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE).SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE& WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DEATIL.HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IFAPPLICABLE). SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FORAGGREGATE BASE & WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEEDETAIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSSPECIALTY PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) - PROVIDE BIDFOR THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS, INCLUDE VARIATIONSOF BASE MATERIAL AND OTHER NECESSARYCOMPONENTS.1. STAMPED & COLORED CONCRETE2. CONCRETE PAVERSMAKERS, COLORS, MODELS, & PATTERN TO BEINCLUDED IN SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.ACCESSIBILITY ARROW (IF APPLICABLE) DO NOTPAINT. 50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACKNOPARKING FILTRATION BASINBOT= 933.00100 YR HWL = 932.25EOF=935.50CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSGARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVELNOPARKINGSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-3AD 100AAD 100BAD 100CAD 100DAD 100EAD 100FAD 100G338 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%AD 100HAD 100IAD 100JAD 100KAD 100L70 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%AD 200AAD 200BAD 200CAD 200DAD 200EAD 200FAD 200GAD 200HAD 200IAD 200JAD 200KAD 200LCBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:27 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN............1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITYLOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.2.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITE PREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION,EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BECOMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS ANDINSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.4.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM(NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS & PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.5.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITYLOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.6.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1% MIN. AND 2% MAX. CROSS SLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS. MAXIMUM SLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:19.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4' IN HEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED ANDENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL ENGINEER. DESIGN DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.10.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISHPROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A FINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THEENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO TOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.11.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREASELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THE SITE.12.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THECONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THE SITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED INEMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS, ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF ISTO BE ESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6INCHES.13.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENTTRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHIN SPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTSWHERE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BEPROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFICOR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BERESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THAN ORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.14.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND/OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THECONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTIONOF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINEWHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. NO TEST ROLL SHALL OCCUR WITHIN 10' OF ANY UNDERGROUND STORMRETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEMS.15. TOLERANCES15.1.THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THEPRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.15.2.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOTBELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.15.3.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THE REQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESSDIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.15.4.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.16.MAINTENANCE16.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION, AND KEEP AREA FREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.16.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TO SPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THECONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD, ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDEDAND MULCHED.16.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OR ADVERSE WEATHER,CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE, AND COMPACT TO REQUIRED DENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSGROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF CHANHASSEN GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TOPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES,DATED 11-23-2020 GROUNDWATER WAS OBSERVED AT ELEVATIONSRANGING FROM 906.40 TO 922.50THE BORINGS & GROUNDWATER ARE AS FOLLOWS:SB-3906.40SB-4911.70SB-5922.50PROPOSED FOOTING DRAIN TILE INVERT ELEVATION = 931.00SPOT GRADE ELEVATION MATCH EXISTINGGRADE BREAK - HIGH POINTS 50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACKNOPARKING FILTRATION BASINBOT= 933.00100 YR HWL = 932.25EOF=935.50CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSGARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVELNOPARKINGSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-38" COMBINED DIPDOMESTIC/FIREWATER SERVICEAND VALVE, STUBTO WITHIN 5' FROMBUILDING, COORD.W/MECH'LPROPOSED GATEVALVE AND VALVE BOXMAKE WET TAPCONNECTION TOEXISTING WATERMAIN, COORD. WITHCITYCONTRACTOR SHALL SAWCUT &REMOVE PUBLIC PVMTS., CURBS, ANDWALKS FOR INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.UPON COMPLETION OF UTILITY WORK,REPLACE ALL MATERIAL, IN KIND, ANDTO CITY STANDARD AND APPROVALREMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY AND CITYSTANDARDSALL UNUSED EXISTING WATERSERVICES WITHIN THE PROPOSEDPROPERTY LIMITS SHALL BE REMOVEDAND ABANDONED BACK TO THE MAINPER CITY CHANHASSEN STANDARDSALL FINAL UTILITY SIZES, MATERIALS,LOCATION, AND CONNECTIONS TO BE VERIFIEDBY A MECHANICAL ENGINEER ANDCOORDINATED WITH CIVIL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.TRENCH DRAINSHALL BEPUMPED INTOBUILDING ANDINTERIORSYSTEMSTUB SANITARY TO 5'FROM BUILDINGIE @ STUB=925.79COORD. W/MECH'L51 LF 6" SCH40SANITARY SERVICE@ 2.00%CONNECT TO EXISTING SAN MHRIM= 938.17EX 8" IE=924.52PROP 6" IE=924.72COORDINATE WITH CITYCBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:32 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.0UTILITY PLAN-WATER AND SEWER............GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:UTILITY LEGEND:CITY OF CHANHASSEN UTILITY NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC UTILITY NOTES.01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLE1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACEANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.2. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONSFROM THE PLANS.4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN ANDSERVICE LINE INSTALLATION" AND "SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITYENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AND THEPROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.5. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED OR PLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE OWNER.6. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) AWWA C151, ASME B16.4, AWWA C110, AWWA C153UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) ASTM D3034 & F679, OR SCH 40 ASTM D1785, 2665, ASTMF794, 1866) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE ASTM F714 & F2306 WITH ASTM D3212 SPEC FITTINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OF FLARED END SECTION.10. UTILITIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THE CONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELYRESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BUILDING LINES. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICALPLANS.11. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALL CATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BESUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS. RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CONNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. HYDRANT EXTENSIONS AREINCIDENTAL.14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATERMAIN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BEREQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTHWATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL.15. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTAL SEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALLUTILITIES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS AND COORDINATED WITH THECITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.17.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SHALL BE CORE-DRILLED.18. COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS.19. COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES WITH ADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITYSTAFF.20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. ALL PAVEMENTCONNECTIONS SHALL BE SAWCUT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BEESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD)AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED.ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUTAPPROVAL BY THE CITY.21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADES WHERE REQUIRED. THEREQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH. STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEETOWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES. COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OFIRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOT IMPACT INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND SUBMIT THESE PLANS TO ENGINEERUPON COMPLETION OF WORK.25.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT. APPROVED RESILIENTRUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, OR OTHERSTRUCTURES.26.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BETESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULES, CHAPTER 4714, SECTION 1109.0. 50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACKNOPARKING FILTRATION BASINBOT= 933.00100 YR HWL = 932.25EOF=935.50CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSGARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVELNOPARKINGSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-38" COMBINED DIPDOMESTIC/FIREWATER SERVICEAND VALVE, STUBTO WITHIN 5' FROMBUILDING, COORD.W/MECH'LPROPOSED GATEVALVE AND VALVE BOXMAKE WET TAPCONNECTION TOEXISTING WATERMAIN, COORD. WITHCITYCONTRACTOR SHALL SAWCUT &REMOVE PUBLIC PVMTS., CURBS, ANDWALKS FOR INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.UPON COMPLETION OF UTILITY WORK,REPLACE ALL MATERIAL, IN KIND, ANDTO CITY STANDARD AND APPROVALREMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY AND CITYSTANDARDSALL UNUSED EXISTING WATERSERVICES WITHIN THE PROPOSEDPROPERTY LIMITS SHALL BE REMOVEDAND ABANDONED BACK TO THE MAINPER CITY CHANHASSEN STANDARDSALL FINAL UTILITY SIZES, MATERIALS,LOCATION, AND CONNECTIONS TO BE VERIFIEDBY A MECHANICAL ENGINEER ANDCOORDINATED WITH CIVIL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.TRENCH DRAINSHALL BEPUMPED INTOBUILDING ANDINTERIORSYSTEM24" PERF. CMP UNDERGROUND FILTRATIONSYSTEMFOOTPRINT SIZE = 32' X 316'12" SIDE & END STONE, 18" STONESEPARATION, 6" STONE COVER 18" SANDBASE, 7.2" STONE BASESTONE BASE/ROCK INFILTRATION IE=932.406" DT/SAND IE=933.0024" CMP IE=934.5024" CMP TOP=936.50STONE COVER=937.00OE=935.25100-YR HWL=935.99CB1RIM=936.61IE=935.65CBMH2RIM=937.15IE=935.46SUMP=931.46CB3RIM=939.85IE=935.35SUMP=931.35CB4RIM=939.00IE=935.44SUMP=931.4438 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 0.50%42 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 0.50%19 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 0.50%37 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 0.50%28 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 2.00%OUTLET CONTROLSTRUCTURERIM=935.00IE=928.5026 LF 6" PVC BUILDINGCONNECTION STUBWITHIN 5FT.COORDINATE WITHMECHANICALINLET IE=935.25INLET IE=935.25OUTLET IE=935.25INLET IE=935.25CONNECT INTOEXISTING CBMHEX IE=930.50(FIELD VERIFY)PR IE=934.6978 LF 12" HDPESTORM @ 2.00%CONNECT INTOEXISTING CBMHEX IE=925.90(FIELD VERIFY)PR IE=926.94INLET IE=935.25AD 100AAD 100BAD 100CAD 100DAD 100EAD 100FAD 100G338 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%INLET IE=930.00AD 100HAD 100IAD 100JAD 100KAD 100L70 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%INLET IE=935.25AD 200AAD 200BAD 200CAD 200DAD 200EAD 200FAD 200GAD 200HAD 200IAD 200JAD 200KAD 200LDRAINTILE IE=931.50ADJUSTED EXISTINGCATCH BASINCBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:36 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.1UTILITY PLAN-STORM SEWER............UTILITY LEGEND:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCATCH BASINGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLEFES AND RIP RAP Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:54 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.0CIVIL DETAILS............ Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:26:56 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.1CIVIL DETAILS............2148" 6" MIN. 18" MIN.KEY1. TOPSOIL2. FREE DRAINING ANGULAR WASHED STONE 3/4" - 2" PARTICLE SIZE (NON LIMESTONE MATERIAL THATCONTAINS LESS THAN 5% DELETERIOUS MATERIALS).INSTALL TO MIN. 95% STANDARD DENSITY PER AASHTO T99.TYP. SECTION DETAILNTS1.INSTALL SILT FENCE AND/OR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSIONCONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THEPRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE INPLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.4.INSTALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC,ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINAL GRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.PERFORM ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.6.SEED AND MULCH ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE.7.CONSTRUCT RETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA.8.IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMENATE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.9.PLANT AND MULCH SITE.10.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING ORIMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION.2.GRADING OF RETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USINGLOW-COMPACTION EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OFUNDERLYING SOILS.3.ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED RETENTION DEPTH (ELEVATION)SHALL BE UNDISTURBED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING12"(TYP)18"12"(TYP)GRADEPAVEMENT/LANDSCAPING/SOD36" DIA. PERF. CMP PIPE.FABRIC WRAP TOP, SIDES AND BOTTOM WITHCONTECH C-40 NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILESUBDRAIN FILTER MATERIAL - FINE FILTERAGGREGATE PER MNDOT 3149.2J6" PERF. CPP DRAIN TILE PIPE PERMNDOT 3245 WITH FABRIC SOCK.LOCATION AS SHOWN ON THE PLANSUNDERGROUND FILTRATION SYSTEMN T S6RAISED GARDEN BOX - TYPICAL, SEE SITE PLAN FOR LENGTHSN T SCOMPACTED SUBGRADE/EXIST. TOPSOILLAWN/FIN. GRADEBURY GARDEN BOX 4" BELOW EXIST.FIN. GRADE AT HIGHEST POINT ,ENSURE TOP OF BOX IS LEVELLINE BOTTOM OF BOX WITH WATERPERMEABLE NON-WOVEN GEO-TEXTILEFILL WITH SPECIALTY PLANTING MIX:1/3 NATIVE TOPSOIL1/3 PEAT MOSS1/3 MANURE/COMPOST1.PLANTER SHOWN MAY DIFFER IN SIZE AND SHAPE FROMPLANTERS SHOWN ON SITE PLAN - CONSTRUCT ALLPLANTERS BASED ON THESE SPECIFICATIONS, BUTFOLLOW THE SIZE AND SHAPES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLANAND ENLARGEMENTS.2.ALL LUMBER TO BE PREMIUM GRADE ARSENIC-FREE,"GREEN", PRESSURE TREATED - OR CEDAR3.SPECIALTY PLANTING SOIL MUST BE THOROUGHLY MIXED."LAYERING" OF MATERIALS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED4.MANURE/COMPOST MUST BE SOURCED FROM MIN. 3DIFFERENT MANUFACUTERS/TYPES (IE COW MANURECOMPOST + MUSHROOM COMPOST + VEGETATIVE WASTECOMPOST). CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT USE COMPOSTFROM MUNICIPAL SOURCES. ONLY "COMPOSTED"MATERIALS SHALL BE USED, NO "RAW" MATERIALS SHALLBE PERMITTED.5.CONTRACTOR MAY SUGGEST ALTERNATE MATERIALS ANDCONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES SUBJECT TO OWNER ANDLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REVIEW AND APPROVAL.4' - 3 3 4" LENGTH VARIES, SEE SITE PLAN24" NOM.CAP: 2X6 CEDAR, MITER CORNERSTRIM: HORZ. 2X4 CEDAR, MITER CORNERS VERT. 2X4 CEDAR, @ POSTSPOST: 4X4 CEDAR, @ CORNERS, MAX. 4' O.C.,SEE PLAN VIEWCROSS BRACE: 2X4 CEDAR, @ POSTSSIDE BOARD: 2X8 CEDAR, FASTEN AT POSTS4' - 10"4' - 10"LENGTH VARIES, SEE SITE PLANLENGTH VARIES, SEE SITE PLAN3' - 0" 3' - 3 3 4" 2' - 8"NOTE:ADJUST CENTER BRACING ASSHOWN ON SITE PLANDIAGRAM. ENSURE NO MORETHAT 5'-0" BETWEEN BRACES,TYP.OUTSIDE OF POSTTO OUTSIDE OFPOST, TYP.OUTSIDE OF TIMBER WALL TOOUTSIDE OF TIMBER WALL,TYP.OUTSIDE OF SEAT TIMBERTO OUTSIDE OF SEATTIMBER, TYP.1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:21 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.2CIVIL DETAILS............EXTEND POST PAST TOP OF POST10 DEGREE SLOPE1 INCH SILICONE RUBBEROR ASPHALTIC CAULKINGCOMPOUNDFILL ANNULAR SPACE TO 1 INCHFROM TOP WITH SILICA SANDCONCRETE FOOTING AS SPECIFIED6"3'-6"2'-6"60"-66"FROM PAVEMENT TOBOTTOM OF SIGN 1/2"MATERIAL VARIES-SEE PLANMETAL SIGN ACCORDINGTO MN STATE CODENOTE:1. SIGN SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED.2. VERIFY POST PAINT C0LOR WITH LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POSTN T S1'-6"6" O.D. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE PAINTED WITH 1COAT OF APPROPRIATE PRIMER AND TWO COATSSIGN ENAMEL. FILL ANNULAR SPACE WITH GROUT.COVER WITH YELLOW "IDEAL SHIELD" PLASTICCOVER.GREEN POWDER COATED STEEL SQUAREPOST AS SPECIFIED1/4" METAL PLATE WELDED TOBOTTOM OF 6” PIPEGALVANIZED STEEL FASTENER(TYP. OF 2)1FINISHED GRADETOOLED CONTROL JOINTSEE DETAIL (TYP.)LIGHT BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR TOTRAFFIC WITH 3" WIDE SMOOTHTROWELLED EDGE5" CONCRETE AS SPECIFIED6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASECOMPACTED SUBGRADENOTES:1. INSTALLATION SHALL BE CERTIFIED AND IN ACCORDANCE TO AN ON-SITEA.C.I. TECHNICIAN AS SPECIFIED.2. SEE GEO-TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GROSS WEIGHTREQUIREMENTS.3. SEE LAYOUT DRAWINGS FOR LIMITS OF WALKS.4. SEE CONCRETE JOINT DETAIL FOR REQUIREMENTS.5. 1/2" WIDE EXPANSION JOINT AND SEALANT AT ALL CURBS.CONCRETE WALK/PAD3"2"THIS OCCURS ONLY WHEREMULCH MEETS EDGE OF WALKLEAVE TOP OFMULCH DOWN 1"FROM TOP OF WALKN T S (PRIVATE PROPERTY)2NOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.HEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT9" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)2" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)2" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T SLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT9" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)2" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)1.5" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T SNOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.34 50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACKNOPARKING CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSGARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVELNOPARKING75 - DNS18 - DNS24 - KFG12 - KFG18 - LSRS7 - SSD17 - LSRS6 - SSD3 - BHS3 - BHS1 - SHL1 - SHL1 - SHL1 - SHL2 - PFC1 - SHL1 - NRM3 - CBS7 - ISL3 - BHS1 - SHL4 - DNS10 - NY3 - BHS3 - NRM3 - BHS3 - CBS3 - NRM3 - BHS3 - NRM7 - FG3 - BHSSEED TYPE 1SEED TYPE 2LAWNEDGING, TYP.18" DECORATIVE ROCKMAINTENANCE STRIP, TYP.18" DECORATIVE ROCKMAINTENANCE STRIP, TYP.EDGING, TYP.EDGING, TYP.EDGING, TYP.LAWNLAWNLAWNLAWN7 - ISL38 - KFG6 - FG36 - SJ6 - KFG6 - KFG8 - LSRS11 - RA7 - SSD8 - SSD1 - RC1 - NY1 - NY3 - LDN10 - LSRS12 - SSD9 - LDN1 - NY1 - NY1 - NY1 - NY7 - LSRS7 - KFG6 - LSRS9 - SSD5 - FBE2 - FBE1 - FBE1 - NY1 - NY1 - NY1 - NY5 - ESH6 - ESH4 - FG10 - FG25 - PMECBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.0LANDSCAPE PLAN............Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:27 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N24904Patrick J. SarverLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.12/4/20LANDSCAPE NOTES:01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLAWN - SODSEED TYPE 1 - MNDOT 34-262 WET PRAIRIE, PERMNDOT SEEDING MANUAL SPECIFICATIONS (2014)1" DIA. ROCK MAINTENANCE STRIP OVER FILTER FABRIC,SAMPLES REQUIRED. PROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON PLANPROPOSED PERENNIAL PLANT SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESSEED TYPE 2 - MNDOT 35-221 DRY PRAIRIE, PERMNDOT SEEDING MANUAL SPECIFICATIONS (2014)SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH, SAMPLES REQUIREDPROVIDE EDGING AS SHOWN ON PLANPROPOSED DECIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN SHRUB SYMBOLS - SEEPLANT SCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED EVERGREEN TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANTSCHEDULE AND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESPROPOSED CANOPY TREE SYMBOLS - SEE PLANT SCHEDULEAND PLAN FOR SPECIES AND PLANTING SIZESEDGINGDECORATIVE BOULDERS (ROUNDED & BLOCK STYLE), 18"-30" DIA.LEGEND1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ONLY PLANT MATERIAL FREE OFNEONICOTINOID BASED INSECTICIDES AND/OR TREATMENTS OF ANY KIND,INCLUDING BY NOT LIMITED TO IMIDACLOPRID (CONFIDOR, ADMIRE,GAUCHO, ADVOCATE), THIAMETHOXAM (ACTARA, PLATINUM, CRUISER),CLOTHIANIDIN (PONCHO, DANTOSU, DANTOP), ACETAMIPRID (MOSPILAN,ASSAIL, CHIPCOTRISTAR), THIACLOPRID (CALYPSO), DINOTEFURAN(STARKLE, SAFARI, VENOM), AND NITENPYRAM (CAPSTAR, GUARDIAN).2.CONTRACTOR SHALL CERTIFY, THROUGH SUPPLIERS POLICY STATEMENTOR AFFIDAVIT, THAT NO NEONICOTINOID BASED INSECTICIDES HAVE BEENUSED ON SITE OR DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE GROWING OR STORAGEPLOTS OF THE SUPPLIED PLANT MATERIAL, INCLUDING THE PLANTING OFAGRICULTURAL (OR OTHER) SEED TREATED WITH NEONICS..POLLINATOR SAFE PLANT MATERIAL:1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLREPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.2.WHERE SHOWN, SHRUB & PERENNIAL BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED WITH 4" DEPTH (MINIMUM AFTER INSTALLATIONAND/OR TOP DRESSING OPERATIONS) OF SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH.3.ALL TREES SHALL BE MULCHED WITH SHREDDED CYPRESS MULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OFPLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ALL MULCH SHALL BE KEPT WITHIN A MINIMUM OF 2" FROM TREE TRUNK.4.IF SHOWN ON PLAN, RANDOM SIZED LIMESTONE BOULDERS COLOR AND SIZE TO COMPLIMENT NEW LANDSCAPING.OWNER TO APPROVE BOULDER SAMPLES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.5.PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM WITH THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN STANDARDS AND SHALLBE OF HARDY STOCK, FREE FROM DISEASE, DAMAGE AND DISFIGURATION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FORMAINTAINING PLUMPNESS OF PLANT MATERIAL FOR DURATION OF ACCEPTANCE PERIOD.6.UPON DISCOVERY OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE QUANTITY OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE SCHEDULE AND THEQUANTITY SHOWN ON THE PLAN, THE PLAN SHALL GOVERN.7.CONDITION OF VEGETATION SHALL BE MONITORED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT THROUGHOUT THE DURATIONOF THE CONTRACT. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS PART OF THE CONTRACT SHALL BE WARRANTED FOR ONE (1) FULLGROWING SEASONS FROM SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE.8.ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL RECEIVE 4" LAYER TOPSOIL AND SOD AS SPECIFIEDUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.9.COORDINATE LOCATION OF VEGETATION WITH UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD UTILITIES, LIGHTING FIXTURES,DOORS AND WINDOWS. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE IN THE FIELD FINAL LOCATION OF TREES AND SHRUBS FORREVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.10.ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL ACCEPTANCE.11.REPAIR AT NO COST TO OWNER ALL DAMAGE RESULTING FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S ACTIVITIES.12.SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVED SURFACES FREE OF DEBRIS GENERATED FROM LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'SACTIVITIES.13.REPAIR AT NO COST TO THE OWNER IRRIGATION SYSTEM DAMAGED FROM LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES.14.PROVIDE SITE WIDE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION. SYSTEM SHALL BE FULLY PROGRAMMABLEAND CAPABLE OF ALTERNATE DATE WATERING. THE SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE HEAD TO HEAD OR DRIP COVERAGEAND BE CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ONE INCH OF PRECIPITATION PER WEEK. SYSTEM SHALL EXTEND INTO THEPUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT/BACK OF CURB.15.CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE APPROVAL OF PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM INLCUDING PRICING FROM OWNER,PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.PLANT SCHEDULE - ENTIRE SITESYMQUANT.COMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMESIZEROOTCOMMENTSDECIDUOUS TREESNRM10NORTHWOOD RED MAPLEAcer rubrum 'Northwood'2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSHL6SKYLINE HONEYLOCUSTGleditsia triacanthos 'Skycole'2.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMORNAMENTAL TREESPFC2PRAIRIEFIRE FLOWERING CRABMalus 'Prairiefire'1.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMISL14IVORY SILK LILAC1.5" CAL.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMEVERGREEN TREESBHS21BLACK HILLS SPRUCEPicea glauca 'Densata'6' ht.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMCBS6COLORADO SPRUCEPicea pungens6' ht.B&BSTRAIGHT LEADER. FULL FORMSHRUBS - CONIFEROUS & EVERGREENNY20NOVA YEWTaxus cuspidata 'Nova'36" HT.CONT.SJ36SPARTAN JUNIPERJuniperus chinensis 'Spartan'36" HT.CONT.DNS79DWARF NORWAY SPRUCEPicea abies 'Pumila'36" HT.CONT.ESH11ENDLESS SUMMER HYDRANGEAHydrangea macrophylla 'Endless Summer'24" HT.CONT.FBE8FIRE BALL EUONYMUSEuonymus alatus 'Select'24" HT.CONT.LDN12LITTLE DEVIL NINEBARKPhysocarpus opulifolius 'Donna May'24" HT.CONT.RC1RUSSIAN CYPRESSMicrobiota decussata24" HT.CONT.PERENNIALS & GRASSESKFG93KARL FOERSTER GRASSCalamagrostis x acutiflora "Karl Foerster"#1CONT.FG27FLAME GRASSMiscanthus sinensis 'Purpurascens'PME25PIXIE MEADOWBRITE ECHINACEAEchinacea 'Pixie Meadowbrite'#1CONT.RA11RHEINLAND ASTILBEAstilbe japonica 'Rheinland'#1CONT.LSRS66LITTLE SPIRE RUSSIAN SAGEPerovskia 'Little Spire'#1CONT.SSD49STELLA SUPREME DAYLILYHemerocallis 'Stella Supreme'#1CONT. REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONL1.1LANDSCAPE PLANNOTES & DETAILS............Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:28 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N24904Patrick J. SarverLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.12/4/201.ENTIRE SITE SHALL BE FULLY IRRIGATED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT IRRIGATION SHOP DRAWINGS FOR REVIEWAND APPROVAL BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.2.SEE MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IRRIGATION WATER, METER, AND POWERCONNECTIONS.3.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION/INSTALLATION. ANY DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND/ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES SHALL BE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CORRECTING DAMAGES SHALL BE BORNEENTIRELY BY THE CONTRACTOR.4.SERVICE EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE PER LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY STANDARDS AND SHALL BE PERNATIONAL AND LOCAL CODES. EXACT LOCATION OF SERVICE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR EQUIVALENT AT THE JOB SITE.5.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH LOCAL UTILITY COMPANY FOR THE PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE ANDMETERING FACILITIES.6.IRRIGATION WATER LINE CONNECTION SIZE IS 1-12" AT BUILDING. VERIFY WITH MECHANICAL PLANS.COVAGE.7.ALL MAIN LINES SHALL BE 18" BELOW FINISHED GRADE.8.ALL LATERAL LINES SHALL BE 12" BELLOW FINISHED GRADE.9.ALL EXPOSED PVC RISERS, IF ANY, SHALL BE GRAY IN COLOR.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT AT 2'-0" BELOW THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE TOP OF PAVEMENT.EXTEND SLEEVES TO 2'-0" BEYOND PAVEMENT.11.CONTRACTOR SHALL MARK THE LOCATION OF ALL SLEEVES AND CONDUIT WITH THE SLEEVING MATERIAL "ELLED" TO2'-0" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AND CAPPED.12.FABRICATE ALL PIPE TO MANUFACTURE'S SPECIFICATIONS WITH CLEAN AND SQUARE CUT JOINTS. USE QUALITY GRADEPRIMER AND SOLVENT CEMENT FORMULATED FOR INTENDED TYPE OF CONNECTION.13.BACKFILL ALL TRENCHES WITH SOIL FREE OF SHARP OBJECTS AND DEBRIS.14.ALL VALVE BOXES AND COVERS SHALL BE BLACK IN COLOR.15.GROUP VALVE BOXES TOGETHER FOR EASE WHEN SERVICE IS REQUIRED. LOCATE IN PLANT BED AREAS WHENEVERPOSSIBLE.16.IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LOCATION SHALL BE VERIFIED ON-SITE WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.17.CONTROL WIRES: 14 GAUGE DIRECT BURIAL, SOLID COPPER IRRIGATION WIRE. RUN UNDER MAIN LINE. USEMOISTURE-PROOF SPLICES AND SPLICE ONLY AT VALVES OR PULL BOXES. RUN SEPARATE HOT AND COMMON WIRE TOEACH VALVE AND ONE (1) SPARE WIRE AND GROUND TO FURTHEST VALVE FROM CONTROLLER. LABEL OR COLOR CODEALL WIRES.18.AVOID OVER SPRAY ON BUILDINGS, PAVEMENT, WALLS AND ROADWAYS BY INDIVIDUALLY ADJUSTING RADIUS OR ARCON SPRINKLER HEADS AND FLOW CONTROL ON AUTOMATIC VALVE.19.ADJUST PRESSURE REGULATING VALVES FOR OPTIMUM PRESSURE ON SITE.20.USE SCREENS ON ALL HEADS.21.A SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON-SITE AT ALL TIMES IN AN UPDATED CONDITION.22.ALL PIPE 3" AND OVER SHALL HAVE THRUST BLOCKING AT EACH TURN.23.ALL AUTOMATIC REMOTE CONTROL VALVES WILL HAVE 3" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4" WASHED GRAVEL UNDERNEATHVALVE AND VALVE BOX. GRAVEL SHALL EXTENT 3" BEYOND PERIMETER OF VALVE BOX.24.THERE SHALL BE 3" MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN BOTTOM OF VALVE BOX COVER AND TOP OF VALVE STRUCTURE.IRRIGATION NOTES:FACE OF BUILDING, WALL, OR STRUCTUREMIN. 3" LAYER OF ROCK MULCH AS SPECIFIED. PROVIDE SAMPLE TOLANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATIONFINISHED GRADECOMPACTED SUBGRADEWATER PERMEABLE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AS SPECIFIED18" - VERIFY W/ PLANAGGREGATE MAINTANENCE STRIPN T SSTAKED LANDSCAPE EDGER AS SPECIFIED, SEE MANUFACTURER'SINSTRUCTIONS AND SPECS. FOR INSTALLATION AND PLACEMENTSLOPE - MIN. 2%, MAX. 5:1VERIFY W/ GRADING PLAN1Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPERENNIAL BED PLANTINGN T SPLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT STEMBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.SIZE VARIESSEE LANDSCAPE PLANMODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ON LOCATION OF PLANTMATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDS OR OVERALL PLANTPLACEMENT4DECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS SHRUB PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL SHAPE FOR SPECIES)PLANT TOP OF ROOTBALL 1-2" ABOVE ABOVESURROUNDING GRADEROOTS AT OUTER EDGE OF ROOTBALL LOOSENED TOENSURE PROPER BACKFILL-TO-ROOT CONTACTSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDEXISTING GRADEROCK OR ORGANIC MULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPENOTES AND PLAN NOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEPMULCH MIN. 2" FROM PLANT TRUNKBACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONDO NOT EXCAVATE BELOW ROOTBALL.THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLRULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT3THREE TIMES WIDTHOF ROOTBALLDECIDUOUS & CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTINGN T SPRUNE AS FIELD DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE (RETAINNORMAL TREE SHAPE)THREE 2"X4"X8' WOODEN STAKES, STAINED BROWNWITH TWO STRANDS OF WIRE TWISTED TOGETHER.STAKES SHALL BE PLACED AT 120° TO ONE ANOTHER.WIRE SHALL BE THREADED THROUGH NYLONSTRAPPING WITH GROMMETS. ALTERNATE STABILIZINGMETHODS MAY BE PROPOSED BY CONTRACTOR.TRUNK FLARE JUNCTION: PLANT TREE 1"-2" ABOVEEXISTING GRADEMULCH TO OUTER EDGE OF SAUCER OR TO EDGE OFPLANTING BED, IF APPLICABLE. ROCK OR ORGANICMULCH, SEE GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES AND PLANNOTES FOR MULCH TYPE. KEEP MULCH MIN. 2" FROMPLANT TRUNKEXISTING GRADECUT AND REMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP 1/3 OF ROOTBALL. IF NON-BIODEGRADABLE, REMOVE COMPLETELYSLOPE SIDES OF HOLE OR VERTICAL SIDES AT EDGE OFPLANTING BEDBACKFILL AS SPECIFIEDCOMPACT BOTTOM OF PIT, TYP.RULE OF THUMB - MODIFY EXCAVATION BASED ONLOCATION OF PLANT MATERIAL AND DESIGN OF BEDSOR OVERALL PLANT PLACEMENT2 CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-3CONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS BEINGREMOVEDINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPCONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.CBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:32 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS............01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"N1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF CHANHASSEN EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT"GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS,48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ORREPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COSTTO THE OWNER.2. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE AN MPCA NPDESPERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ANY EROSION CONTROLPERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.3. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES, DESCRIPTIONS,AND PRACTICES.4. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES.5. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION, INSPECTIONS,AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. 50' BUILDING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACK10' BU ILD ING SETBACKNOPARKING FILTRATION BASINBOT= 933.00100 YR HWL = 932.25EOF=935.50CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSGARAGE LEVEL1ST FLOOR LEVELNOPARKINGSB-7SB-8SB-1SB-6SB-2SB-4SB-5SB-3AD 100AAD 100BAD 100CAD 100DAD 100EAD 100FAD 100G338 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%AD 100HAD 100IAD 100JAD 100KAD 100L70 LF 6" SCH40PVC STORM @0.5%AD 200AAD 200BAD 200CAD 200DAD 200EAD 200FAD 200GAD 200HAD 200IAD 200JAD 200KAD 200LCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPCONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCHBASINS.PERIMETEREROSION CONTROLAT CONSTRUCTIONLIMITS, TYP.INLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPCBMH2 WITHSUMPUNDERGROUNDSTORMTECH DC-780INFILTRATION SYSTEM 1 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:36 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS............01" = 30'-0"30'-0"15'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF CHANHASSEN EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT"GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS,48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ORREPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COSTTO THE OWNER.2. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE AN MPCANPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ANY EROSIONCONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.3.SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.4.SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSION CONTROLNOTES.5.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION, INSPECTIONS,AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:LEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:43 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS............OVERFLOW AT TOP OFFILTER ASSEMBLYOVERFLOW IS 12 OF THE CURBBOX HEIGHTHIGH-FLOW FABRICFILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER, 6"ON-GRADE 10" AT LOW POINTEXISTING CURB, PLATE, BOX,AND GRATENOTES:1. REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEMAFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT.3. REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ERO-4C.CURB INLET FILTERN T S1TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S3FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.4FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24" 24" 24" MIN. 6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S2 Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:44 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE............OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING SECTION 21PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMPERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO MEET NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THEPROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES:SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS A DEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING GREEN SPACE INTO A NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND DRIVE. SITE,GRADING, UTILITY AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WILL OCCUR.NATIVE BUFFER NARRATIVE:PRESERVING A 50' NATURAL BUFFER AROUND WATER BODIES IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WATER BODIES ARE NOTLOCATED ON SITE.SOIL CONTAMINATION NARRATIVE:SOILS ONSITE HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTAMINATED. SINCE NO CONTAMINATION EXISTS, INFILTRATION IS FEASIBLE AS LONG AS SOILTYPE IS CONDUCIVE TO INFILTRATION.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE AND DISCHARGES TO THE FOLLOWING: SUSAN LAKE, ANN LAKE, RILEY CREEK AND BLUFF CREEK - SUSANLAKE AND BLUFF CREEK ARE IDENTIFIED AS IMPAIRED WATER BODIES PER THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST. SUSAN LAKE AND ISIMPAIRED FOR NUTRIENTS AND BLUFF CREEK IS IMPARED FOR FISHES BIOASSESSMENTS AND TURBIDITY. BECAUSE THESE WATERS ARELOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE SITE, BMPS AS DEFINED IN THE NPDES PERMIT ITEMS 23.9 AND 23.10 APPLY. THESE ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.DURING CONSTRUCTION:A.STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETEDLATER THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASED.B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 14. MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THATSERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE (5) OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.DESIGN ENGINEER: MATTHEW R. PAVEK P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 5/15/2011 - 5/16/2011TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12RE-CERTIFICATION: 2/27/2020 (8 HOURS), EXP. 5/31/2023THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL ORWHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERALPERMIT (DATED AUGUST 1, 2018 # MNR100001) AND ANY LOCAL GOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNINGEROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL.STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPPTHE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A: CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE)FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALL TEMPORARY ANDPERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPPDOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS4. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AT ALL ADJACENT AND DOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS5. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL6. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (SECTION 14)7. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE8. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL9. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE10. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES11. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES12. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S13. INSTALL STREET SECTION14. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER15. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS16. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH17. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND18. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)19. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING,REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION:THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BEKEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THESITE. THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARSAFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 4. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY RECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THENOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 11, INSPECTIONSAND MAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OFWAY, CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUAL MAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OFALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSIONPREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BMPS ANDIMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCTINSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IN ACCORDANCE WITHTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTIONWITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESEINDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITHTHE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION OR AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEENDETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER SECTION21 OF THE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER ISEXPECTED TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORM WATERMANAGEMENT SYSTEM.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSSWPPP AMENDMENTS (SECTION 6):1.ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.A OR ITEM 21.2.B OR ANOTHER QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL MUST COMPLETEALL SWPPP CHANGES. CHANGES INVOLVING THE USE OF A LESS STRINGENT BMP MUST INCLUDE A JUSTIFICATIONDESCRIBING HOW THE REPLACEMENT BMP IS EFFECTIVE FOR THE SITE CHARACTERISTICS.2.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECTPROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION,OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE DISCHARGE OFPOLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECTPROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER INSPECTIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS BY THE SITE OWNER OROPERATOR, USEPA OR MPCA OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE IN ELIMINATING OR SIGNIFICANTLYMINIMIZING THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER OR THE DISCHARGES ARECAUSING WATER QUALITY STANDARD EXCEEDANCES (E.G., NUISANCE CONDITIONS AS DEFINED IN MINN. R. 7050.0210,SUBP. 2) OR THE SWPPP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE OBJECTIVES OF A USEPA APPROVED TMDL.BMP SELECTION AND INSTALLATION (SECTION 7):1.PERMITTEES MUST SELECT, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN THE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP AND IN THIS PERMIT IN ANAPPROPRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVANT MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS ANDACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES.EROSION PREVENTION (SECTION 8):1.BEFORE WORK BEGINS, PERMITTEES MUST DELINEATE THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED.2.PERMITTEES MUST MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR DISTURBANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT WITH STEEP SLOPES. WHENSTEEP SLOPES MUST BE DISTURBED, PERMITTEES MUST USE TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PHASING AND STABILIZATIONPRACTICES DESIGNED FOR STEEP SLOPES (E.G., SLOPE DRAINING AND TERRACING).3.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS, INCLUDING STOCKPILES. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATEDIMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY OR TEMPORARILY CEASED ONANY PORTION OF THE SITE AND WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS. STABILIZATION MUSTBE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. STABILIZATION ISNOT REQUIRED ON CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES.STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON TEMPORARY STOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANICCOMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) BUTPERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF THE STOCKPILE.4.FOR PUBLIC WATERS THAT THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS PROMULGATED "WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS" DURINGSPECIFIED FISH SPAWNING TIME FRAMES, PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREASWITHIN 200 FEET OF THE WATER'S EDGE, AND THAT DRAIN TO THESE WATERS, WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING THERESTRICTION PERIOD.5.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF THE LAST 200 LINEAR FEET OF TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES OR SWALES THAT DRAIN WATER FROM THE SITE WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTINGTO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF REMAINING PORTIONS OFTEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACEWATER OR PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASES.6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DURINGCONSTRUCTION (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK-DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILT DIKES, ETC.) DO NOT NEED TO BESTABILIZED. PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THESE AREAS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THEIR USE AS A SEDIMENTCONTAINMENT SYSTEM CEASES7.PERMITTEES MUST NOT USE MULCH, HYDROMULCH, TACKIFIER, POLYACRYLAMIDE OR SIMILAR EROSION PREVENTIONPRACTICES WITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGEDITCH OR SWALE SECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS SLOPE OF GREATER THAN 2 PERCENT.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT ALL PIPE OUTLETS WITHIN 24 HOURSAFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER OR PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM.9.PERMITTEES MUST NOT DISTURB MORE LAND (I.E., PHASING) THAN CAN BE EFFECTIVELY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED INACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 11.SEDIMENT CONTROL (SECTION 9):1.PERMITTEES MUST ESTABLISH SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS OF THE SITE ANDDOWNGRADIENT AREAS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO ANY SURFACE WATER, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. PERMITTEES MUSTINSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN AND MUST KEEPTHE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES IN PLACE UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER.2.IF DOWNGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE OVERLOADED, BASED ON FREQUENT FAILURE OR EXCESSIVEMAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESOR REDUNDANT BMPS TO ELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING AND AMEND THE SWPPP TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONALPRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN ITEM 6.3.3.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENTCONTAINMENT SYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK-CHECK DAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ONLY ASAPPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS.4.A FLOATING SILT CURTAIN PLACED IN THE WATER IS NOT A SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP TO SATISFY ITEM 9.2 EXCEPT WHENWORKING ON A SHORELINE OR BELOW THE WATERLINE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT TERM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY(E.G., INSTALLATION OF RIP RAP ALONG THE SHORELINE) IN THAT AREA IS COMPLETE, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ANUPLAND PERIMETER CONTROL PRACTICE IF EXPOSED SOILS STILL DRAIN TO A SURFACE WATER.5.PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ADJUSTED OR REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATESHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGE OF VEHICLES, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THESHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED. PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE THENEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.6.PERMITTEES MUST PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS USING APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THEYESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER ON ALL AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THE INLET.7.PERMITTEES MAY REMOVE INLET PROTECTION FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (E.G. STREETFLOODING/FREEZING) IS IDENTIFIED BY THE PERMITTEES OR THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY (E.G.,CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER). PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THENEED FOR REMOVAL IN THE SWPPP.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF STOCKPILES ONTHE DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER.9.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE STOCKPILES OUTSIDE OF NATURAL BUFFERS OR SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDINGSTORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACE FOR THESTORMWATER. 10. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A VEHICLE TRACKING BMP TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK OUT OF SEDIMENT FROM THECONSTRUCTION SITE OR ONTO PAVED ROADS WITHIN THE SITE. 11. PERMITTEES MUST USE STREET SWEEPING IF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENTTRACKING ONTO THE STREET. 12. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 14. 13. IN ANY AREAS OF THE SITE WHERE FINAL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WILL OCCUR, PERMITTEES MUST RESTRICT VEHICLEAND EQUIPMENT USE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. 14. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE TOPSOIL ON THE SITE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 15. PERMITTEES MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 16. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR, IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE ON THE SITE, PROVIDEREDUNDANT (DOUBLE) PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS WHEN A SURFACE WATER IS LOCATED WITHIN 50 FEET OF THEPROJECT'S EARTH DISTURBANCES AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALLPERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT LEAST 5 FEET APART UNLESS LIMITED BY LACK OF AVAILABLE SPACE. NATURALBUFFERS ARE NOT REQUIRED ADJACENT TO ROAD DITCHES, JUDICIAL DITCHES, COUNTY DITCHES, STORMWATERCONVEYANCE CHANNELS, STORM DRAIN INLETS, AND SEDIMENT BASINS. IF PRESERVING THE BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE,PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE REASONS IN THE SWPPP. SHEET PILING IS A REDUNDANT PERIMETER CONTROL IFINSTALLED IN A MANNER THAT RETAINS ALL STORMWATER. 17. PERMITTEES MUST USE POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS IN ACCORDANCEWITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL DESIGN SPECIFICATIONSPROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENTCONTROLS PRIOR TO CHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATED STORMWATER TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEMFOR FILTRATION OR SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (SECTION 10):1.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING(E.G., PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENT BASINON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MAY DEWATER TO SURFACE WATERS IF THEY VISUALLY CHECKTO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED AND NUISANCE CONDITIONS (SEE MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2)WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. IF PERMITTEES CANNOT DISCHARGE THE WATER TO A SEDIMENTATION BASINPRIOR TO ENTERING A SURFACE WATER, PERMITTEES MUST TREAT IT WITH APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THEDISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SURFACE WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.2.IF PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE WATER CONTAINING OIL OR GREASE, THEY MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR ORSUITABLE FILTRATION DEVICE (E.G., CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.3.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT DOESNOT CAUSE EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS OR INUNDATION OF WETLANDS INTHE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.4.IF PERMITTEES USE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THEY MUST HAUL THE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL,RETURN THE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASHWATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (SECTION 11):1.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE A TRAINED PERSON, AS IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 21.2.B, WILL INSPECT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTIONSITE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALLEVENT GREATER THAN 1/2 INCH IN 24 HOURS.2.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS.3.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND POLLUTION PREVENTIONMANAGEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS. PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE ORSUPPLEMENT ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTERDISCOVERY UNLESS ANOTHER TIME FRAME IS SPECIFIED IN ITEM 11.5 OR 11.6. PERMITTEES MAY TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME IFFIELD CONDITIONS PREVENT ACCESS TO THE AREA.4.DURING EACH INSPECTION, PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES ANDCONVEYANCE SYSTEMS BUT NOT CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, FOR EVIDENCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITION.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS,CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABILIZE THE AREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS INEXPOSED SOIL. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OFDISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL, REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMITTEES MUST USEALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHINSEVEN (7) DAYS OF OBTAINING ACCESS. PERMITTEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATEAND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK IN SURFACEWATERS.5.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS, STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMSWITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT FOR SEDIMENTATION FROM EROSION OR TRACKED SEDIMENT FROM VEHICLES.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES WITHIN ONE (1) CALENDAR DAY OF DISCOVERY OR, IFAPPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO AVOID A SAFETY HAZARD TO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS.6.PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOMENONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE.7.PERMITTEES MUST DRAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND REMOVE THE SEDIMENT WHEN THEDEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME.8.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE THAT AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE SITE (OR AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITEIN THREE (3) CALENDAR DAYS) IS TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.B.9.PERMITTEES MAY ADJUST THE INSPECTION SCHEDULE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 11.2 AS FOLLOWS:a. INSPECTIONS OF AREAS WITH PERMANENT COVER CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH, EVEN IF CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITY CONTINUES ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE; ORb.WHERE SITES HAVE PERMANENT COVER ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL AND NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS OCCURRINGANYWHERE ON THE SITE, INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH AND, AFTER 12 MONTHS, MAY BESUSPENDED COMPLETELY UNTIL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RESUMES. THE MPCA MAY REQUIRE INSPECTIONS TORESUME IF CONDITIONS WARRANT; ORc.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS, INSPECTIONS MAYBE SUSPENDED. INSPECTIONS MUST RESUME WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RUNOFF OCCURRING, OR UPON RESUMINGCONSTRUCTION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. 10. PERMITTEES MUST RECORD ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BEING CONDUCTEDAND THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED WITH THE SWPPP. THESE RECORDS MUST INCLUDE:a.DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTIONS; ANDb.NAME OF PERSONS CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS; ANDc.ACCURATE FINDINGS OF INSPECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARENEEDED; ANDd.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN (INCLUDING DATES, TIMES, AND PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES); ANDe.DATE OF ALL RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL FOR EACHEVENT. PERMITTEES MUST OBTAIN RAINFALL AMOUNTS BY EITHER A PROPERLY MAINTAINED RAIN GAUGE INSTALLEDONSITE, A WEATHER STATION THAT IS WITHIN ONE (1) MILE OF YOUR LOCATION, OR A WEATHER REPORTING SYSTEMTHAT PROVIDES SITE SPECIFIC RAINFALL DATA FROM RADAR SUMMARIES; ANDf.IF PERMITTEES OBSERVE A DISCHARGE DURING THE INSPECTION, THEY MUST RECORD AND SHOULD PHOTOGRAPHAND DESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE DISCHARGE (I.E., COLOR, ODOR, SETTLED OR SUSPENDED SOLIDS, OIL SHEEN,AND OTHER OBVIOUS INDICATORS OF POLLUTANTS); ANDg.ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED ASREQUIRED IN SECTION 6 WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (SECTION 12):1.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING ORTEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITHSTORMWATER. PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT A SOURCEOF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BE EXPOSED TO STORMWATER.2.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTICSHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZECONTACT WITH STORMWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE, (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE,HYDRAULIC FLUIDS, PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES, ADDITIVES, CURINGCOMPOUNDS, AND ACIDS) IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. STORAGE ANDDISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7045 INCLUDING SECONDARYCONTAINMENT AS APPLICABLE.4.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY STORE, COLLECT AND DISPOSE SOLID WASTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7035.5.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.6.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS,INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADED INCLUDING THE USE OFDRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ARE AVAILABLE ATALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FORRECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS. PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLS IMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BYMINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UP MEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE.7.PERMITTEES MUST LIMIT VEHICLE EXTERIOR WASHING AND EQUIPMENT TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. PERMITTEESMUST CONTAIN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA IN A SEDIMENT BASIN OR OTHER SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE CONTROLSAND MUST DISPOSE WASTE FROM THE WASHING ACTIVITY PROPERLY. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORESOAPS, DETERGENTS, OR SOLVENTS.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUTOPERATIONS (E.G., CONCRETE, STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTIONMATERIALS) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PERMITTEES MUST PREVENT LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUTWASTES FROM CONTACTING THE GROUND AND MUST DESIGN THE CONTAINMENT SO IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFFFROM THE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES INCOMPLIANCE WITH MPCA RULES. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A SIGN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE WASHOUTFACILITY.PERMIT TERMINATION (SECTION 4 AND SECTION 13):1.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ALL TERMINATION CONDITIONS LISTED IN SECTION 13 ARECOMPLETE.2.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SELLING OR OTHERWISE LEGALLY TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRESITE, INCLUDING PERMIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROADS (E.G., STREET SWEEPING) AND STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTUREFINAL CLEAN OUT, OR TRANSFERRING PORTIONS OF A SITE TO ANOTHER PARTY. THE PERMITTEES' COVERAGE UNDERTHIS PERMIT TERMINATES AT MIDNIGHT ON THE SUBMISSION DATE OF THE NOT.3.PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND MUST INSTALL PERMANENT COVER OVER ALL AREASPRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. VEGETATIVE COVER MUST CONSIST OF A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATION WITH ADENSITY OF 70 PERCENT OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. VEGETATION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF ASPECIFIC AREA DICTATES NO VEGETATION, SUCH AS IMPERVIOUS SURFACES OR THE BASE OF A SAND FILTER.4.PERMITTEES MUST CLEAN THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT ANDMUST ENSURE THE SYSTEM MEETS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 15 THROUGH 19 AND IS OPERATING ASDESIGNED.5.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.6.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS PRIORTO SUBMITTING THE NOT. PERMITTEES MAY LEAVE BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE ON-SITE IN PLACE.7.FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ONLY, PERMIT COVERAGE TERMINATES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IF THE STRUCTURES AREFINISHED AND TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION AND DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL IS COMPLETE, THERESIDENCE SELLS TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND THE PERMITTEE DISTRIBUTES THE MPCA'S "HOMEOWNER FACT SHEET" TOTHE HOMEOWNER.8.FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND (E.G., PIPELINES ACROSS CROPLAND), PERMITTEES MUSTRETURN THE DISTURBED LAND TO ITS PRECONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL USE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.SEED NOTES:ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SALVAGE AND PRESERVE EXISTING TOPSOIL NECESSARY FOR FINAL STABILIZATIONAND TO ALSO MINIMIZE COMPACTION IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDING THE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TOA MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATSCOVER CROP) FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT A SEEDING RATE OF 100LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCESEED GERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90% COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OF STRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS.GENERAL SWPPP REQUIREMENTS AND NOTES:TPS HOLDING LLC350 HWY 7SUITE 218EXCELSIOR, MN 55331CONTACT: TODD SIMNING Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:49 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT A: SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTPROJECT NAME: POWERS RIDGE APARTMENTSPROJECT LOCATION (BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCCURS. INCLUDE ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE.)ADDRESS: 1361 LAKE DRIVECITY OR TOWNSHIP: CHANHASSENSTATE: MNZIP CODE: 55317LATITUDE/LONGITUDE OF APPROXIMATE CENTROID OF PROJECT: 44.854310 N, -93.555120 EMETHOD OF LAT/LONG COLLECTION (CIRCLE ONE): GPS ONLINE TOOL USGS TOPOGRAPHICALL CITIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: CHANHASSENALL COUNTIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: CARVERPROJECT SIZE (NUMBER OF ACRES TO BE DISTURBED): 3.4PROJECT TYPE (CIRCLE ONE): RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL & RD CONSTRUCTION OTHER (DESCRIBE):CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE (TO THE NEAREST TENTH ACRE)EXISTING AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE : 0.6POST CONSTRUCTION AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 2.2TOTAL NEW AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 1.6RECEIVING WATERSWATER BODY IDNAME OF WATER BODY WATER BODY TYPE SPECIAL WATER? (Y/N) IMPARIED WATER (Y/N)10-0013-0010-0012-0007020012-710.LAKE SUSANLAKE ANNBLUFF CREEKRILEY CREEKLAKECREEKCREEKNYDATES OF CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION START DATE: 03-2020ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 03-2021GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT INFORMATIONDESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WHAT WILL BE BUILT, GENERAL TIMELINE, ETC): XXXXXDESCRIBE SOIL TYPES FOUND AT THE PROJECT: SOILS IDENTIFIED ON SITE ARE MOSTLY CLAY. SEE SOILS REPORT FOR MORE INFORMATIONSITE LOCATION MAP - ATTACH MAPS (U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPS OR EQUIVALENT) SHOWING THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL RECEIVING WATERS, INCLUDINGWETLANDS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, STORMWATER PONDS, OR BASINS, ETC. THAT WILL RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT. USE ARROWS SHOWING THE DIRECTION OF FLOW AND DISTANCE TO THE WATER BODY.GENERAL SITE INFORMATION (III.A)1. DESCRIBE THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICIES (BMP'S). INCLUDE THE TIMING FOR INSTALLATION AND PROCEDURESUSED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY BMP'S AS NECESSARY. (III.A.4.A)THE PROJECT IS PROTECTED BY TWO (W) MAIN BMP'S, SILT FENCE AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES. THE SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE AND MONITORED AS NECESSARY. INLETPROTECTION DEVIDES WILL BE INSTALLED IN ALL CATCH BASINS ON THE SITE AND ANY OFF SITE THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THIS SITE. AS THE PROJECT PROGRESSES ADDITIONAL BMP'S SUCH AS EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET MAY BE UTILITZED.2. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A TABLE WITH THE ANTICIPATED QUANITITIES FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT FOR ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (III.A.4.B) SEE PAGE SW1.33. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A SITE MAP THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING FEATURES (III.A.3.B-F):EXIST AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMRWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS.LOCATIONS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND SOIL TYPES.·EXISTING AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS.·LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTRUBED.·LOCATION OF AREAS OF PHASED CONSTRUCTION.·ALL SURFACE WATERS AND EXISTING WETLANDS WITHIN ONE MILE FROM THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE SITE (IDENTIFIABLE ON MAPS SUCH AS USGS 7.5 MINUTEQUADRANGLE MAPS OR EQUIVALENT. WHERE SURFACE WATERS RECEIVING RUNOFF ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL NOT FIT ON THE PLAN SHEET, THEY MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH AN ARROW,INDICATING BOTH DIRECTION AND DISTANCE TO THE SURFACE WATER.·METHODS TO BE USED FOR FINAL STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREA4. WERE STORMWATER MITIGATION MEASURES REQUIRED AS THE RESULT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, OR OTHER REQUIRED LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW THESE MEASURES WERE ADDRESSED IN THE SWPPP. (III.A.6)N/A5. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED IN A KARST AREA SUCH THAT ADDITIONAL MEASURES WOULD BE NECESSARY OT PROJECT DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN MINN. R. CHAPTERS 7050 AND 7060? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO BE USED. (III.A.7)N/A6. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A CALCEREOUS FEN LISTED IN MINN. R. 7050.0180, SUBP. 6 B? NOIF YES, A LETTER OF APPROVAL FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO APPLICATION FOR THIS PERMIT. (PART I B.6 AND PART III.A.8)7. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A WATER THAT IS LISTED AS IMPARED FOR THE FOLLOWING POLLUTANT(S) OR STRESSOR(S): PHOSPHORUS, TURBIDITY, DISSOLVED OXYGEN OR BIOTIC IMPAIRMENT? USE THE SPECIAL ANDIMPAIRED WATERS SEARCH TOOL AT: WWW.PCA.STATE.MN.US/WATER/STORMWATER/STORMWATER-C.HTMLN/AIF NO, SKIP TO TRAININGDOES THE IMPAIRED WATER HAVE AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS (TMDL) WITH AN APPROVED WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY? NOIF YES:A. LIST THE RECEIVING WATER, THE AREAS OF THE SITE DISCHARGING TO IT, AND THE POLLUTANT(S) IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.B. LIST THE BMP'S AND ANY OTHER SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RELATED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.IF THE SITE HAS A DISCHARGE POINT WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE IMPAIRED WATER AND THE WATER FLOWS TO THE IMPAIRED WATER BUT NO SPECIFIC BMPS FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL, THE ADDITIONALBMPS IN APPENDIX A (C.1, C.2, C.3 & (C.4-TROUT STREAM)) MUST BE ADDED TO THE SWPPP AND IMPLEMENTED. (III.A.7). THE ADDITIONAL BMPS ONLY APPLY TO THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT THAT DRAIN TO ONE OF THEIDENTIFIED DISCHARGE POINTS.N/A8. IDENTIFY ADJACENT PUBLIC WATERS WHERE THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) HAS DECLARED “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS” DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMEFRAMESN/ASELECTION OF A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (III.D.)1. WILL THE PROJECT CREATE A NEW CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO ONE ACRE? YES OR NOIF YES, A WATER QUALITY VOLUME OF ONE INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE CUMULATIVE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE (SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT) THROUGH INFILTRATION UNLESS PROHIBITED DUETO ONE OF THE REASONS IN PART III.D.1.J. IF INFILTRATION IS PROHIBITED IDENTIFY OTHER METHOD OF OTHER VOLUME REDUCTION (E.G., FILTRATION SYSTEM, WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN, REGIONAL PONDING OR EQUIVALENTMETHOD2. DESCRIBE WHICH METHOD WILL BE USED TO TREAT RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE PROJECT (III.D):·WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN·INFILTRATION/FILTRATION·REGIONAL PONDS·COMBINATION OF PRACTICESINCLUDE ALL CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN INFORMATION FOR THE METHOD SELECTED. SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH METHOD.FILTRATIONCALCULATIONS ARE WITHIN THE SITE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT AND PART OF THIS SWPPP AS ATTACHMENT D.3. IF IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO MEET THE TREATMENT REQUIREMENT FOR THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME, DESCRIBE WHY. THIS CAN INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAYPRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT, SUCH AS GRASSES SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS, WILL BE IMPLEMENTEDTO TREAT RUNOFF PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. (III.C)IT IS FEASIBLE TO MEET REQUIREMENT FOR WATER QUALITY VOLUME.4. FOR PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE TO TROUT STREAMS, INCLUDING TRIBUTARIES TO TROUT STREAMS, IDENTIFY METHOD OF INCORPORATING TEMPERATURE CONTROLS INTO THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEM.N/AEROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES (IV.B)DESCRIBE THE TYPES OF TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION BMP'S EXPECTED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCITON:1. DESCRIBE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE EROSION. DELINEATE AREAS NOT TO BEDISTURBED (E.G., WITH FLAGS, STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) BEFORE WORK BEGINS.SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT ATHE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE.2. DESCRIBE METHODS OF TEMPORARILY STABILIZING SOILS AND SOIL STOCKPILES (E.G., MULCHES, HYDRAULIC TACKIFIERS, EROSION BLANKETS, ETC.):TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION WILL BE SEED AND MULCH AND EROSION BLANKETS WHERE REQUIRED, WITH PERMANENT COVER BEING EITHER SOD OR LANDSCAPE FEATURES.3. DESCRIBE METHODS OF DISSIPATING VELOCITY ALONG STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND AT CHANNEL OUTLETS (E.G., CHECK DAMS, SEDIMENT TRAPS, RIP RAP, ETC.):SOD WILL BE UTILIZED ALONG CHANNELS AND RIP RAP AT CHANNEL.4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STABILIZATION OF DITCH AND SWALE WETTED PERIMETERS (NOTE THAT MULCH, HYDRAULIC SOIL TACKIFIERS, HYDROMULCHES, ETC. ARE NOT ACCEPTABLESOIL STABILIZATION METHODS FOR ANY PART OF A DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE)FINAL STABILIZATION OF SWALES WILL BE SOD5. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS (E.G., RIP RAP, SPLASH PADS, GABIONS, ETC.)RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT PIPE OUTLETS, IF APPLICABLE6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO PROMOTE INFILTRATION AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL ON THE SITE PRIOR TO OFFSITE DISCHARGE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE (E.G., DIRECT STORMWATER FLOW TOVEGETATED AREAS):DISCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA AND INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE UTILIZED7. FOR DRAINAGE OR DIVERSION DITCHES, DESCRIBE PRACTICES TO STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET OF THE PROPERTY EDGE OR POINT OF DISCHARGE TOSURFACE WATER. THE LAST 200 LINEAL FEET MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO SURFACE WATERS AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILYOR PERMANENTLY CEASED FOR ALL DISCHARGES TO SPECIAL, IMPAIRED OR “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS”. ALL OTHER REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES ORSWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER, PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.N/A, NO DITCHES ON SITE8. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION (E.G., CONSTRUCTION PHASING, MINIMIZING SOIL DISTURBANCE,VEGETATIVE BUFFERS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, SLOPE DRAINING/TERRACING, ETC.):OTHER EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO; MINIMIZING SITE EXPOSURE WHEN POSSIBLE.9. IF APPLICABLE, INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN APPENDIX A PART C.3 REGARDING MAINTAINING A 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE OR INSTALLING REDUNDANT BMPS FOR PORTIONS OF THE SITETHAT DRAIN TO SPECIAL WATERS).N/A10. IF APPLICABLE, DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE TO PROTECT PLANNED INFILTRATION AREASMINIMIZE SITE EXPOSURE IN AREAS ADJACENT TO INFILTRATION AREAS.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICIES (IV.C)DESCRIBE THE METHODS OF SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURB ANDGUTTER SYSTEMS1. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROL:SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE SITE2. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SOIL STOCKPILES:SEED AND MULCH AS WELL AS EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS WILL BE UTILIZED AS NECESSARY3. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION:SEE INLET PROTECTION DETAILS4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO MINIMIZE VEHICLE TRACKING AT CONSTRUCTION EXITS AND STREET SWEEPING ACTIVITIES:THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.5. DESCRIBE METHODS, IF APPLICABLE, ADDITIONAL SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G., DIVERSION BERMS) TO BE INSTALLED TO KEEP RUNOFF AWAY FROM PLANNED INFILTRATION AREAS WHEN EXCAVATEDPRIOR TO FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA:SILT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING TO PROTECT INFILTRATION AREAS.6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND PRESERVE TOP SOIL (UNLESS INFEASIBLE) AT THIS SITE:LIGHT TRACKED EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED, TOPSOIL WILL BE STRIPPED AND STOCKPILED7. DESCRIBE PLANS TO PRESERVE A 50-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT'S SOIL DISTURBANCE AND A SURFACE WATER OR PLANS FOR REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS IF A BUFFERIS INFEASIBLE:DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG WETLAND. PROJECT WILL NOT DISTURB WITHIN 200 FEET OF WETLAND.8. DESCRIBE PLANS FOR USE OF SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS (E.G., POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, ETC.) SEE PART IV.C.10 OF THE PERMIT:N/A9. IS THE PROJECT REQUIRED TO INSTALL A TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN DUE TO 10 OR MORE ACRES DRAINING TO A COMMON LOCATION OR 5 ACRES OR MORE IF THE SITE IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF ASPECIAL OR IMPAIRED WATER?NOIF YES, DESCRIBE (OR ATTACH PLANS ) SHOWING HOW THE BASIN WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.C OF THE PERMIT.N/ADEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (IV.D)1. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE MEASURES TO BE USED TO TREAT/DISPOSE OF TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER AND METHOD TO PREVENT EROSION OR SCOUR OF DISCHARGE POINTS (SEE PART IV. D OF THEPERMIT):N/A 2. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE USE OF FILTERS FOR BACKWASH WATER? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW FILTER BACKWASH WATER WILL BE MANAGED ON THE SITE OR PROPERLY DISPOSED (SEE PART III.D.3. OF THE PERMIT):N/AADDITIONAL BMP'S FOR SPECIAL WATERS AND DISCHARGES TO WETLANDS (APPENDIX A, PARTS C AND D)1. SPECIAL WATERS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE TO SPECIAL WATERS? NO2. IF PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAY PRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, THENOTHER TREATMENT SUCH AS GRASSED SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT WILL BEPROVIDED.N/A3. DESCRIBE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS FOR EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH A CONTINUOUS POSITIVE SLOPE TO A SPECIAL WATERS, AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS FOR AREAS THATDRAIN FIVE OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.N/A4. DESCRIBE THE UNDISTURBED BUFFER ZONE TO BE USED (NOT LESS THAN 100 LINEAR FEET FROM THE SPECIAL WATER).N/A5. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL ENSURE THAT THE PRE AND POST PROJECT RUNOFF RATE AND VOLUME FROM THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOURPRECIPITATION EVENTS REMAINS THE SAME.N/A6. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL MINIMIZE ANY INCREASE IN THE TEMPERATURE OF TROUT STREAM RECEIVING WATERS RESULTING IN THE 1, AND2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION EVENTS.N/A7. WETLANDS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE STORMWATER WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO A WETLAND (E.G., CONVERSION OF A NATURAL WETLAND TO ASTORMWATER POND)? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE WETLAND MITIGATION SEQUENCE THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART D OF APPENDIX A.N/AINSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (IV.E)DESCRIBE PROCEDURES TO ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE:·ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND·WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND WITHIN (7) DAYS AFTER THATINSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION,AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S AND INFILTRATION AREAS.INSPECTOR WILL FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND FILL OUT "ATTACHMENT B - CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST"1. Describe practices for storage of building products with a potential to leach pollutants to minimize exposure to stormwater:ALL BUILDING PRODUCTS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE EXPOSURE2. Describe practices for storage of pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers, treatment chemical, and landscape materials:ALL LANDSCAPE TREATMENT CHEMICALS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZED EXPOSURE3. Describe practices for storage and disposal of hazardous materials or toxic waste (e.g., oil, fuel, hydraulic fluids, paint solvents, petroleum-based products, wood preservative, additives, curing compounds, and acids) accordingto Minn. R. ch. 7045, including restricted access and secondary containment:ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS.4. Describe collection, storage and disposal of solid waste in compliance with Minn. R. ch. 7035:ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND SOLID WASTER WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS5. Describe management of portable toilets to prevent tipping and disposal of sanitary wastes in accordance with Minn. R. ch. 7040:SANITARY AND SEPTIC SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED TO WORKERS WITH PORTABLE FACILITIES MAINTAINED AS NEEDED BY THE PROVIDER.6. Describe spill prevention and response for fueling and equipment or vehicle maintenance:EMPLOYEES WILL BE TRAINED IN TECHNIQUES DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE SPILLS. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS.7. Describe containment and disposal of vehicle and equipment wash water and prohibiting engine degreasing on the site:ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE WASHED OFF SITE8. Describe storage and disposal of concrete and other washout wastes so that wastes do not contact the ground:ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR OFF SITE.FINAL STABILIZATION (IV.G)1. DESCRIBE METHOD OF FINAL STABILIZATION (PERMANENT COVER) OF ALL DISTURBED AREAS:FINAL STABILIZATION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH PAVEMENT, SOD AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS.2. DESCRIBE PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING FINAL STABILIZATION AND TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE (SEE PART IV.G.1-5):UPON STABILIZATION DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE CONTRCTOR AND OWNER SHALL MUTUALLY TRANSFER THE NPDES PERMIT TO THE NEXT OWNER WITH DOCUMENTS DESCRIBING THE NATURE OFTERMINATION PROCEDURE.DOCUMENTATION OF INFEASIBILITY: (IF APPLICABLE)SOILS INFORMATIONMAP UNITSYMBOLGLGLENCOE CLAY LOAMMAP UNIT NAMEKCLESTER-KILKENNY LOAMKC2LESTER-KILKENNY LOAM,MODERATELY ERODEDKD2LESTER-KILKENNY COMPLEX,MODERATELY ERODEDLAKENYNYNN Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture4931 W. 35th Street, Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416civilsitegroup.com 612-615-0060LAKE PLACE 1361 LAKE DRIVE W. CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 350 HWY 7, SUITE 218 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 TPS HOLDING LLC PROJECT ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:20351............12/4/20CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:KW, BJMP..............12/4/2020 9:27:50 AMCOPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.cP R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N44263Matthew R. PavekLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.12/4/20REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.5SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT B: SWPPP INSPECTION FORMATTACHMENT C: MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMNOTE: THIS INSPECTION REPORT DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL ASPECTS OF THE NATIONAL APOLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS) CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT ISSUED ON AUGUST 1,2013. THE COMPLETION OF THIS CHECKLIST DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE; IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE(S) TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.FACILITY INFORMATIONSITE NAME: FACILITY ADDRESS: PERMIT NUMBER:CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:INSPECTION INFORMATIONINSPECTOR NAME: _______________________ PHONE NUMBER: _________________________DATE (MM/DD/YYYY): _____________________TIME: ____________ AM / PMIS THE INSPECTOR CERTIFIED IN SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL AND IS IT DOCUMENTED IN THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)?IS THIS INSPECTION ROUTINE OR IN RESPONSE TO A STORM EVENT:RAINFALL AMOUNT (IF APPLICABLE): ____________IS THE SITE WITHIN ONE AERIAL MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPARED WATER?IF YES, FOLLOW APPENDIX A AND OTHER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTSNOTE: IF N/A IS SELECTED AT ANY TIME, SPECIFY WHY IN THE COMMENT AREA FOR THAT SECTION.EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.B)1.SOIL STABILIZATION WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR 14 DAYS? (7 DAYS WHERE APPLICABLE)2.HAS THE NEED TO DISTURB STEEP SLOPES BEEN MINIMIZED?3.ALL DITCHES STABILIZED 200; BACK FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE WITHIN 24 HOURS? (NOT MULCH)4.ARE THERE BMP'S FOR ONSITE STOCKPILES?5.ARE APPROPRIATE BMP'S INSTALLED PROTECTING INLETS/OUTLETS?6.DO PIPE OUTLETS HAVE ENERGY DISSIPATION?COMMENTS:SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.C)1.PERIMETER CONTROL INSTALLED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS?2.PERIMETER CONTROL TRENCHED IN WHERE APPROPRIATE?3.50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER MAINTAINED AROUND ALL SURFACE WATERS?3.1.IF NO, HAVE REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS BEEN INSTALLED?4.INLET PROTECTION ON ALL CATCH BASINS AND CULVERT INLETS?5.VEHICLE TRACKING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AT ALL SITE EXITS?6.ALL TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITHIN 24 HOURS?7.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS STAKED AND MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?8.ARE ALL INFILTRATION AREAS PROTECTED WITH A PRETREATMENT DEVICE?9.DO ALL STOCKPILES HAVE PERIMETER CONTROLS?COMMENTS:MAINTENANCE-EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (PART IV.E.)1.ARE ALL PREVIOUSLY STABILIZED AREAS MAINTAINING 90% GROUND COVER?2.ANY DITCH EROSION OBSERVED?3.PERIMETER CONTROL--HAS SEDIMENT REACHED ONE HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE?4.ARE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MAINTAINED AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY?COMMENTS:OTHER1.ARE ALL MATERIALS THAT CAN LEACH POLLUTANTS UNDER COVER?2.HAS ACCESS BEEN RESTRICTED TO ONSITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS?3.DOES ON-SITE FUELING ONLY OCCUR IN A CONTAINED AREA?4.ARE ALL SOLID WASTES BEING PROPERLY DISPOSED OF?5.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA COMPLETELY CONTAINED?6.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA MARKED WITH SIGN?COMMENTS:7.WERE ANY DISCHARGES SEEN DURING THIS INSPECTION, SEDIMENT, WATER, OR OTHERWISE?7.1.IF YES, STATE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL POINTS OF DISCHARGE. PHOTOGRAPH THE DISCHARGE AND DESCRIBE THE DISCHARGE (COLOR, ODOR, FOAM, OIL SHEEN, ETC). HOW WILL IT BE REMOVED? HOW DID THE DISCHARGEHAPPEN? HOW MUCH WAS DISCHARGED? HOW WILL IT BE STOPPED, AND HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO STOP? IS THE DISCHARGE GOING INTO AN ADJACENT SITE? WAS THE DISCHARGE A SEDIMENT DELTA? IF YES, WILL THE DELTA BERECOVERED WITHIN 7 DAYS?8.WILL A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BE UTILIZED IN THIS PROJECT AS REQUIRED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.D OF THE PERMIT? DESCRIBE:9.IS ANY DEWATERING OCCURRING ON SITE?9.1.IF YES, WHERE? WHAT BMP IS BEING USED? HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING DEWATERED? IS THE WATER CLEAR? WHERE IS THE WATER BEING DISCHARGED TO?10.IS A COPY OF THE SWPPP LOCATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE?11.HAS THE SWPPP BEEN FOLLOWED AND IMPLEMENTED ON SITE?12.IS A SEDIMENTATION BASIN REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?12.1.IF YES, ARE THEY MAINTAINED AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?13.IS THE TOPSOIL ON THIS PROJECT BEING PRESERVED?13.1.IF YES, EXPLAIN HOW THE TOP SOIL IS BEING PRESERVED. IF NO, EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS INFEASIBLE.14.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?14.1.DO ALL INFILTRATION AREAS HAVE PRETREATMENT DEVICES?15.DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTED DURING THE INSPECTION, REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, AND RECOMMENDED DATE OF COMPLETION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:16.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP:17.POTENTIAL AREAS OF FUTURE CONCERN:18.ADDITIONAL COMMENTSDISCLOSURES:·AFTER DISCOVERY, THE PERMIT REQUIRES MANY OF THE DEFICIENCIES THAT MAY BE FOUND IN THIS CHECKLIST BE CORRECTED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME. SEE PERMIT FOR MORE DETAILS.·THIS INSPECTION CHECKLIST IS AN OPTION FOR SMALL CONSTRUCTION SITES. LARGE CONSTRUCTION SITES AND LINEAR PROJECTS REQUIRE MORE EXTENSIVE/MORE LOCATION SPECIFIC INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS.·THE PERMITTEE(S) IS/ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMP'S AS WELL AS EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S UNTILANOTHER PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT ACCORDING TO PART II.B.5., OR THE PROJECT HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION AND A NOTICE OF TERMINATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.Y N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/A POWERS BLVDAUDUBON RDLAKE DRIVE WESTLAKE SUSAN SUNSET RIDGE PARK SITE POWERS RIDGE SENIOR LIVING 3 STORY POWERS RIDGE CONDOS 3 STORY POWERS RIDGE CLUBHOUSE 1 STORY FEDERAL PLASTICS CORP/ FEDERAL PACKAGE 1 STORY XYLEM COMPANY 1 STORY HOWARDS JEWLERY 1 STORY CLASSIC GYMNASTICS 1 STORY DIRECT SOURCE 1 STORY BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES/ VESSCO 1 STORY CHILDREN OF TOMORROW LEARNING CENTER 1 STORY SMARTRAC TECHNOLOGY 1 STORY IDI DISTRIBUTORS 2 STORY TRANS ALARM 2 STORY ONSITE TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 1 STORY QUALITY MOLD 1 STORY MAGNEY CONSTRUCTION 1 STORY WORLDWIDE TRADE CORPORATION/ THE TRANSFORMATION CLUB 1 STORY TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |SITE CONTEXT 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 02NOT TO SCALE TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |CONTEXT AERIALS 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 03 NORTH WEST AERIAL NORTH EAST AERIAL SOUTH WEST AERIAL SOUTH EAST AERIAL EXISTING 1 STORY BLDG. EXISTING 3 STORY BLDG. PROPOSED 3 STORY BUILDING BUILDING FOOTPRINT 41,506 SF LOWER GARAGE 110 STALLS LA KE DR I VE W. P R O P E R T Y L I N E B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT IN HATCHED AREA PROPERTY LINE DECK @ 1ST FLOOR LEVEL SURFACE PARKING, SEE CIVIL PICKLE BALL COURT DROP-OFF SURFACE PARKING, SEE CIVIL PATIO @ GARAGE LEVEL 10' FENCE AROUND PICKEL BALL COURT WITH LANDSCAPE SCREENING, SEE SCREENING LOADING/SERVICE PARKING AREA TRENCH DRAIN GARAGE ACCESS DECKDECKDECKDECK DECKDECKDECKDECKDECKDECK DECKPATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO DECKPATIO @ FIRST FLOOR LEVEL RAISED PLANTER BEDS ACCESS POINT @ GARAGE LEVEL TO OUTDOOR PATIO/PICKELBALL COURT MONUMENT SIGN STORMWATER FILTRATION POND, SEE CIVIL EXISTING MONUMENT SIGNAGE MAIN BUILDING ENTRANCE PORTE COCHERE 1 0 ' B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K L I N EPROPERTY LI NE10' BUILDING SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE CROSSWALK STRIPING, SEE CIVIL TRANSFORMER CROSSWALK STRIPING, SEE CIVIL LANDSCAPE SCREENING, SEE CIVIL 20 7 8 EXISTING PARKING TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |SITE PLAN 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 04 SCALE 1" = 30'-0"1 Site Plan PROPOSED 3 STORY BUILDING BUILDING FOOTPRINT 42,600 SF LOWER GARAGE 110 STALLS UTILITY E A SE M E N T DECK @ 1ST FLOOR LEVEL SURFACE PARKING -SEE CIVIL PICKLE BALL COURT PATIO @ GARAGE LEVEL ACCESS POINT @ GARAGE LEVEL TO OUTDOOR PATIO/PICKELBALL COURT SURFACE MOUNTED WALL LIGHTS LABEL MANUFACTURER ARTICLE NAME LIGHT LOSS FACTOR QUANTITYTYPE LIGMAN UMT-31428 MATRIX 4 SURFACE 0.80 LUMENS 3350 20 STRING LIGHTS - UB-EX_2400K_G19-F 0.8045 230 TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |LIGHTING PLAN 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 05 SCALE 1" = 20'-0"1 Lighting Plan SCALE 3" = 1'-0" Photometric Plan DN 1 08 110 PARKING STALLS TRASH ROOM STAIR 3 08 WATER / ELETRICAL OPEN AREA BELOW DECK ELEV.LOBBY. STAIRSTAIR 18' - 0" 26' - 0" 18' - 0"18' - 0" 26' - 0" 18' - 0" SERVICE 1002 SF 1D-D 951 SF 1D-A 965 SF 2-B 812 SF 1-A 974 SF 1D-A 965 SF 2-B 788 SF 1-A 787 SF 1-A 1072 SF 2-A 1046 SF 2D-A 690 SF 1M-A 995 SF 2-B 944 SF 1D-A 814 SF 1-A 813 SF 1-A 944 SF 1D-A984 SF 2-B 5652 SF COMMON 945 SF 2D-A 994 SF 2-A 691 SF 1M-A 995 SF 2-B 744 SF 1M-A 784 SF 1-A 997 SF 2-B 947 SF 1D-A 816 SF 1-A 996 SF 2-B 938 SF 1D-A 817 SF 1-A 986 SF 2-B 944 SF 1D-A 813 SF 1-A 989 SF 2-B 3 08 2 08 4 08 746 SF 1M-A TRASH ELEV. CORRIDOR CORRIDOR STAIR STAIR STAIR 261 SF COMMON RAISED DECK 77' - 0"570' - 5" PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIO PATIOPATIODECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECKTUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |FLOOR PLAN -GARAGE & FIRST 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 06 SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 1 Garage Plan P1 SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 2 1st Floor Plan 1 08 3 08 2 08 4 08 985 SF 2-D 1002 SF 2D-A 1210 SF 2-A 690 SF 1M-A 984 SF 2-B 744 SF 1M-A 784 SF 1-A 988 SF 2-B 946 SF 1D-A 815 SF 1-A 989 SF 2-B 998 SF 1D-D 913 SF 1D-B 920 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 812 SF 1-A 944 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 787 SF 1-A 786 SF 1-A 1072 SF 2-A 1034 SF 2D-A 689 SF 1M-A 1001 SF 2-B 937 SF 1D-A 813 SF 1-A 813 SF 1-A 944 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 774 SF 1-B 1016 SF 2-C 923 SF 1D-C 946 SF 1D-A 816 SF 1-A 986 SF 2-B 943 SF 1D-A 813 SF 1-A 986 SF 2-B 745 SF 1M-A 570' - 5"77' - 7"77' - 3"571' - 0" TRASH ELEV. STAIR STAIR STAIR CORRIDOR LOBBY DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECKDECKDECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK 1 08 3 08 2 08 4 08 1157 SF 2D-A 1048 SF 2-A 689 SF 1M-A 984 SF 2-B 744 SF 1M-A 784 SF 1-A 987 SF 2-B 943 SF 1D-A 812 SF 1-A 989 SF 2-B 998 SF 1D-D 1899 SF COMMON 917 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 812 SF 1-A 943 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 784 SF 1-A 784 SF 1-A 1067 SF 2-A 1032 SF 2D-A 686 SF 1M-A 1001 SF 2-B 937 SF 1D-A 813 SF 1-A 812 SF 1-A 943 SF 1D-A 984 SF 2-B 774 SF 1-B 1016 SF 2-C 922 SF 1D-C 943 SF 1D-A 812 SF 1-A 985 SF 2-B 943 SF 1D-A 812 SF 1-A985 SF 2-B 745 SF 1M-A 570' - 5"77' - 2"76' - 10"TRASH ELEV. STAIR STAIR STAIR CORRIDOR LOBBY 571' - 0" ROOF ABOVE ROOF ABOVE DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECKDECKDECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK DECK 1 08 3 08 2 08 4 08 6" / 12"6" / 12" 10" / 12"10" / 12" 4" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"TRASH EXHAUST VENT ELEVATOR OVERRUN 4" / 12"ROOF ACCESS ROOF ACCESS 4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"10" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"10" / 12" TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |FLOOR PLAN -2ND, 3RD, ROOF 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 07 SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 1 2nd Floor Plan SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 2 3rd Floor Plan SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 3 Roof Plan 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" Garage 89' -0" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAP ALUMINUM BALCONY SIDING #1 SIDING #3 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM SIDING #4 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM MASONRY #1 SIDING #2 BLADE SIGNAGE SIDING #1 MASONRY #1 SIDING #1SIDING #4 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM MASONRY #1 SIDING #2 ALUMINUM BALCONY ALUMINUM RAILING MASONRY #210' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"11' - 0"SIDING #3 6' - 5" 10' - 5"39' - 8"WALL SCONCES STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY WALL SCONCES41' - 9"EQ EQ 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAP ALUMINUM BALCONYSIDING #3 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM MASONRY #1 SIDING #1 ARCHITECTURAL METAL LOUVER SIDING #2 SIDING #1 MASONRY #1 SIDING #3SIDING #4 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM SIDING #4 SIDING #2 MASONRY #1SIDING #4 SIDING #3 MASONRY #1 ALUMINUM BALCONY PORTE COCHERE -STANDING SEAM -LIGHT BIRCH WOOD -MASONRY #2 MASONRY #2 10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"33' - 0"SIDING #1SIDING #1 STANDING SEAM METALCANOPY STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY WALL SCONCES 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" Garage 89' -0" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAP ALUMINUM BALCONY SIDING #1 SIDING #2 MASONRY#1 ALUMINUM RAILING MASONRY #210' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"11' - 0"EXTRA DARK BRONZE GARAGE & SERVICE DOOR STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY WALL SCONCES 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAPALUMINUM BALCONY SIDING #1 SIDING #2 MASONRY #2 10' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"MASONRY #2 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF WALL SCONCES FINISH SCHEDULE MASONRY #1 MANUFACTURER: SIOUX CITY BRICK TYPE: BRICK COLOR:BLACK HILLS VELOUR MASONRY #1 -ALTERNATE MANUFACTURER: TBD TYPE: CULTURED STONE STYLE:ASHLAR COLOR:FRESCO MASONRY #2 MANUFACTURER: TBD TYPE: CULTURED STONE STYLE:ASHLAR COLOR:WINTER SIDING #1 TYPE:FIBER CEMENT SIDING OR LP SMART SIDE MANUFACTURER: TBD SERIES: STATEMENT COLLECTION STYLE:BOARD & BATTEN SIZE:BATTENS @ 2' O.C COLOR:ARCTIC WHITE SIDING #2 TYPE:FIBER CEMENT SIDING OR LP SMART SIDE MANUFACTURER: TBD SERIES:STATEMENT COLLECTION STYLE: HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING SIZE:5" EXPOSURE COLOR:ARCTIC WHITE EXTERIOR FINISHES PERCENTAGES TOTAL -ALL ELEVATIONS MASONRY #1 4804 SF 11% MASONRY #2 4243 SF 10% SIDING #1 13466 SF 31% SIDING #2 8861 SF 20% SIDING #3 7288 SF 17% SIDING #4 5008 SF 11% TOTAL 43670 SF 100% SIDING #3 TYPE:FIBER CEMENT SIDING OR LP SMART SIDE MANUFACTURER: TBD SERIES:STATEMENT COLLECTION TYPE: HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING SIZE:7" EXPOSURE COLOR:GRAY SLATE SIDING #4 TYPE:FIBER CEMENT SIDING OR LP SMART SIDE MANUFACTURER: TBD SERIES:STATEMENT COLLECTION TYPE: HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING SIZE:7" EXPOSURE COLOR:RICH ESPRESSO ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES: MANUFACTURER: CERTAINTEED SERIES:LANDMARK ASPHALT SHINGLES COLOR:GEORGETOWN GRAY STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY: MANUFACTURER:FIRESTONE SERIES:KYNAR 500/ HYLAR 5000 TYPE:ALUMINUM COLOR:DARK BRONZE WINDOWS MANUFACTURER: TBD TYPE: DOUBLE HUNG COLOR:WHITE OR BLACK ALUMINUM STOREFRONT MANUFACTURER:TBD COLOR:DARK BRONZE METAL FLASHING MANUFACTURER: TBD TYPE: 22 GUAGE PREFINISHED COLOR:TO MATCH ADJACENT MATERIAL METAL LOUVER COLOR:PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT MATERIAL DECKS & RAILINGS MANUFACTURER: TBD TYPE: PRE MANUFACTURED ALUMINUM COLOR:WHITE OR BLACK LIGHTING METHOD: BACK LIT HEIGHT: 6'-0" WIDTH:4'-0" SIGN DISPLAY AREA: 24 SF 6' - 0"4' - 0"TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |ELEVATIONS 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 08 SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 1 North Elevation SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 2 South Elevation SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 3 East Elevation SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 4 West Elevation SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"5 Elevation - Monument Sign TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |RENDERINGS 12/03/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 09 OPTION 1: DARK BRICK, WHITE WINDOWS OPTION 2: DARK STONE, BLACK WINDOWS ENTRANCE VIEW VIEW FROM NORTH WEST CORNER AERIAL FROM NORTH EAST CORNER ENTRANCE VIEW VIEW FROM NORTH WEST CORNER AERIAL FROM NORTH EAST CORNER TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |PERSPECTIVES 12/04/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 10 SCALE1VIEW FROM SOUTH EAST SCALE3VIEW FROM SOUTH WEST SCALE6AERIAL VIEW 2 SCALE2VIEW FROM NORTH EAST SCALE5AERIAL VIEW 1 SCALE4VIEW OF ENTRANCE FROM SOUTH WEST ELEV. COMMON ELEV. LOBBY TRASHCORRIDOR 1041 SF 2-A 1386 SF 2D-B 693 SF 1M-A 991 SF 2-B 754 SF 1DM-A 789 SF 1-A 989 SF 2-B 818 SF 1-A 991 SF 2-B 869 SF 1D-D 991 SF 2-B 818 SF 1-A 889 SF 1D-A 991 SF 2-B 790 SF 1-A 789 SF 1-A 1099 SF 2D-A 1041 SF 2-A693 SF 1M-A 991 SF 2-B 889 SF 1D-A 817 SF 1-A 818 SF 1-A 889 SF 1D-A 991 SF 2-B 793 SF 1-B 1016 SF 2-C 925 SF 1D-C 887 SF 1D-A 818 SF 1-A 991 SF 2-B 889 SF 1D-A 818 SF 1-A 992 SF 2-B 754 SF 1DM-ASTAIR STAIR STAIR STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF STG. 25SF 889 SF 1D-A 987 SF 1D-B RECESSED DECK RRSTG. 65SF MECH./ ELEC. 77SF 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" Garage 89' -0" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAP ALUMINUM BALCONY SIDING #1 SIDING #3 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM SIDING #4 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM SIDING #1 MASONRY #1 SIDING #1SIDING #4 SIDING #2 COMPOSITE TRIM MASONRY #1 SIDING #2 ALUMINUM BALCONY ALUMINUM RAILING MASONRY #210' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"11' - 0"SIDING #3 WALL SCONCES STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY WALL SCONCES ALUMINUM AND GLASS RAILING MASONRY #2 @ RECESSED DECK MASONRY #1 LIGHT BIRCH WOOD POST 1st Floor 100' -0" Roof 132' -11 5/8" 2nd Floor 111' -7 7/8" Garage 89' -0" 3rd Floor 122' -3 3/4" ARCHITECTURAL ASPHALT SHINGLES WOOD FASCIA WITH PREFINISHED WRAP ALUMINUM BALCONY SIDING #1 SIDING #2 MASONRY#1 ALUMINUM RAILING MASONRY #210' - 8"10' - 8"11' - 8"11' - 0"EXTRA DARK BRONZE GARAGE & SERVICE DOOR STANDING SEAM METAL CANOPY WALL SCONCES ALUMINUM AND GLASS RAILING MASONRY #2 @ RECESSED DECK LIGHT BIRCH WOOD POST TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS |3RD FLOOR -DECK OPTION 12/16/201361 Lake Drive West, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen Independent Living 11 SCALE 1" = 20'-0"1 3rd Floor Plan - Deck Option SCALE 1" = 20'-0"2 North Elevation - Deck Option SCALE 1" = 20'-0" 3 East Elevation - Deck Option SCALE4VIEW FROM NORTH EAST - DECK OPTION NOTE: THIS OPTION SHOWS A DESIGN STUDY FOR AN ALTERNATE RECESSED DECK ON THE 3RD FLOOR COMMON SPACE. A FINAL COST EXERCISE BY GENERAL CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED IN ORDER TO CONFIRM THE INCORPORATION OF THE DECK IN THE FINAL BUILDING PERMIT PLANS IF ADD IN COST IS APPROVED BY OWNERSHIP. December 28, 2020 Chanhassen Planning Commission 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen MN. Subj: Site plan for 1361 Lake Drive West, Case number 2024-04, 110 unit Senior Living, Garage exit. Dear Planning Commission members, I am writing this letter to express my concern about the layout of the subject building. As shown in the published plans the garage exit will be on the East end of the building which in my opinion is a very bad location for it. I have three reasons for this thinking. 1. The exit facing east requires a LEFT TURN to get on to the drive which leads out of the property. As drivers we all must know that LEFT TURNS are always quite “testy” to navigate, requiring a clear approach and clear vision both directions. Not only does this exit require a LEFT TURN but the road onto which you must turn is entering a very sharp LEFT TURN itself at that point. What this means is that to see any traffic approaching from the left you must be able to look over your left shoulder while at the steering wheel of your car. I am 83 years old and in very good shape plus very limber, but that kind of contortion would be a bit much even for me. After entering the driveway by making the sharp left turn, the quite narrow drive takes a sharp right turn before meeting Lake West drive. This amounts to what is called an “S”curve in roadway lingo. Please remember this is a Seniors Living Apartment complex. Do we really need to test their driving skills in this way? 2. If on the East end of the 1361 building the garage exit would point directly into the exit for the 1321 Building. Needless traffic stress for Seniors to navigate. 3. Because it faces East it will be pointing directly into the bright morning sun. More needless distractions for the Seniors to navigate. And Seniors do most of their travel in the morning. If the 1361 garage exit were on the west end of the building none of the concerns mentioned above would apply. For the sake of all the Seniors who will live in 1361 please carefully consider my comments and have the building layout changed to put the garage exit on the west end. I am not 100% sure about this fact but if the exit were on the East those exiting would be driving over the 1321 driveway. I suspect this would require some sort of easement granted from the 1321 owners. I can tell you for sure that I would advise, discuss, advocate, and lobby long and hard the Board of Directors for 1321 to vote against such an easement. Thank you all very much for reading this letter and taking it into consideration. Sincerely, Sherman Beyl, Powers Ridge Condominiums owner 1321 Lake Drive West #307 952-448-0550 cc: Powers Ridge Condominiums Board of Directors CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. col.JNTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk ofthe City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy ofthe attached notice ofa Public Hearing to consider a request for a PUD Amendment, Site Plen Review and variance for a ll0-unit apartmetrt building (Lake Place) for senior living located at 1361 Lake Drive W. Zoned Planned Unit Development-Residential (PUD-R), Planning Case No. 2021-04 to the persons named on atlached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid 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 Treasuler, Carver County' Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Kim . Meuwissen. De Clerk (Seal) JEAil M SIECKLIIiGIttrynUoUfnotarih.btEd!bJ.e. 2020. No tary Public Subscribed and syern to before me this:l.qday of JYCor-nLlr- n Subject Parcel Dl!clrliner This map is neither a legally re@ded map nor a suruey and is nol intenaled lo.be us€d as one. illB map is a comptlation oI recods. infofiration and data located an vafous city, countv. stale and tederal oftces and othet sources reg€dlng the area shoun. and ls to be used br rebrence purposes only. The City does not watrant that the Geographic lnbmatbn System (GlS) Data used lo p.epare thas map are enor free and the City does not represeni trrat lne GIS Data can be used ior navigational facking or any other purpo; requanng exactng measurcrnent of di3l,ance o. dil€dion o. gecigion in the ifuon of Oeooraph'c featureg. The p.ecedrng drrdamer is provded puBuant to M';nesob SGMas Sa66.03, Subd 2'l (2000). and the user ol thrs map ac*nowtedgps Ulat $e City shall not be liable for any damag€s, and erpEssly waiveg all daims, and agrees to Gfend. indemntt, and hold hamless the Cily from any and all daims broooht bt u3er. its employeel o, agerrc. or thid parlles l6ich atige out of lhe users access or ure a,f datra provided. lr l\ DlscLlrnor Thig map is neithe. a legally recorded map .lor a suNey and ls not intended to b€ used as one. ihis map is a compilation ot records. info.maton and data located an vadous crty, coontv. stale and federa! olices and othet sources regardrng the area shown. and rs lo be used lor relerence pumo6* ooly The Cty does not wanant lhat the GeographE lnfomalron System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are eror free, and lhe City does not Ep.esent that the GIS Data can be used for navoatonal, ttacting or any other purpose requidng eracting measuemenl of dislance ol directlon or preosion in lhe depictjon ot geographic ,ealures The preceding disdaimer is provrded pursuant to Minnesota Statules 5466 03, Subd 2l (2000), and the user of thas map acknowledges that the cily shall not be liable tor any damaoes, and expressly waives all claims. and agrees to deEnd, andemnify, and hold harmless the CrV trom any and all claams brouoht b, User, its employees or agents. or third partres whidl adse ord of the use/s access or use of data provided. <TAX-NAMET ITAX_ADD_L1> <TAX ADD_L2tr (Next Record,(TAX_NAME) <TAX-ADD-LI r rTAX ADD L2r Subject Parcel a EI { .l 7) ,5. llhr{ L '{I.S 'i.. _ \.'1 .., , *w I'I hr \-'!!t'*ilh. 9, ra9- o9 Etig*tE iEEIEI;Eg .EIgfIEE€ti Bf,iBiggE; E iIB g* gfi Ig 0) o -go, cic IDil) E os tl, o o-o c -go- clE o o) o c(! 3 Jo Eo{, E o oo E Eoo GI o- JJ .= 6Io(! F 'E E ..t)pEoF o o c o C! E o o =o .E o o o) (o crto9B -o) !- oEtc Y oEe Er : c PE ooB e- Eee I re Eo - - c! -c o E! 9-o 9::6 EEE P';e!::o-e EgEE E iE EE;; ;gE E:tfrE[ [iHe*{; iE:E;Eg E HEEEEE Ee 5E.!2E ! oU)t-(JO-; o)(! 0.d6fg(!c(J(,rN(r)S o fo E o .g o .9. c')c'Eo o)E .9 ==o .9E o 0,ooo- fo- c)EF q,E fo -o c)E CDc.EgEd == :.E E 9k6Ed^'o 6-5=Etr=c<j'q f e ct)o-oi (E 6= .O o.9-oc EEfl =(tr o6>- :EH 3 =dE g_9 56qon+(.) o .>dl 0) o =oot-F. o) -o Eo.cO oca o oI tol(L o c il)p OJt c E FO EPoo E.FE 6El -EsElNO-oto c;>Eo6 ea(!q J,E(Eb ;6 9=Fr (5Ecq) c',o o(')c o(,=rl) o) E 0) coE = -o o) =co o,)E oo =o loCc o,) o E c) ooo f o) E o !co o) o coc rl)aooco) E!cCo o) (l.) o o,0) f q) oE =E cocE.c,o) U) c) =llJz (o =;; iEE:e ei EaEE :iiiEliiiiEii iEiE:EiEigiEi EEiiEEEiEE$iE EiiiiEIgiiEEEi ;gE!iiEEgEF:iE 0 6 s E 5 6! 3 E E EI E ! I E E as n ! q E Et,9 E E E ! s I E E 3 n oa ..o9EgOa) o=OE=ogo a!o o. CI >Er.9 o. a!9to-J 9.;o.=o-:o-Xf: -O(!.C =E i;t F c6 (, €o o G IJoJ i!oo o o- g,c (,o = 9.9,=o8.9oFJ-E .9o6o =CDG.S oEq,G .98ocz3 o GE oso EDg (, ID = .g.ELI'oo0, '=IE .JE=o€ode E.:og eE E1za ooa!E l!Eo ,rP o9 E*;Ar: ;v - - tr o- !f;asef5;r !lEt Esg aEIEiEEE EEIEEEET,-Ela€! E g Effi8BiE E EIE H€EE EE*E;EE ;; ' o 6 o E .ai fo to NoN o E (,6ot!E G IJ (5 o)o,([o, -ooi ()(l)'6' o- -o =a ()E Eoo E .9o ,2 E Eoo E t! L qst- tD gE,g"E eEE ,"oB ?Eee I i'e E .E e'- 8€€ E Eig gE:! € qE :='e HoYo, .q iioEa CL< >6Od,ir€ E_sB€Nia cEY.q aE; BEE ;eEl E HgE EE-i eEf;5FE6€ aoc(Jirrr(!G)r o fo E o ,E o .t2 o,E (u c)E .96 o- .12 o (l, oo, o, o)EF o)E )o -o o o q) E o)c.EOE -"EB eE*'o (!-tr-E(D'= (Dc:c<d'd =- dto-oi (5 b= 6 or.9 EET =(B 6E>:;E 8go€g;d '6 .q ql 3 dtotJ >,E(5d CO(t il) i,EgE .,q9= FJ .E o .9 F E c!oo t- o NoN |r) o (D 0) o ot-F. o) -o Eo "co oC foO oI tof(L .qc o)p q)t o) o)o d o o t e e o JJ .EIo-a(LF .Ec E U) E!oF CI o =o, .E o o o) <o iEieiisiiii t E E 6g E I g 6 E !6 3 I E E s n n_ d 2 E E I E .9 E E q I'6 'a E E oEcq) c')G o)ocorl) c) E o) -o c o)E = o) 3 o)E fo c ,F o.9 oc co rl)o) o!([ooa o !co (! E o)o C)E cC) E! C o)o o)co o) o o oo,).c,f E EocEo)Ea o)3 UJz (!B =; €..o9ECOG' lr=OE:ogo (lo ELo >ctoar 'E CLGeto-J 9i; at .= o. :lIi - il,(!.C =6 at .EF 06 q, t!o .9 o(, oJ .:,;6oo.Lo o- 't 0, (g 0) CL C;c'-() C) E 0) Eo o,.cl c(E o- o o() o cd l3t,lo t-t- o (! ;E333==333B833===3==B=====c d, G, G, G C 4 C, C, d, d, n C, 4 e, d, d, C, d, t G G t 4 c, c,ooooooo6660000006600000060 Y Y Y Y Y Y !Z :' Y Y Y Y Y :Z Y !Z V :Z Y Y :Z Y !Z :Z Y :zls55s33S3tSS5533ltttJS53J3 ,\ l\t e{ N a!N N .\r a{ a! N i\,1 a{NNNNNa\tc{NNNNNa\lrnrnmm(nmfi1 rnm an rn a'' an an (n rn an man.n,nfn(n m frr.nH !i .r !-{ ri .i 6 ooornfn lY) o!'E QoodN st .r N .n r^ (o o o H rn !n rn;j OOAoO o ooo AO.r.r ri () cjcjcjo5aeeaao V-1 Y-i !4 !/.1 |1. Vl {r .^ .a r.tl si |n !a r/1 .^ u) r,) .'| I,i !/r .n .^ ia ra r^ =nn€@6ao@rrco l!1mfn an.n.n rn .n .n ,n (n .'| rn (b.n.n fn ryi .rii3nF.*rlrl*gn sr..***r..r'.*n A r.- r.- r. r. n n r..r--n l.'.***{*n.{{*H.i-d = Er Fr.ro ,: -,- .! a o o o,] a o o qr .! o 11) o m m.n rn .i rn rn .n rn .n (r .n m.n.n.n.n fn .n rn.n.oGnl:14.4t4t4t4d'4t414.nl^r,rlnglrrtrnrrl .n ta ra .n r,r ut !a ta rn !,) r^ 1,l !/r r^ .^ rn ./) rri r,|6 9 E 1,) rn rn I^ r,l o !n rn fr 'Jl ur v) rn ut ra rn .,) ur rn u) .a ra rn r,) rn ra lrr ul r^ !a !n rn rn ui rri uiz ; [i z z z z z A Z Z Z Z Z Z 2 2 z Z Z Z Z Z 2 z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z z z Z Z Z z ^ "i 2 < i i i a i = 2 i i i i i 2 2 i i i i i i i i i i i 2 2 i 2 2 2 i 2 2 i iiz -- q t4 L! q qr z u/ trl r! ul !! L! ^l= ? d AAAAS aASAAa A a A a a a a e 3 8 a a a a s s e s a a a g A g A = * ii ; E = = r = < r r r r r - E - r r r r r I - - r r r r r r - r r r r - - r-r"l > X 1 Z 1 4 1 = 1 1 = z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z z z z z z 2Fri=55558;5d555855855655J555555855565588 d&GdG dAAESA EHSilEiFN*EHH3H$HilfiHiEEHTREHfiH$.^ ===== = di d d a da ee e ci d d d ct ci ci d d ct ct d ci ci d d ci d ci<-ii1:1 - z z z z z z z 2 2 2 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 2 2 2h < g 3 3333;3 3 3; = = B B B 3 B = 3 3 3 = E 3 = = 3 = = 3 3;3 3 = =a=82ee; e; h e 5 53885 E E 5 5 6 E 5E E E 5 E 5 E E E E 5 5 5 E5 5s'=3Hv vEvEE!EEsEEE gII9 EEMVy gEEV9 gEE?=Iyrs3rssrs55333stssss3t33ss33s3ts53333 -_l Q(-qq9aC,aoNori- n n 0q a a o e n n !! !! !! .! ..! .! ry .! .! ..r.r (t .rl N .! N .r{ .r N r\t .{ .! N N .r c{ N .{ N .t<t o d d mln(n mrnan m (nm rn arl rnan ai rn atrn dttY)an.nanan an tnfn fit rnan rn m ariFF{F.tFr ..t Fr Fr -i ii i i i - i ; .{ d i - i Ed, Pl, :*EEEEiig:EEEEEiaEEs;EEE:EEEE;iEgEEiEEE; o0 @ Q o o o o o o o N r.\ io r. rl (o .! {,l o .r N \l ot m !a or i\ <l ri m m !-r c! o (n F. <l .n (o(p F o m t !a (o F n co .r ai ry cr! o .n \o ro r. ao @ Q 0o or c.,t ol o rr .! N .n !t rl @ N r- 6 ^i 6o ^r .n m o m.! c.l m N.r.\t .\t At C{ N <t .t m.{ ..t .,,1 .{ ...1 N N c{ N - + -o oo o oo o e a o o o o oo o oo o o o o o o c) o oo o o oo o od o 66 cirnrar,rq)9!99!O(6q)ln.nrn!nrnu)rnl^!ar'r!'ll,t.n!n!arar'r!/)r^r'ir.rr^'n6!arnr',!6!n.! .D rn o o o o o .n o rn o o o o lll o rY) r! .') rn .n (n,n rn rn m m .n m rn .n rn .n (Yt m .o rn .n - \o lo rD st <l <t sl <l ro <l (o ro @ \o @ @ ro ro (o (o (o {o (o \o @ @ ro (.l (o (o ro @ to (o @ @ <, rrj (rtrn u) rn ln la .a rn l,) u) rn rA r^ r'r !n !6 !a rJt rrl !n ra !a !/) r^ rn r/1 rn rn !n (n rn lrt .n r'r !a ra rnai N .{ .\r N N .\r N .{ .\r N .{ r\r ..,J N c.,t N .{ a! N N .{ .{ r\t N .{ .\r N .,1 NNN^i^i 6i.,lN N.{.{ d,d,c,d,t d,ooooo o399!9 3!!t!! =IIIII Izzzz2 z =3==g**gls;=555;eeeeE;EE ^!zYY!ZYY!Zy!Z!aY!ZE3Jt3S3t333S3{a.raoooooioti<P m N .{ a- ao ch o !i rn at N a\l =m(nln anmman.n!aH!i.i 1 ' g g -eia3 ; ; ; g ; g 1 6 E ; ; ; E 3 EE a E e = i ffi 1 a E ; E ; a E fi ;a 3 3 g *"=A zII =C 3z tslJPPn|1|iP ts|ieP 6 5 ar it tu uJ uJ (,J uJ t., ur (r 66 6 6uJ 'J., qJ Giu aJ @d o '!o @ (' nrN N FFEEEFEEFEFEEEEEEEFsE!EEE!EEEEEEEEEIEEEE'^ 7 7 7 * ^ 7 ^ i< ;< 1 i< 7 ^ -^ 7 -^ ^ ^ ^ = a a ^ - - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - ^ ^ ^ x x ^ ^ x 9 9 9 E I I S B S I I I B I S S I = I B S E I B S B B E I E E E H B I S 9=99 ===g=====€€€€E{={{{{{={€{€{{==€{E€=€€{€€i t "= 12222E ! E E E i a r p= 6 s= g= p= i 6 p= i p= p= 6 s= 6 p= g= =ZZZ! i ! a gHH;gEEHdg='"=gBHEgEEEEaHB;EHEEH;*uilEEEH r)a)a)a)oriala)a)ooooooalooat.1ooo6al 6 a) ato o o(1 o.) ')6(.1 '1 ')6iiiiiii-.rrrrii-rtt-.rI-r..-rrr-rr-rr-rr 2 2222222 z z 2 2 2 2 22 2 22 2 Z ZZ2 2 z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z ----rrrrrr-r==========I==irrrrrrl-.r-rrr a 6 a a -s 6 v a v v v g s s -8 s sA I I v u v a fr fr fi, fr #, fr, fr fr fr fr fr fr fr fr, fr fr, frftfr Anli!drnhnrd rmmmEEEz z z 2 z z z z z z z 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?7 ? ?7 ? ? = =====ZZ==-- 2 =.2 = =ZZ =-- z 2 = - z z z z z z z z z z z z z z Lnui(,L (^ur( ( (n (, (Jr (, ur (, !,! (n (' (,! ur ur (n ( (' Ln t,r (,r ui 6 o (' (, (' u ol" ra ni ti G t"f inGGa^a^\ (rtt'L urtrtL urt.ttL ('( (r(nuur(r.ur (r ur (rr (! gJ u) uJ (! (r (r uJ ur (! r.; ur (! uJ t,.l t uJ (! (, r..r ii tl rl t,r trl rl r,l u' tl uJ uJ (,.r o tl u't uJ gl *e*e pppiieFF iiJ;n - -,!',i,i;. 6i&nJududed,J +;, - -uj && &,i d, i'' ur(n(,Ln(,r (n urur(^ (,a;r^G(nt (,r(n uJi l.r L tn L ur p@@ur(^ N ratnui 666E6Ea.s n i"; ln or rJ ur (o 6 i- Lo i! i! i., iu L,J Lu t! U UJ 6 6 6 6 6 [r i, iJJ Lu Lu i, i/J (, i],, i'r (! (^' ur u' (l) ur (p q) (! u) E uJ (, ur (, ur (rJ rrr (rr uJ w w 6 6 E 6 6 6 6 ur a! uJ ur'; iu (, (, ur (r' ll, ^r N r\'| N' sr N iJ EFFtrtr|'JF;itjiP}J t-oPPiggTFFEEEEEFEFEEEEEEEEEFEEFEEEEEEEEEI7 = 7 7 --. --. ^ 7 - 1 i< - ^ 7 V 7 7 7 7 ^ r< i - a ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ I ^ ^;i iti i'i iri i'i iri in m iri rn m 6 iir ir 6 rn E 9 B B E I B S I S S = B I B B g I B I I B I E 99=9 S H I S B E B B I E== =i= ==€ {= = {{ { {{ { =€= {€= {€€ { €.>e1E{ {==z-- -6 -9 EF QA7V€€ u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u E - ^J i'' nJ N M r\J N ^J r! ^r N o, o,, o, s o,, or (h c,, 6, oi o o 6i ai 6 6, a, oi o o . . . 5 H 5 5 5 5 $ $ $ E $ $ $ H S S $6i ni ni 6 ai ai @ (! (, (r) uJ (, (! ur r, s, (, ur (! (, (,r (, w EHHEHHEHHEFHEEHHEEEEEHE€HHg3HEEEEHEEEBEEin 6 6 6 < oo @ '\J 6 6 5 t P P (, uJ (Jl r\, 'o \r n) (r) ^J q, @ <h e ..r F @ N @ .\r (o @ @ ?.i 6 { @ O O 6 d (n t (/t sl rO F- (o .! C, ra (n Or Ol u) F r.t ^t !t l.\O 9 9 4 aO E @ ir !i ir C| ry I r/) ra r^ rn rn (O l. cO @ 6 oO qt .r cO F- aO - ul F 6 6 l..i .a !' r/i (d rDH o o o !r o o o Q O o O e e I A O A A A O O O O o o o o o O O O 6 Fr N 6 6 6 n -C C C C o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o O 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ct 6 6 6 ij ijln Ul r,1 rrt ul rn ta./) !n .A rA rA ul ql ra .,) rn r/,l Ut tl rn rn r^ t,) 1r1 .n lJt tr.n.a rA 6 .rt r,t ra 6.a !1 !,t .,t.rr q) rn.n (n (n.n rn.n.n (n (n oooo lYr r! an.n.n.n rn o q).r! (. (n.n m d1 (t) lrl .yr.n.n.n.nd)mtO (O (O (o @ (O (o (o (O rO @ rO (9 I (9 i! !0 (o (o (o (o {O rO @ @ \O (o \O i! @ \o iO iO !O (Ct (o @ (o i..i (ora I/) u) .n ra l,t r,) r,.l 1,) ut l,t 1,) I,t r.'l rn rrl vl rn rn .n rn r,1 .n ul rJl .n ra ra .,) ra ut I..t st rn !n .n r,1 1,] .^ r^N a\r arll r! art it ft N a\.| e! Na{ N a\t a{ N .\tN a{ rr ar r\ a\l a! a{ N .\t a{ f{ N Na{.!atar a\t a\t a\l a\l a! ===33==3=3333;=33=3d, c G, 4, d, c, d, c, c G, G, <, e & d, c, G n c,ooooo66000000000000 Y !' Y Y : Y :' :' Y Y Y Y Y Y !Z Y Y X Ys535S3tSttSS55l3Stt \l <l <l st I <t <t rt tl rl <t sl \l \l s <t <l rt !tan m (n an m m m m rn (n rn m rn an m an an lY) m =3=GCCooo s35 S i O tO Or .\l O @ 6 d CO I rr 01 Ol 01 o\OrNO OO O cO O1 .rOan an -l !-r H an N d ..1 a\'/dm(nd H d r-{.{ anat a{N a{ .rianNui ui r,l rn l,) iri aa ta .n iri !n iri !^ r^ ut rn r, .^ iri i lri r^ rrt I^ l^ .ri id It.n .n l!1 rt .n m .n fn m .n m rrl rn m .n-rYi-.ri.Yj .ri m .n mm.ri.'' 14dOo.r:tl\ F\ F- F\ l.- i\ r\ r\ i\ r\ i\ l.\ F\ l.\ F\ F- l\ ,.\ l.\ l.\ f\ l.\ F. N F\ r\ i\ I.t N F- i F- F. (o d F f. drd!-rF{.rda a; 'o -:.!m m dt m an an rn m rn .n an m an m an (n m an.n.n an m an m tn rn .n rn an an ii a't an ri i''i I I ,_.n rn ra rrt r,) r,r 1,.} rn I,t !r1 rJl r,,l ur ul ra ra ./) rn lt.t r.lt (n rrt rn rn rn ra 1,) rJt ut !a u) ra ra .ri ; ! = =(n ul 6 vt r/l rrt rJt rn rn !n .,) ra r^ rn r,t r..t (n sl rn rn rn rn 1,.l la ut vt !n rn 6 ln .ri rJi rrt .a - I li IZ Z Z Z Z Z Z 2 Z 2 z z z Z Z Z Z Z 2 z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z z z z z z z -; 2 yr ir .a X=====>E=>>E>>>E==>>>>>>=:E:>>>>==:fl=3=1r2 i i i ; i i i i 2 2 i i i i i ; i i i i i i i i i i i i 2 2 i z 'i i < > 4 i; i=Z^-,.i-2th th tt th ul th th .h th .a tt v\ tr1 ttvtt/l\/,ttt'/r t^ 66666666 6=<!?--= --. =th th th t^ tt\ th .t vt ti .i ttt vt tr1 q\ th ttt \,rr \r\ ui a a i i a uiv\lia iAi aAlAi 4 <<)+1qZ r r :! E - - - - - E - r r r r r - - E E r r r r - ! - r r r r - - o. = i 6 .c ; Oz z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z - = e :! t2 I z$fffSfSf+SSfSfSfSff++fS$fS+++sst=FEgEigP(J (J (J (J I I I u I I u (J (J (J (J (J (J (J I 9 (J (J (J (J 9 9 (J (J (J (J (J O u O 6 G O i! O 3 =o HEEHilHTBEgE;BHHBilBHHHEEEE=o.^EgEE.,-:E o 2 2 p 2 2 I 2 2 2 2 2 I e z z e 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2E : r E A==== E E : g E " E ==3===3==3====38=333==3333===33338=X9S=64 c c e e, c, c, G, c, d, d, c, d, aE c, e e e c, c, d, d, e G G oE d d n e e at d > J Y i! r = ttoooo o6o66o o6oooooooo6oooo66ooooo oi\<ztrao Y y Y Y Y y y y y y y y y y !a y y y y y y y y !a y y y y y y t = = Y u O = .t = 6srsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssi3:;3:E=6 d r.r t-r H .rH!-{H d66-rb--69 9 9 s !r tr s <r rr <r rr rr tr q !r sr tr rr tr s !r rr sr tr rr <r tr rr s tt <r <r s = 6,r 6 d (o Fm .r1 .n rn.i lY, in ai iY, an fil m ln rn .n (n m lrl dl in.n rn m.n,n 6 lrr lYr lr).t m,n (n 6 F oi 6 .{ |i i,1d !-.r,{ _..1 .{.{.i =3O€-t- :Er=E;EriEEiiEEugEEeE;=EEse E=gg*EeEfuEE =33=3=83=33333=c c a, d, d, c, c G, c, 6, d, d, d, G c,oooooooo60060c)0 YYY!YYYYY!.Y!YYYsssssstsssSSssS sl st $ rt I € rl st .!.{ t.r) t.r Ar.Yt rn (n m rn m d).n rn (n m trt d) an (n EEEEEE*EEEEEUEE=;EiuEsEEEEEEEil=iEEE?E=E !i ;=E E ,, Ere 6gHfl'al,ei SEEEHEEESEEEeESEt;rlddEsssssttaaBssBttsHs EEE'EETTlEII;E6[EEEEE!=:g;:3g!i=Ea;iiiI3 =3i EE E a ,,,,EE E E E EiEE EE E E EEiE E EE; iEEEEEE EE ;*;;;;;;;;;;;:=;H;a;i;nEiaii-e;uestEEH5 €EtiiiSSiii$ 5 iFiESHHFEEF IF $ i A $ EBHEH $H'E EHEE"$ E ;E X g -oF = E a € @@@tsr, (, uJ (, 5 N' UJ UJ Ch N g' (r' AJ { qT I\'roooP P(DPP6CbP(, AJ UJ ('J P N', ('(r)P5ur@<)NF'\lPP(/l(AFEgEEESF-;xx;;xrb6rrl>>mazoozza,0rroC,>{o==ao€, -- FPTJPPIJ@(^)UJUJUJUJ(!PUJAJAJSI'JUJ5P}IPP}IPOEEEEEES mmEmrnmF 990000cl-rrar-,€€==€{:! PPIJPP 5l\rot\JNn t\J(,rNtsPOPPPPPtsEgEEFFFEExi<xx-^^-i< oo900099(,,r-Fuv--,€=€€{€€{€ NJ A.,, AJ N N A) AJ N I.,, N AJ N AJ I\' AJ 19 AJ NJ N, N AJ N NJ AJ N',, N AJ N,, N N N N tJ N N' NGiJr6iji,urr,u,( Lnr !.Gi,i,! ut (^ (^ tr (, 9 qt u, L,r (,l (^ (, ( ur( urr,( vrutl,(4Iql6i6i6i66diiii6polroiiii56d66660roroiNJr.Joro1 0r or o! on r\, or or o! 01 00djajajur(rJuJn)^Jar..r@(r,i.Jia(u(]u'fjarajarqr@t4(,-JNJ^JuJ(,u'(!r,JuJlv!tr'|q,u,u'lq'9?G ai a^ a^ i^ G p a ut 5, (^ (,l i5 ia Lt !n O, (,l t' u or (^ o rri 5 P O (^ ( (t ( rri '4 Q I ui ( l,l or Vr HEEE€EEEEHHg€EEEEEFEEFEEEEEEEEEEgEEEEEEEE u; :i j; ui ar o b N 6 6 F d 6 - 6 6 i, E d i5 @ b o o o o u' lt (^ or or P c' ^J (D o n' o q' EEEEsEEEESEEa;<l iiii^:>:^iiirrininirmm|n>=>.noo099000zozo,uu-urrvot9,{==€{==€i{9= o.\oo =;d.4oo ts F o sH Ouraozo<o-E c =o IF oa z(Jrqi4.ro69 E= o Ote(o |.\ F d 3IFlo PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Consider a Request for Setback Variances for the Construction of a Deck on Property Located at 3616 Red Cedar Point Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.2. Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, Associate Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­01 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13­foot shoreland setback and 18­foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant initially requested an 18­foot shoreland and 18­foot east front yard setback variances to expand an existing deck with a nonconforming 13­foot encroachment into the property’s 75­foot shoreland setback; however, after consulting with staff they agreed to a proposed redesign which will only require a 13­foot shoreland setback variance. They have stated that the existing 100 square­foot deck is too small to provide a useable outdoor area, and that due to the location of the existing home and deck, it cannot be expanded without a variance. The applicant has noted that many surrounding properties have been granted variances to allow for various updates and improvements, and that other properties in the area have nonconforming decks. They also state that they feel the proposed 306 square­foot deck is modestly sized and that due to the fact it is only four feet above grade, it will not have a significant visual impact on other residences. Finally, they explain that their goal in requesting the variance is to create a reasonably sized deck to facilitate their enjoyment of the property. It has been the City’s general practice to require properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks to maintain those setbacks and not encroach further into the required shoreland setback. In this case the applicant’s existing deck has a nonconforming 62­foot shoreland setback, and all portions of the proposed expansion, save the stairs, would maintain that setback. Staff felt that a fairly minor revision to the proposed plans would allow for the stairs to be positioned off of the west of the deck where they will not increase the existing encroachment into the 75­foot shoreland setback. Since no feature of the site necessitated the applicant’s proposed placement of the stairs, staff requested that they relocate the stairs to allow for a 62­foot shoreland setback rather than the requested 57­foot shoreland setback. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to reposition the stairs. Given the unique nature of the parcel, staff does not have any concerns with the request to extend the deck into the east front yard. Note: From conversations with the applicant, staff anticipates that at some point in the future a variance will be PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for Setback Variances for the Construction of a Deck on Property Locatedat 3616 Red Cedar PointSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.2.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­01PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13­foot shoreland setback and 18­foot east frontyard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts theattached Findings of Facts and Decision.SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant initially requested an 18­foot shoreland and 18­foot east front yard setback variances to expand anexisting deck with a nonconforming 13­foot encroachment into the property’s 75­foot shoreland setback; however,after consulting with staff they agreed to a proposed redesign which will only require a 13­foot shoreland setbackvariance. They have stated that the existing 100 square­foot deck is too small to provide a useable outdoor area, andthat due to the location of the existing home and deck, it cannot be expanded without a variance.The applicant has noted that many surrounding properties have been granted variances to allow for various updates andimprovements, and that other properties in the area have nonconforming decks. They also state that they feel theproposed 306 square­foot deck is modestly sized and that due to the fact it is only four feet above grade, it will nothave a significant visual impact on other residences. Finally, they explain that their goal in requesting the variance is tocreate a reasonably sized deck to facilitate their enjoyment of the property.It has been the City’s general practice to require properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks to maintainthose setbacks and not encroach further into the required shoreland setback. In this case the applicant’s existing deckhas a nonconforming 62­foot shoreland setback, and all portions of the proposed expansion, save the stairs, wouldmaintain that setback. Staff felt that a fairly minor revision to the proposed plans would allow for the stairs to bepositioned off of the west of the deck where they will not increase the existing encroachment into the 75­foot shorelandsetback. Since no feature of the site necessitated the applicant’s proposed placement of the stairs, staff requested thatthey relocate the stairs to allow for a 62­foot shoreland setback rather than the requested 57­foot shoreland setback.The applicant has indicated that they are willing to reposition the stairs. Given the unique nature of the parcel, staff doesnot have any concerns with the request to extend the deck into the east front yard. Note: From conversations with the applicant, staff anticipates that at some point in the future a variance will be requested impacting the footprint of the existing structure or for the replacement of the existing home. Staff has informed the applicant that if such a variance request is received, staff will use conditions shown on the survey dated February 27, 2020 to determine the extent of the property’s nonconformities, rather than any conditions that could be created if the present variance request is approved. APPLICANT Red Cedar Point LLC, 3627 Red Cedar Point Road, Excelsior, MN 55331 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:  "RSF" ­ Single­Family Residential District LAND USE:Residential Low Density ACREAGE:  .16 acres  DENSITY:  NA  APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 1, General Provisions Section 1­2, Rules of Construction and Definitions Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single­Family Residential District Section 20­615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks BACKGROUND County records indicate that the house was built in 1920. In July of 2020, the city issued a building permit for a substantial interior remodel. In August of 2020, the owner applied for a permit to expand the deck and was informed that a variance would be required. Several permits for maintenance are also on file with the city. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approves a 13­foot shoreland setback and 18­foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. 1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. Stairs must be relocated so as to maintain a 62­foot shoreland setback. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for Setback Variances for the Construction of a Deck on Property Locatedat 3616 Red Cedar PointSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.2.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­01PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13­foot shoreland setback and 18­foot east frontyard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts theattached Findings of Facts and Decision.SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant initially requested an 18­foot shoreland and 18­foot east front yard setback variances to expand anexisting deck with a nonconforming 13­foot encroachment into the property’s 75­foot shoreland setback; however,after consulting with staff they agreed to a proposed redesign which will only require a 13­foot shoreland setbackvariance. They have stated that the existing 100 square­foot deck is too small to provide a useable outdoor area, andthat due to the location of the existing home and deck, it cannot be expanded without a variance.The applicant has noted that many surrounding properties have been granted variances to allow for various updates andimprovements, and that other properties in the area have nonconforming decks. They also state that they feel theproposed 306 square­foot deck is modestly sized and that due to the fact it is only four feet above grade, it will nothave a significant visual impact on other residences. Finally, they explain that their goal in requesting the variance is tocreate a reasonably sized deck to facilitate their enjoyment of the property.It has been the City’s general practice to require properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks to maintainthose setbacks and not encroach further into the required shoreland setback. In this case the applicant’s existing deckhas a nonconforming 62­foot shoreland setback, and all portions of the proposed expansion, save the stairs, wouldmaintain that setback. Staff felt that a fairly minor revision to the proposed plans would allow for the stairs to bepositioned off of the west of the deck where they will not increase the existing encroachment into the 75­foot shorelandsetback. Since no feature of the site necessitated the applicant’s proposed placement of the stairs, staff requested thatthey relocate the stairs to allow for a 62­foot shoreland setback rather than the requested 57­foot shoreland setback.The applicant has indicated that they are willing to reposition the stairs. Given the unique nature of the parcel, staff doesnot have any concerns with the request to extend the deck into the east front yard.Note: From conversations with the applicant, staff anticipates that at some point in the future a variance will berequested impacting the footprint of the existing structure or for the replacement of the existing home. Staff has informedthe applicant that if such a variance request is received, staff will use conditions shown on the survey dated February27, 2020 to determine the extent of the property’s nonconformities, rather than any conditions that could be created ifthe present variance request is approved.APPLICANTRed Cedar Point LLC, 3627 Red Cedar Point Road, Excelsior, MN 55331SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  "RSF" ­ Single­Family Residential DistrictLAND USE:Residential Low DensityACREAGE:  .16 acres DENSITY:  NA APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 1, General ProvisionsSection 1­2, Rules of Construction and DefinitionsChapter 20, Article II, Division 3. VariancesChapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming UsesChapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management DistrictChapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single­Family Residential DistrictSection 20­615, Lot Requirements and SetbacksBACKGROUNDCounty records indicate that the house was built in 1920.In July of 2020, the city issued a building permit for a substantial interior remodel.In August of 2020, the owner applied for a permit to expand the deck and was informed that a variance would berequired.Several permits for maintenance are also on file with the city.RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approves a 13­footshoreland setback and 18­foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to theConditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets allrequirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required afterplan review.3. Stairs must be relocated so as to maintain a 62­foot shoreland setback. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact (Approval) Variance Document (Approval) Development Review Application Variance Request Letter Survey Affidavit of Mailing WRC Memo CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 5, 2021 CC DATE: January 25, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021 CASE #: PC 2021-01 BY: MYW SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant initially requested an 18-foot shoreland setback and 18-foot east front yard setback variance to expand the existing deck; however, after consulting with staff they agreed to a 13- shoreland setback variacne. The property’s current deck has a nonconforming 62-foot shoreland setback and the proposed increase in size requires a variance from the 75-foot lake setback. The existing home has a nonconforming 15.3-foot east front yard setback and extended the deck out from the edge of the house would require a variance from the 30-foot east front yard setback. LOCATION: 3616 Red Cedar Point Road APPLICANT: Dave Melin Red Cedar Point LLC 3627 Red Cedar Point Road Excelsior, MN 55331 PRESENT ZONING: “RSF” – Single-Family Residential District 2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: .16 acres DENSITY: NA LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant initially requested an 18-foot shoreland and 18-foot east front yard setback variances to expand an existing deck with a nonconforming 13-foot encroachment into the property’s 75-foot shoreland setback; however, after consulting with staff they agreed to a proposed redesign which will only require a 13-foot shoreland setback variance. They have PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13-foot shoreland setback and 18-foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 2 stated that the existing 100-square foot deck is too small to provide a useable outdoor area, and that due to the location of the existing home and deck it cannot be expanded without a variance. The applicant has noted that many surrounding properties have been granted variances to allow for various updates and improvements, and that other properties in the area have nonconforming decks. They also state that they feel the proposed 306-square foot deck is modestly sized and that due the fact it is only four feet above grade, it will not have a significant visual impact on other residences. Finally, they explain that their goal in requesting the variance is to create a reasonably sized deck to facilitate their enjoyment of the property. It has been the city’s general practice to require properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks to maintain those setbacks and not encroach further into the required shoreland setback. In this case, the applicant’s existing deck has a nonconforming 62-foot shoreland setback, and all portions of the proposed expansion, save the stairs, would maintain that setback. Staff felt that a fairly minor revision to the proposed plans would allow for the stairs to be positioned off of the west of the deck where they will not increase the existing encroachment into the 75-foot shoreland setback. Since no feature of the site necessitated the applicant’s proposed placement of the stairs, staff requested that they relocate the stairs to allow for a 62-foot shoreland setback rather than the requested 57-foot shoreland setback. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to reposition the stairs. Given the unique nature of the parcel, staff does not have any concerns with the request to extend the deck into the east front yard. Note: From conversations with the applicant, staff anticipates that at some point in the future a variance will be requested impacting the footprint of the existing structure or for the replacement of the existing home. Staff has informed the applicant that if such a variance request is received, staff will use conditions shown on the survey dated February 27, 2020 to determine the extent of the property’s nonconformities, rather than any conditions that could be created if the present variance request is approved. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 1, General Provisions Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District. Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks. BACKGROUND County records indicate that the house was built in 1920. In July of 2020, the city issued a building permit for a substantial interior remodel. 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 3 In August of 2020, the owner applied for a permit to expand the deck and was informed that a variance would be required. Several permits for maintenance are also on file with the city. SITE CONSTRAINTS Zoning Overview The property is a corner lot zoned Single-Family Residential District and is located within the Shoreland Management District. This zoning classification requires riparian lots to be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have front yard setbacks of 30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, a shoreland setback of 75 feet, and limits parcels to a maximum of 25 percent lot cover. Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height, and properties are allowed one water oriented accessory structure up to 250 square feet in size within the 75-foot shoreland setback. The lot is 7,206 square feet with 1,015 square feet (14.1 percent) lot cover. The southern lot line has only 77.35 of the required 90 feet of lot frontage and the north lot line has only 45 of the required 90 feet of lake frontage. The existing home has nonconforming 72.8-foot shoreland, 15.3-foot east front yard, and 15-foot south front yard setbacks. The existing deck’s stairs have a nonconforming 62-foot shoreland setback and feature a 12-square foot landing with a nonconforming 59-foot shoreland setback. The deck itself has a nonconforming 66-foot shoreland setback. The property does not meet the minimum size or garage requirements for a single-family structure. The property’s parking pad is located within city right-of-way. The other features of the property appear to meet the other requirements of the City Code. Bluff Creek Corridor This is not encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs on the property. Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a floodplain. Shoreland Management The property is located within a Shoreland Protection District. This district requires a 75-foot structure setback from the lake’s ordinary high water level and limits the property to a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent. It also requires 90 feet of lot width and a minimum 20,000 square feet of lot area. 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 4 Wetland Protection There is not a wetland located in the development site. NEIGHBORHOOD Red Cedar Point The plat for this area was recorded in August of 1913. Over the subsequent century, the City of Chanhassen was formed, a zoning code was passed, the zoning code was amended numerous times, and buildings were built, demolished, and rebuilt to meet the standards and needs of the existing ordinances. Additionally, the neighborhood’s roads were not always constructed within their designated right of way. In some areas, this has led to portions of buildings being located in the right of way and portions of these roads being located within residents’ property lines. Very few properties in the area meet the requirements of the city’s zoning code, and most properties either are nonconforming uses or are operating under a variance. Variances within 500 feet: 3603 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 2015-14): 20.2’ front setback, 17’ lake setback (two-story attached garage) - Approved 3605 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1988-11): 4’ E side setback, 2’ W side setback, 26’ lake setback (garage, addition intensifying non-conforming) - Approved 3607 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1981-08): 7.5’/13.5’ lake setback (deck/stairs) – Approved (PC 1992-01): 1.5’ side setback, 14.5’ lake setback (addition expanding non-conforming) - Approved 3613 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1976-11):10’ lot frontage (house) - Approved (PC 1979-02): 20’ and 13’ front setback, sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot area (house) - Approved (PC 1983-09): 12’ front setback, 2’ side setback, 7’ lake setback (house) – Approved 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 5 3617 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 2018-01): 11.5’ front setback, 22.1’ lake setback, 11% LC (home) – Approved* (PC 2019-03): 8.5’ front setback, 25.1’ lake setback, 10.4% LC (home) - Approved 3618 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1993-06): 8’ side setback, 15’ lake setback (deck and porch) - Approved 3622 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 2017-09): Intensify non-conforming by raising garage in side yard setback (garage) - Approved 3624 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1985-20): 1.2’ front setback, 4.8’ side setback (detached garage) - Approved 3625 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 2009-15): 15.5’ front setback, 6.5’ E side setback, 9’ driveway setback, 18.5’ lake setback, 12.3% LC, allow one car garage (house) - Approved 3627 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 2016-11): 13.6’ lake setback, 4.8% LC (home) - Approved 3628 Hickory Rd. (PC 2002-05: 13’ front setback (Hickory), 2’ front setback (Red Cedar Point), 5’ side setback (detached garage) - Approved 3629 Red Cedar Point Rd. (PC 1980-08): 12’ front setback, 3’ foot side setback, +1.5’ side setback for (chimney), 20’ lot width, 40’ lot frontage, 13,000 square feet lot area (house) - Approved (PC 1987-13): 12’ front setback, 3’ side (house) - Approved 3633 South Cedar Drive (PC 2006-04): 22.5’ front setback, 15.8’ front setback, 2.39% LC (garage) - Approved 3637 South Cedar Drive (PC 1978-07): 19’ front setback (garage) - Approved (PC 2004-07): 19.25’ front setback, 4’ lake setback, 15% LC (addition) - Approved (PC 2008-04): 20.2’ front setback, 8’ side setback (house) - Approved 3701 South Cedar Drive (PC 1980-04): 14’ front setback, 25’ lake setback, and sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot (house) - Approved (PC 1985-27): 5’ front setback, 35’ lake setback (house) – Approved (PC 2015-07): increase existing non-conformity (enclose deck 15’ in lake setback) - Approved 3705 South Cedar Drive (PC 1996-04): 3’ side setback, 31’ lake setback, 25% LC (house) – Approved 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 6 *Note: Variance 18-01 lapsed due to one year passing without construction occurring. ANALYSIS Shoreland Setback The city’s shoreland ordinance establishes a 75-foot structure setback in order to prevent the installation of lot cover near ecologically sensitive areas, creates separation between structures and the lakeshore, and provides for a consistent visual aesthetic for riparian properties. Due to the important role that this setback plays in protecting the quality of the city’s lakes and the potential for these variances to impact both the neighboring properties and all users of the city’s lakes, the city has historically been very hesitant to grant shoreland setback variances. When these properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks apply for variances to expand, staff has always recommended that the expansion be required to maintain the existing lake setback. In this case, the existing deck and stairs encroach 13 feet into the required 75- shoreland setback. The applicant does not believe that the existing 6-foot by 14-foot deck provides adequate space and is proposing to replace it with a 10-foot by 29-foot deck. The edge of the proposed deck would maintain the distance from the lake of the current stairs, with its own stairs terminating five feet closer to the lake. After staff expressed concern with the proposed placement of the stairs, the applicant agreed to relocate them to the west side of the deck in order to maintain the existing shoreland setback. Surveying aerial photos of the surrounding properties show that nearly every riparian property in the neighborhood has a lake facing deck or patio, and the deck proposed by the applicant appears to be of a fairly similar size to those located on nearby properties. Staff agrees that the existing deck’s 6-foot width provides a very limited amount of space for outdoor gatherings, and that proposed expansion is of a reasonable size and in keeping with the general standards of the neighborhood. 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 7 While the applicant has agreed to relocate the stairs, staff wishes to articulate the reasons why the city requested the redesign. The proposed location of the stairs did not appear to be necessitated by any feature of the property and resulted in the new deck encroaching an additional five feet into the shoreland setback. A fairly minor redesign, shown above, shifting the stairs to the west side of the deck provided for similar functionality while maintaining the existing nonconforming shoreland setback. Staff was concerned that granting a variance to increase a nonconforming shoreland setback to accommodate a design choice could be used as a precedent for other more impactful encroachments into shoreland setbacks within this neighborhood. This concern is especially relevant as multiple properties within the Red Cedar Point neighborhood have nonconforming shoreland setbacks and will likely be rebuilt or remodeled within the next few years. Staff feels it is very important that the precedent that variances to the shoreland setback only be granted to address practical difficulties and that they are not granted to accommodate design choices be maintained. For these reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve a 13-foot shoreland setback variance to permit the deck expansion. Front Yard Setback The property is an atypical corner lot, due to the fact that the public right-of-way along the east lot line extends to the lake, but is only occupied for approximately half of its length by Red Cedar Point Road which turns east, becoming a dead-end drive serving five houses. The property does not have a garage and access is facilitated by a driveway/parking pad primarily located in the unimproved right-of-way area northeast of the home. While this easternmost segment of Red Cedar Point Road is very low traffic, it is an improved roadway and, as such, the property has a 30-foot front yard setback along its east lot line. The northeast corner of the home is located 15.3 feet from the east property line. The applicant is proposing to extend the new deck 10 feet out from the rear of the home which, due to angle of the house and property line, would place the edge of the deck 12 feet from the east property line. Numerous other properties in the areas do not meet the required front yard setbacks and the city has granted four front yard variances to properties within 500 feet allowing homes or garages, more visually impactful structures, to be located within 12 feet of a front lot line. 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 8 Due to the fact that the deck will only be approximately 4-feet above grade, is of open construction, is primarily oriented towards the lake, and is not facing another residential structure, staff does not believe that granting the front yard setback variance will negatively impact any of the surrounding properties. Since the road in question is extremely low traffic and does not extend the full length of the lot line, staff does not believe that any sightline or safety concerns that would typically arise from a requested variance from a corner lot’s front yard setback apply. For these reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the requested 18-foot east front yard setback variance. Impact on Neighborhood Red Cedar Point is one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city. Many of its properties are nonconforming uses, and 16 of the 25 properties within 500 feet of 3616 Red Cedar Point Rd have been granted at least one variance. Of these 16 properties, 10 have a variance are for reduced front yard setbacks and 11 were permitted a reduced shoreland setback. Many of the nine properties which do not have a variances also have nonconforming front yard and shoreland setbacks. The applicant’s proposal to expand the existing deck is a relatively minor alteration that is not expected to negatively impact any of the surrounding properties or environmental features. Again, staff wishes to articulate why the city requested that the applicant relocate the steps. Whenever possible, the city requires properties requesting variances to maintain their existing nonconforming lake setbacks, and staff believed that a relatively minor design change would allow the applicant to adhere to this standard while still expanding the deck. Staff was concerned that granting the variance as requested could contribute to establishing the precedent that homeowners can increase their nonconforming shoreland setbacks for aesthetic or design reasons, which has the potential to lead to other more impactful variance requests. For those reasons, staff requested the applicant relocate the stairs to maintain the existing nonconforming setback. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approve a 13-foot shoreland setback and 18-foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision. 1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed the building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. Stairs must be relocated so as to maintain a 62-foot shoreland setback. 3616 Red Cedar Point Road January 5, 2021 Page 9 ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Decision (Approval) 2. Variance Document (Approval) 3. Development Review Application 4. Variance Request Letter 5. Proposed Plan and Survey 6. Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice 7. WRC Memo g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-01 3616 red cedar point road var\staff report_3616 red cedar point_var.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION (APPROVAL) IN RE: Application of Red Cedar Point, LLC, for a variance to expand a nonconforming deck on a property zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF) - Planning Case 2021-01. On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 1, Block 1, Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta. 4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The city’s shoreland ordinance establishes a 75-foot structure setback in order to prevent the installation of lot cover near ecologically sensitive areas, creates separation between structures and the lakeshore, and provides for a consistent visual aesthetic for riparian properties. When properties with existing nonconforming shoreland setbacks apply for variances to expand, the city has with few exceptions required that the expansion maintain the existing lake setback. In this case, the applicant’s proposal does not create additional lot cover and the low open profile of the proposed deck will not be visually intrusive. Many of the surrounding structures or their architectural elements similarly protrude into the required lake setback and the applicant’s proposal would not disrupt the existing visual aesthetic. The request variance would primarily expand the deck horizontally while maintaining the existing shoreland setback, with the exception of the stairs which would encroach closer to the lake. Granting the variance to expand the deck while requiring that the stairs be relocated 2 to maintain the existing deck’s nonconforming lake setback would be consistent with past practice and in harmony with the intent of the City’s shoreland ordinance. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The applicant’s proposed deck is modestly sized and consistent with what is found on other properties in the neighborhood. The small size of the lot and home’s placement on the lot mean that no expansion of the deck would be possible without a variance. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to the substandard size of the lot and nonconforming status of the existing structure. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: Red Cedar Point is one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city. Many of its properties are nonconforming uses, and 16 of the 25 properties within 500 feet of 3616 Red Cedar Point Road have been granted at least one variance. Of these 16 properties, 10 have a variance for reduced front yard setbacks and 11 were permitted a reduced shoreland setback. Many of the nine properties which do not have a variances also have nonconforming front yard and shoreland setbacks. The proposed deck appears to be similar in size and orientation to other decks within the area and is not expected to negatively impact any of the surrounding homes or environmental features. Overall, the proposal appears to be consistent with the exiting character of the neighborhood. That being said, the request to increase the deck’s nonconforming setback to accommodate the proposed placement of the stairs is denied. Whenever possible, the city requires properties requesting variances to maintain their existing nonconforming lake setbacks, and a relatively minor design change will allow the applicant to adhere to this standard while still expanding the deck. Granting the variance as requested could contribute to establishing the precedent that homeowners can increase their nonconforming shoreland setbacks for aesthetic or design reasons, which has the potential to lead to other more impactful variance requests, potentially altering the character of the locality. 3 f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report #2021-01, dated January 5, 2021, prepared by MacKenzie Young- Walters, is incorporated herein. DECISION “The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13-foot shoreland setback and 18-foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck, subject to the Conditions of Approval.” 1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. Stairs must be relocated so as to maintain a 62-foot shoreland setback ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-01 3616 red cedar point road var\findings of fact and decision 3616 red cedar point road (recommended).doc 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2021-01 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13-foot shoreland setback and 18-foot east front yard setback variance to permit expanding the existing deck. 2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta. 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review 3. Stairs must be relocated so as to maintain a 62-foot shoreland setback. 4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. 2 Dated: January 5, 2021 CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: (SEAL) Elise Ryan, Mayor AND: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2021 by Elise Ryan, Mayor, and Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\variance document 21-05.doc t Sets* Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) subnirarDate: fSIq IAa Pc ode: (Refer to ttl€ a,4]rcofiate Applicdirt Checuisr tor ! Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers ..... E Conditional Use Permit (CUP) ! Single-Family ResidenceE Atl others................ E lnterim Use Permit (lUP) ! ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence. n Att others E Att others 2l cc Date: I :<6GDay Revie{, Date: rre,qui,ed subrifrd lnfo,r,,€l*n that nrus, a@opny this aNi@li,l) $600 E subdMsion (SUB)$100 E create 3 tots or less ........................................ $300 n Create over 3 |ots.......................$600 + $15 per lot( tots) $325 $425 $325 $425 app tr ETtr ! Metes & Bounds (2 lots) n Consolidate Lots............. fl Lot Line Ad.iustmentE rinal P|at......... (lncludes $450 'Additimal escrow escrow for attomey costs)' may be rcquirBd ,or ottler applications ..........$300 ..........$1s0 ....$150 ....$700 ! Rezoning (REZ) thtough th€ devdopmont cootracr I etanned Unit Development (PUD) .-..... .... .. .. $750 E Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 E Minor Amendment to existing PUD_................ $100 (Additin€l recoding fees may apply) E Sign Plan Review ........ $1s0 E Site Ptan Review (SPR) E Administrative .................-... $100 n Commercial/lndustrial Districts'.........-....-....... $500 Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:( thousand square feet) 'lndude number of g!S!@ employees: 1ndude numb€r of Ig! 6mdoyees: El Residential Districts......................................... $500 Plus $5 per dwelling unit ( units) A Notilication Sign lcity to instatt and rBmove) .......................... ........ $200 f] Wetand Alteration Permit (WAP) n Single-Family Residence................... E at oters... ! zoning Appeal.. ! Zoning ordinance Amendment (zoA)................. $500 llqlE: Wher multiple appllcations are processed concurtently, the appropriate fee sh8ll be charg€d for each appllcatlon. ....... $2oov4b $3 per address addresses) ... $50 per document " ""$500 E1"ri"n""(vAR)........... ........ $150 ........ $27s ................... $100 E property Owners' List within 500' (city to gererdte afier pre.applicatioo rn€et ng) . (Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that' ' E ConOitional Use Permit E Vacation I Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) lv)........... lnterim Use Permit Variance Easements L_ easements) E Site Plan Agreement E Wefland Alteration Permit! oeeos TOTAL FEE: CITT OT CHAI{HASSIII APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 2: Required lnformation Description of Proposal:3r\ LE* 9-"1 C.l-.P',^t P"^JProperty Address or Location: Parcef #: Z5 LLo ee I O Legal Description:+t Rrf OL Total Acreage:-1,l,DL +Wetlands Present?EYes E tto Present Zoning:Selecl One Requested Zoning Select One Present Land Use Design "1;on. Select One )Requested Land Use Designation:Select One {2.r M Itr Existing Use of Property:a e)iJz-L-.,,.2 lcheck box if separate nanative is attached COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTTENT Planning Division - 7700 Ma*et Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1 100 / Fax: (952) 227-1110 pplicant lnformationSection 3: Property Owner and A APPLIGATT OTHER THAN PROPERJY-.OWNER: h signing this application, t, as apptbant, represent to have obtainedauthorization from the propertv owner to fite this applicatiin. ia*. t" p u"rnd by conditions of approvat, subjecl only tothe right to objeci at the hearings on tne application'or drri"g Gi' "pp""r p.rioo. tt'trts apptilton-tiJs not teen signed uythe property owner, I have attacfied separaie documentaiiriorrrrr'r"o"r capacity to file the application. This appticationshould be processed in my name and iam tne partv wtr-om ir,l i-ity .norro -ntact regarding any matter pertaining to thisapplication l will keep mr6elf informed of the cteaoiines tor su-oiri6sion of material and the progress of this application. Iturther unde$tand thal additional fees ,av oe *'iised for -nrriiing r*., t"asioiriv stuoL!, Jrc -with an estimate prior toany authorization to proceed with the stuoi. t certiri tnaGe-inifrarion ano exhitits submitted are true and conect. Name:Contacl: Phone:Address: city/stareizip: Email: Cell: Fax: DateSignature PRoPERTY owNER: In signrng this apprication, r, as property own-er, have ful regar capacity to, and hereby do,authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conoiti6ni ot approval are binding and agree to be bound by thoseconditions, subiect only to the riqhtloobject at the trearingroi ouri-ng the appeat periods. I wilt keep m)rser informed ofthe deadlines for submission of materiatLnd the p.gr*""; thriipirication. rfurther understanoliat aooitionar rees maybe charged for consulting fees, feasibitity studies: eti. with an estiriate prtor to any authorization to proceed with thesludy. I certify that the information and exhibits submitteo ire tru" ano "or,"a.Name' Pa* Czl,-D-:^\ LLc cortact\arr, M'.\i,,. Address:z3 al ,^t o.J Pho'le.45z 231 Bzll Co\S rl'/ts)s3i Cell: Fax:Emait: th a\.,..ateLQ a.lne. a*.- Signature:t>a.n Tfuti*Date: 1Il 1t2020 This application must be completed in full and must be applicable City Ordinance prcvisions. BeforB filing this and confer with the planning Department to deteririne rsquirements and fues. accompanied by all information and plans required by application, refer to the appropriate Apptication Checitist the specific ordinance and applicable procedural A determination of compreteness of the apprication shal be made within 1s business dayswritten notice of apprication deficiencies sh;I be maired to treilpiicant wrthin 1s business of application submittat. A days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER (if appticabte) Name Address City/Statezip Email: Cell: Fax: Who should a€celye clpies of staff reports? ElaProperty Owrer Ma: SEmait E t,taiteo paoer Coov! Appticant Via: D Emait E ttaieO paier Co",jH*%r* H EEil:;i Euffi;:rgii 'Other Contac-t n Name:c Address: t Email IJ r.vs, Section 4: Notification lnformation INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANToevrce. and deliver Com plete all n ecessary form fields then lect s ^ E save a copy to you rwithrequiredandpaymenttosendacopytothedtvlorprocessins to crty a long SAVE FORU d ocumenls PRINT FOAM v I to SUBiIIT FORM digital f city/state/zip: Contact: Phone: 3616 Red Cedar Point Road Variance Request - setback from the lake Minnewashta To whom it may concern: lam the current owner ofthe above mentioned property. The existing cabin is roughly 100 years old and we have been making some minor modifications to make it bit more liveable. To date, we have not added onto the existing structure but would like to add/extend the current deck to make it more useable. I am asking the city of Chanhassen to consider allowing me a eighteen (18) foot setback variance from the lake to construct a lake side deck. Our total setback would be at fifty-seven (57) feet versus city ordinance of seventy-five (75) feet. Written justification of how this request complies with the findings for granting a variance pursuant to Section 20-58 as follows; 1. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent ofthis chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. This variance request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. Where there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficuhies include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. lt is impossible for us to have a useable deck on the lakeside without the variance. 3. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. The request is not based upon economic considerations at all. We are asking for the variance so that we may enjoy the property from a quaint sized deck - more of quiet enjoyment than anything economically based. 4. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The existing home sits as-is to the lake. Currently it is non- conforming and with the constraints between the road and the lake, it is reasonable to ask for a variance to create a reasonable size deck. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character ofthe locality. The variance request and proposed deck will be in harmony ofthe existing surroundings. Many surroundings properties have the same constraints and have been granted variances for similar situations. lt is lakeside and there are other properties that also have decks that do not conform. lastly, the request will not impair other properties from enjoying their properties. The deck will be consistent in height as the existing stoop of the lakeside. lt is approximately 4' from the ground as we walk from our first floor to the proposed deck. Because it is more than 30" offthe ground, we will be required to have wood railing around it's perimeter. Additionally, it will have steps to grade By granting the variance, this property will remain consistent with the harmony of its surrounding neighborhood. We appreciate your consideration. Dave and Jennie Melin Red Cedar Point, LLC 3627 Red Cedar Point Road Chanhassen, Mn 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. colrt{TY oF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk ofthe City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of a Public Hearing to consider a request for setback variances for the construction of a deck on property located at3616 Red Cedar Point Road. Zoned Residential Single-Femily (RSF)' Planning Case No. 2021-01 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes ad&essed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records ofthe County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. -11 Kim .M euwlssen. Subscribed and to belore me thia lsl day o ,2020. (Seal) 4/r\No tary Public JEAfl M lihfn Dl3cl.imgr This map is neither a legally recoded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. ihis map is a compilation of records, intormatron and data located in vadous city, countv. state and ledelaloftces and other sources regarding lh€ area shown and is lo be used b. reteEnce purposes only. The Cry does not wananl that lhe Geographc lniormation System (GlS) Data used to prepare this n1ap are eror lree. and the Crty do€s nol rcpreseni thal the GIS Oata can be used lor navigatonal. tracking o. any other purpo; requiring exacting measurement of dastance or direction or precjsion in the ilepidion of geographic fealures. The preceding dasclaimer is provided pulsuant to Mi;nesota Statutes S466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map aclnowledges thal the Crty shall not be liable for any darneges. and expressly waives all daims, and agrees to dafend, indemnify, and hold ha.mless the City from any and alldaims brought bt User, ats ernployees or agents. or third pates \ fiich arise oul of lhe users ac@ss or use of data Provrded. <TAX-NAMET rTAX_ADD_L1> *TAX_ADD-L2r (Next Reeord I(TAX_NAME) rTAX_ADD-L'tr ITAX ADD L2r Subject Parcel Dbcl.im.r Thas map is neither a legally recorcled map nor a suNey and is not intended to be used as one. ihis map is a comprlation oI recods, informatron ancl data located in vanous oty county. state and federaloffices and other sources regarding the area shown and is to be ufu ior refurence purposes only. The Crty do€s not wanant that the Geogrdphic lnformatron syslem (Gls) Data used to prepare this map are enor free. and the city does not repr6ent that the Gls Data can tE used for navigational, tracking or any olher purpo,se requlnng exactng measurement of distance ol direc0on or preosion in the depi$on of geographic Eatures. The p{eceding disdaamel is p(ovided pu6uant to Minesota Stiatulas 5465 03. Subd. 21 (2000). and the user of this map acknowledges lhat the Caty shall not be laable for any damages. and expressly waives all clerms. and agrees to ddfend, andenniry, and hold ha.mless the City from any and all claams broughl bt User. its employe€s or agents, or third pa.ties which aris€ out of the use/s access or use of data p.ovided. Subiect Parcel'l t :ll 7\ T, ' IaJ: l, : 1l .l" ...-.--.-- tl ffiry 6 f' a jl !:}_ r 1 i^_i rE I.a * El=EE:s * Hl;e.E E; :EI:3EEE EHEEgig EE,:HEEE =;il€gt€E*EEH3$ P=€8PE{ E 9;EeE g 3; b;bi5 = 6:NoN o ? E ooo(g E G o ..,: ., () ooo dc o,o E q) o oEtooct,)6(U E3!i 0) .,oB96';E-O.,;-> 6o>o$-C o E o .q.i =o (,1 ;)i 0,o = .9o .9 E Eoo d o g o =E3 &9 -E.EoOEo-: 8.Ioq' .9E (o3 (o-(., < .PEa-v3 +,tE sg EEi i p g a. P EEBE 3q=E ;-aE E A3P? o,.E u ! --a1EEExp bXEp tfHE gfi!; aE=E E='E;EzEi [i H et*Ii 33eE g*E: E E EEo.9 -c.9 (,(rFO(Lnr; O)(E O F (5 cU (/'rN(9S q) .c, :qr : g P E {, _9 F E ctoo F o NoN (o .(u)co j o! olF E2dl q) (g oN |... o.) -o Eo o oCf (! I : EoL o-qE9 €(/)(,E(l)EocC:0)QD EBar.o'ooo-ocg,q ET -otl, E$o6=oeLcoo o9pi 9-a 5E oJ) .E (L opo oot ,g E o oo LL u-)t c o)o)ooroc'EO(l) .n0)v Eq, oE€o),> 9@6.>Eooq)i= -cqo ?.4a(D .oo_Q =gcroo)-oo oEoo.zto- E6 i, o) fi o)cai =_9tlJ :zd- aoo c =c Ecq) o.cco I-o >; = l C o o E I q E E g!-!6, a E 6 q a6 q j I E E E .9 E E o! E € E € E p 3EI ElI EE E .s En .9 6aa _9 E tE o E E- 9 E E 6 0 = E E ;- 6 I E q q E !6 i q E E I E E E ntg E c E E p I tE E E q € E E E e e 3a ! q!a E E 3 €I E !6 sE! E E ; E E b E E E E E a 6 EII6-q 6! 8eII IE E E 6 06 ..o9 Oo, o=OE =ooo iioc;o Eooo o >trr.9 o.Geto-J 6 .EF ca o oo o oooJ :jooo CLo o- TDE ooE c P.9.=6 E.eoFJ-E .9oEo,IDc.E oE €i, l!.9dog2il o(! l! o l,,E (,o =EtEEOL(al!r,a, .= -EoE=o9(Jdg oc cEEOzE (l ull! Eo.g(J o: EBE-t.rat(! =o'F ctlE (! E= l,) EEE;t E;iEEo 6 a9 * 3EE;i }EIE:-;3=.eE R E =5.r ile.E€Er P pt 3,PEEE<o Q oE-r,-cutrar>iE AE.EoE!9o o < oF= ?c Eco (5EcoEq () @ 0)=(I, =E .gNc o):aoo =o(o coo o ([() o- o It)'6' o- .12E )o-oo o)co(l)Io o, cn .F o, 0) E oE o o 0)-o r[ o, o) .c. o o) o co =ao = I 6toN o g E oool!s o (J o !o o E ; lo 'q ii; o (! Eo -o ll) =(!Io,c o -,_ .9. q) o o) Eoa, E .9o .!2 E Eoo tlt o- (, o (5 It,q)(! o- -oq); (.) o, 0o- o o)a 9-3c9, Q 'i or - P =-EE sc ; eEee B3'eE -!,E e'- 85 € E :3EEE EEeE EeaH :gEE:: x.,s 9 Hrx AEEa BSEa:5t5 g E o.= [;Es icEt *E-BEeE#58 l-(6cC)ir-No<. o o) oE. a Eol,! o_q€P) € (/) l,E(DEocc0)o?, EBitQE(50) -ocg,S Et-oao$o 6oLco9 o9EI96 5E o (I) 0) o ooF-f.- o) -o EoE(-) (.) Clo oI ()JJ c'6o (5ooo ! 0)t ,E c) 0) oo LLat o rl) E E o E o < ! Eq; E: -YoooPo-FE 6 P'1 8E (od >,qoE =>(oq J,E-qb36 F5 ooco ([ o)oc!'.= O Eg 5E5o),i! 2-aEA6oooiEE Pg --o03-ooQE:+cJool o6oo>t o=96 eE JCcEo)L @g =*IrlHzd- oc lcq co o-cc$-c q ==; lc o o) E c 9 q E Ee E q !c E I c I 5 E a ! E E s , E E -q : E I E p E qI;3 3 e _9 E 3 8aI I E e p E E B6 I E E E IE E E a a i o g ,E q € E de ! E E 6 E t95! 9 6E e ! ]j 3t nq .9 .e E 3E I g I E E e E EE 5GI E E 3 6E E E I q E 8. E EI E E -6 a lq I q ,9 EI I E E -q I E I E ! a6 a En b 6 a ! 3E t ! 3 q EI aE6a 6 EE e 9 ijt !).= =olfi e{,G.C =r o t!IoJ too(LIo o ,o Eoc!Io- >Etoo'Eo-GetGJ a, E F€ o t!o t, .9 !o. {,.c o o It 9u,to.= o-Hf; eOr! .E =r !r!ot .Eo(I oE o)o !ot (o (o(.) c6 .,o9!:coa, o=OEfooo o ooo o oo ooooo ooo c eo q9oo o o q)X = 56 t 6or i(i c.r 66 < t^ (,l (o\oF.6or.r@o<roii ij .6 F i.v ii ii m.n o o 6 .n o.n cl.n m (n.n s o l,) a <tE E ii 5 ii ii 6 ii ci a 6 d ci o o 6 0 0 a a I o o o oEEEEggEEEE3B333833333E33E =gHgggFggEtsg33BH333HE33EEE- ai fj ij ii ^i c.i 6i c.i c.i ..r c.r 6i N .! N N ^J .\l r\ .! r\r .! .! (\ N aao600006606 0 60A A A G, d e, e t d. G G d. 4 Ge2222222222r-Z 2 ztztx 22x5666o65ooo66 6 e,ee.e.q. 99q 9 c. e. c. G. e d E 4 c. c. d e ? e 2 o o o 6 6 = d d o;E8E666666666afiiY:YYY;66Y5 3 U U U U U U U U.r., (J v !J rz F F F F F Y v v F SYEEEEEEEEEEgEgE=ABAAA=EEA { ru to or Fl (n u) F-.n F\ oo a\r rn F- @ (h O r-t rn F .{ q} !g O < !o 'rJ iyi =6ar ijcib J-r F{N r.,l .\l (\ N (r) rn (n rnOC)o H (\ q,;3Hggsgg333H333H33H35hlhHh 3 F{ -t -{ oq) Fr !.t (O !-.@rO(o(eaOQaq B+ah Ai.\r .! a! a! a! N ra, N (o co 6 @ ao @ (o -L.l- r-.1 iiN F\ F\ r.\ r.\ a\ F. N F (D (O \O rll ra, F. a(I,E9 \t \ riT|\q")?q99+C9 3?6', d H -r -r r-l !-{ Fl r'{ !'l Fl Fl -{ !'{ t'a F{ Fl r"l r"l !'l .l u1 ri6@ .y! m lYl m .Y, m .') d) (Yl (n m ln (n ,n (n (n .n tn m .n ul dll^ O 6 ;i iyi iri.yi rYt rYi (n (n ln .n .n (n rn .n {n m d) (rt rn rn - (n - o = Lri iri ui rti lr1 ur !n Ln sl !n !n tn u1 ri r.l) ra ut lrl ul rn - rn = Q ryi r.ri rti rri 'ri ui ti t^ !') u1 r/1 ul lrl L,t rr1 l,) rn 6 ln l/1 ur > lnz':. 9 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z,-z- F'3: = > => > = > > = = > > : = > > > => > 9 >-r 3 -:E oe oa d oe oe d d oa oi d d c't'q'er'd d !4 4!r = de 6 d;O6oAoo oq o99 o999 99999 Eq? = F } 4 2' 292 2! 922999929292y 2-r rr = (/) ii; E tr uJ r! L! ur ur uJ 'rr uJ r! t! ur lrr L! r! r! = urx',zr 2 { U - - U 6 - (J O O O O O O u e !J (J (J (J e z ()ao<TXXXXX=**i==xiixxxxxx=xl: i U U Li iri Li ir; tJ t! t! iri ui ur t! r! ui r! lrl rr,r ur r! ur r! a uJ 6640O60660 6 0 G, G. 4. - c. G. e. d E E G G2>222222r-2 2 xzxrr 2- 5o66o66ooo 6 &c.c,e,e O = 3 ? x x E E x E E x E xlz:.g s E t 8:z=3A,frZ93UUUU UUU UUO UOE E E E EOU H E AE = 3 E -B E "3 E E E E E g = E P A A A A B P E E =-t id -r (', r{ tn rt F\ rrt F. @ a,l !^ F @ Ot O Fr (n F El !4 (o O 'r ':'lx'i aj 6 aj i5 ct ir ri; - .{ N N N N.n o (!l o o I o Fr o oa in 6 6 6 6 6 r0 \o (D (o (o,o tt) (I) (o r.o ro I I \ N F- F ol Na;;Fi 6 rn rn .n rn.n rnom (n (n rn (n m(nrn.n rnm rn vt r' ad.Fzt-azo>4AEe 's A .-E= Ip _ E .( #, e ??_ .! z tDi a6 9;= 1 Ziaa 3 E-6: E=iE;:-Hi =E:EeEE ;EEgri=EEiiEEisE=EE MacKenzie – below are my comments regarding the setback variance request for the construction of a deck on property located at 3616 Red Cedar Point Road: The applicant is proposing placing a deck and stairs on the lake side of their property. The current plans propose placing the deck 57 feet from the shoreline. The amount allowed per City ordinance is 75 feet. Staff believes that because the deck is not an impervious surface, and due to the numerous other existing nonconformities of the site, and other site restraints on the lot, that granting the deck variance would be permissible. However, staff believes that the plans should be revised to show the stairs coming off another part of the deck, specifically not on the lake side. This would increase the distance from the lake shore from proposed 57 feet to 62 feet. The proposed footprint of the deck can remain unchanged. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, Matt Unmacht Water Resources Coordinator CITY OF CHANHASSEN PH. 952.227.1168 FX. 952.227.1110 www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range on Property Located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.3. Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, Associate Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­02 PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a golf driving range, subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” SUMMARY OF REQUEST A golf driving range operated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive from 1998 to 2018. Since golf driving ranges are an interim use within the A2 district, the business was subject to an IUP. Due to the fact that much of the property is located within a floodplain and has extensive wetlands, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) were also required in order to prepare the site for the business. After the initial site plan and permits were approved in 1998, the original owner applied for and received a series of variances and amendments to expand the operation, including an amendment allowing for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor and the addition of a second story to the driving range bunkers. The most recent variance and amendment was approved in 2016 and allowed for an 11,100 square­ foot addition to the clubhouse. After the driving range closed in 2018, the IUP expired. The applicant has purchased the property and is requesting that a new IUP be issued to allow for the resumption of the business’ operations. The applicant is not proposing any expansion or significant alterations to the existing facilities or grounds. They have stated that their intention is to operate the business in a manner substantially similar to what was previously present on site. They are aware that a golf driving range is an interim use and that the permit will terminate once municipal services are extended to the site. The City and other applicable jurisdictions have reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and as no modifications are proposed that could impact any of the site’s sensitive environmental features, no agency has expressed concerns about the proposed reopening. Staff reviewed the previously issued IUP and has retained the conditions that are still applicable. The City is also requiring that the applicant pass a fire and building inspection and address any Code violations that may be present before reopening. Given that a golf driving range operated in this location for many years without issue, staff recommends that an IUP, with appropriate conditions to mitigate potential impacts, be approved to allow for the resumption of operations on this site. APPLICANT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range on PropertyLocated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.3.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­02PROPOSED MOTION:“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a golf drivingrange, subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.”SUMMARY OF REQUESTA golf driving range operated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive from 1998 to 2018. Since golf driving ranges are an interimuse within the A2 district, the business was subject to an IUP. Due to the fact that much of the property is located withina floodplain and has extensive wetlands, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)were also required in order to prepare the site for the business. After the initial site plan and permits were approved in1998, the original owner applied for and received a series of variances and amendments to expand the operation,including an amendment allowing for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor and the addition of a second story to the drivingrange bunkers. The most recent variance and amendment was approved in 2016 and allowed for an 11,100 square­foot addition to the clubhouse. After the driving range closed in 2018, the IUP expired.The applicant has purchased the property and is requesting that a new IUP be issued to allow for the resumption of thebusiness’ operations. The applicant is not proposing any expansion or significant alterations to the existing facilities orgrounds. They have stated that their intention is to operate the business in a manner substantially similar to what waspreviously present on site. They are aware that a golf driving range is an interim use and that the permit will terminateonce municipal services are extended to the site.The City and other applicable jurisdictions have reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and as no modifications areproposed that could impact any of the site’s sensitive environmental features, no agency has expressed concerns aboutthe proposed reopening. Staff reviewed the previously issued IUP and has retained the conditions that are stillapplicable. The City is also requiring that the applicant pass a fire and building inspection and address any Codeviolations that may be present before reopening. Given that a golf driving range operated in this location for many yearswithout issue, staff recommends that an IUP, with appropriate conditions to mitigate potential impacts, be approved toallow for the resumption of operations on this site. APPLICANT Brian and Keri Colvin, 825 Flying Cloud Drive, Chaska, MN 55318 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:  “A2” – Agricultural Estate District LAND USE:Office/Agriculture ACREAGE:  97.75  DENSITY:  NA  APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 19, Article III, Section 19­41, Connection Required Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 2, Section 20­232, General Issuance Standards Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 3, Section 20­259, Golf Driving Ranges Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay District Chapter 20, Article VII, Shoreland Management District Chapter 20, Article X, “A2” Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND The subject site is south of the Minnesota Highway 101/Great Plains Boulevard and County Road 61/Flying Cloud Drive intersection. The site is over 90 acres in area. The vast majority of the property is in the floodplain of the Minnesota River.  This means the site is subject to periodic flooding. There is a creek (Assumption Seminary Creek) on site and a large wetland surrounding the subject site, which encompasses adjacent properties that are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).  The subject site is one of the few parcels not included in the Minnesota River “Raguet” Wildlife Management Area.  This entire property has been identified as an area whose development pattern needs to be sensitive to the watershed, including the wetland and the creek. The subject property has gone through the public hearing process for a variety of reasons in the past. On July 13, 1998*, the City Council approved the following (subject to conditions): Site Plan #98­8 for a golf improvement center. Interim Use Permit #98­2 which expires in the year 2020, to allow a golf and driving range in the A2 District. Conditional Use Permit #98­2 for alteration of a floodplain. Wetland Alteration Permit #98­1. First reading and waived the second reading of Code Amendment #98­1 to amend Section 20­265, Standards for Golf Driving Ranges to allow a retail pro shop. Variance to allow the square footage of the office/clubhouse to be increased to 986 square feet. *On July 13, 1998, the City Council denied the request for extended hours of operation (Variance #98­1). On September 13, 1999*, the City Council approved the following, subject to conditions: An amendment to City Code Section 10­55(b) to allow a golf course driving range with permanent plumbing facilities to be eligible for a liquor license. On­sale intoxicating sale 3.2 malt liquor license contingent upon receipt of the $280 license fee and the liquor liability insurance certificate.The licensed premises would include the clubhouse and outdoor brick patio, driving range, par three course, and putting course.No beer would be allowed to be consumed in the parking lot area. An amendment to Site Plan #98­8 to allow for an expansion of a second story to the driving range bunkers for Rain Snow or Shine Golf. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range on PropertyLocated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.3.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­02PROPOSED MOTION:“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a golf drivingrange, subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.”SUMMARY OF REQUESTA golf driving range operated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive from 1998 to 2018. Since golf driving ranges are an interimuse within the A2 district, the business was subject to an IUP. Due to the fact that much of the property is located withina floodplain and has extensive wetlands, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)were also required in order to prepare the site for the business. After the initial site plan and permits were approved in1998, the original owner applied for and received a series of variances and amendments to expand the operation,including an amendment allowing for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor and the addition of a second story to the drivingrange bunkers. The most recent variance and amendment was approved in 2016 and allowed for an 11,100 square­foot addition to the clubhouse. After the driving range closed in 2018, the IUP expired.The applicant has purchased the property and is requesting that a new IUP be issued to allow for the resumption of thebusiness’ operations. The applicant is not proposing any expansion or significant alterations to the existing facilities orgrounds. They have stated that their intention is to operate the business in a manner substantially similar to what waspreviously present on site. They are aware that a golf driving range is an interim use and that the permit will terminateonce municipal services are extended to the site.The City and other applicable jurisdictions have reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and as no modifications areproposed that could impact any of the site’s sensitive environmental features, no agency has expressed concerns aboutthe proposed reopening. Staff reviewed the previously issued IUP and has retained the conditions that are stillapplicable. The City is also requiring that the applicant pass a fire and building inspection and address any Codeviolations that may be present before reopening. Given that a golf driving range operated in this location for many yearswithout issue, staff recommends that an IUP, with appropriate conditions to mitigate potential impacts, be approved toallow for the resumption of operations on this site.APPLICANTBrian and Keri Colvin, 825 Flying Cloud Drive, Chaska, MN 55318SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  “A2” – Agricultural Estate DistrictLAND USE:Office/AgricultureACREAGE:  97.75 DENSITY:  NA APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 19, Article III, Section 19­41, Connection RequiredChapter 20, Article IV, Division 2, Section 20­232, General Issuance StandardsChapter 20, Article IV, Division 3, Section 20­259, Golf Driving RangesChapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use PermitsChapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay DistrictChapter 20, Article VII, Shoreland Management DistrictChapter 20, Article X, “A2” Agricultural Estate DistrictBACKGROUNDThe subject site is south of the Minnesota Highway 101/Great Plains Boulevard and County Road 61/Flying Cloud Driveintersection. The site is over 90 acres in area. The vast majority of the property is in the floodplain of the Minnesota River. This means the site is subject to periodic flooding.There is a creek (Assumption Seminary Creek) on site and a large wetland surrounding the subject site, whichencompasses adjacent properties that are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).  Thesubject site is one of the few parcels not included in the Minnesota River “Raguet” Wildlife Management Area.  This entireproperty has been identified as an area whose development pattern needs to be sensitive to the watershed, including thewetland and the creek.The subject property has gone through the public hearing process for a variety of reasons in the past.On July 13, 1998*, the City Council approved the following (subject to conditions):Site Plan #98­8 for a golf improvement center.Interim Use Permit #98­2 which expires in the year 2020, to allow a golf and driving range in the A2 District.Conditional Use Permit #98­2 for alteration of a floodplain.Wetland Alteration Permit #98­1.First reading and waived the second reading of Code Amendment #98­1 to amend Section 20­265, Standards forGolf Driving Ranges to allow a retail pro shop.Variance to allow the square footage of the office/clubhouse to be increased to 986 square feet.*On July 13, 1998, the City Council denied the request for extended hours of operation (Variance #98­1).On September 13, 1999*, the City Council approved the following, subject to conditions:An amendment to City Code Section 10­55(b) to allow a golf course driving range with permanent plumbingfacilities to be eligible for a liquor license.On­sale intoxicating sale 3.2 malt liquor license contingent upon receipt of the $280 license fee and the liquorliability insurance certificate.The licensed premises would include the clubhouse and outdoor brick patio, drivingrange, par three course, and putting course.No beer would be allowed to be consumed in the parking lot area. An amendment to Site Plan #98­8 to allow for an expansion of a second story to the driving range bunkers for Rain Snow or Shine Golf. On October 27, 2006, the City Council approved the following subject to conditions: An amendment to Site Plan #98­8 and Interim Use Permit #98­2 for the construction of an 11,100­square foot addition to the principal structure. A 10,300­square foot building area variance from the 800­square foot building area restriction for the golf driving range principal structure. A variance for the use of steel paneling as a primary exterior material. On February 2, 2016, the previous site owner withdrew an application for the following: An amendment to Site Plan #98­8, Interim Use Permit 98­2, and Conditional Use Permit 98­2 to allow an outdoor recreation area for volleyball and horseshoes, upgrades to existing patio area, and a paintball course. A variance to allow two monument signs that are non­compliant with City Code design standards, exceed the number of allowed signs, and exceed the maximum display area for signage in the Agricultural Estate District (A2). An amendment to Chapter 11 and Chapter 20 of the City Code to allow paintball as an exempt firearm use and as an interim use in the Agricultural Estate District (A2). *Note: Staff was unable to find the files containing Site Plan 98­8, Interim Use Permit 98­2, Conditional Use Permit 98­2, Variance 98­1, and Wetland Alteration Permit 98­1. As a result, staff has relied on the background notes and research contained in the staff reports and files from Planning Cases 2006­30 and 2016­01. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for a golf driving range subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation: 1. This Interim Use Permit will terminate 12 months after the parcels to the north, across Flying Cloud Drive, 850 Flying Cloud Drive and 780 Flying Cloud Drive, connect to City sewer. 2. Prior to resuming operations, the property owner must schedule an inspection of the property to verify that the property meets building, accessibility, and property maintenance codes. The property owner must provide the inspector access to the interior and exterior areas of the property. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 3. Property owner must provide evidence that a septic compliance inspection took place at the time of sale. This evidence must show that requirements of Carver County Ordinance Section 52.199 were followed at the time of property transfer. If no septic compliance inspection occurred, a compliance inspection must be conducted and any deficiencies corrected. 4. Prior to resuming operations, a fire inspection must be conducted. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 5. No development, grading, or expansion of the site is permitted beyond what was approved under Interim Use Permit 98­2, Conditional Use Permit 98­2, Wetland Alteration Permit 98­1, and Site Plan 98­8, as restated and amended. 6. The applicant must improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscape plan should be submitted to the city for approval. Minor grading may also be necessary to ensure the rain garden functions properly. 7. A minimum of 45 landscape trees (all existing trees) must be maintained within the developed area (from back of building north up to right­of­way). 8. Six overstory deciduous trees must be planted around the parking lot. 9. Driving range nets shall comply with previous recommendations from the DNR, including the condition that the nets be 4½ feet off of the ground. 10. A pesticide and fertilizer maintenance program shall be submitted to the city by April 1 of each year.  Storage of PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for an Interim Use Permit to Operate a Golf Driving Range on PropertyLocated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone)Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.3.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­02PROPOSED MOTION:“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a golf drivingrange, subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.”SUMMARY OF REQUESTA golf driving range operated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive from 1998 to 2018. Since golf driving ranges are an interimuse within the A2 district, the business was subject to an IUP. Due to the fact that much of the property is located withina floodplain and has extensive wetlands, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)were also required in order to prepare the site for the business. After the initial site plan and permits were approved in1998, the original owner applied for and received a series of variances and amendments to expand the operation,including an amendment allowing for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor and the addition of a second story to the drivingrange bunkers. The most recent variance and amendment was approved in 2016 and allowed for an 11,100 square­foot addition to the clubhouse. After the driving range closed in 2018, the IUP expired.The applicant has purchased the property and is requesting that a new IUP be issued to allow for the resumption of thebusiness’ operations. The applicant is not proposing any expansion or significant alterations to the existing facilities orgrounds. They have stated that their intention is to operate the business in a manner substantially similar to what waspreviously present on site. They are aware that a golf driving range is an interim use and that the permit will terminateonce municipal services are extended to the site.The City and other applicable jurisdictions have reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and as no modifications areproposed that could impact any of the site’s sensitive environmental features, no agency has expressed concerns aboutthe proposed reopening. Staff reviewed the previously issued IUP and has retained the conditions that are stillapplicable. The City is also requiring that the applicant pass a fire and building inspection and address any Codeviolations that may be present before reopening. Given that a golf driving range operated in this location for many yearswithout issue, staff recommends that an IUP, with appropriate conditions to mitigate potential impacts, be approved toallow for the resumption of operations on this site.APPLICANTBrian and Keri Colvin, 825 Flying Cloud Drive, Chaska, MN 55318SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  “A2” – Agricultural Estate DistrictLAND USE:Office/AgricultureACREAGE:  97.75 DENSITY:  NA APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 19, Article III, Section 19­41, Connection RequiredChapter 20, Article IV, Division 2, Section 20­232, General Issuance StandardsChapter 20, Article IV, Division 3, Section 20­259, Golf Driving RangesChapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use PermitsChapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay DistrictChapter 20, Article VII, Shoreland Management DistrictChapter 20, Article X, “A2” Agricultural Estate DistrictBACKGROUNDThe subject site is south of the Minnesota Highway 101/Great Plains Boulevard and County Road 61/Flying Cloud Driveintersection. The site is over 90 acres in area. The vast majority of the property is in the floodplain of the Minnesota River. This means the site is subject to periodic flooding.There is a creek (Assumption Seminary Creek) on site and a large wetland surrounding the subject site, whichencompasses adjacent properties that are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).  Thesubject site is one of the few parcels not included in the Minnesota River “Raguet” Wildlife Management Area.  This entireproperty has been identified as an area whose development pattern needs to be sensitive to the watershed, including thewetland and the creek.The subject property has gone through the public hearing process for a variety of reasons in the past.On July 13, 1998*, the City Council approved the following (subject to conditions):Site Plan #98­8 for a golf improvement center.Interim Use Permit #98­2 which expires in the year 2020, to allow a golf and driving range in the A2 District.Conditional Use Permit #98­2 for alteration of a floodplain.Wetland Alteration Permit #98­1.First reading and waived the second reading of Code Amendment #98­1 to amend Section 20­265, Standards forGolf Driving Ranges to allow a retail pro shop.Variance to allow the square footage of the office/clubhouse to be increased to 986 square feet.*On July 13, 1998, the City Council denied the request for extended hours of operation (Variance #98­1).On September 13, 1999*, the City Council approved the following, subject to conditions:An amendment to City Code Section 10­55(b) to allow a golf course driving range with permanent plumbingfacilities to be eligible for a liquor license.On­sale intoxicating sale 3.2 malt liquor license contingent upon receipt of the $280 license fee and the liquorliability insurance certificate.The licensed premises would include the clubhouse and outdoor brick patio, drivingrange, par three course, and putting course.No beer would be allowed to be consumed in the parking lot area.An amendment to Site Plan #98­8 to allow for an expansion of a second story to the driving range bunkers forRain Snow or Shine Golf.On October 27, 2006, the City Council approved the following subject to conditions:An amendment to Site Plan #98­8 and Interim Use Permit #98­2 for the construction of an 11,100­square footaddition to the principal structure.A 10,300­square foot building area variance from the 800­square foot building area restriction for the golf drivingrange principal structure.A variance for the use of steel paneling as a primary exterior material.On February 2, 2016, the previous site owner withdrew an application for the following:An amendment to Site Plan #98­8, Interim Use Permit 98­2, and Conditional Use Permit 98­2 to allow an outdoorrecreation area for volleyball and horseshoes, upgrades to existing patio area, and a paintball course.A variance to allow two monument signs that are non­compliant with City Code design standards, exceed thenumber of allowed signs, and exceed the maximum display area for signage in the Agricultural Estate District(A2).An amendment to Chapter 11 and Chapter 20 of the City Code to allow paintball as an exempt firearm use andas an interim use in the Agricultural Estate District (A2).*Note: Staff was unable to find the files containing Site Plan 98­8, Interim Use Permit 98­2, Conditional Use Permit98­2, Variance 98­1, and Wetland Alteration Permit 98­1. As a result, staff has relied on the background notes andresearch contained in the staff reports and files from Planning Cases 2006­30 and 2016­01.RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permitfor a golf driving range subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact andRecommendation:1. This Interim Use Permit will terminate 12 months after the parcels to the north, across Flying Cloud Drive, 850Flying Cloud Drive and 780 Flying Cloud Drive, connect to City sewer.2. Prior to resuming operations, the property owner must schedule an inspection of the property to verify that theproperty meets building, accessibility, and property maintenance codes. The property owner must provide theinspector access to the interior and exterior areas of the property. All health and safety items noted during theinspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the datesnoted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection.3. Property owner must provide evidence that a septic compliance inspection took place at the time of sale. Thisevidence must show that requirements of Carver County Ordinance Section 52.199 were followed at the time ofproperty transfer. If no septic compliance inspection occurred, a compliance inspection must be conducted andany deficiencies corrected.4. Prior to resuming operations, a fire inspection must be conducted. All health and safety items noted during theinspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the datesnoted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection.5. No development, grading, or expansion of the site is permitted beyond what was approved under Interim UsePermit 98­2, Conditional Use Permit 98­2, Wetland Alteration Permit 98­1, and Site Plan 98­8, as restated andamended.6. The applicant must improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of theproposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscapeplan should be submitted to the city for approval. Minor grading may also be necessary to ensure the rain gardenfunctions properly.7. A minimum of 45 landscape trees (all existing trees) must be maintained within the developed area (from back ofbuilding north up to right­of­way).8. Six overstory deciduous trees must be planted around the parking lot.9. Driving range nets shall comply with previous recommendations from the DNR, including the condition that the nets be 4½ feet off of the ground. 10. A pesticide and fertilizer maintenance program shall be submitted to the city by April 1 of each year.  Storage of all chemicals shall be outside of the floodplain. 11 . The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvements shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the interim use permit. 12. The building must be painted in earth tones. 13. The property owner shall submit an access permit application to Carver County Public Works. 14. Permits must be obtained for the construction of, alteration of, or occupancy use changes to any buildings on the site. 15. Any further site development or land alterations that occur within the floodplain or near the wetland may require additional approvals or permitting. Any change to the site must be approved and properly permitted. 16. The property owner shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation (Approval) Exhibit A Development Review Application Narrative Statement of Compliance Site Plan (Full Site) Site Plan (Building Area) Restated and Amended SPA, IUP, CUP Engineering Memo WRC Memo Watershed District Comments Carver County Comments Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 5, 2021 CC DATE: January 25, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021 CASE #: PC 2021-02 BY: MYW SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to operate a golf driving range on a property zoned “A2” – Agricultural Estate District. A golf driving range was previously operated on the property under IUP 1998-2; however, this permit expired after the driving range closed in 2018. The applicant is proposing resuming operation of the pre-existing driving range in line with requirements of the previously issued IUP. LOCATION: 825 Flying Cloud Drive APPLICANT: Brian and Keri Colvin 825 Flying Cloud Drive Chaska, MN 55318 PRESENT ZONING: “A2” – Agricultural Estate District 2040 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Agriculture ACREAGE: 97.75 acres LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has limited discretion in approving or denying interim use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the use standards outlined in the zoning ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable use standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of an Interim Use Permit for a golf driving range, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY A golf driving range operated at 825 Flying Cloud Drive from 1998 to 2018. Since golf driving ranges are an interim use within the A2 district, the business was subject to an IUP. Due to the fact that much of the property is located within a floodplain and has extensive wetlands, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and a Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) were also required in order to prepare the site for the business. After the initial site plan and permits were approved in 1998, the original owner applied for and received a series of variances and amendments to expand the operation, including an amendment allowing for the sale of 3.2 percent malt liquor and the addition of a second story to the driving bunkers. The most recent variance and amendment was approved in 2016 and allowed for an 11,100- square foot addition to the club house. After the driving range closed in 2018, the IUP expired. The applicant has purchased the property and is requesting that a new IUP be issued to allow for the resumption of the business’s operations. The applicant is not proposing any expansion or significant alterations to the existing facilities or grounds. They have stated that their intention is to operate the business in a manner substantially similar to what was previously present on site. They are aware that a golf driving range is an interim use and that the permit will terminate once municipal services are extended to the site. The City and other applicable jurisdictions have reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and as no modifications are proposed that could impact any of the site’s sensitive environmental features, no agency has expressed concerns about the proposed reopening. Staff reviewed the previously issued IUP and has retained the conditions that are still applicable. The City is also requiring that the applicant pass a fire and building inspection and address any Code violations that may be present before reopening. Given that a golf driving range operated in this location for many years without issue, staff recommends that an IUP, with appropriate conditions to mitigate potential impacts, be approved to allow for the resumption of operations on this site. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 3 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 19, Article III, Section 19-41, Connection Required Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 2, Section 20-232, General Issuance Standards Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 3, Section 20-259, Golf Driving Ranges Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Article V, Floodplain Overlay District Chapter 20, Article VII, Shoreland Management District Chapter 20, Article X, “A-2” Agricultural Estate District BACKGROUND The subject site is south of the Minnesota Highway 101/Great Plains Boulevard and County Road 61/Flying Cloud Drive intersection. The site is over 90 acres in area. The vast majority of the property is in the floodplain of the Minnesota River. This means the site is subject to periodic flooding. There is a creek (Assumption Seminary Creek) on site and a large wetland surrounding the subject site, which encompasses adjacent properties that are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The subject site is one of the few parcels not included in the Minnesota River “Raguet” Wildlife Management Area. This entire property has been identified as an area whose development pattern needs to be sensitive to the watershed, including the wetland and the creek. The subject property has gone through the public hearing process for a variety of reasons in the past. On July 13, 1998*, the City Council approved the following (subject to conditions): • Site Plan #98-8 for a golf improvement center. • Interim Use Permit #98-2 which expires in the year 2020, to allow golf and driving range in the A2 District. • Conditional Use Permit #98-2 for alteration of a floodplain. • Wetland Alteration Permit #98-1. • First reading and waived the second reading of Code Amendment #98-1 to amend Section 20-265, Standards for Golf Driving Ranges to allow a retail pro shop. • Variance to allow the square footage of the office/clubhouse to be increased to 986 square feet. *On July 13, 1998, the City Council denied the request for extended hours of operation (Variance #98-1). On September 13, 1999*, the City Council approved the following, subject to conditions: 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 4 • An amendment to City Code Section 10-55(b) to allow golf course driving ranges with permanent plumbing facilities to be eligible for a liquor license. • On-sale intoxicating sale 3.2 malt liquor license contingent upon receipt of the $280 license fee and the liquor liability insurance certificate. The licensed premises would include the clubhouse and outdoor brick patio, driving range, par-three course, and putting course. No beer would be allowed to be consumed in the parking lot area. • An amendment to Site Plan #98-8 to allow for an expansion of a second story to the driving bunkers for RSS Golf. On October 27, 2006, the City Council approved the following subject to conditions: • An amendment to Site Plan #98-8 and Interim Use Permit #98-2 for the construction of an 11,100 square-foot addition to the principal structure. • A 10,300 square-foot building area variance from the 800 square-foot building area restriction for the golf driving range principal structure. • A variance for the use of steel paneling as a primary exterior material. On February 2, 2016, the previous site owner withdrew an application for the following: • An amendment to Site Plan #98-8, Interim Use Permit 98-2, and Conditional Use Permit 98- 2 to allow an outdoor recreation area for volleyball and horseshoes, upgrades to existing patio area, and a paintball course. • A variance to allow two monument signs that are non-compliant with City Code design standards, exceed the number of allowed signs, and exceed the maximum display area for signage in the Agricultural Estate District (A2). • An amendment to Chapter 11 and Chapter 20 of the City Code to allow paintball as an exempt firearm use and as an Interim Use in the Agricultural Estate District (A2). *Note: Staff was unable to find the files containing Site Plan 98-8, Interim Use Permit 98-2, Conditional Use Permit 98-2, Variance 98-1, and Wetland Alteration Permit 98-1. As a result, staff has relied on the background notes and research contained in the staff reports and files from Planning Cases 2006-30 and 2016-01. SITE CONSTRAINTS Bluff Creek Corridor This is not located within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 5 Wetland Protection A wetland delineation was conducted and approved when the development originally went in. Because the function of the site is not changing, and that no impacts to the wetland or area adjacent to the wetland areas are anticipated, another wetland delineation will not be required. The wetlands on site are classified as preserve, meaning that they are considered high quality. However, the building, parking lot, and driving range are all located outside of the wetland area and its associated setbacks and buffers. Additionally, the use of the property will not negatively impact the wetland. The applicant is not proposing any other activities or alterations that are expected to impact the wetland. The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District has echoed the above noting that since no land- disturbing activities, drainage alteration, or fill is proposed, they have no concerns with the proposal. The watershed has advised that the applicant should familiarize themselves with watershed rules, and that if they decided at a future date to conduct any land disturbing activities, drainage alterations, or add fill, approval from the Watershed District will be required. In the event that the applicant decides any of the aforementioned activities are necessary, City approval would also be required. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs on the property. Shoreland Management Approximately 30,000 square feet of the northeastern most corner of the property is within the shoreland overlay district due to being within 300 feet of the centerline of a stream. A small section of the existing parking lot is located within this area; however, it is well clear of the overlay district’s 100-foot parking lot setback. No other portion of the shoreland management district’s ordinance would apply to the applicant’s proposal. The applicant is not proposing increasing the parking lot area or encroaching further towards the stream, and as such, the development is not anticipated to negatively impact the stream. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 6 Floodplain Overlay This property is within the Minnesota River’s floodplain. The majority of the parcel is located within the Floodway District; however, the buildings are located outside of the one percent annual chance flood area and driving ranges are a permitted use within the Floodway District. The applicant is not proposing any activities or alterations that would require a Conditional Use Permit or which would be prohibited within the floodplain overlay district. ACCESS Due to the realignment of Great Plains Boulevard, the site no longer has access via a signalized intersection. While this is a change from the original conditions under which IUP 98-2 was issued, the site still has direct access via a right-in right-out access to Flying Could Drive. Staff believes this situation provides adequate access; however, Flying Could Drive is a county highway and the applicant will need to abide by any conditions set by Carver County. Carver County Public Works has indicated they have no concerns with the existing access; however, they have requested that the applicant be required to submit an access permit application. Staff has included this requirement as a condition of approval. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The applicant is not proposing any grading, nor are they proposing any changes to the property’s drainage patterns. No alterations are proposed that are anticipated to require erosion control. LANDSCAPING The parking lot does not meet minimum requirements for landscaping. Currently, there are some mature evergreens near the parking lot, but six deciduous trees were required at the time of the original IUP. These required trees are not on site presently. Staff recommends that this condition be applied to the proposed IUP. INTERIM USE PERMIT Interim uses are uses that the City believes are currently appropriate for an area, but will not be suitable in future. Applicants wishing to receive an IUP must demonstrate that the use will not unduly impact adjacent parcels or the community and that it will be consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance. The City’s zoning code lists general and specific requirements for most IUPs. If an applicant can demonstrate that they meet all of the requirements the City must issue an IUP; however, the City can place reasonable and justifiable conditions on the permit in order to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with a 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 7 proposed use. In order to ensure that these use are temporary, the City Code requires that an IUP has an identified date or event that will terminate the use, stipulates that the use will terminate upon any change in the City’s zoning regulations which renders the use nonconforming, and that the permit will terminate in the event of subdivision or a change in lot lines. The City can also revoke IUPs if the conditions of approval are violated. Standards for Issuing The standards for issuing an IUP for a golf driving range in an A2 district are listed below. Staff has written an assessment of the applicant’s proposal’s compliance in italics beneath each criterion. Sec. 20-232. - General issuance standards. The Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the City Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: (1) Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. A golf driving range operated in this location for many years without incident. No portion of the applicant’s proposed use of the site differs significantly from the previous use, and no detrimental impacts are anticipated. (2) Will be consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and this chapter. The City’s Comprehensive Plan calls for the portion of this site outside of the floodplain to be rezoned for office use; however, the Comprehensive Plan allows for a parcel zoned at a less-intensive land use designation to retain its existing zoning until municipal services are available. Additionally, the City Code permits interim uses as a mechanism for allowing “a use that is presently acceptable but that with anticipated development will not be acceptable in the future.” Since the proposed use of the site is a temporary use of the site until sewer and water becomes available, it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 20 of the City Code. (3) 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. The previous golf driving range operated in this area for many years without incident. The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing facilities and their proposed use of the site does not differ significantly from the previous use. The existing facilities are in keeping with the existing character of the area, and resuming operations will not impact the area’s essential 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 8 character. It is anticipated that once sewer and water becomes available, the site will redevelop in a manner compatible with the area’s intended character. (4) Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Resuming operation of a golf driving range at this location will not be hazards to or disturb the surrounding uses (a nursery/landscaping business and motel to the north and floodplain and open spaces to the west, south, and east) as there were no issues with the previous golf driving range. It is anticipated that once sewer and water become available, this site and the properties to the north will redevelop. (5) 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. The pre-existing golf driving range was adequately served by the aforementioned public facilities and services and its private well and septic system. As the applicant’s proposed use is substantially similar to the previous use, no inadequacies are anticipated. (6) Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The previous golf driving range did not created excessive requirements for public facilities and services, and was not detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The applicant’s proposed resumption of operations is not expected to create a strain on public resources, and reopening a closed business is good for the economic welfare of the community. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the community’s economic welfare. (7) Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare due to excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents or trash. The conditions placed upon the permit ensure that the use of the property as a golf driving range will not impact adjoining properties or environmental resources in the manner described above. The previous golf driving range operated under broadly similar conditions for many years without incident, and resuming using the site as a golf driving range is not expected to negatively impact surrounding properties or environmental features. (8) Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. The right-in right-out access to Flying Cloud Drive provides a vehicular approach which is not anticipated to create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. (9) Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 9 The applicant is not proposing any alterations to the site beyond what is already present. Resuming the operation of the site as a golf driving range will not result in any of the above. (10) Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. The site and facilities are pre-existing and no significant alterations are proposed. Resuming the use of the site as a golf driving range will not alter or degrade the aesthetics of the area. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the area’s aesthetics. (11) Will not depreciate surrounding property values. The applicant has expressed their intention to maintain the site and facilities to a high standard. It is expected that an operational and well maintained business will do more to maintain the surrounding property values than a vacant building would have. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the area’s property values. (12) Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. The applicant’s proposal meets the requirements of Sec. 20-259. – Golf Driving Ranges. Sec. 20-322. - General issuance standards. The Planning Commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the City Council shall issue interim permits only if it finds, based on the proposed location, that: (1) The use meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in section 20-232 of the City Code. The proposed golf driving range meets the standards for the issuance of a conditional use permit. (2) The use conforms to the zoning regulations. The existing facilities and proposed use conform to the requirements of the City’s zoning code. (3) The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. Golf driving ranges are a permitted interim use within the A2 zoning district. (4) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. The extension of the City sewer and water to the area is a clearly identifiable event that will trigger the termination of the IUP. (5) The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. The applicant is proposing to utilize existing facilities and no new structures or modifications are proposed for the site that would impose additional costs on the public, were it to become necessary for the public to take the property in the future. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 10 (6) The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use. Failure to agree to or violation of any of the conditions of approval will result in the revocation of the IUP. Sec. 20-259. - Golf driving ranges. The following applies to golf driving ranges with or without a miniature golf course: (1) The location of the driving range is limited to being adjacent to TH 5 and TH 212 and access must be from a collector or arterial which leads to TH 5 or TH 212. The property is located on Flying Cloud Drive, which was TH 212 at the time the ordinance was passed, and access is from Flying Cloud Drive which is classified as an arterial street. The City approved the driving range’s location in IUP 98-2 and Planning Case 2006-30. (2) Hours of operation shall be from sunrise to sunset. The applicant is proposing the following hours of operation: These hours are the same as the hours that were requested and found to comply with this criterion as part of Planning Case 2006-30. (3) Provision of adequate parking areas and submission of a landscaping plan shall be in conformance with Article VIII of this chapter. Adequate parking areas are provided. The parking lot does not meet minimum requirements for landscaping; however, this deficiency can be remedied by requiring the applicant to plant six deciduous trees around the parking lot as a condition of approval. (4) No site shall be located within 500 feet of a single-family residence. There are no single-family residences within 500 feet of the driving range. (5) Buildings on the site may not exceed 800 square feet and shall be painted in earth tones. Variances to exceed this standard were issues as part of Site Plan 98-8 and PC 06-30. The existing buildings comply with the approved site plans and variances. (6) A retail pro shop is permitted. Only prepackaged food may be sold with no commercial cooking appliance allowed. A 3.2 malt liquor license is allowed provided the applicant applies for and receives approval of a liquor license in accordance with City Code. Retail sales are limited to golf-related items and the pro shop. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 11 The applicant is proposing selling prepackaged pizzas and has applied for a 3.2 malt liquor license; both of these activities conform to the requirements of this standard. All other merchandise will be limited to golf-related items or other prepackaged foods as permitted by this condition. Termination As was noted earlier, IUPs are intended to grant temporary use of a property until changing circumstances render that use undesirable. The City Code requires that either a specific date or event be identified that will cause the IUP to be terminated. The ordinance also specifies that IUPs terminate if the conditions of approval are violated, the City’s zoning regulations change to render the use nonconforming, or the property is subdivided. In this case, the City permits golf driving ranges as an IUP as a way to provide reasonable use of certain properties zoned A2 until sewer and water become available and the City’s long-term land use plan for the area can be realized. The City’s 2040 Land Use Plan guides 825 Flying Cloud Drive occupied by the golf driving range’s structures for Office Use; however, Section 2.13.3 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan allows for parcels to retain their current zoning and less-intensive land use designation until urban services become available. Once urban services are available, both the City’s Comprehensive Plan and intent of the IUP ordinance require that the interim use ends in order to allow for the property to redevelop in the intended manner. Staff would consider urban services to be available once the required connection criteria stipulated in Section 19-41 of the City Code are met. Section 19-41 states that properties are required to connect to City sewer when the system is extended to an adjacent premise, the same block, or within 150 feet of the property. This section of the City Code requires the connection be made within 12 months of any of the above criteria being met. As applied to this property, staff would consider the criteria to be met once the sanitary sewer was extended to the parcels to the north, 850 and 780 Flying Cloud Drive. In order to meet the requirements of the interim use ordinance, staff will add a clause to the permit stating that the IUP will expire 12 months after the parcels to the north connect to City sewer. Conditions 1) This IUP will terminate 12 months after the parcels to the north across Flying Could Drive, 850 Flying Cloud Drive and 780 Flying Could Drive, connect to City sewer. 2) Prior to resuming operations, the property owner must schedule an inspection of the property to verify that the property meets building, accessibility, and property maintenance codes. The property owner must provide the inspector access to the interior and exterior areas of the property. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 3) Property owner must provide evidence that a septic compliance inspection took place at the time of sale. This evidence must show that requirements of Carver County Ordinance Section 52.199 were followed at the time of property transfer. If no septic compliance 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 12 inspection occurred, a compliance inspection must be conducted and any deficiencies correct. 4) Prior to resuming operations, a fire inspection must be conducted. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 5) No development, grading, or expansion of the site is permitted beyond what was approved under Interim Use Permit 98-2, Conditional Use Permit 98-2, Wetland Alteration Permit 98-1, and Site Plan 98-8, as restated and amended. 6) The applicant must improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscape plan should be submitted to the City for approval. Minor grading may also be necessary to ensure the rain garden functions properly. 7) A minimum of 45 landscape trees (all existing trees) must be maintained within the developed area (from back of building north up to right-of-way). 8) Six over story deciduous trees must be planted around the parking lot. 9) Driving range nets shall comply with previous recommendations from the DNR, including the condition that the nets be 4½ feet off of the ground. 10) A pesticide and fertilizer maintenance program shall be submitted to the city by April 1 of each year. Storage of all chemicals shall be outside of the floodplain. 11) The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvement shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the IUP. 12) The property owner shall submit an access permit application to Carver County Public Works. 13) Permits must be obtained for the construction of, alteration of, or occupancy use changes to any buildings on the site. 14) Any further site development or land alterations that occur within the floodplain or near the wetland may require additional approvals or permitting. Any change to the site must be approved and properly permitted. 15) The property owner shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. UTILITIES City utilities are not available at present to the property. A private well and septic system provide adequate water and sewer service. Once urban services are extended to the parcels to the north, the IUP will terminate within 12 months. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 13 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the interim use permit for a golf driving range subject to the conditions of approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation: 1) This IUP will terminate 12 months after the parcels to the north across Flying Cloud Drive, 850 Flying Cloud Drive and 780 Flying Could Drive, connect to City sewer. 2) Prior to resuming operations, the property owner must schedule an inspection of the property to verify that the property meets building, accessibility, and property maintenance codes. The property owner must provide the inspector access to the interior and exterior areas of the property. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 3) Property owner must provide evidence that a septic compliance inspection took place at the time of sale. This evidence must show that requirements of Carver County Ordinance Section 52.199 were followed at the time of property transfer. If no septic compliance inspection occurred, a compliance inspection must be conducted and any deficiencies correct. 4) Prior to resuming operations, a fire inspection must be conducted. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates note on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 5) No development, grading, or expansion of the site is permitted beyond what was approved under Interim Use Permit 98-2, Conditional Use Permit 98-2, Wetland Alteration Permit 98-1, and Site Plan 98-8, as restated and amended. 6) The applicant must improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscape plan should be submitted to the City for approval. Minor grading may also be necessary to ensure the rain garden functions properly. 7) A minimum of 45 landscape trees (all existing trees) must be maintained within the developed area (from back of building north up to right-of-way). 8) Six over story deciduous trees must be planted around the parking lot. 9) Driving range nets shall comply with previous recommendations from the DNR, including the condition that the nets be 4½ feet off of the ground. 10) A pesticide and fertilizer maintenance program shall be submitted to the city by April 1 of each year. Storage of all chemicals shall be outside of the floodplain. 11) The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvement shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the interim use permit. 12) The building must be painted in earth tones. 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) IUP January 5, 2021 Page 14 13) The property owner shall submit an access permit application to Carver County Public Works. 14) Permits must be obtained for the construction of, alteration of, or occupancy use changes to any buildings on the site. 15) Any further site development or land alterations that occur within the floodplain or near the wetland may require additional approvals or permitting. Any change to the site must be approved and properly permitted. 16) The property owner shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Exhibit A 3. Development Review Application 4. Narrative 5. Statement of Compliance 6. Site Plan (full site) 7. Site Plan (building area) 8. Restated and Amended SPA, IUP, CUP 9. Engineering Memo 10. WRC Memo 11. Watershed Comments 12. Carver County Comments 13. Affidavit of Mailing g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-02 825 flying cloud dr - golf zone\golf zone iup staff report.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Brian and Keri Colvin for an Interim Use Permit to operate a golf driving range at 825 Flying Cloud Drive. On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Brain and Keri Colvin for an interim use permit for the property located at 825 Flying Could Drive preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned A2 - Agricultural Estate District. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Office/Agricultural. 3. The legal description of the property is: See Exhibit A 4. Section 20-232: a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. A golf driving range operated in this location for many years without incident. No portion of the applicant’s proposed use of the site differs significantly from the previous use, and no detrimental impacts are anticipated. b. The proposed use will be consistent with the objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance. The City’s Comprehensive Plan calls for the portion of this site outside of the floodplain to be rezoned for office use; however, the Comprehensive Plan allows for a parcel zoned at a less-intensive land use designation to retain its existing zoning until municipal services are available. Additionally, the City Code permits interim uses as a mechanism for allowing “a use that is presently acceptable but that with anticipated development will not be acceptable in the future.” Since the proposed use of the site is a temporary use of the site until sewer and water become available, it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 20 of the City Code. 2 c. The proposed use 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. The previous golf driving range operated in this area for many years without incident. The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing facilities and their proposed use of the site does not differ significantly from the previous use. The existing facilities are in keeping with the existing character of the area, and resuming operations will not impact the area’s essential character. It is anticipated that once sewer and water become available, the site will redevelop in a manner compatible with the area’s intended character. d. The proposed use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Resuming operation of a golf driving range at this location will not be hazardous to or disturb the surrounding uses (a nursery/landscaping business and motel to the north and floodplain and open spaces to the west, south, and east) as there were no issues with the previous golf driving range. It is anticipated that once sewer and water become available, this site and the properties to the north will redevelop. e. The proposed use 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. The pre-existing golf driving range was adequately served by the aforementioned public facilities and services and its private well and septic system. As the applicant’s proposed use is substantially similar to the previous use, no inadequacies are anticipated. f. The proposed use will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The previous golf driving range did not created excessive requirements for public facilities and services, and was not detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The applicant’s proposed resumption of operations is not expected to create a strain on public resources, and reopening a closed business is good for the economic welfare of the community. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the community’s economic welfare. g. The proposed use 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. 3 The conditions placed upon the permit ensure that the use of the property as a golf driving range will not impact adjoining properties or environmental resources in the manner described above. The previous golf driving range operated under broadly similar conditions for many years without incident, and resuming the use of the site as a golf driving range is not expected to negatively impact surrounding properties or environmental features. h. The proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. The right-in right-out access to Flying Cloud Drive provides a vehicular approach which is not anticipated to create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. The applicant is not proposing any alterations to the site beyond what is already present. Resuming the operation of the site as a golf driving range will not result in any of the above. j. The proposed use will be aesthetically compatible with the area. The site and facilities are pre-existing and no significant alterations are proposed. Resuming the use of the site as a golf driving range will not alter or degrade the aesthetics of the area. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the area’s aesthetics. k. The proposed use will not depreciate surrounding property values. The applicant has expressed their intention to maintain the site and facilities to a high standard. It is expected that an operational and well maintained business will do more to maintain the surrounding property values than a vacant building would have. Since the proposed use is temporary, granting the permit will not preclude future development to the detriment of the area’s property values. l. The proposed use will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Article IV of the City Code. The applicant’s proposal meets the requirements of Sec. 20-259. – Golf Driving Ranges. 5. The Planning Commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the City Council shall issue interim permits only if it finds, based on the proposed location, that: 4 a. The use meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in Section 20- 232 of the City Code. The proposed golf driving range meets the standards for the issuance of a conditional use permit. b. The use conforms to the zoning regulations. The existing facilities and proposed use conform to the requirements of the City’s zoning code. c. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. Golf driving ranges are a permitted interim use within the A-2 zoning district. d. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. The extension of the City sewer and water to the area is a clearly identifiable event that will trigger the termination of the interim use permit. e. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. The applicant is proposing to utilize existing facilities and no new structures or modifications are proposed for the site that would impose additional costs on the public, were it to become necessary for the public to take the property in the future. f. The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use. Failure to agree to or violation of any of the conditions of approval will result in the revocation of the interim use permit. 6. The Planning Commission shall recommend an interim use permit and the City Council shall issue an interim use permit only if it finds that it meets the stipulated use specific standards set forth in Section 20-259 of the City Code. The following applies to golf driving ranges with or without a miniature golf course: a. The location of the driving range is limited to being adjacent to TH 5 and TH 212 and access must be from a collector or arterial which leads to TH 5 or TH 212. 5 The property is located on Flying Cloud Drive, which was TH 212 at the time the ordinance was passed, and access is from Flying Cloud Drive which is classified as an arterial street. The City approved the driving range’s location in IUP 98-2 and Planning Case 2006-30. b. Hours of operation shall be from sunrise to sunset. The applicant is proposing the following hours of operation: These hours are the same as the hours that were requested and found to comply with this criterion as part of Planning Case 2006-30. c. Provision of adequate parking areas and submission of landscaping plan shall be in conformance with article VIII of this chapter. Adequate parking areas are provided. The parking lot does not meet minimum requirements for landscaping; however, this deficiency can be remedied by requiring the applicant to plant six deciduous trees around the parking lot as a condition of approval. d. No site shall be located within 500 feet of a single-family residence. There are no single-family residences within 500 feet of the driving range. e. Buildings on the site may not exceed 800 square feet and shall be painted in earth tones. Variances to exceed this standard were issued as part of Site Plan 98-8 and Planning Case 06-30. The existing buildings comply with the approved site plans and variances. f. A retail pro shop is permitted. Only prepackaged food may be sold with no commercial cooking appliance allowed. A 3.2 malt liquor license is allowed provided the applicant applies for and receives approval of a liquor license in accordance with City Code. Retail sales are limited to golf-related items and the pro shop. The applicant is proposing selling prepackaged pizzas and has applied for a 3.2 malt liquor license; both of these activities conform to the requirements of this standard. All other merchandise will be limited to golf-related items or other prepackaged foods as permitted by this condition. 6 7. The planning report #2021-02, dated January 5, 2021, prepared by MacKenzie Young- Walters is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit subject to the following conditions: 1) This Interim Use Permit will terminate 12 months after the parcels to the north across Flying Could Drive, 850 Flying Cloud Drive and 780 Flying Could Drive, connect to City sewer. 2) Prior to resuming operations, the property owner must schedule an inspection of the property to verify that the property meets building, accessibility, and property maintenance codes. The property owner must provide the inspector access to the interior and exterior areas of the property. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 3) Property owner must provide evidence that a septic compliance inspection took place at the time of sale. This evidence must show that requirements of Carver County Ordinance Section 52.199 were followed at the time of property transfer. If no septic compliance inspection occurred, a compliance inspection must be conducted and any deficiencies correct. 4) Prior to resuming operations, a fire inspection must be conducted. All health and safety items noted during the inspection must be corrected prior to reopening, and any remaining items will need to be addressed by the dates noted on any compliance letters that result from the inspection. 5) No development, grading, or expansion of the site is permitted beyond what was approved under Interim Use Permit 98-2, Conditional Use Permit 98-2, Wetland Alteration Permit 98-1, and Site Plan 98-8, as restated and amended. 6) The applicant must improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscape plan should be submitted to the City for approval. Minor grading may also be necessary to ensure the rain garden functions properly. 7) A minimum of 45 landscape trees (all existing trees) must be maintained within the developed area (from back of building north up to right-of-way). 8) Six over story, deciduous trees must be planted around the parking lot. 9) Driving range nets shall comply with previous recommendations from the DNR, including the condition that the nets be 4½ feet off of the ground. 10) A pesticide and fertilizer maintenance program shall be submitted to the City by April 1 of each year. Storage of all chemicals shall be outside of the floodplain. 11) The property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvement shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the interim use permit. 12) The building must be painted in earth tones. 7 13) The property owner shall submit an access permit application to Carver County Public Works. 14) Permits must be obtained for the construction of, alteration of, or occupancy use changes to any buildings on the site. 15) Any further site development or land alterations that occur within the floodplain or near the wetland may require additional approvals or permitting. Any change to the site must be approved and properly permitted. 16) The property owner shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-02 825 flying cloud dr - golf zone\iup findings of fact.docx 13 EXHIBIT A The East half of the Southeast Quarter (E ½ of SE ¼) of Section 35, Township 116 North of Range 23 West, excepting therefrom one half (½) acre in the Northeast Corner, being all that part lying North of the Chaska and Shakopee Road, also the North 26 acres of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (N 26 A of NW ¼ of SE ¼) of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23, containing in all 105.50 acres; also excepting therefrom the following described parcel of land, to-wit: Commencing at a point in center line East and West of Section 35, Township 116 North, Range 23 West which point bears West 30 rods from the Northeast corner of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 35, thence West 50 rods to the Quarter post, thence South on the Quarter line 40 rods to the Shakopee Road, thence Northeasterly along said road to place of beginning situated in the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23 and containing 6 acres of land less the amount sold to the State of Minnesota for Trunk Highway purposes; also Excepting therefrom a parcel of land sold to the State of Minnesota for Trunk Highway purposes and described in that certain Warranty Deed dated January 23, 1924 and filed for record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Carver County, Minnesota on March 5, 1924 at 11 o’clock A.M. and recorded therein in Book 33 of Deeds on page 5; also: Excepting therefrom a parcel of land sold to the State of Minnesota for Trunk Highway purposes and described in that certain Warranty Deed dated January 28, 1924 and filed for record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Carver County, Minnesota on March 5, 1924 at 11 o’clock A.M. and recorded therein in Book 33 of Deeds on page 6. COUIUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPART ENT Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (952) 227 -'1110 Submrttal Dale: ' * CruOTCHAI{HASSIN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW +()PC Dale D * *r.' I d 60-Day Review Date (Reler lo tl7€ qqopride Applicalbn Che*lisl for requircd submittal hlofinatioa lhat mus, a@n$any this application) ! Comprehensive Plan Amendment................... E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers E Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Subdivision (SUB) E Create 3lots or |ess......... D Create over 3 lots............. ( El Metes & Bounds (2 lots)...ntrtr E Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) E Single-Family Residence......! ett omers....... E zoning App€al E Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)....... lots) Consolidate Lots............................. Lot Line Adjustment.........................:::.:.::.:. Final P|at............... (lncludes $450 €scrow for attomey costs)' 'Additk rEl sscrot'v may b€ tsquited for othe, epplac€lbrrs throwh he devslopln€i{ contrad. Vacation of Easements,/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 (Additional rccodirE f€es may apply) Variance (VAR).... .................. $200 $600 $100 tr fi tnterirn Use Permit (lUP) E ln coniunction with Single,Family Residence.. $325 E All Others....... .................... $425 ! Rezonins (REz) tr D Single-Family Residence All Others........................ Planned Unit Development (PUD) . Minor Amendment to existing PUO All Others.............. tr!! ....... s750 ....... $100 ....... $500 tr trtr tr Sign Plan Review.. ................... $ 1 50 Site Plan Revie$, (SPR) E Administrative. ................... $1OO E Commerciaulndustrial Districts'...................... $5OO Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:( thousand square feet) 'lnqlude number ot g!i.g!Eg employees: _ 'lrlclude number ot !e! employoes: I Residential Districts......................................... $5OO Plus $5 per d,velling unit ( units) !gIE: When mulliple spplic6lions .r€ proca€3€d coicurrendy, th€ app.opriate lee shall be cha,g€d for cach appllcadon. $1s0 $275 $100 $500 ... $200[ ruomcation Sign (city to i.Etatt and remo,re] ................... E Property Owners' List within 500' (cty to generate after pre-appticarbn meeung) .! Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that aooly)..............................' E Conditional Use Permit E inferim Use permil E Vacation E VarianceE Metss & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) E] Easements (_ea sem€nts) $3 per address addresses) ......................... $50 per documentE Site Plan AgreementE Wetland Alteration Permito*r|ff'lZr,l eq'^ Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Section 2: Required lnformation Oescription of Proposal: Property Address or Location pa,,cet*, 2fO3{12@ totat ecreage: 4. 1,1 Legal Description: Wetlands Present?p ves D r.to a -ff,3 Present Zoning Select One Present Land Use Desig Existing Use of Property nation. Select One Echeck box if separate nanative is attached Requested Zoning . Selecl One Requested Land Use signat ;on. Select One r \ J/s/ l $150 $150 $700 $325 $425 Seclion 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to lile the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contacl regarding any matter perlaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and lhe 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 lo proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Address Name Name Contact Phone: city/state/zip Email: Cell Fax cell Fax Signature Date: PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as properly owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the Iiling of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subiect only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. 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 eslimate prior lo any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify lhat the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name Address City/State/zip PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) ,.Phone; Cell oalr,: H.^ /-,h,% Address: Citylstatezip Email: ^0* This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions- Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application defciencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. who should receive coPios of statt rcPorts? iltr rottE Corltac't lnformatl,on: Name: Address: City/State/;ziP Property Owner Via: Applicant Via: Engineer Via: OtheF Ma: ! Maibd eaper Copy ! Maileo Paper copy ! Mailed Paper copy E tuaiteo Paper copyD D Email: INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary affiniNt Fontt ano oetiver to city along with required form fields. then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your L documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to ssnd a digital copy to the city for Processing SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBi,llT FORM Email: Signature: contact - 9c,2-4?tl- l7q* bft-dsY-Wg? Contact: _ gt^^o - Section 4: Notification lnformation D! D D Email Email Email Email GOLF ZONE My wife Keri and I are in the process of purchasing the land and building at 825 Flying Cloud dr, in Chanhassen, formerly known as the Golf Zone. We are purchasing this property for many reasons, but the main reason is to reopen it. When Keri and I found out that the golf zone had shut down back in 2018 we were saddened to hear the news. This was a place that we would bring our two sons on the weekends or a night after work to spend a little quality family time playing a round of putt-putt golf or working on our game at the driving range. \Men we were finally able to get in contact with the owner Jeff and found out he was willing to sell it, my wife and I jumped on the opportunity as soon as we could! Our intention of opening this is to bring a positive place to the surrounding communities, somewhere that family and friends can come out and play some putt-putt or work on their game, somewhere that the local schools can bring the golf team or golf instructors can teach in the cold snowy months of winter. We would also like to use the Golf Zone as a platform for local foundations to raise money for their charities. Vvhile enriching the direct and sunounding communities, we will also adhere to codes both socially and as a business. We will follow all proper protocols regarding building maintenance, structure and upkeep. ln addition, we will adhere to all state, county and city requirements for the health and safety of our employees and staff. Eventually we would like to put our own spin on the place too, maybe a couple simulators inside for winter golf league, or a putt-putt course outside too and maybe add some new technology in the booths ofthe driving range to better your game. By reopening the doors to the Golf Zone again, Keri and I feel not only will it bring positivity to the surrounding communities, but joy to our family! Thanks much, Brian and Keri Colvin. Walterc, MacKenzie From: Sent: lo: Subject: Dcc. I - Jer" ll Mm 10u - 8po. Tuc-Fri 9ra - 8po Sa-Sua 8a - 8pn Statement of compliance with 12 general standards for an interim use permit. a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health or safety. The health and safety of the public, our employees, and neighboring communities is our number one priori$ b. While the proposed use is not consistenl with the Citys comprehensive long term plan for the area, the Citys zoning ordinance does allow for the proposed and does not require different level of use until after municipal services become available. c. We will be using the existing facility whlch has been operated for years without an issue. d. This property will be used as a positive, non{isturbing, non-hazardous facility for the existing and future neighboring uses. e. The proposed use will be served by adequate public streets, private well and septic system. f. The use is temporary until municipal services are brought to the site. The use of the existing facility will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. Will maintain the pre-existing level of use, which operated for years without issue. h. The existing vehicular approach to the parking lot will be assisted by east and west roundabouts and double lanes which will not interfere with traffic or sunounding public thoroughfares. i. The existing facility does not cause any loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. We will be using the existing facility which has been operated for )rears without an issue. k. The property and business will be kept to the highet standard and will not depreciate sunounding property values l. We intend on maintaining the pre€xisting level of use, that wes operatd for )rears without any issues. Sec. 20-259- Gof driving ranges 1. Meets this standard. 2. tr'inding: Hours are: Scptl-Nw.3l Mo lOu - 7po. Tuc-Fri 9ro - ?po Sef-Suo 8aa - Tpor Feb, l-Mey3l I\[m 10ao - 9po Tuc-Fri 9u - 9po S{r-Sua 8a - 9!@ Jorcl-Au93l ldo 10ro - 9po Tue-Fri 9ro - 9p. 1 brian colvin < brcolvinT@yahoo.com > Thursday, December 3, 2020 'l 'l:00 AM Walters, MacKenzie golf zone final statement of compliance 3. Meets this standard 4. Meets this standard 5. The existing facility exceeds 800 square feet which a pr@xisting varianoe was grantd from this standard. 6. We are cunently in the process of applying for a 3.2 malt liquor license and we plan on selling pre,packaged pizza's only which both meet this standard. 2 ]:t:LIEi!iii-I8tt ? ,gI :1, 8F 'xlalq6l6tt--IIIIIli EFulIE*--{!t. I 2i !iiliiri'if,F't, \ - - --- tH Zl*_ - ,^ , , i aI rJ x /Iit6 IF iI ,,1,:/ it li-l ti iit!!!ur€tHBal:rr!lil ! !' ..--'--^ )/ 't(0 fii ilr!i b5 l; l'!ll fi' l' I i:1f,;i:; l!'?E iEiI'ia;; ilii ,tE t ffiiiiij,$ir$' '!V n I a { l -J'td;1 Ix 3 !* a Ei6 ; ,a^ 3+Ari- I,J I>22 zEa i9R =.D z 3 o \ It t, ogzol6ooo_o E. i.: 91. I -.o tJ -- t,...2-rL I itiillli!r:i iiiii ! c- 3 \ ;i+i;r zoofFzootFozzJt!z= (r rL 8F f .L1tz H<5a-ai; Es:-.#IIIA oo 9q v_rrs a; [,tE t?'. : I .i oo is vt :?(E 9-< i ,l.EF-l:-:=::::=-:=::::\ tn E I I 1 L "%-..-)-rt:r' j: +a .1.....,,.j[ 0\ I 1 ,- .' i ?]Iill ; Memorandum To: MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner From: Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer CC: Charles Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer George Bender, Assistant City Engineer Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator Date: December 17, 2020 Re: Golf Zone Interim Use Permit Review - City Planning Case No. 2021-02 The Engineering Department has reviewed the Interim Use Permit submittal for 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone). These comments are divided into two categories: general comments and proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the applicant in the proper planning of public works infrastructure for this project, to inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed conditions are requirements that Engineering recommends be formally imposed on the applicant in the final order. Note that references to the “City Standards” herein refer to the City of Chanhassen Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. General Comments/Findings 1. Any and all utility and transportation plans submitted with this application have been reviewed only for the purpose of determining the feasibility of providing utility and transportation facilities for the project in accordance with City Standards. A recommendation of Interim Use Permit (IUP) approval does not constitute final approval of details, including but not limited to alignments, materials and points of access, connection or discharge, that are depicted or suggested in the application. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as applicable. The City of Chanhassen Engineering and Public Works Department will review plans, in detail, when they are submitted and approve, reject or require modifications to the plans or drawings based upon conformance with City Standards, the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances and the professional engineering judgment of the City Engineer. 2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the proposed Golf Zone can be developed in accordance with the requirements of the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances (as it pertains to Engineering and Public Works requirements) and City Standards, provided it fully addresses the comments and conditions contained he rein, and can be approved. 3. Based on the applicant’s narrative and provided plans it is their intent to re-open the existing golf driving range (Golf Zone) located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive without alteration or additional improvements. The applicant provided in their plan submittal the same plans submitted with the original build-out of the site, which were approved under Site Plan Permit #98-8, Interim use Permit #98-2, and Conditional Use Permit #98- 2. Engineering staff believes condition “l.” and “o.” still apply. See proposed condition 1 and condition 2. 4. Based on the information provided by the applicant it is the intent not to alter, expand, construct, or further improve the site from the originally approved plans and subsequent build-out. The site is adequately served by private utilities (sanitary sewer and water) on-site and has access directly from County State Aid Highway 61 (Flying Cloud Drive). However, the originally submitted plans which were reviewed and ultimately approved in 1998 do not accurately reflect the abutting right-of-way where ingress/egress to the site is had. Previously, the intersection used to access the site at Flying Cloud Drive and Great Plains Boulevard (TH 101) was serviced by a fully controlled intersection via a traffic signal. During the course of the TH 101 Project, which began construction in 2020, TH 101 was relocated further east to tie-in to a newly constructed round-a-bout. Subsequently, the traffic signal system was removed and salvaged and a median was constructed through the intersection creating a right-in/right-out access to the site. As such, access has changed from the original site approval in 1998 and any conditions set by Carver County must be adhered to. See proposed condition 2. Proposed Conditions 1. The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvement shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the interim use permit. 2. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. Memorandum To: MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner From: Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator CC: Charles Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer Ryan Pinkalla, Water Resources Technician Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer Date: December 22, 2020 Re: Golf Zone Interim Use Permit Review - City Planning Case No. 2021-02 The Water Resources Department has reviewed the Interim Use Permit submittal for 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone). These comments are divided into two categories: general comments and proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the applicant in the proper planning of any water resources issues or stormwater infrastructure for this project, to inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed conditions are requirements that Water Resources recommends be formally imposed on the applicant in the final order. General Comments/Findings 1. Based on the applicant’s narrative and provided plans it is their intent to re -open the existing golf driving range (Golf Zone) located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive without alteration or additional improvements. This is an important point when reviewing this development for potential water resources issues. The site contains one high value wetland, classified as Preserve in the City’s Wetland Inventory Classification System. This wetland classification requires a 40 foot permanent buffer and a 40 foot setback from that buffer. This project is not proposing placing any structures near the wetland or buffer. 2. Related to Number 1 above, the original site was delineated before 2015, and as such, this delineation has expired. However, because usage of the site is not proposed to be changed, and that the proposed development is not encroaching on the existing wetland or buffer, a new wetland delineation is not required at this time. If, at any point in the future, any activities are proposed in these locations, a new wetland delineation may be necessary. The applicant shall work with the City to determine if/when this is necessary. 3. This property is within the Minnesota River’s floodplain. The majority of the parcel is located within the Floodway District; however, the buildings are located outside of the one percent annual chance flood area and driving ranges are a permitted use within the Floodway District. The applicant is not proposing any activities or alterations that would require a Conditional Use Permit or which would be prohibited within the floodplain overlay district. The applicant shall work with the City if any site changes within the Floodway District are proposed as a Conditional Use Permit may be necessary. 4. There is a creek (Assumption Seminary Creek) on site, and approximately 30,000 square feet of the northeastern most corner of the property is within the shoreland overlay district due to being within 300 feet of the centerline of the creek. A small section of the existing parking lot is located within this area; however, it is well clear of the overlay district’s 100 foot parking lot setback. No other portion of the shoreland management district’s ordinance would apply to the applicant’s proposal. The applicant is not proposing increasing the parking lot area or encroaching further towards the stream, and as such, the development is not anticipated to negatively impact the stream. 5. Based on the information provided by the applicant it is the intent not to alter, expand, construct, or further improve the site from the originally approved plans and subsequent build-out. The original IUP contained a condition that the applicant install a rain garden in a swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition, and including plantings within the rain garden. It does not appear that those plantings ever took within the rain garden or were not originally installed. See proposed condition 2 below regarding improvements to the rain garden. 6. It is the opinion of the Water Resources Department that the proposed Golf Zone can be developed in accordance with the requirements of the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances (as it pertains to Water Resources requirements) and City Standards, provided it fully addresses the comments and conditions contained herein, and can be approved. Proposed Conditions 1. The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance of the storm drainage improvements (ponds and ditches). Failure to properly maintain the storm drainage improvement shall give the City the right to hire out the work and bill the applicant and/or revoke the interim use permit. 2. The applicant shall improve the existing rain garden within the proposed swale on the north and west side of the proposed addition. Improvements should include plantings such as trees, shrubs, and perennials. A landscape plan should be submitted to the City for approval. Minor grading might also be necessary to ensure the rain garden functions properly. 3. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and comply with their conditions of approval. 4. Any further site development or land alterations that occur within the floodplain or near the wetland might need additional approvals or permitting. All potential changes must be approved and properly permitted if proposed. From:Steckling, Jean To:Steckling, Jean Subject:FW: Agency Review Request - 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) Date:Monday, December 28, 2020 2:38:02 PM From: Katy Thompson <katy@youngecg.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 5:08 PM To: Walters, MacKenzie <MWalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Linda Loomis <naiadconsulting@gmail.com>; Della Schall Young <della@youngecg.com> Subject: Re: Agency Review Request - 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) Good afternoon Mackenzie, The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District has reviewed the documents provided for the interim use permit at 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Gold Zone). While the project is located within the 100-year floodplain, as presented the project does not propose any land-disturbing activities, drainage alteration, or placement of fill. The LMRWD does not have any comments at this time, however we recommend that the owners of 825 Flying Cloud Drive review the District's rules before disturbing any land, placing any fill, or altering any drainageways on the site. If the Project changes significantly, a narrative summarizing the proposed change and how it maintains compliance with Rule C - Floodplain and Drainage Alteration Rule, or others it may trigger with the changes, must be submitted to the District. Thank you and please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions, Katy From:Steckling, Jean To:Steckling, Jean Subject:FW: Agency Review Request - 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) Date:Monday, December 28, 2020 2:40:55 PM From: Angie Stenson <astenson@co.carver.mn.us> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 4:23 PM To: Walters, MacKenzie <MWalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Henricksen, Erik <EHenricksen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Lyndon Robjent <lrobjent@co.carver.mn.us>; Dan McCormick <dmccormick@co.carver.mn.us>; Darin Mielke <dmielke@co.carver.mn.us> Subject: RE: Agency Review Request - 825 Flying Cloud Drive (Golf Zone) Hi MacKenzie and Erik, We had a chance to review the materials for the Golf Zone IUP located at 825 FlyingCloud Dr. At this time, our only comment and condition is for the applicant to submit anaccess permit application to County Public Works as the County is the road authoritynow instead of MnDOT. We do not have outstanding concerns about the existing access. I noticed on the agency review request the response deadline is today. Please add thiscondition to the staff report and/or let me know if a formal memo is preferred from usfor the Council meeting on January 25. Angie Stenson AICP │ Sr. Transportation Planner Carver County Public Works Mobile 612.360.7422 │ Email astenson@co.carver.mn.us CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COI-]NTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy ofthe attached notice of a Public Hearing to consider a request for an Interim Use Permit to operate a golf driving range on property located at 825 Flying Cloud Drive. Zoned Agricultural Estate (A2), Planning Case No.202l-02 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid 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 ofthe County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesot4 and by other appropriate records. -I Kim u wissen, Deputy (Seal) JEAII U SIECKLINGlOyruUr*neorl*rqthtr.e. .i ...v No tary Public Subscribed and s)a(om to before me thi€I( day of l-Y(<wrr'< f . 2020. Subiect Parcel Area Disclaimer This map is neilher a legally re@rded map nor a suNey and is not antended to be used as one. This map is a @mpilalion of rcco.ds. anformalion and data located in vadous cit, county, sbte and lederal off@s and other sour@s regarding the area shown, and is lo be us€d for reference purposes only The City does not wanant that the Geographic lnformalion System (GlS) Data used to prepare tiis map are enor ftee. and the City does not rep.esent lhat the GIS Data can be used for navrgational, tracking or any other pu.po+ requiring exacting measurement of distance or dhecton or precision in the depiclion of geographic Eatures. The p.ecedang disclaimer is provided pu6uant to Minnesota Statlnes 5466.03, Subd 21 (2000), and $e user of this map acknowledges that the city shall not be iiable for any darnages, and expressly waaves all daims. and agrees lo defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Cfty from any and all claims brought by User, rts employees or agents, or third partes f,tlich anse out ot the usefs acaess or use of data provided <TAX_NAMET <TAX_ADD_Lll <TAX ADD L2r Subject Parcel Arga Diaclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compila[on of records, infomallon and data tocated in various city, county, strate and federal offces and other sources rcgarding the area shown, and is to be used for reierence puDoses only. The City does not warant that the Geographic lnformation System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are enor ftee. and the City does not represeni th3t the GIS Data can be used tor navigatronal, trackang or any other purpose requiring exacling measuremenl of distance or dircction or precisaon in the depictjon of geographic fealuEs. The preceding disclaimer is provided puBuant lo Minnesota statutes s466 03, Subd. 21 (2000). and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, ancl expressly waives all claims. and agrees to defend. indemniry, and hold harmless the City l?om any and all clarms brought by User, ils employees or agents, or third partres which arise oul of the use/s ac@ss or use of data povided. rJ r. t.f.; D L. ] I ,.,ru l-P I (Next Record)(TAX_NAMED <TAX_ADD_LI l (TAX_ADD_L2)D ,,, ? #". }1).r' L.7 7E. I L. l at a-fl q:- ".El EEIa g EIE:EEE gEI:EEEE EHii$ig EE,IfiEEE =;il egt { f;$eEtsflc?< e F r! > E g;Eel: 3; b;bi5 =6ir :lNlosI i E (,oo G (ls ':(.,t!i =., o) o rl) o- c;c oo E IDE o oEtaoc(,(EG -ooc3!! Ol,(,B I6- =h(! .,3> >o) o E o E !23 fo oo E .9oo E o(,) c c o o- Q' o o Gi ocI5 ID: o:N.;ts og.2 or Oi,_oo 3.e6BoECc2'eu- r!.oB6l-.o< Oa-c c)!s2 9 -O': fiE Hn ;aqEe od ;Ei i e g a. P EEBE $q=E ;AEE AiP?p!"-: :6;i EE:a5 39cH EiaI E[tso6= ? cE Y eEaEi 3i H etSIi 33gE g*E+ EEEEo.9.E.=.rAlOO- c, E-.P q *< O- O +=.:9Foc(JirrN(rt 0) o C)E 9E Fif EPoooPo=F3 6El -EsEN()-!,u)c; >_E(!6:a(oq j.qsbH6 o2 d) o) o ooF.F. o -o Eoc O oc) oI o, o n)o-o o =E rl)(! il) f E osc o IDfq E o o)p co O N c ,= E o rl) o IIJ El f .9 1'ocoN d (! c., o oY 06 c .o co o o(, q) -orl), =o It)E o o o)oo aa Eo o 0)p !Eo o) f .E E ti o o(s o- ltoroc 0) c')o c')c 0)o E c o)E =c .9 (!oi= oc q) opc([ o E o, 0) o)oq) o o-c C,)6 =UJz , c ai Eco oEco.cI'o B = = ac o o leEEa;i i,EE :EIiE:gEliiii ffiEE;EEieiiE; aEffit+ig;BiE siiBiEEEiisEEi :;EiiiEe;EiElt a e E E9 -g: € oI E s I e 6 e5 62 E E e E E E a i : n E E a 6 3 E 06 .. 99_o!, o=O'E =oo() o =o to CI e o- >EEOo li:o-GstGJ e ii,o,= *^E e(,o.c =r o E F c6 o (lo ;j(!ooILor Ec oo =g 9.o.=oh.9oFrE .9oEo:C'G.E o=or!.9dosz3 6(! G o CDt o 0,E P.EL|a€r,o'=tEoE =o4odp ot PE'EE Zg 66 GE E,o o 91 9lc ,.EI EfiTA g EI5 E E;E efi]c;EEE Hrls:;= i gE,ifi5E5 E Bil €.8: E IEE EEgi E?;Eeng3; b;bi5 CL (,,c o)o E q)E 0) o It,n co o- ID.c, rl) 11, o o =lo = o g o o E ,|2 B lo no Noa\ o E !,ooo G q (, i; 3 oo o oo E F oo E G o. !,E o o .; o ([ o) =oo,(o o- -oo 'o(n'6' o o oE 9-iqB i-EE e* ;t-a'tD (DX o E EE5 8;! E':EPE o*!E E ;EEE THET EEEg EEEEcoYC, .lU 6-- E!o ^ OE > 6 O O) eE€= teB;€EEI hiE; a sEE if,rE tgBE *E#5FE qo+13F(!cL}(/'rNd)S 0) oE p d) o (! ooFt- rli o) -o E(\, .c oc foo (E I o o) g ooo o E n) (, l E q) 5c a! o o)fo E o o)p co N t'-'1' q) (s u,J o a f .9 o c.)CoN co c'= 'C c)Y 06 c(! d) a; !2 yo NH ob oE,>oor'oo B-piio- oECE5eLL i!,oBN-@< c E .t!) F cioIF (g NoNd -(o)c(!"a joo o)5F = I x;e6: E Ei i s? BoE E-d o b Pe ?ei EE6 E.3 o +r :;n ;6EEEd C E: -9<9,riE :98 iEi6!E EEFrit-oi F EE F*iiErbEB!96? ;iEEi;3 E E I Eq q a E E 6 a 3 3 * E 8E q q a -q E 6 E q 9! 6 E E - E €t I E E 5'-9 E E E e I sI E E !E I E E ,9 !u? E E t IIE E E E E eE6 e s E E 8 ! e! E&e EI I € E 5 E a ga ! E s 3 E! E te E E I E It 9g s€ q 9 3q ! E I I6 E q:E E g: E o o at -olo 3 =o o.c. o oq)E(5o o-f o o lt)p oc(o rl) f ,EF a o) ooo- uiorocooto c 0) (I.) Ec o).c B c .s ooiE'- c q) oco o E o) c) q) o) o ol c ,P U) =ulz oc fc Ec o) (I,Eco-cI'6 = =; fc o) I ii,o.= *'$ |tl.C =r i, .EF c6 o oo o GooJ 6oot!o G Uo ;o E(, CIo o- >E8.9 o.G9trJ .9 oooJ o5 ,.o9ccoo o=(l,E =ooo ooooooooo6oOOOOOO.T6NLrna!anoNFOOO-rC)ClFlFFrr-at ra r/1 r,! N N LA rr1 !nmmlnmoolnanrn_oooooooooz rn l, rn Ln rJ) u) rr1 rrl u) JNa!a!r!Na{NNl\l GG.aooof=oo(JU (9(9 == lnoN L'')o00 G,C,Eqoooo:z:zY6uJ uJ t! >UJ UJ lrJ /\ dGG.V,(J(JUO !! !r- E !z---rzLTJJJ:daoaoo:r{-rO.rL!u@drootd..aa!o irA !i Fl Fl |\\ ot r\an <l<lor_r <l.n ,n rl rl o ".r d')Frrisr<lrnO O6lJ1LmOFr,!r16rcltrn!a<fNFCn.b**ln.nfi05PdlJ?t?t226liiAF{mnn==fifl"ifrrrtr,,lL^::l/)6Ztnr\2zz2izz2zlr==E[!==a=Ess$Erj'g=$l'3??7.,At?,92f,5UEe3h5=E G,odxxxAZ =xiiiEEe 8s _EEEUUT-33 ;,9 g E liZq-EZe,i d * G H 3 t E i >< (.l ait .\r 6 ctr o N Fr c)d-{Fl<llal,lOO(,rrAFriFrFrr-rFrla(llF€ 13 :!zE f ur -aL =1 gg :< Eroa 9A =1i =212a-i9ax3-i23i =do=6i*uof ='6 =E * fr * g =g PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Consider a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Excavation of Existing Wetland Along with Excavated Borrow Being Placed on a Location within the Parcel Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.4. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­03 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve an Interim Use Permit to allow site grading subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The developer is requesting an Interim Use Permit for excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the parcel . APPLICANT Black Cherry Development LLC, 14500 Martin Drive, Ste 3000, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:  Agricultural Estate District, A­2 LAND USE:Residential Low Density ACREAGE:  112 acres  DENSITY:  NA  APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 7, Article III, Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection BACKGROUND On July 10, 1995, the City Council approved the preliminary and final plat of Butternut Ridge Addition, Subdivision #95­9, creating one lot and one outlot.  This subdivision permitted the property owner to sell the 2½­acre home site on the PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for an Interim Use Permit for Excavation of Existing Wetland Along withExcavated Borrow Being Placed on a Location within the ParcelSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.4.Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­03PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve an Interim Use Permit to allow sitegrading subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe developer is requesting an Interim Use Permit for excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow beingplaced on a location within the parcel .APPLICANTBlack Cherry Development LLC, 14500 Martin Drive, Ste 3000, Eden Prairie, MN 55344SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  Agricultural Estate District, A­2LAND USE:Residential Low DensityACREAGE:  112 acres DENSITY:  NA APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 7, Article III, Excavating, Mining, Filling and GradingChapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use PermitsChapter 20, Article VI, Wetland ProtectionBACKGROUND On July 10, 1995, the City Council approved the preliminary and final plat of Butternut Ridge Addition, Subdivision #95­9, creating one lot and one outlot.  This subdivision permitted the property owner to sell the 2½­acre home site on the property and keep the balance of the site for the owner’s personal use and future development.  The property owner still owns the home on the property. On July 7, 2020, the City of Chanhassen received a complete Wetland Delineation Report for the property and a Notice of Application was sent on July 15, 2020. The on­site Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) was held on July 29, 2020 in order to review the wetland boundaries and types. The wetland types that were delineated on the property were Types 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. The TEP and LGU concurred with the boundaries and types and the Notice of Decision was issued on August 8, 2020. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Interim Use Permit to permit excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the parcel, as shown on the plans prepared by Alliant Engineering dated December 4, 2020, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation Application for Development Review Applicant's Narrative Plan Set Wetland Delineation No Net Loss Decision RPBCWD Wetland Comment Letter Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 5, 2021 CC DATE: January 25, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021 CASE #: 2021-03 BY: RG, EH, JS, MU SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The developer is requesting an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the parcel. LOCATION: Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition, (PID 251550022) and Outlot E, Foxwood (PID 252990510, City) and 9197 Eagle Ridge Road PID 250240811 APPLICANT: Black Cherry Development, LLC 14500 Martin Drive, Ste. 3000 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 terhart@riekor.com PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District (A-2) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: Approximately 112 acres DENSITY: NA PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to allow site grading subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 2 of 10 LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city has limited discretion in approving or denying IUPs, based on whether or not the proposal meets the standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance and excavating, mining, filling and grading regulations. If the city finds that all the applicable standards are met, the Permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an IUP to permit the removal of organic soils from the wetland and the stockpiling of soil on the property in anticipation of the eventual development of the site. Since there is no net loss of wetland, City Code does not require a Wetland Alteration Permit. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 7, Article III, Excavating, Mining, Filling and Grading Chapter 20, Article IV, Division 5, Interim Use Permits Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection BACKGROUND On August 14, 2020, the Chanhassen City Council approved the adjustment to the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD) Primary Zone boundary to encompass the additional 3+ acre area adjacent to Highway 212. (Planning Case #2020-13) As part of the 2040 Comprehensive plan adopted on February 10, 2020, the city approved a three acre land use amendment from Residential Low Density to Office in the western portion of the parcel encompass the area adjacent to Highway 212 . On May 26, 2009, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following (Planning Case #2009-06): Rezoning of Lot 1, Block 1, from Agricultural Estate District, A2, to Office & Institutional District, OI.” (Note that the rezoning of the parcel is only effective with the final platting of the subdivision); Conditional Use Permit with Variances to encroach into the primary zone and required buffer for development in the Bluff Creek Corridor; Subdivision (Preliminary Plat) creating one lot, two outlots and dedication of public right-of- way; Site Plan with Variances for building height and Bluff Creek Primary Zone setbacks for Planning Case #08-16, for a two-phase, three-story, 160,000 square-foot professional office building, and up to a 731-stall, five-level parking ramp; and Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 3 of 10 A sign size Variance request to permit an eight-foot tall sign with up to 64 square feet of sign display area. As part of the city’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the City approved a Land Use amendment of the westerly 10 acres of the property from Residential-Low Density to Office. This site also represents a significant gateway into our community. As such, it is anticipated that the development be a higher caliber and grander scale than other development in the OI district. This area is separated by both topography and vegetation from the remainder of the parcel to the east. It is anticipated that the remainder of the site will develop with a mix of housing types that maintain the 1.2 – 4.0 units per acre net density. On October 23, 2006, the Chanhassen City Council approved Wetland Alteration Permit #06-32 for the construction of an access road and stormwater pond. The wetland mitigation for this is located just east of the proposed Lot 1 and north of the large wetland complex. In 2006, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) constructed an extension of Powers Boulevard from Lyman Boulevard to Pioneer Trail in conjunction with the Trunk Highway (TH) 212 project. Future development within the city requires a lift station south of TH 212 and north of Pioneer Trail along Powers Boulevard. In addition, the TH 212 project needed to provide access to properties south of TH 212, west and east of the Powers Boulevard extension. Due to Carver County’s requirements for separation of access points onto a county road, the curb cut to access the Erhart property was located adjacent to an existing wetland. The applicant proposed the construction of a 31-foot wide street to provide access to the western portion of the property, in addition to the future city lift station. In conjunction with the access point and lift station location, the property owner requested and received a wetland alteration permit (Planning Case #06-32) in 2006. The wetland mitigation required of the permit has not been completed. On July 10, 1995, the City Council approved the preliminary and final plat of Butternut Ridge Addition, Subdivision #95-9, creating one lot and one outlot. This subdivision permitted the property owner to sell the 2½-acre home site on the property and keep the balance of the site for the owner’s personal use and future development. The property owner still owns the home on the property. On July 7, 2020, the City of Chanhassen received a complete Wetland Delineation Report for the property and a Notice of Application was sent on July 15, 2020. The on-site Technical Evaluation Panel was held on July 29, 2020 in order to review the wetland boundaries and types. The wetland types that were delineated on the property were Types 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6. The TEP and LGU concurred with the boundaries and types and the Notice of Decision was issued on August 8, 2020. ANALYSIS WETLAND On November 19, 2020, the applicant submitted a No-Loss Application for wetland excavation through the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) process. A Notice of Application was sent to the TEP on November 24, 2020. The proposed wetland excavation was discussed during a Technical Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 4 of 10 Evaluation Panel (TEP) meeting on December 8, 2020. Based on the information provided, the proposed activity appears to be unregulated based upon WCA 8420.0105 Scope. Subpart 1., which states the following: “Scope; generally. Wetlands must not be impacted unless replaced by restoring or creating wetland areas of at least equal public value. This chapter regulates the draining or filling of wetlands, wholly or partially, and excavation in the permanently and semi-permanently flooded areas of type 3, 4 or 5 wetlands, and in all wetland types if the excavation results in filling, draining, or conversion to nonwetlands.” Because the applicant is proposing only excavation in Type 1/2/6 wetlands on the property, and that the excavation will not exceed a depth of 6.5 feet, this activity is not regulated by the WCA. This means that this project is not anticipated to result in a net loss of wetland function or value, and as such, no wetland replacement or mitigation is necessary. The Notice of Decision with this determination was sent on December 22, 2020. Section 20-417. – Exemptions and no loss determinations. of the City Code states: “Activities exempted by Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0122 or determined to result in no net loss of wetlands shall be exempted from the provisions of this article. However, certificates of exemption or no loss must be obtained from the city prior to starting work.” This means that activities that result in no net loss of wetlands are exempt from the City’s Wetland Protection Article and thus exempt from the Wetland Alteration Permit process. This project qualifies for this exemption. This section of the City Code also states the following: “A person conducting an activity in a wetland under an exemption shall ensure that: 1. Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures are taken to prevent sediment discharges from the site; 2. The activity does not block fish activity; and 3. The activity is conducted in compliance with all other applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including best management practices as listed in Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0112, and water resource protection requirements established under M.S. § 103H. Numbers 1 and 3 listed above are listed under the Water Resources Conditions below. Number 2 listed above is not anticipated to apply to this project as the current wetland is not fish habitat and no proposed activities are anticipated to block fish activity. Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 5 of 10 Wetland Alteration Area INTERIM USE PERMIT The Engineering Department has reviewed the IUP submittal for excavation associated with the “Erhart/Blanski/City Wetland Alteration” submittal. These comments are divided into two categories: general comments and proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the applicant in the proper planning of public works infrastructure for this project, to inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings. Proposed conditions are requirements that Engineering recommends be formally imposed on the Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 6 of 10 applicant in the final order. Note that references to the “City Standards” herein refer to the City of Chanhassen Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. General Comments/Findings 1. Any and all erosion control, utility and transportation plans submitted with this application have been reviewed only for the purpose of determining the feasibility of the project in accordance with City Standards. A recommendation of IUP approval does not constitute final approval of details, including but not limited to alignments, materials and points of access, connection or discharge, that are depicted or suggested in the application. The City of Chanhassen Engineering and Public Works Department will review plans, in detail, when they are submitted and approve, reject or require modifications to the plans or drawings based upon conformance with City Standards, the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances and the professional engineering judgment of the City Engineer. 2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the proposed IUP application can be developed in accordance with the requirements of the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances (as it pertains to Engineering and Public Works requirements) and City Standards, provided it fully addresses the comments and conditions contained herein, and can be approved. 3. The applicant is proposing to excavate approximately 21,200 cubic yards of material from an existing wetland along with placing the excavated wetland spoils on a portion of parcel 25155022 (the applicant’s 114.54 acre property). The proposed request is to complete the excavation of an existing wetland (Wetland 2) during winter months to create a basin for a permanent water storage area along with the enhancement of the visual aesthetic of the existing wetland. The plans provided propose no net increase or decrease in the size or footprint of the wetland. The applicant has also provided erosion control plans in general conformance with Sec. 19-145 as required by City Ordinance. However, minor amendments to the provided plan will be required to best protect down gradient wetlands and sensitive environmental areas, e.g. the placement of two rows of silt fence adequately installed adjacent and abutting wetlands, etc. See proposed condition 1 and 2. 4. The erosion control plans provide an estimate of 3.669± acres of disturbance associated with the proposed grading activities. To guarantee compliance with the plan, and related remedial work, a cash escrow or letter of credit shall be furnished to the City before any site grading commences. In accordance with sec. 19-145.(d), the security is calculated based on the allowable, per parcel, amount of $7,500.00 per acre. Based on the disturbed area, this will equate to $27,517.50. See proposed condition 3. 5. Based on several pre-application meetings regarding possible future development of parcel 25155022, staff has concerns regarding the location of the wetland spoils stockpile and haul route. While the haul route is feasible, it is recommended that the alignment and location be reconsidered in conjunction with the future build-out of the area (future wetland buffers, potential rear yard areas, future street connections, etc.). Ultimately, the proposed haul route is adjacent to wetlands and preventative measures to assure minimal compaction should be pursued to promote the long-term health of the surrounding natural environment (i.e. a restoration plan, preventative compaction measures such as ground Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 7 of 10 protection mats over wood mulch, etc.). Additionally, while the location of the wetland spoil stockpile is ultimately the purview of the applicant, it currently is being placed within the path of a potential public road extension. As wetland soils, or hydric soils, are anticipated to be the predominately excavated material and are typically high in organic materials, they do not lend themselves to suitable road subgrades. It is the understanding of staff that the location of the wetland spoil stockpile is temporary, and as such, the proposed stockpile area will need to be surveyed before and after placement to delineate the boundary of material placed. This will ensure that once the material is relocated it will not serve as subgrade to future road extensions within the parcel. See proposed condition 4. 6. The proposed wetland where excavation is to occur is adjacent to single-family homes, thus staff recommends permitted hours of operation to be in accordance with Sec. 13- 52.(c) particular to “Construction activities in conjunction with new developments…”. See proposed condition 5. 7. The applicant’s narrative and plans indicate that all work associated with dredging/grading of the wetland will be completed in the winter with final stabilization of all areas in late spring or early summer. Thus, staff feels it adequate for the IUP to be approved for a period of one (1) year from the date of approval. See proposed condition 6. 8. The proposed development will exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). Along with the MPCA’s NPDES Construction Permit, other jurisdictional authorities’ rules may be triggered requiring additional permitting. See proposed condition 7. Landscaping and Tree Preservation The city-owned parcel at the northwest corner of Wetland 2 has both upland and wetland natural communities. The woods on the city property are a mix of lowland tree species such as ash, boxelder and elm along with buckthorn. The woods are not high quality by forestry standards but are highly valuable for wildlife habitat as well as valuable to neighboring properties as screening from Highway 101. Wildlife habitat in the adjacent subdivision has been severely impacted so that any small area of sanctuary is needed and highly beneficial. Additionally, Highway 101 will continue to increase in use and a visual buffer aids the neighboring properties in quality of life and home value. Staff does not recommend the removal of the wooded area for the dredging of the pond. The applicant has submitted a plan showing tree removal for the purpose of excavating a wetland, creating a haul route and stockpiling dredged material. Existing conditions in the upland area surrounding the wetlands are fully wooded with native species, such as oak, maple, linden, elm, ash and others. The woods are generally of high quality with minimal scattered areas of invasive species, mainly buckthorn. The property area is eventually proposed to be developed as low density residential with lots potentially backing up to the wetlands. The applicant’s haul route is being located in the future rear yards of the home lots thereby reducing Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 8 of 10 the quality of woods and yard because of tree loss and construction impact. Staff recommends that either best management practices be required to minimize all effects of tree removal and compaction along the route or the route be relocated to the future roadway alignment. Realigning it would protect the high quality woods for the future placement of homes and take advantage of an existing private ATV trail. A site inspection revealed that the applicant has already removed trees in the wetland buffer, the haul route and the stockpile area. The buffer and haul route would have been untouched by the potential development of the site and provided future home sites with beautiful, wooded rear yards. With the excavation project, these rear yard areas have now been de-forested and will suffer buckthorn invasion as well as challenging regeneration of native trees due to compaction. Soil compaction within the haul route will be detrimental to the adjacent wetland as it will increase runoff, decrease natural infiltration, and impact the health of nearby trees and vegetation. It will be important to the long-term health of the site that the impacts to soil and vegetation in the buffer and haul route be minimized as much as possible or eliminated altogether. Staff recommends that if the proposed haul route is allowed in its proposed location then a restoration plan that includes native tree and shrub plantings throughout the buffer and haul route be required. Additional de-compaction measures will be required as well, if needed. A tree inventory was not provided with the plans. The restoration plan does not include any trees or other plantings. Only seeding of disturbed areas has been included. Staff recommend that if the haul route is not relocated, then the route shall be replanted with native species along the entire route. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Interim Use Permit to permit as shown on the plans prepared by, subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation: Engineering 1. The applicant and their Engineer shall work with city staff in amending the Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, dated December 4, 2020, prepared by Mark Rausch, PE with Alliant Engineering, Inc., to fully satisfy Sec. 19-145 of City Ordinance and address any staff concerns. 2. All erosion control reviewed and approved in conjunction with Condition 1 shall be installed prior to the initiation of any site grading. Inspection and approval by the city of the installed erosion control measures must be had prior to grading operations. 3. The applicant shall supply a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $27,517.50 prior to grading operations. 4. A survey of the proposed stockpile location shall be provided before grading operations and after grading operations to delineate the total area and volume of material stockpiled in conjunction with this Interim Use Permit. 5. Permitted hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday with no work permitted on Sunday or public holidays. Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 9 of 10 6. The Interim Use Permit shall be approved for a period of one (1) year from the date of City Council approval. The applicant will need to request a formal extension 60 days prior to the expiration date of the Interim Use Permit. 7. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, as necessary, i.e. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Army Corps of Engineers, etc. and comply with their conditions of approval. Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the edge of grading and hauling limits throughout the entire project prior to any work being done. 2. The applicant shall install ground protection mats with an underlayment of shredded wood mulch on the entire length of the haul route. The mats will require an inspection by the city prior to use. 3. The applicant is required to submit a restoration plan that includes the replacement of trees within the buffer area and the haul route. The quantity shall be determined to match the existing density occurring in the forest outside of the construction limits. 4. Soil compaction tests shall be taken and levels documented post construction. If soil bulk density exceeds limits to plant growth (1.0g/cc), then appropriate restoration method shall be employed such as aeration as directed by the city. 5. No vegetation outside of the wetland boundary shall be removed on city property. 6. No access to the project site shall be allowed through city property. 7. The applicant is required to submit a restoration plan that includes the replacement of trees within the buffer area and the haul route. The quantity shall be determined to match the existing density occurring in the forest outside of the construction limits. 8. The removal of the wooded areas for the dredging of the pond shall not be permitted on the city owned parcel and should be preserved on the other two parcels. Water Resources 1. The applicant must limit all grading to the wetland boundary. No grading or vegetation removal is allowed beyond the wetland into the upland. 2. The wetland boundary must be completely flagged and walked with the city’s Water Resources Coordinator before any construction activities can begin. 3. Erosion and sediment control measures must be adequately in place before construction begins. Planning Commission Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Add. IUP WAP – Planning Case 2021-03 January 5, 2021 Page 10 of 10 4. No grading is permitted in the Type 3 portion of Wetland 2 (see plans for further details). Area of non-disturbance must be flagged prior to construction and approved by the City’s Water Resources Coordinator. 5. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits through the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Overlay District, including dredging, floodplain, ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Narrative 4. Grading Plan 5. Survey 6. No-Loss Application Notice of Decision 7. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-03 erhart wap and iup\staff report erhart iup wap.doc 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Black Cherry Development LLC for an Interim Use Permit for excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the parcel. On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Black Cherry Development LLC for an Interim Use Permit for the property located at Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition, (PID 25.1550022) and Outlot E, Foxwood (PID 25.2990510, city-owned) and 9197 Eagle Ridge Road PID 250240811. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed conditional use and was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A-2. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential Low Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is: Outlot A, Butternut Ridge Addition and Outlot E, Foxwood Addition. 4. Section 20-232: a. The proposed use will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. The proposed grading will enhance the aesthetics of the area. b. The proposed use will be consistent with the objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance by preserving and enhancing the wetland function and value. c. The proposed use 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. The proposed pond will enhance the appearance of the area. d. The proposed use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. The proposed use will enhance the planned neighboring uses. 2 e. The proposed use 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 use will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The storage capacity of the wetland will improve stormwater management for the area. g. The proposed use 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 use will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed use will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed use will not depreciate surrounding property values. l. The proposed use meets standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Article IV of the City Code. 5. The Planning Commission shall recommend an Interim Use Permit and the City C ouncil shall issue an Interim Use Permit only if it finds, based on the proposed location, that: a. The use meets the standards of a Conditional Use Permit set forth in Section 20- 232 of the City Code. b. The use conforms to the zoning regulations. c. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zoning district. d. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty upon completion of the grading and restoration. e. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. f. The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use. 6. The planning report #2021-03 dated January 5, 2021, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. 3 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to permit the excavation of the wetland and storage of soil on the property in anticipation of the eventual development of the site subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY:___________________________________ Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-03 erhart wap and iup\findings of fact erhart.docx Section 1: Application Type (check all that aPPly) Suornitral Date: l]}O PC Date:cc D"blf qs]a-f 6e.Day Review Data:3/al 2t $32s I suuoivision 1sua1E Create 3 lots or leqs ........................................ $300 E Create over 3 bts......................-$600 + $15 per lot( lots) E Metes & Bounds (2 lots)...........................,...... $300 E Lot Line Adjustnent.........................................$150 E Final P|at....... ......-............... $700 (lndudes $450 escrow for attomey costs)' 'Additiond €56tow may be ]€quired for other applicatilms tfuor4h the devdopment cdlt-acl $750 E Vacation of Easemenb/Right-of-way (VAC)..'...-. $300 $1 0O (Additior|al r€co.ding l€€s may 4ply) $200 Ll (Re.ff, to the ap!,r,odate Arptic,/do,l C,E(r,Jis, fq tqu d stturifial info.naliot thal mN mstwtty this aqdicdiqt) E Comprehensive Plan Amendment.............,........... $600 E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers..... $1fi) E Conditional Use Permit (CUP) ! Rezoning (REZ) E Phnned Unit Development (PUD) ! Minor Amendment to existing PUD E CommerciaUlndustrial Districts'$500 Plus $10 per 1 ,000 square feet of building area:( thousand square feet) 'lndude number of gllEDg emdoyees: 'lrdude ruEnber of @4 emdoys€s: n ReskJential Distsicts......................................... $5m) Plus $5 per dwelling unit ( units) E Single-Family Residence El Escrow for Recording Documents (check allthat E Conditional Use Permit E Vacation E Metes & Bounds SubdMsion (3 docs.) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) E Single-Family Residence...... $325 $42s f! Spn ean Review................ ....... $150 E Site Plan Review (SPR) I Administrative ...................... $100 $1s0 $275 $10o $500 E Al otners. E Zoning Appeal El Property Ounrers' List within 5OO' (Oty b gerE atg aner pte.applicatiar meding) .........-. :.:....-.-...........-............ $3 per addless ( 70 addresses) E Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) XgfE: When muhiple applicati,ons arc processed concufier ry' the approprlate tee shdl be chaIgsd for each apPllcadon. $50 per document) Dtr lnterim Use Permit variance Easements L__ easements) E Site Plan Agreement E Wetand Alteration Permit E Deeds TOTAL FEE:$'r,210 00 COTTUTITY DEVELOPI EI{T DEPART EI{T Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1 100 / Fax: (952) 227-1110 CITY OT CHAI{HASSXil APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Section 2: Required lnformation Description of Proposal: proposed excavaton of an existing wetand with bonow excavation placed on existing adjacent Property. property Address or Location: Parent Parcel is, E of Poflefs Blvd, w of Great Plains Blvd, s of Foxwood hvelopment, N ' Parcel #:2s1550022 Legal Description:See Attached Total Acreage:112.74 Wetands present? Z yes E tto Present Zoning:Single-Famity Residential District (RSF)Requested Zoning:Not Applicable Present Land Use Designation . Residential Low Density Requested Land Use Desig nr1;on. Not ApPlicable Wetland and residentialExisting Use of Properq/: ECheck box if separate narative is attach€d. E tnterim Use Permit (lUP) ! ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence.. E ett ottrers...... Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicanl, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to lile this application. I agree lo be bound by conditions ol approval, subiect only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has nbt b€en signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the apptication. This application should bs processed in my name and I am lhe party whom ths City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and lhe progress of this application. I further understand lhat additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, elc. with an eslimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify thal the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Black Cherry Development, LLC Contact Phone: City/Statezip Email: Signature PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this applicalion, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, aulhorize the filing of this application. I understand that 6onditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to obiect at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission ol material and the progress ol this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulling fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name Black Cherry Development, LLC Contact: Phone: Tim Erharl Address 14500 Martin Drive, Ste. 3000 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 (612) 963-0733 Cell: Fax. Date City/Statezip Email:tefiart@riekor.com Signature PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Name: Alliant Engineering, lnc Cell: Fax: Oale Contact: Phone: 11t30t20 Mark Ra[s.:h (612) 767-9339 City/Statezip: Email 733 Marquette Ave. Ste. 700 Minneapolis, MN. 5902 mrausch@alliant-inc.com Cell Fax This application must be completed in lull and musl be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Departmenl to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and tees. A determination ot completeness of the application shall be made within '15 business days of applicalion submittal. A wrilten notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. E Property owner via: E Email E Applicant Yra: E Email I Engineer Via: E Email E ouer Via: E Email n Maited Paper copy n Mailed Paper copy I Mailed Paper Copy I uailed Paper Copy Who should receiye copies of staff reports?'Olher Contact lnformation: Nams: Dan Blake INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Com plete all necess8ry form fields, lhen select SAVE FoRM lo save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documenls and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital copy to the city for processing SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUEMIT FORM Name: Add-o.. Address: Soclion 4: Notification lnformation Address: _ city/state/ziD:Email: danblake@Demtom.com CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA December 4, 2020 SITE INFORMATION PID & Acreage Parcel I : 251550022 - 112.78 acres - Tim and Dawne Erhart Parcel 2: 250240811 - 3.67 acres - David & Mary Blanski Parcel 3: 252990510 - 1.66 acres - Citv of Chanhassen Wetland Management The wetland (Wetland 2) to be modified exists partially within three parcels noted above. The wetland limits have been delineated by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company May 12, 2020. T?ie City of Chanhassen approved the delineation on August 7,2020. Wetland 2 was classified as a manage 2 as previously reviewed by the City and Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District with the Foxwood subdivision approval and as defined in the City's Surface Water Resource Plan. ERIIART / BLANSKI / CITY PROPERTY WETLAND ALTERATION AND INTERIM USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL NARRATf\'E Work Area Location: E of Powers Blvd, W of Great Plains Blvd, S of Foxwood Development, N ofw 96s St. DESCRIPTION OF INTERIM USE PERMIT REQUEST The request for interim use permit is for the proposed excavation of an existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the Erhart parcel. The proposed request is to complete the excavation of an existing wetland (Wetland 2) during winter months to create a basin for a pennanent water storage area. The applicant is proposing the work to enhance the visual appearance of the existing wetland, but the work will additionally provide hydrologic flood storage in excavated basin as well. The excavated borrow material from the wetland will be placed on the Erhart parcel property. The wetland modification will not result in a net increase or decrease in the size of the wetland. The propose wetland alteration is simply adding depth to the wetland to create a watff storage pool. The application provides a proposed grading plan that shows the maximum grading work possible, with no excavation or permanent impact outside of the wetland delineation limits. The actual grading work will be completed as 'field fit' construction process to allow flexibility in deviating from plans based on existing conditions. At no point will the proposed grading limits exceed what is shown in the civil engineering plans. Contmctor to work with the applicant, landowner representatives, wetland scientist and relevant regulatory authorities when completing grading activity to provide the desired result for all. lnterim Use Permit December 4, 2020 Wetland Alteration - Chanhassen, MN Page I of 3 Local Govemmental Unit City ofChanhassen Riley Purgatory BluffCreek Watershed District Wetland Classificalion Buffer Strip Requirement Accessory Structure Setback to Buffer Average Base Buffer Width Requiredr Min. Avg Base Buffer Width Required2 MANAGE 2 20 30 t5 MEDIUM 40 20 INTERIM USE PERMIT I2 GENERAL STANDARDS JUSTIFICATION Check to City findings for granting an Interim Use Permit (pursuant to City Subdivision Code Section 20-321): a. The wetland alteration will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, or general welfare ofthe neighborhood or the city. The excavation of the wetland is following all SWPPP regulations and guidelines. The wetland is being graded with a 10' l0:l slope of the edge to ensure future safety of the public. The alteration of the wetland will not be an inconvenience to the neighborhood or the city. The wetland alteration will provide more value to sr[rounding neighbors as the visual appearance of the wetland will be more appealing to the public and visitors to the city. The construction will be during winter months as to have minimal impact. b. The wetland alteration has no effect on the objectives ofthe city's comprehensive plan. c. The wetland has been designed and will be constructed and maintained to be compatible to the surrounding existing wetlands. d. The existing wetland does not have a planned use in the neighborhood. The wetland alteration will not be hazardous in any way to the neighborhood. e. The wetland will visually serve all travelers along Great Plains Blvd (TH 101). The Wetland is also visible from Eagle Ridge Road. The city will maintain access with the owned City owned Outlot in the Foxwood Development. New property owners in the proposed conceptual development will have an enhanced view of the altered wetland. f. The wetland has no requirements for any public facilities. The alteration of the wetland is being privately funded and will increase the value ofhomes in the area. g. The wetland alteration will not be detrimental to any persons or property because of noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. The contractor will complete all activities in accordance with City code. h. The wetland currently does not have any approaches. The wetland alteration will not be adding any approaches that may alter traffic in any manner. i. The wetland is currently not of historic significance.j. The altered wetland will have a very similar aesthetic look of surrounding wetlands. k. The wetland alteration will not depreciate surrounding property values. l. The wetland alteration is will meet all city requirements and standards. Interim Use Permit December 4. 2020 Wetland Alteration - Chanhassen, MN Page 2 of 3 Principal Structure Setback to Buffer Wetland Classification Notes: l.) The wetland buffer calculations for future subdivision will be provided with the subdivision application. CONCLUSION The applicant respectfully concludes that the request for interim use permit will maintain existing total wetland area. The proposed modification will result in a wetland classification consistent with the existing wetland, not reduce hydrologic capacity in the wetland and fits within the City's goals and objectives for this area. December 4 Wetland Alteration - Chanhassen, MN Page 3 of 3 HAWKCREST COURT HAWKCREST CIRCLEEAGLE RIDGE ROADINFILTRATION BASIN 2WETLAND 2T.H 101PROJECTLOCATIONWETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATIONCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTASUITE 700ALLIANT ENGINEERING, INC.733 MARQUETTE AVENUEMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402PH: 612-758-3080CONSULTANT FX: 612-758-3099SURVEYOR ENGINEER PETER GOERSLICENSE NO. 44110MARK RAUSCHLICENSE NO. 43480LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTEM: mrausch@alliant-inc.comEM: pgoers@alliant-inc.comMARK KRONBECKLICENSE NO. 26222EM: mkronbeck@alliant-inc.comDEVELOPER SUITE 3000BLACK CHERRY DEVELOPMENT, LLC14500 MARTIN DRIVE,EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344CONTACT: TIM ERHARTPH: 612-963-0733VICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALEERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION COVER1SHEET INDEX NO.COVER SHEET1EXISTING CONDITIONS2SITE PLAN3WETLAND EXCAVATION/GRADING PLAN4SPOIL PILE/GRADING PLAN5EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN6EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS7RESTORATION PLAN8WETLAND SCIENTISTADAM CAMERONKJOLHAUG ENVIRONMENTALEM: adam@kjolhaugenv.comSERVICES COMPANY 1413122987653211119876BLOCK 55OUTLOT COUTLOT DOUTLOT EOUTLOT EOUTLOT CBLOCK 3BLOCK 4HAWKCREST COURT HAWKCREST CIRCLE4BLOCK 2BLOCK 512EAGLE RIDGE ROADINFILTRATION BASIN 2FL / FW / LW / LW / LW/LWW L / FSW / F W / LL / WWWW LLWWWWINFILTRATION BASIN 2BOTTOM EL 891TOP EL 891.24 HWL 895.99 HWL 918.69(GREAT PLAINS BLVD.)STATE TRUNK HWY. NO. 101WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION EXISTING CONDITIONS2EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND: 111512143131617181229876532111198746BLOCK 55OUTLOT COUTLOT DOUTLOT EOUTLOT EOUTLOT CBLOCK 3BLOCK 4HAWKCREST COURT HAWKCREST CIRCLE4BLOCK 2BLOCK 1OUTLOT ABLOCK 512OUTLOT FEAGLE RIDGE ROAD WETLAND 3CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND 2CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYW 1434113529876211032456789BLOCK 1BLOCK 2BLOCK 3OUTLOT AWETLAND 4CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYGREAT PLAINS BLVD. (TH-101)WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONSITE LEGEND: ERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION SITE PLAN3HAUL ROAD SECTIONA'-A'SITE DATA: 232111198OUTLOT DOUTLOT EOUTLOT EBLOCK 4BLOCK 512EAGLE RIDGE ROADINFILTRATION BASIN 2INFILTRATION BASIN 2BOTTOM EL 891TOP EL 891.24 HWL 895.991324WETLAND 2CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND 4WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION GRADING NOTES: GRADING LEGEND: ERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION WETLAND EXCAVATION/GRADING PLAN4TYPICAL GRADING CROSS SECTIONB'-B'ESTIMATED EARTHWORK: NATURAL WETLAND OUTLET CROSS SECTIONC'-C' 434113529876210789BLOCK 1BLOCK 2BLOCK 3OUTLOT AWETLAND 3CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION SPOIL PILE GRADING PLAN5GRADING LEGEND: POTENTIALLY IMPACTED TREESESTIMATED EARTHWORK: BLOCK 3BLOCK 4HAWKCREST COURTBLOCK 5EAGLE RIDGE ROAD WETLAND 3CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND 2CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYW 1WETLAND 4CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYGREAT PLAINS BLVD. (TH-101)DNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDNDDISCHARGE POINT TO LAKERILEY VIA WETLAND(LAKE RILEY IS AN IMPAIRED WATERSWITHIN 1 MILE)WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN6NOTE TO CONTRACTOR: ACTIVE SWPPP LEGENDVICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALENOTE: RESPONSIBLE PARTY:DURING CONSTRUCTION:EROSION CONTROLIMPAIRED WATER REQUIREMENTLEGEND: DND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEWASHED ROCK ORWOOD/MULCH PERSPECIFICATIONS18" MINIMUM CUT OFF BERM TOMINIMIZE RUNOFF FROM SITENOTES:1. MnDOT 3733 TYPE 4 FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED UNDER ROCK OR MULCH TOSTOP MUD MIGRATION THROUGH MATERIAL.2. FUGITIVE ROCK OR MULCH WILL BE REMOVED FROM ADJACENT ROADWAYS DAILY OR MORE FREQUENTLY AS NECESSARY.3.CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THECOMMENCEMENT OF GRADING OPERATIONS ON THE SITE.4.THE ENTRANCE MUST BE MAINTAINED IN PROPER CONDITION TO PREVENTTRACKING OF MUD OFF THE SITE. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOPDRESSINGWITH ADDITIONAL ROCK, WOOD/MULCH, OR REMOVAL AND REINSTALLATION OFTHE PAD.5.THIS ENTRANCE WILL BE USED BY ALL VEHICLES ENTERING OR LEAVING THEPROJECT.6.THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE WILL BE REMOVED PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OFBITUMINOUS SURFACING.PUBLIC ROAD50' MINIMUM LENGTHROCK-6" MINIMUM DEPTHWOOD/MULCH- 12" MINIMUM DEPTH20' MINIMUM WIDTHNOTE:ALL SLOPES WITH A GRADE EQUAL TO OR STEEPER THAN 3:1REQUIRE SLOPE TRACKING. SLOPES WITH A GRADE MORE GRADUALTHAN 3:1 REQUIRE SLOPE TRACKING IF THE STABILIZATION METHODIS EROSION CONTROL BLANKET OR HYDROMULCH.UNDISTURBED VEGETATIONTRACKED EQUIPMENTTREADS CREATE GROOVESPERPENDICULAR TO SLOPEDIRECTION.SLOPESLOPE TRACKINGEROSION CONTROL BLANKETINSTALLATIONOVERLAPLONGITUDINAL JOINTSMINIMUM OF 6"OVERLAP END JOINTSMINIMUM OF 6" AND STAPLEOVERLAP AT 1.5' INTERVALS.ANCHOR TRENCH(SEE DETAIL AND NOTES BELOW)ANCHOR TRENCH1. DIG 6" X 6" TRENCH2. LAY BLANKET IN TRENCH3. STAPLE AT 1.5' INTERVALS4. BACKFILL WITH NATURAL SOIL AND COMPACT5. BLANKET LENGTH SHALL NOT EXCEED 100'WITHOUT AN ANCHOR TRENCH6"6"1' TO 3'DIRECTION OFSURFACE FLOWNOTE:SLOPE SURFACE SHALL BE FREE OF ROCKS, SOIL CLUMPS,STICKS, VEHICLE IMPRINTS, AND GRASS. BLANKETS SHALLHAVE GOOD SOIL CONTACT.STAPLE PATTERN/DENSITY SHALLFOLLOW MANUFACTURERSSPECIFICATIONSERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTOL NOTES AND DETAILS 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700EROSION CONTROL SCHEDULE:FINAL STABILIZATION:EROSION CONTROL GENERAL NOTES:POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES:SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES:DUST CONTROL:MAINTENANCE PROGRAM:EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLWINTER STABLIZATION: DEWATERING: BLOCK 3BLOCK 4HAWKCREST COURTBLOCK 5EAGLE RIDGE ROADINFILTRATION BASIN 2INFILTRATION BASIN 2BOTTOM EL 891TOP EL 891.24 HWL 895.99WETLAND 3CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND 2CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYW 1WETLAND 4CLASSIFICATION ASSUMED:MANAGE 2 - CITY, MEDIUM - RPBCWDBUFFER REQUIREMENTS:20' MIN.,40' AVG., 80' MAX - RPBCWD20' MIN. + 30' SBK - CITYWETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT 733 Marquette AvenueMinneapolis, MN 55402612.758.3080www.alliant-inc.comSuite 700FOR REVIEW ONLYPRELIMINARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONERHART/BLANSKI/CITY WETLAND ALTERATION RESTORATION PLAN8LEGEND:SEED PLANTING NOTES: PLANTING NOTES: mi OARD OF WATER ND SOtt RESOURCES Minnesota Wetland Conseruation Act Notice of Decision WCA Decision Type - check all that a Replacement Plan lmpacts (replacement plan decisions only) Total WcA Wetland lmpact Area: Bank Account Number(s): Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendations (attach if any| Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen County: Carver County Applicant Name: Timothy A & Dawne M Erhart c/o Dan Blake Project Name: Erhart Property Wetland Delineation LGU Project No. (if any): 2020-07 Date complete Application Received by LGU. 07 /o7 /2020 Date of LGU Decision: O8/O7 /2O2O Date this Notice was Sent: 08/07 /2O2O E Wetland Boundaryflype E Sequencing ! No-Loss (8420.0415) Part:!AtrB trCtrDtrE DF trC trH E Replacement Plan E Bank Plan (not credit purchase) E Exemption l8/.zO.O42Ol Subpart:f)2 tr 3tr4tr5 tr 6 !7 tr8tr9 X Approve I Approve w/Conditions EDeny E NoTEP Recommendation LGU Decision X Approved with Conditions (specify below)1 List Conditions: E Approvedl Decision-Maker for this Application: I Staff E Governing Board/Council ! other Decision is valid for: X 5 years (defauh) tr other (specify): 1 wetlond Replocement Plon opprovotis not volid untilBWSR confi.ms the withdtowolof ony rcquircd wetlond bonk ctedits. Fot project- specific replacement o finonciol assuronce per MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 and evidence thot oll requircd forms hove been recorded on the title of the Wopefty on which the rcplocement wetlond is locoted must be provided tothe LGU Jot the opptovolto be volid. LGU Findin - Attach document(s) and/or insert narrative providi the basis for the LGU decisionl 1 Findings must considet any TEP rccommendotions Attached Project Documents BWSR NOD Form - November t2,2Ot9 1, X Attachment(s) (specify) : X Summary: Four wetlands were delineated on the property. The wetland types are as follows: Wetland 1- Type 1, Seasonally flooded basin; Wetland 2-Iype 6/2/3, Shrub-carr, wet meadow, shallow marsh; Wetland 3 - Type 2/3/5, Wet meadow, shallow marsh, open water; and Wetland 4 - Type 6/3/5, Shrub-carr, shallow marsh, open water. ln addition to those wetlands, one constructed stormwater basin was delineated along with a small tributary that connects Wetland 2 and Wetland 3. The delineation boundary and type will be approved upon receipt of the wetland boundary shapefile. Applicant Representative: The Pemtom Land Company Wetland Replacement Type: E Project Specific Credits: E Bank Credits: ! Denied X Site Location Map E Project Plan(s)/Descriptions/Reports (specify): Appeals of [GU Decisions lf you wish to appeal this decision, you must provide a written request within 30 ca lenda r da vs of the date vou received the notice. All appeals must be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources Executive Director along with a check payable to BWSR for 5500 unless the LGU has adopted a local appeal process as identified below. The check must be sent by mail and the written request to appeal can be submltted by mail or e-mail. The appeal should include a copy of this notice, name and contact information of appellant(s) and their representatives (if applicable), a statement clarifying the intent to appeal and supporting information as to why the decision is in error. Send to: Appeals & Regulatory Compliance Coordinator Minnesota Board of Water & Soils Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 travis.rermundson@state.mn.us Does the LGU have a local appeal process applicable to this decision? I Yest E No 1[ yes, oll appeals must fitst be considered vio the locol oppeols process. Local Appeals Submittal Requirements (LGU must describe how to appeal, submittal requirements, fees, etc. as applicable) Send S50.00 to 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Notice Distribution (include name) R uired on oll notices: tionol or As ble Signature: 'lhrt (hn4* Datei 08/07 /2O2O This notice and accompanying application materials may be sent electronically or by mail. The LGU may opt to send a summary of the application to members of the public upon request per 8420.0255, subp. 3. 2 X SWCD TEP Member: Aaron Finke E BWSR TEP Member: Ben Carlson ! l-GU TEP Member (if different than LGU contact): X DNR Representative: Melissa Collins X Watershed District or Watershed Mgmt. Org.: Terry Jeffery, Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District B Applicant: Timothy A & Dawne M Erhart Company c/o Dan Blake; Adam Cameron X Agent/consultant: The Pemtom Land X Corps of Engineers: D BWsR Wetland Mitigation coordinator (required for bank plan applicat ions only): D Members of the Public (notice only):n other BWSR NOD Form - Novembet 12,2Ot9 BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 1 Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen County: Carver County Applicant Name: Timothy A and Dawne M Erhart Applicant Representative: Adam Cameron, Kjolhaug Environmental Project Name: Erhart Property No-Loss Application LGU Project No. (if any): 2020-18 Date Complete Application Received by LGU: 11/19/2020 Date of LGU Decision: 12/18/2020 Date this Notice was Sent: 12/22/2020 WCA Decision Type - check all that apply ☐ Wetland Boundary/Type ☐ Sequencing ☐ Replacement Plan ☐ Bank Plan (not credit purchase) ☒ No-Loss (8420.0415) ☐ Exemption (8420.0420) Part: ☐ A ☐ B ☐ C ☐ D ☐ E ☐ F ☐ G ☐ H Subpart: ☐ 2 ☐ 3 ☐ 4 ☐ 5 ☐ 6 ☐ 7 ☐ 8 ☐ 9 Replacement Plan Impacts (replacement plan decisions only) Total WCA Wetland Impact Area: Wetland Replacement Type: ☐ Project Specific Credits: ☐ Bank Credits: Bank Account Number(s): Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendations (attach if any) ☒ Approve ☐ Approve w/Conditions ☐ Deny ☐ No TEP Recommendation LGU Decision ☐ Approved with Conditions (specify below)1 ☒ Approved1 ☐ Denied List Conditions: Decision-Maker for this Application: ☒ Staff ☐ Governing Board/Council ☐ Other: Decision is valid for: ☒ 5 years (default) ☐ Other (specify): 1 Wetland Replacement Plan approval is not valid until BWSR confirms the withdrawal of any required wetland bank credits. For project- specific replacement a financial assurance per MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 and evidence that all required forms have been recorded on the title of the property on which the replacement wetland is located must be provided to the LGU for the approval to be valid. LGU Findings – Attach document(s) and/or insert narrative providing the basis for the LGU decision1. ☒ Attachment(s) (specify): ☒ Summary: The TEP met virtually on December 8, 2020 and concurred with the applicant’s determination that any excavation will occur in Types 1/2/6 wetlands and will not exceed 6.5 feet in depth. As such, these activities are not regulated by the Wetland Conservation Act. The No-Loss application is approved. 1 Findings must consider any TEP recommendations. Attached Project Documents BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 2 ☒ Site Location Map ☐ Project Plan(s)/Descriptions/Reports (specify): Appeals of LGU Decisions If you wish to appeal this decision, you must provide a written request within 30 calendar days of the date you received the notice. All appeals must be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources Executive Director along with a check payable to BWSR for $500 unless the LGU has adopted a local appeal process as identified below. The check must be sent by mail and the written request to appeal can be submitted by mail or e-mail. The appeal should include a copy of this notice, name and contact information of appellant(s) and their representatives (if applicable), a statement clarifying the intent to appeal and supporting information as to why the decision is in error. Send to: Appeals & Regulatory Compliance Coordinator Minnesota Board of Water & Soils Resources 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 travis.germundson@state.mn.us Does the LGU have a local appeal process applicable to this decision? ☒ Yes1 ☐ No 1If yes, all appeals must first be considered via the local appeals process. Local Appeals Submittal Requirements (LGU must describe how to appeal, submittal requirements, fees, etc. as applicable) Send $50.00 to 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Notice Distribution (include name) Required on all notices: ☒ SWCD TEP Member: Ben Drates/Tom Genelin ☒ BWSR TEP Member: Ben Carlson ☐ LGU TEP Member (if different than LGU contact): ☒ DNR Representative: Melissa Collins ☒ Watershed District or Watershed Mgmt. Org.: Terry Jeffery, Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District ☒ Applicant: Timothy A and Dawne M Erhart ☒ Agent/Consultant: Adam Cameron, Kjolhaug Environmental Optional or As Applicable: ☒ Corps of Engineers: ☐ BWSR Wetland Mitigation Coordinator (required for bank plan applications only): ☒ Members of the Public (notice only): Eric Trelstad (Replacement Plan Applications only) ☐ Other: Signature: Date: 12/22/2020 This notice and accompanying application materials may be sent electronically or by mail. The LGU may opt to send a summary of the application to members of the public upon request per 8420.0255, Subp. 3. BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 3 protect. manage. restore. 18681 Lake Drive East Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-607-6512 www.rpbcwd.org MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Terry Jeffery, Watershed Planning Manager DATE: December 23, 2020 RE: Wetland Alteration Permit 2021-003 RPBCWD Comments Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed wetland alteration. We received an application on December 18, 2020 and have not yet performed our review. We will have comments specific to our rules later. Chanhassen has a long history of wetland protection. Even prior to the Wetland Conservation Act, the City of Chanhassen codified the protection of wetlands from degradation with Article VI of Chapter 20 of Chanhassen City Code. The stated goal and purpose of Article VI is to prevent “alteration and destruction of wetlands... unless there is no feasible alternative.” [§20-401(b)] Clearly this constitutes wetland alteration and there is a feasible alternative; leave the wetland as is. Section 20-402 (3) states the purpose of the article is to “Require(ing) sound management practices that will protect, conserve, maintain, enhance and improve the functions and values of wetlands within the community.” Section 20-410 states that when a wetland alteration is to be allowed the alteration must not have a “net adverse effect on the ecological and hydrologic characteristics of the remaining wetland” and “shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation.” The proposed alteration will result in the loss of interspersion of plant communities and the subsequent habitat provision. The excavation will result in the overall watershed losing diversity and structure and instead will leave primarily type 5, open water wetlands. Moreover, there is no restoration plan in place to address the plant community within the excavated area. Nor is there any attempt to provide any habitat variability via undulation of the excavated area. The proposal does little more than mimic a stormwater pond rather than seek to improve the functions and values of a wetland. Even were the City to allow it on private land, it is unclear how this meets the intent of protecting this area in an outlot during the development of Fox Path to protect the 2 wetland from alteration. Further, the plat of Fox Path utilized better site design to minimize tree loss where feasible. This proposal will result in removal of up to 1.5 acre of woodland. To allow this to move forward is not in keeping with the stated goals of the Surface Water Management Plan either. Whether the wetland is classified by the City of Chanhassen as a Manage 1 or a Manage 2 wetland, this proposal is not in keeping with the stated management strategy in Table 42 of Chapter V of the Surface Water Management Plan. It is the District’s hope that you will consider the net impact that this will have on habitat provision and deny this application as it alters and degrades the overall quality of the wetland. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COUNTYOFCARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk ofthe City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy ofthe auached notice ofa Public Hearing to consider a request for a Wetland Alteration Permit and Interim Use Permit for excavation of existing wetland along with excavated borrow being placed on a location within the parcel. Zoned Agricultural Estate (A2), Planning Case No.202l-03 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid 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 ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records ofthe County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesot4 and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and thisl$ day o m to before me Kim T. M euwlssen-Depu JEAil u <t-,2020. Notary Public (Seal) l$r.b!t.!!. Subject Area DltcblnEr This map is neither a lega,ly ccorded map nor a guNey and is not iniended to be used ar one. illi3 map is a co-mpilbtion ot rEcords. anloamation and data located in varioss city. "orrnw state ano teoeratifrces and olher sourceg regBrdlng the area 3hown and ls lo be u;d br rcfe.eoce purposes or y The C y does not wanant that trle Geog6phic tnbmalbn Sy3Em (GlS) Data used to Prepa.e thls map are ero.lree, and the city does not reoreseni rrat ure Gls Dala can be used lo. navQatonal tracking or any other purpose lequrnng e)6ctng rneasurement ol dstance or drreclion or preoson n the ikd,aion ot seoe6 ,c batures ttre preceding alEdaimer ls povided pu6uanl lo Mi;nesota SdM;s aas6.o3. subd. 21 (2ooo), end the user of his map acrno*ledges mat fre Crty snatt n6t te liable for any damagE3. and e)Qressly waiv6 all daims and aorees lo d;End, ndemn y, and hold harmle$ the City ttom any and alldaim3 bmught d User. lts employees o( agents. or thlrd partes which anse out ot the users access or uEe of dal,a Provided. <TAX-NAMET tTAX-ADD-Ll r <TAX-ADD-L2r (Next RecordD(TAX-NAMEtt ITAX-ADD-LI r ITAX_ADD_L2r Subject Area DLchim€r This map 6 ncither a legally recotded map nor a sun ey anal is nol inlended to be lr3ed as one. itris map is a compihtion of recods info.mation and data loaated in variqls crty. counlv. state and ledeaal 6fices and other soorces regardlng th€ area shown. and rs to be u3ed br releleoce purposes only. The Ciy does not war.anl that the GeograPhc lnbrmatbn SFtem (GlS) Oata used to prepare this map are etro( fee, and the Crty does not reorereni rlat the GIS Data can be used lo. neugattonal kackrng or any other pu,poie ,equitlng exactng measuaemenl of d6tance oI drrection or p.eosion n he ddion ot g€o!6Phrc Eature3. The preceding disdairner is provrded pu6uant to Mi;n6otra Statljtas !a66.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknodedg€s thd a|e City shan not be liable for any dameges. and erpessly waaves all daims, and aore€ to dehnd. indemn Y. and hold hamlegs $e city ftom any and alldaims brought d user. its employees or igenls. or thrrd partes whrch adse oul of the usefs access or use of dalia provided. l "x 1, -r$r tt a. \\ ,F- il,/ nI Ff 5s I l \ cA-' E tfal ..1 F vt \ \;- 15 I : E I ,/1 ;*:r fl I r.I a\ ,Jt- B.l - .1 "t t'I \ lEistrii iE;t:I;Eg .EIEfIiIEEi BEliBiigii .a o ([ o, o, c;E.F (, o) E o)E Eo o)-o c(! -o- C)E 0.,(l) o co; lo = E., C' E .9o ,9 E Eoo G o. <,ooi o TE<g -u)o- .c (o5o,3i do2rOEtP 6E(Lo (E=E6OE $O,oo;Eo< =6 .)o o o o o '6 (l, an o o {,.E o .9. c .9 Goo t* U!? _o,fi 85 E e i-E€ .gE E aEiEEEE! eEeg EEif; eE€E E="EI€rEI SiHe iTEE 9EE:gEEE Ep E=o.!2 -c ! (,(rF(JtL P-aBEso.Foc(Jar-N(Y)S o)-c a c; . d i E .C .0 F E cioo a- o oloN o .o c(!., ;oE ()lF o E2dl () (! Eoof.-F. 0)-o EoEo oc:)oo ([- or9 -9coE c9(!- 6.o =6PE6oxcoo =Ev0)co.o!6o->o,(5C96a-o ,e0 'FOc6 o!o-goOqe JOcx.L il) E=c= E IDo-coFg o Ec(5 o) =([ o o)aU E o (,p coo !co N o) (\l UJ E)=a ,9 o o,coN oo o o)o o.c,o o(5 dl () JJ o o(, q) -- -o0, = --o o.c o ! It)!oo o-a o) o oIt)p pco o) a .g F lt 0) ooo- c .o oo =oc o., o !co (5 E o) c) ll)oo o o-a a ,9')o =ulz 6(! !E c)o)(5 otE It) 0, Ec o) i fiq cq) o-ccoE =;; - C o o E e E E .gg E 9 2 E g !.E I Ea E g!! I I E 6 ! E E e .9 & E d g = & E e- E gI E E sII I 6 ? *g 8E 9 ,9 E 96 E E 3I 3 -lE E ! Ig ii! E E IqE E -s aE o E , !5 E 3E e E E 6,9 53 E a E q ;6 !9i q 3 I! E 3 n E :o a E_89 gE E c E e E E E E 8p & I E I E E a E & E E I e E e g e ! E EEI ! E 8 E p 3 E E 9 E P ,!E E E cI 6 aI? e EI E ! 8€ Ea _8 E; I 3r ,e 9 t 3 I E 3 i P 3 E q ! 6 q c5 ..o9Etroo o=C'E:ooo go(, CI >Er.9 o.Geto-J iri F c6 o Go .9 oooJ :,: Goo CLo o- Bg tDo =E9.9 .=l, E.E rE .9o5o:CDo- .EEEoc.9f, OEz3 ooE G.co E" E a, o, =oDc .E .9 (!6o'=-EC'E €()dE 5,=OE cE ETze tAo G Eo o c !t o q E E .9 F E c!oo t- o NoN d eofcG j(!E o):,F !2d) o) o =ooF.F. n) -o EoEo c,oO oI N o) (s ul 6 f) .E EocoN or9 o-9(E= EeE'ES ct6.s ^o=6.98 'E ii oE-coootts -c()E a_q-QxogEH o 6o EE E qEE o0ro9d.g Eq HoJ (.,!rcx'; .= o) 5CE J.J q) o)o O (! dl o o ! o E o o rl) OJ U) (o o) =o .c.Eoc !co c o) Eo-o o) o)o Doo] ol! o.,E o .c fo p .>(I) .E -q(L (! tl, o o 0)3 q) o).c 9---o, =E 8 E-t= Ec ; eEee 83eE aE:E EEgi Fgag liEE::E.P ggEE eE€E E=Hg; E aE; gEEH 3*ET E HEE *s-i, i sH #,5 F < c!rD + lgFOEU('DT(\(ri E (,oI o oo E Eoo G o- . rP o !9 siEExi; HagefE;r Elit:.sE ;EIEHcEE a El;i sEEo-Elx;! E g gBiggEg EINE=3E; Ei* si te o =o o E .a3 Jo =.t6JNo aa o i E o6ot!s o .: 3i B ,(5 o)o)oo-o o); o() oo- _!, --o 0).c, .9 q) o it)o c;c o)o E n)E o, o o)-o c .go- ID-c oo o co3-o aa E ,g o c) c oc lc E a(l) (s -cco ,9o i;; o!C o,o)(o oroc! EoEo) EE;g 9. -o.En6o E,P:E! Pe XE -oOQ.g ool'6o c lrtb8(DE .> .; o=p6 '"9JCcEorL@i =* =E 6e 6 B E E] F g .9 t _o ceIIEI*; EB 9e!:!; p5.E i9 EE E5Atit 3; t 9 Eg g ;t gr t 5 E E a E r 9! r 6 6 E E ! Ei:ii;i'ig EiliiEiiiiE EEEEEEEEeci iiiiEEgiiEE Eg::iiiEEAE; e E.J ! EsE hE>FEi E PH E! st E e3ts s i=EiiaiE!d!E..EEee ;5E IEEyE. i!€;i! !de5!ll EiEqb' =E9:E E EFE1:t EE6 itE654 e 9 L; .EF c6 o Go E .9 GooJ :: Goo CLo o- t!(, CI Et >trtsoOEo.oetCJ c6 ..o9ECoo o=OE3Ooo q 3 n 9i;o.=o-: i= |tl.tr BE 96o.= =a,FS vC,G.C =; ooo o oocroa oQQ9 e)o oe,e,oaQoooooooaooooooooN l:r QO .o or qt O N O ry o F F- O r-{ m O O O O o c, O O O 6 6 6 6 6 ; 6 6 6 = c.r 6rrt O O H -{ O .\r \t (O (O 6 6 o rrt u) m .{ (o r^ t\ @ (a .\l < 6 6 6 (\l l'i 6 c{ - < < O o +I I O I O O O O Q () ..r o o 6 H o m .{ m d .n i H a .n 6 ..r (n 6 - .n .,t (i) dr 6 6 6qt El O O O O O qt @ (o L.'l !D tl ul ul O !,t u) rjl r,l rrl Ln Ln Ot Ln d) ur !n O !n Ln L') !/t rJt ut ta Olor or H H H H H ( (\r.{.\t o1 < .t .t or f{.\.{ or d (h .\t .\t 6 .\r ..t N ..r 6i @ \4i 6i6r a! (o (o {t, ll, (o .\r o o Q .! o o o .t o o o o o o o N o N o o Fa o o o o o 6 rn ..1 - v! v! v! 4 v! cr rrl rrl c! r/l ./) 4 qr ln ln ut ul rn r/1 r/1 Ln Ln ur r^ ut rn r/) Ln Ln Ln ur r/r ur Ln Lrl L/r .n = a\ a\ a! a! a\l a! a\l a! a! (\ a! a! a! a! a{ 6l a{ a\t N N N N a{ N a\| a\| a{ N N N N N N a! N N .\id od, (,33B33333 FFFFFFF...t t .lt ..ll vl u.t v,t th =----r-r(,FFFFFFF<ro(o(o(p(o(!)ror!( ot qt or 01 or( !1-.O..tO..lOOOd N l\l atl dt rrt (o anl\F.F.FNFF\Ot F.I 9ananN.n -{ Cr r{ .\r .! F. at H.\t an .n tn i!,n lYr m m,yi m.rltr$FFFF s $ BBB EEE$B B $giqB$$B$B*ST St t'N N F N N - i.T N N F. N F N '\ F. N '\ FF. T\ N N@ T. F. T. F. F. F. F. +!t r/) H.{ _iod-{ddH ryHdF{.rddH,nrr1 rrt.n 6 m .rt m fit [! 6 an.n m,n.o M.n.n.n (n (t tn lY) an .n rn I rn (Y| (n .n (n (n m = = S S S BS $fi ; n B S S S g BBBBSSB.^3s33BSSSB sB S Z2 2 zz zzz zhhz z zzzaz zz z z zz tzdzzz z z z z z z z2 ^ j ! : i i i i i> 2 ; i i i i3 ; ; ; ; i i i1 ;2 ; id i i-r, ;;\ :,= g H UAAAAz=AAAAA E H H H VVAU >. H :.H H d H H VA"'s"'s"'s='ea?if f f i f -1 jS S + + S = f * f S $ $ $ E f i I t E S t + f f I * a-,o6 z z z z z z* <z z z z z< z z z zzzz I z o z zz zzzz2z zd <99rIIIIIdF--EII-IIIr-II<IYr-=EIITIIIOF 9 19 9 (J 9 9 (J (J O.',/' U (J (J (J (J I (J (J 9 (J (J (,, (J .O (J > (J (J Z (J (J (J (J U (J O (, Zo<6danFg 8o S tYg x a !nci rs < .\l Z ai7=====n i -{ E ;EEee??eq...2-"2 e, 1 a z E:C EEEEEE E fr ; qEHHH EEHHHHHA:HEHHEHEHf; HHE I)5 Ql e !o F 0Q o dr 4 (9 vr :. .{ e, o rr ir c, H <) !-{ Q..r.{ o o o f{ o cl Fr c, !-,r c, d c) o HgqOO H n -l d $ qtOO <tOOO O t< ?r N.{ dlli.n\DOOO-.-. H.\.Nananl,l ,6OF Fr c{ -{ -rN(nst!,t(O{OrO rO (O(O(g(o(o@(.o(oF li li F\ F\ F.F F. F. a,. ra F Ot o Z.i = ? :EEEE=lEEE;xg; gEEg;rggEgrIggg;IiS;gE 9o 6 da od, G, th c, cur ur zur EH== H======FE=E=={=6;is;;hhhhtsas;;gBTEEBEEEEEEESESEE -.n 9 6 li o O Ot Ot Ot ot (,\.-{ r,/1 O1 O 6 qrd sl o o ): H o r-{ o H o H <r F. o 6 d 63r\roo ,\ ,\ m dt + N o .t o !-.r( Ol (O (O O Or (o (o (O \O (O (O Ol Ot N Or F- F. zzzzzQ o606014:.r<<<<<9E I. F F F I t- = d,vul .J1 t^/)l/t54UJUJUJUJ!!UJUU#===22ilzXoooooXqqIIIIIuio- oo.{.{odr.n-r<lt/r F.AqrOl01 Fil O i.l !-l i.l .{ r\l ln( Fl r{ -l !.r .l (h ia oo L IiaEEEEEEEEiE;EEEEiEE=3I;ElEE*aEEs z6l --l,ctt ".{ \o (o (o (o (o Gr (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (0 (o (o (o !o @ (o (o ro to (o (o ro (o (o ro i J 6 6 6 6 6r or or r,! o t! 6 6 tI tr, N N N l\J \, rj N N ^J r" P PEEsBBEEeBgJgEiGesesieuBBeEsEEEtsEEs i===qF9= = 884 6= aE = = aEaaaaaaaEaEFaa fi EEEEEEEaESEiBn=nnnBnaBaBBB=a4[aaI= ^^^^ai-^^*>7 X ui X (,,i v' |4 6 vr 6 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 =iitt6h6; i6C ;i-{;i-r-'r-{;i-'rii tr rrinimi' I.-;ii ^ -F SqEcrr!rSSeeeeee EzL .1 6 at ..) o o o o (1 ar r) o a'r o o n r) r) o n o o n r) r) n o o (.) r) o r) o !niiirrtr-r---iYr-r-rtr-f ..-----r-rP;;;;tttt>>>Ettttttt>>>ttt>>D>>>>>!n2222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 z z EEEEEEEEEfiffi*fi8fifi*fi**fi*BE*BHH*HHHE# hfimmrnmmmmrn:2'? e -i -2 :2 a i a a ? -i " ? ? " " ? ? ? " ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? !" =22==2=-2= = = 2 = Z = 2 = = z 2 = - 2 z z z z z z z z z 2 (, u! (n ( ( rn (,r ( u! (,! (n (, vr (, (n (, !4 !4 (, l,r (,r (, lJt (, t'l lJi (n t' (,i !nni ni G G i,i 6 'it nt an u (,l iri ii tti tti 6 !i (, (, t,' tit (, (,t t, (rr ui r, ( (,! u l'n (n ur !'sJ sr r, (r, (, (, (^, (, o rp rp nj nj nj nj a., 6j @ ur rx u., (rr (r) @ u' (r, @ (' u' q' (r) ur lrr lrrp p p lJ r- r- e r-'- l-'- lJ -,- P P >' e tr | a q -'1 li'i !1 il ii ii -J..t\ -l -J -r -l ..r-r-r!--J'n-J\-J-J-l-l{{{{{{\.J{{{!-'l!\ri-id;g;d&-,i,i--si tu N ,r6 6666666 d, or \J (E ! ! Xtrj 66606-oo @ts o(n S 3 ts-r (,u!aa!na(nlJl Po 0.(o EEEESEHEHq€EHSHEEEHEEHEESEES i=iEi3HiH=i*HiHHHHHHHNHHNHN= 3Ei g=ieaHaqaHqHHeeaeHH"eccs-t?- - 6ejlseeeeeaeeege c (o (o ro ro (o{ r.l or q\ or POFOO zzzz4-{ --{ --{ -.{ ,,uoooo,r)o6r)0 -{ --{ -.{ --{ lliiv-- AJ AJ i.' N AJ IU tJ N' N N) N AJ N N,, N N t\J NJ N) AJ AJ N) N iJ I\) l\J AJ N AJ I\I(, (, ( (, t" u' v' G G ij G i.i i.i si 6 i, i, i, trt u! 4, (, ur tn ta r.r! tn t.n u !.lr E H E H 5 H 5 E 5 5 5 1,'xi ij ij i; ij ij N'' N ir i'j n' u ^.l N) N N N,l ^) HHHHeeEEa3EEH8E8s8E8EEEEgEEE3EEEE8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Consider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non­Conforming Structure by Adding a Second Story to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.5. Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, Associate Planner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­05 PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to the existing home. Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front, side, and shoreland setbacks a variance is required. They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space. The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations. The applicant has noted that the property’s small lot size, setbacks, and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’s footprint would require significant setback variances. Additionally, the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4 percent of the property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also require a lot cover variance. For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible and least impactful way to modernize and expand the home. Finally, they believe that the proposed plan is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and represents and improvement to the existing structure. Historically, it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance, as it pertains to single­family residential structures, is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks. It has been staff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a second story so long as the addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height, does not create new impervious surface, and does not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure. The proposed project meets all of these criteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the property without requesting more extensive and impactful variances, for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance. A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report. APPLICANT PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non­Conforming Structure by Adding a SecondStory to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley BoulevardSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­05PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconformingstructure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subjectto the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to the existinghome. Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front, side, and shoreland setbacks a variance isrequired. They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations. The applicant hasnoted that the property’s small lot size, setbacks, and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’s footprintwould require significant setback variances. Additionally, the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4percent of the property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also require alot cover variance. For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible and leastimpactful way to modernize and expand the home. Finally, they believe that the proposed plan is consistent with theexisting character of the neighborhood and represents and improvement to the existing structure.Historically, it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance, as it pertains tosingle­family residential structures, is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks. It has beenstaff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a secondstory so long as the addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height, does not create new impervious surface, anddoes not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure. The proposed project meets all of thesecriteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the property without requesting more extensive andimpactful variances, for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance.A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report. APPLICANT Alma, LLC 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750, Orono, MN 55331 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING:  “RSF” – Single­Family Residential District LAND USE:Residential Low Density ACREAGE:  .29 acres  DENSITY:  NA  APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District. Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single­Family Residential District Section 20­615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks. BACKGROUND In 1977, the city issued a 9­foot front yard setback, 7.5­foot shoreland setback, and sub 20,000 square­foot lot size variance to permit a single­family home on the site. In June of 1979, the city issued a building permit for a single­family home. In 1993, the city issued a 7.9­foot front yard setback and 9­foot shoreland setback variance to permit an addition on the site. In October of 1993, the city issued a building permit for an addition. Several permits for interior work, re­roofing, and other maintenance are also on file with the city. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approve the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the following conditions, and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2, 2020. 4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3, 2020. 5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, January 5, 2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non­Conforming Structure by Adding a SecondStory to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley BoulevardSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: B.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: Planning Case No. 2021­05PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconformingstructure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subjectto the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to the existinghome. Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front, side, and shoreland setbacks a variance isrequired. They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations. The applicant hasnoted that the property’s small lot size, setbacks, and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’s footprintwould require significant setback variances. Additionally, the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4percent of the property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also require alot cover variance. For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible and leastimpactful way to modernize and expand the home. Finally, they believe that the proposed plan is consistent with theexisting character of the neighborhood and represents and improvement to the existing structure.Historically, it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance, as it pertains tosingle­family residential structures, is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks. It has beenstaff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a secondstory so long as the addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height, does not create new impervious surface, anddoes not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure. The proposed project meets all of thesecriteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the property without requesting more extensive andimpactful variances, for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance.A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report.APPLICANTAlma, LLC 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750, Orono, MN 55331SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING:  “RSF” – Single­Family Residential DistrictLAND USE:Residential Low DensityACREAGE:  .29 acres DENSITY:  NA APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 20, Article II, Division 3. VariancesChapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming UsesChapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District.Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single­Family Residential DistrictSection 20­615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks.BACKGROUNDIn 1977, the city issued a 9­foot front yard setback, 7.5­foot shoreland setback, and sub 20,000 square­foot lot sizevariance to permit a single­family home on the site.In June of 1979, the city issued a building permit for a single­family home.In 1993, the city issued a 7.9­foot front yard setback and 9­foot shoreland setback variance to permit an addition on thesite.In October of 1993, the city issued a building permit for an addition.Several permits for interior work, re­roofing, and other maintenance are also on file with the city.RECOMMENDATIONStaff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approve the variancerequest to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side,and shoreland setbacks, subject to the following conditions, and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision:1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets allrequirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required afterplan review.3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2,2020.4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3, 2020.5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact (Approval) Variance Document Development Review Application Narrative Survey Proposed Plan Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 5, 2021 CC DATE: January 25, 2021 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021 CASE #: PC 2021-05 BY: MYW SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a variance to add a second story to their existing home. Portions of the house’s foot print encroach 10.9 feet into the front setback, .4 feet into the east side yard setback, 11 feet into the shoreland setback, and 2.5 feet into a sanitary sewer easement. The applicant is not proposing increasing the home’s foot print and the proposed second story would increase the building’s height to approximately 22.8 feet, significantly under the district’s 35 foot maximum height. Due to the fact that portions of the proposed second story are within required setbacks, the proposal intensifies an existing nonconforming use and requires a variance. LOCATION: 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard APPLICANT: Alma, LLC 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750 Orono, MN 55331 OWNER: Steve Galleger 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: “RSF” – Single-Family Residential District 2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: .29 acres DENSITY: NA LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to the existing home. Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front, side, and shoreland setbacks a variance is required. They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space. The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations. The applicant has noted that the property’s small lot size, setbacks, and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’s footprint would require significant setback variances. Additionally, the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4 percent of the property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also require a lot cover variance. For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible and least impactful way to modernize and expand the home. Finally, they believe that the proposed plan is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and represents and improvement to the existing structure. Historically, it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance as it pertains to single-family residential structures is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks. It has been staff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a second story so long as the addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height, does not create new impervious surface, and does not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure. The proposed project meets all of these criteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the property without requesting more extensive and impactful variances, for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District. Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks. BACKGROUND In 1977, the city issued a 9-foot front yard setback, 7.5-foot shoreland setback, and sub 20,000 square foot lot size variance to permit a single-family home on the site. In June of 1979, the city issued a building permit for a single-family home. In 1993, the city issued a 7.9-foot front yard setback and 9-foot shoreland setback variance to permit an addition on the site. 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 3 In October of 1993, the city issued a building permit for an addition. Several permits for interior work, re-roofing, and other maintenance are also on file with the city. SITE CONSTRAINTS Zoning Overview The property is zoned Single-Family Residential District and is located within the Shoreland Management District. This zoning classification requires riparian lots to be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have front and rear yard setbacks of 30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, a shoreland setback of 75 feet, and limits parcels to a maximum of 25 percent lot cover. Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height, and properties are allowed one water- oriented accessory structure up to 250 square feet in size within the 75-foot shoreland setback. The property is also encumbered by a 15 foot sanitary sewer easement. The lot is 12,569 square feet with 3,068 square feet (24.4 percent) of lot cover. The existing home has a nonconforming 19.1-foot front yard, 9.6-foot east side yard, and 64-foot shoreland setbacks. The house has an existing deck that appears to have a nonconforming 66.9-foot shoreland setback. The west side of the home encroaches approximately 2.5 feet into a sanitary sewer easement. The house and other features appear to meet all other requirements of the City Code. Bluff Creek Corridor This is not encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs on the property. Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a floodplain. Shoreland Management The property is located within a Shoreland Protection District. This district requires a 75-foot structure setback from the lake’s ordinary high water level and limits the property to a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent. Wetland Protection There is not a wetland located in the development site. 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 4 NEIGHBORHOOD Shore Acres The plat for this area was recorded in July of 1951 and it predates the establishment of the City of Chanhassen. The plat created numerous small lots that do not meet the city’s current minimum lot area and dimension requirements. Many of these lots were subsequently consolidated under a single Property Identification Number (PIN) in order to create larger combined parcels, though most of these parcels still fail to meet minimum lot area and dimension requirements. Homes in this area date from the 1950s to the present and there is a fairly eclectic mix of housing styles including both single and two story homes. On some properties, the original homes have been replaced with newer construction, and additions and remodels are common. Many properties have received one or more variances and most of the properties appear to have nonconforming elements. Variances within 500 feet: 331 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1997-06): 10’ front setback (pool) – Approved 340 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1983-04): 7.33’ rear setback (porch/deck) – Approved 361 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1997-03: 1.6’ front setback (deck) – Approved 9217 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1998-06): 7’ front setback (addition) – Approved (PC 2004-19): 7’ side setback (addition) – Approved 9221 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1992-02): 14’ front setback, 6.5’ side setback, 7% lot cover (detached garage) – Approved (PC 2003-07): 6.66’ west side setback, 5’ east side setback, 18’ shoreland setback, sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot area, 55’ lot frontage, 38’ lake frontage (rebuild house) – Approved 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 5 9225 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1996-09): 3’ east side setback, 5’ west side setback, 33’ shoreland setback, 25% lot cover (house) – Approved 9227 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1983-10): 6’ side setback, 2.5’ side setback (addition) – Approved 9231 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1997-13): 17.8% lot cover (addition) – Withdrawn 9235 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1981-07): lot size, lot frontage, shoreland and side setback (replat) – Approved (PC 1986-01): 25’ south shoreland setback, 40’ west shoreland setback (house) – Approved 9239 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1981-07): lot size, lot frontage, shoreland and side setback (replat) – Approved (PC 1982-09): 5’ side setback, 42’ shoreland setback, 50’ lot frontage, sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot (house) – Approved 9241 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1976-03): 20’ front setback, 5’ side setback (house) – Approved 9243 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1977-23): 9’ front setback, 7.5’ shoreland setback, sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot (house) – Approved (PC 1993-08): 7.9’ front setback and 9’ shoreland setback (addition) – Approved 9247 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1989-01): 14’ front setback, 4.5’ west side setback, 7’ shoreland setback (house) – Approved 9249 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1999-14): 18’ shoreland setback (detached garage) – Approved 9251 Kiowa Trail (PC 1977-12): from sewer moratorium for lots less than 2.5 acres – Denied (PC 1977-13): appeal of PC 1977-12 - Denied 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 6 ANALYSIS Intensifying Nonconformities The applicant’s home encroaches into three of the property’s required setbacks. It extends .4 feet into the 10-foot east side yard setback, 10.9 feet into the 30-foot front yard setback, and 11 feet into the 75-foot shoreland setback. The property had received variances in 1977 and 1993, respectively, allowing for a 9-foot front yard and 7.5-foot shoreland encroachment and for a 7.9-foot front yard and 9-foot shoreland encroachment. It is likely that the discrepancies between the setbacks approved by these variances and what was found during the December 2, 2020 survey are the result of either errors during construction or improvements in survey methodology. The home also encroaches approximately 2.5 feet into a sanitary sewer easement. Since the property has existed with its present footprint since 1993 and all required permits were applied for and approved, the home is considered a legal nonconforming structure. Nonconforming structures are regulated by Sections 20-71 and 20-72 of the City Code. Section 20-71 of the City Code explains the intent of the nonconforming use ordinance as: The purpose of this division is: (1) To recognize the existence of uses, lots and structures which were lawful when established, but which no longer meet all ordinance requirements; (2) To prevent the enlargement, expansion, intensification or extension of any nonconforming use, building or structure; and (3) To encourage the elimination of nonconforming uses, lots and structures or reduce their impact on adjacent properties. Subsequent sections of the city’s nonconforming use ordinance permit the continuation, replacement, maintenance, and improvement, but not expansion of nonconforming uses, Sec. 20- 72(a), and require that additions to nonconforming single-family dwellings meet setback requirements, Sec. 20-72(d). When evaluating variance requests for additions to nonconforming homes, staff examines the extent to which the requested variance deviates from the stated intent 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 7 and provisions of the nonconforming use ordinance and attempts to balance this with the variance finding’s practical difficulties and reasonable use standards. In this instance, while the home’s location on the lot is nonconforming, its use, a single-family residence, is the desired use for the zoning district. Although the structure does encroach into required setbacks beyond what is permitted by the issued variances, the discrepancies are fairly minor and are not out of keeping with variances granted to similar properties or other nonconforming structures within the neighborhood. Importantly, the applicant’s proposal maintains the home’s existing footprint and would not increase any of the nonconforming setbacks. The applicant has stated that they are requesting this variance because the existing house does not provide enough space for their family. The existing house has two bedrooms and two bathrooms with approximately 1,700 square feet of living space, considerably smaller than many homes within the city. Due to the substandard size of the lot, it would not be possible to increase the home’s footprint without requesting additional setback variances as well as a lot cover variance. Even if the house was demolished and a new home constructed, there is no potential placement on the lot that would allow a larger new home to be constructed without variances, and it is almost certain that a two-story structure would be built to minimize the extent of those variances and amount of lot cover. Finally, staff investigated the possibility of adding a second story to the home that conformed to the required setbacks and found that only a 16 foot wide second story would be permitted, as shown in the graphic to the left. Staff believes this would be too narrow to provide a reasonable alternative for increasing the home’s living space. Given that the applicant’s desire to increase the home’s living space is reasonable and that the city does not believe it would be desirable to grant the variances required to expand the home’s footprint, staff agrees with the applicant’s position that expanding upwards is the least impactful Setback, Variances, and Nonconformities (in feet) Required 1977 Var. 1993 Var. Existing Discrepancy Front 30 21 22.1 19.1 1.9 E. Side 10 10 10 9.6 0.4 W. Side 10 10 10 15.1 0 Easement 15 15 15 12.5 2.5 Shoreland 75 67.5 66 64 2 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 8 way to improve the property. Staff does not believe that the proposed second story’s relatively modest 22.8 feet of building height, significantly under the zoning district’s 35 foot maximum, is excessive or that it would negatively impact surrounding properties. For these reasons staff supports the requested variance. Impact on Neighborhood Shore Acres is an older subdivision with an eclectic mix of home styles from various decades where most homes have either received a variance or are nonconforming structures. A visual survey of Lake Riley Boulevard shows a roughly even split between single-story and two-story homes. Generally speaking, the older homes appears to be of single story design with newer homes featuring a second story. As the older housing stock is updated, staff expects the neighborhood’s proportion of two story homes to increase. The applicant’s proposed second story addition does not feature heavily peaked roofs and is well under the district’s 35-foot height limit with a proposed height of 22.8 feet. While any increase in height does increase the visual mass of the home, this proposal does not alter the footprint of the home and is not expected to negatively impact any of the surrounding homes or environmental features. Overall the proposal appears to be consistent with the exiting character of the neighborhood and represents a meaningful improvement to the building’s existing façade. Existing Façade Proposed Façade RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approve the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the following conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision: 1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 9243 Lake Riley Blvd January 5, 2021 Page 9 3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2, 2020. 4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3, 2020. 5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Decision (Approval) 2. Variance Document (Approval) 3. Development Review Application 4. Variance Request Narrative 5. Survey 6. Proposed Plan 7. Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\staff report_9243 lake riley blvd_var.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION (APPROVAL) IN RE: Application of Alma, LLC, on behalf of Steve Galleger, for a variance to expand a nonconforming home by adding a second story on a property zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF) - Planning Case 2021-05. On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density. 3. The legal description of the property is: Lots 38 and 39, Shore Acres. 4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: It is the intent of the city’s nonconforming use ordinance to allow for the maintenance and replacement of nonconforming structures, but not their expansion. The nonconforming use ordinance specifically requires that additions to nonconforming structures meet city setbacks. At its core, the nonconforming use ordinance exists to prevent the expansion of existing nonconformities and encourage their eventual removal. In this case, the existing use is the same as the desired use (i.e. a single-family home), so granting the requested variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, it is extremely unlikely that any single-family home of a modern design could be placed on the lot without requesting variances at least as extensive as the existing structure’s non-conformities, which means that there is no realistic scenario wherein this property is brought into compliance with the district’s setbacks. Since the proposed expansion would maintain the home’s existing footprint and not expand the 2 house’s horizontal encroachment into the required setbacks, granting a variance to allow the addition of a second story does not violated the intent of the non-conforming use ordinance. It is also the intent of the Code to limit the extent of variances granted to the minimum required to address a practical difficulty. Any expansion of the home’s footprint would require the applicant to request larger and more impactful variances than what is currently being proposed, including a variance to the property’s lot cover limit. Granting a less impactful variance to permit the vertical expansion of the structure is in harmony with the intent of the zoning code. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The applicant’s proposal to increase living space by adding a second story is reasonable given the size and configuration of the existing home. The height of the applicant’s proposed second story is well below the zoning district’s maximum height; however, the home’s nonconforming footprint means that a second level cannot be added without a variance, since the existing placement means that any second story built outside of the required setbacks would be too narrow to provide a viable option for increasing the home’s living space. Finally, the house’s placement on the lot means that no expansion of the footprint is possible without requesting more impactful variances. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to the substandard size of the lot and nonconforming status of the existing structure. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: Shore Acres is an older subdivision with an eclectic mix of homes from various decades where most homes have either received a variance or are nonconforming structures. A visual survey of Lake Riley Boulevard shows a roughly even split between single-story and two-story homes. Generally speaking, the older homes appear to be of single-story design with newer homes featuring a second story. As the older housing stock is updated, staff expects the neighborhood’s proportion of two-story homes to increase. The applicant’s proposed second story addition does not feature heavily peaked roofs and is well under the district’s 35-foot height limit with a proposed height of 22.8 feet. While 3 any increase in height does increase the visual mass of the home, this proposal does not alter the footprint of the home and is not expected to negatively impact any of the surrounding homes or environmental features. Overall, the proposal appears to be consistent with the exiting character of the neighborhood and represents a meaningful improvement to the building’s existing façade. f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report #2021-05, dated January 5, 2021, prepared by MacKenzie Young- Walters, is incorporated herein. DECISION “The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” 1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2, 2020. 4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3, 2020. 5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Steven Weick, Chairman g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\findings of fact and decision 9243 lake riley blvd (approval).doc 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2021-05 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks. 2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lots 38 and 39, Shore Acres. 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2, 2020. 4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3, 2020. 5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020. 4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. 2 Dated: January 5, 2021 CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: (SEAL) Elise Ryan, Mayor AND: Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2021 by Elise Ryan, Mayor, and Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\variance document 21-05.doc Doo.Sign En elope lD: 9209FE02-8CA7403343F7-871 868016F1 E tr tr tr tr tr D submittat Date: L2 42020 * CITY OT CIIAI'IIIASSXI'I Variance E Wefland Alteration Permit Easements ( easements) E' TOTAL FEE. ts61.00 APPLICATION FOR OEVELOPMENT REVIEW ." o",", 1tS:lll CC Date: I )<JI 60-Day Review Date $200 -...-..... $3 oer address ( 37 addresses) apply).................... ......-.-........... $50 per document E lnterim Use Permit f] Site Plan Agreement (Reter to the apptupdate Arylicatkn Checldist tor equhed submiltal iqlontatbn that iNd ac].Enpany this applbalion) Comprehensive Plan tunendment......................... $600 E Subdivision (SUB) E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers..... $ 100 ! Create 3 lots or less ........................................ $300 ! Create over 3 |ots.......................$600 + $15 per lor Conditional Use Permit (CUP) [_ tots)E Single-Family Residence .................. . . ........ $325 fl Metes & Bounds (Z fotsl __.............................. $3OOD Alt Others..-.-... .................. $425 ! consotidate Lots..._.......................................... $150 rnrerim use permir(rup) E :i:iffii:i:::Tlll...:.:........:....:.:....::::.::::....::3133D ln coniunction with singte-Family Residence.. $325 " irnctuoes g+so escrow for attomey costs).E All Others........ .................. $425 :eaaru,*ot"*,or r.y be required ro. other appticatbns Rezoning (REZ) though the developrnent contract' E Planned Unit Development (PUD).................. $750 D Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 E Minor Amendment to existing PUD................. $100 (Additimal recording fees mav applv) E All others........ ......... ....'. $500 E variance (vAR)... ... ..... ................................ g2oo sign Ptan Review................................................... $150 ! werand Arteration permit (wAp) Site Plan Review (SPR) E Single-Family Residence............................... $150 E eoministrative.. ....-......................................... $1oo E lrtt otrers........ .........."" $275 tr 3i#i'fi"[1'f.HTJ,?iJ]S,;;;;;;;il;;llo' ! zoninsAppear """ $roo ( thousand square feet). E zoning ordinance Amendment (zoA)................. $500'lnclude number of q&q[@ employees: _ 'lnclude number of @! employees: E Residentiat Distrias-.....................-------- SsOO !9IE: l lrcn multicle +Dlicetions are proceas€d concurr6ntv' Plus $5 per dwetling ,nit f- ,nit"i thc appropdate fr€ Ehall b6 cha'ged for eac+l applictllon' E Notification Sign (city to install and remove) ........................ @ Property Owners' List within 500' (city to geneEte afrer p.e-applicatbn meeting) ... ! Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that D Conditional Use Permit D Vacation E Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) Etr Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) Section 2: Required lnformation Description of Proposal: Add 2nd Story and New RooI Structure to existing home tooFrint 9243 Lake Riley BlvdProperty Address or Location: Parcel #: 257950220 Total Acreage: Present Zoning Legal Description Section 24, Township 1 16, Range 023 o.29 Wetlands Present?Z ves E tto Single-Family Residential District (RSF)Requested Zoning Single-Family Residential District (RSF) Select One Requested Land Use Designati on. Selecl One Residential COMT,IUNITY DEVELOP ENT DEPARTi'ENT Planning Oivision - 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 553'17 Phone'. (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (9521227-1110 Present Land Use Designation: Existing Use of Property: Echeck box i separate nanative is attached. Dodsign En elope lO: 9209FE02-8CA74033€3F7-871868016F1E Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal priod. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. 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 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Alma Homes, LLC sis Name Address:2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750 City/State/Zip: Orono, MN 55331 Email: Ethan@almahomesmn.com Contact. Ethan Kindseth Phone: (612) 741-9069 Cell: Fax: Date: r2/3/202O qon6"1. Steve Galleger Phone: (952) 937-0321 cel: (952) 258-3936 Fax: (952) 937-0321 Contact Phone: Cell: Fax: nature: I l-,,.i,. *wlur PROPERW OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have tull legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the righl to obiect at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep mysetf 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are Eue and conect. Steve GallegerName 9243 Lake Riley Blvd City/State/Zip: Chanhassen, MN 55317 Email: gallegersp@aol.com Address: ciry/stare/zip: Email: sis nr1rr". Steve Galleger DEdJIY sq.r.d ry sk Gd.os olE a 11 13 r0 564]]5rD',Date:111'18t20 This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and mnfer with the Planning Department to determine the specmc ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A wriften notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Name: E Properly owner Via: E Email E Applicant Via: E Email ! Engineer Via: E Email E other via: E Emait ! t'rtailed Paper Copy E laaiua Paper copy E Maileo Paper copy ! ttaited Paper Copy Who should receive copies of staff reports?tOther Contact lnformation: Name City/State/Zip: Email: INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital copy to the city for processing. PRINT FORM Address: Section4: Notification lnformation Address: SAVE FORU SUBMIT FORM ALMA HOMES DESTGN I BUILD I RENOVATE The Applicants recently purchased this property with the hopes of updating the house and structure to accommodate their family's needs. They come into this at a great disadvantage as they are starting out with an existing structure that is noncompliant with utility easements, front yard setbacks, side yard setbacks and OHW setbacks. They are currently compliant, albeit marginally, with the impervious surface requirements for this neighborhood at 24.4% hardcover. ln light of these obstacles, the applicant has worked hard to achieve a plan to remodel the home in such a manner as is allowable without a variance requirement. lnevitably the resounding conclusion is that it is almost impossible to achieve the desired additional living space without seeking variance approval. This variance request is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Chapter and also consistent with the comprehensive plan. We are starting with a structure that is non-compliant with numerous setbacks. The existing structure is dilapidated and in need ofserious major updating or complete demolition. We are looking to maintain the existing footprint and add on to the structure vertically to accommodate our clients' living needs for their family. The Applicant's intent is to improve the quality ofthe Lake Riley Blvd neighborhood, updating a neglected 1979 home with a home that is in harmony and consistent with current style homes on the street. The requested variance is to allow a second story to be added which would mirror the same footprint as the main floor footprint. This approved variance would allow the homeowner to maximize the potential square footage while respecting the intent of other stated variances. lt is also allowin8 the Applicant to execute a comprehensive renovation plan that fits well other homes on the lake. The practical difficulties leading to this requested variance is directly correlated to the small size of lot which limits the flexibility to improve the property to a level equal to similar homes on lake Riley 8lvd. Mfi Litr:nx #8C72fi)74 612-790-7t\61)rr* rr .alntahorttcsnt n.tlnt Applicant owns a home on Lake Riley that is a late 70s built, rambler style home with a crawl space under the main house foundation. Applicant is seeking a variance to remodel their home and add a second story to the existing structure following the existing structural footprint of the home. Numerous expert opinions and design options have led us to the conclusion of this beinB the least invasive method to meet the client's spatial needs in light ofthe existing zoning restrictions in place. ALMA HOMES DESICN I BUILD I RENOVATE While this variance request is not based on economic considerationt it is b€lieved that this approved variance would greatly improve the essential character ofthe locality and be an additional catalyst to increasing home values for the neighborhood. The restrictions that we are facing in the proposed project are not a result of a condition caused by the property owner. These are pre-existing conditions that existed when the property owner acquired the property. We are askinS for consideration in this matter as the practical difficulties inherent to the location, size and shape of the lot, combined with the existing structural footprint in relation to the easements and setbacks make any sort of footprint expansion impossible leaving the only reasonable alternative to expand the structure up. The proposed plans are intended to compliment the other existing homes in the neighborhood and in no way alter the essential character of the locality. Ethan Kindseth Alma Homes, LLC MN Licerrsc #ts(]72fi )7,1 612-790-7t\60 www.ahrahomcsnrn.colr EARTHRIGID INSULATIONCONCRETE BLOCKCONCRETEBRICKPLYWOODSTEEL OR STEEL STUD WALLBATT INSULATIONGYPSUM BOARDGRAVELWOOD OR WOOD STUD WALLSOUND INSULATION IN WALLMIN. (3) 2X SOLID BLOCKINGBEARING WALLMATERIALSELEVATION DRAWING NUMBERWALL TYPEDECORATIVE COLUMN TYPESHEET NUMBERSHEET NUMBERSECTION DRAWING NUMBERDETAIL DRAWING NUMBERSHEET NUMBERPOINT LOAD FROM ABOVEELEVATION HEIGHTELEVATION TYPEW2C1SYMBOLSPRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE:ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/2/2020 11:59:51 PMA0--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LCKESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCETITLE SHEETSHEET LISTSheet Number Sheet NameA0 TITLE SHEETA100 EXISTING PLANA101 LOWER FLOORA102 MAIN FLOOR PLANA103 UPPER FLOOR PLANA104 ROOF PLANA200 ELEVATIONSA201 ELEVATIONSA202 SECTIONSA500 PERSPECTIVESAREA SCHEDULELevel Name AreaMAIN FLOOR MAIN FLOOR 1659 SFMAIN FLOOR GARAGE 487 SFMAIN FLOOR: 2 2146 SFUPPER FLOOR UPPER FLOOR 1933 SFUPPER FLOOR STORAGE/GAMERedundantAreaUPPER FLOOR: 2 1933 SFGrand total: 4 4079 SFNOTE:THIS DRAWING IS AN ARTISTIC INTERPRETATION OF THE GENERAL APPEARANCE OF THE DESIGN. IT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE AN EXACT RENDITION.SCALE:2FRONT -- PERSPECTIVESCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3FRONT - PRESENTATION CRAWL SPACE ACCESSATTICACCESSATTIC ACCESS46' - 1"28' - 11"36' - 1"3' - 0"45' - 11"8' - 8 1/2"20' - 4 1/2"75' - 0"3' - 0"24' - 2"11' - 11"75' - 0"EXISTING DECK39' - 1"39' - 1"20' - 0"PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/2/2020 11:59:53 PMA100--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEEXISTING PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1EXISTING PLAN x19' -7"23' -5"x14' -5"12' -0"x28' -2 1/2"15' -0"x17' -0"11' -8"x7' -0"7' -6"x8' -2 1/2"11' -8"x8' -0"14' -0"x17' -0"11' -8"x8' -2 1/2"6' -0"x5' -0"5' -0"x5' -0"4' -0"UPBEDROOM 1BATHW.I.C.2-CAR GARAGEW/ LIFTGREAT ROOMDININGCLOSETISLANDFIREPLACEEXISTING DECKUPDOWNSHOWER3' - 2"5' - 3 1/2"DW10' - 8"4' - 0"REF.RANGEFOYER15' - 0"4' - 10" 5' - 4" 4' - 10"LOCKERSBUFFETMUDPANTRYO.H.C.AUDIVELARO.H.C.PWD.KITCHEN6068 SLDR3030 TRSM3030 TRSM246820682668406828682468246830683036 S.H.3068 GL.3068 GL.3036 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.3036 S.H. 3036 S.H. 3036 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.16'-0" X 8'-0" O.H.D.3668 W/ 12" SIDELIGHTS3050 S.H. 3050 S.H. 3050 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.CLOSET6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.1' - 0"2655 CSMT6055 FXD6055 FXD6055 FXD2655 CSMT6'-8" H.H.EXISTING6'-8" H.H.EXISTING6'-8" H.H.EXISTING6'-8" H.H.EXISTING6'-8" H.H.EXISTING9068 TRIPLE SLIDER40682468POCKETOFFICE3' - 0"24' - 2"11' - 11"46' - 1"28' - 11"75' - 0"3' - 0"36' - 1"39' - 1"45' - 11"8' - 8 1/2"20' - 4 1/2"75' - 0"39' - 1"20' - 0"CONCRETESTOOP1A2022A2023A202PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/2/2020 11:59:55 PMA102--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEMAIN FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1MAIN FLOORNOTE:NEW MAIN FLOOR LAYOUT ON EXISTING FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT x13' -8"11' -4"x12' -0"13' -5 1/2"x5' -5"9' -4"x13' -10"7' -4"x8' -4"11' -0"x13' -5 1/2"11' -6"x14' -0"14' -10"x12' -5"13' -0"x9' -7"8' -5"x19' -7"9' -7"x13' -2"13' -10"UPDOWNMECH/STORAGEBEDROOM 2BATHOFFICE/BEDROOM 3SITTINGMASTERBEDROOMMASTER BATHMASTER CLOSETLAUNDRYWALK-UP BARSTORAGEBENCHO.H.C.SHOWERCLOSETGAME ROOM/LOFTRAILING2' - 0"4' - 4 3/8"3' - 0"3' - 0"2' - 0"SHOWERLINENWDCLOSET+2'-2"+2'-2"+2'-2"+2'-2"3030 TRSM6'-2" H.H.3040 S.H. 3040 S.H. 3040 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.3040 S.H. 3040 S.H.6'-8" H.H.6'-8" H.H.3050 S.H. 3050 S.H.8'-10" H.H. 8'-10" H.H.3050 S.H. 3050 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.3050 S.H.3050 S.H. 3050 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.3050 S.H. 3050 S.H.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.2650 S.H.6'-8" H.H.2468 PKT.2468 PKT.20682868286826684068266840682868246826682468 PKT.5/0 x 6/82468LINENSLOPED CLG.IN SHOWERLINEN2650 S.H.6'-8" H.H.16682468 PKT.6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H. 6'-8" H.H.2650 S.H. 4050 FXD 2650 S.H.2650 S.H.6'-8" H.H.1A2022A2023A202PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/2/2020 11:59:57 PMA103--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEUPPER FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1UPPER FLOOR A2012A200A201A2002114" / 12"6" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"6" / 12"5 1/2" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"4" / 12"4" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"1' - 6"PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/2/2020 11:59:59 PMA104--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEROOF PLAN MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"T.O.F.-1' -9 1/2"6' - 8"6' - 8"8' - 0"1' - 8"9' - 0"1' - 9 1/2"RAISED PLATE20' -10"RAISED UPPER12' -10"6" / 12"6" / 12"14" / 12"14" / 12"14" / 12"12" 12"12" 12"12" 12"12" 12"12" 12"12" 12"25' - 10 1/2"MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"RAISED PLATE20' -10"2' - 2"RAISED UPPER12' -10"4" 12"4" 12"4" / 12"6" / 12"6" / 12"14" / 12"14" / 12"PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/3/2020 12:00:19 AMA200--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEELEVATIONSSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1FRONTSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2BACK MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"T.O.F.-1' -9 1/2"RAISED PLATE20' -10"RAISED UPPER12' -10"6" 12"4" 12"4" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"T.O.F.-1' -9 1/2"RAISED PLATE20' -10"RAISED UPPER12' -10"4" / 12"12" / 12"12" / 12"6" 12"6" 12"PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/3/2020 12:00:33 AMA201--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEELEVATIONSSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1LEFTSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2RIGHT MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"RAISED PLATE20' -10"RAISED UPPER12' -10"8' - 0"2' - 2"10' - 2"9' - 0"2-CAR GARAGEW/ LIFTPWD. MUDMECH/STORAGESITTINGEXISTING PLATE HEIGHTCRAWL SPACE20" FLOOR TRUSSMAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"6'-8" MIN. STAIRHEAD HEIGHTCRAWL SPACE9' - 0"MAIN FLOOR0"MAIN PLT. HT.9' -0"MAIN WIN. H.H.6' -8"UPPER FLOOR10' -8"UPPER PLT. HT.18' -8"UPPER WIN. H.H.17' -4"RAISED PLATE20' -10"RAISED UPPER12' -10"BEDROOM 2 BATHOFFICE/BEDROOM 32-CAR GARAGEW/ LIFT MUDCRAWL SPACELINE OFSLOPED CEILING20" FLOOR TRUSSPRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/3/2020 12:00:36 AMA202--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCESECTIONSSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1GARAGE SECTIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2STAIR SECTIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3RAISED PLATE SECTION PRELIMINARY - FOR VARIANCEPROJECT:DATE:DRAWN BY:CHK'D BY:DATE: ISSUED FOR:COPYRIGHT 2020 ALMA HOMESC:\Users\Laura Coffman\Desktop\Galleger_Residence_12-3-20_WITH LIFT.rvt12/3/2020 12:01:04 AMA500--12/3/209243 LAKE RILEY BLVD.LC KESTEVE AND DIANE GALLEGERGALLEGER RESIDENCEPERSPECTIVESSCALE:1BEFORESCALE:2.AFTER .SCALE:3AFTER .SCALE:4BACK CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COI.]NTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21,2020, 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 ofa Public Hearing to consider a request for variances to modify a non-conforming structure by adding a 2nd story to an existing home located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard. Zoned Single-Family Residential @SF), Planning Case No. 2021-05 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 ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota" and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and m to before me Kim T. Meuwissen, Deputy k thiFJ:+ day o 4,rrYl 2020. Notary Pub (Seal) JEAITI anoffneota Subject Parcel Dllchimer ThG map is neither a legally recoded map nor a suNey and i9 not inteoded to be used as one. ihb map is a compilalion of ecotds, informalion and data located an vanou3 cjty, couitv. staie and federaloftces and olher sources regadrng the area shown and is lo be ufu for aebrence purpoces only The cfy does not waranl that the Geogftlphic lnionnation Systern (GlS) Data used to p.epare $is map are eror free. and the Crty does not lepresent that the Gls Data can b€ us€d for navigatonal, facking or any other purpoae requidng eracting rft,asurelrEnt of d6tance or diledion or pfecjs,oo in the d€ficton of geographic batureJ. The preceding dEdairns is p.ovlded pu6uanl to Minnesota Stratutes 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000). and dle user of thas map acknowledges $at the City shall not be liable for any damages, and erpressly waives all daims and agrces to deEnd, indemnify. and hold harmless the City forn any and all claims b.olght by User, rts employees or agents. or third padies whidl arise out of the 6e/s access or use of data prcvided. (TAX-NAME)} tTAX-ADD-LI r <TAX-ADD-L2tr (Next Record,r(TAX-NAiiEr ITAX_ADD_LI r rTAX_ADD-L2r Subiect Parcel Obchll|E Thb map is ne her a ktgally rccorded map nor a 3uruoy aM is nol anlended to be used as one. This map is a co.npiletion of rcco.ds, informatoo and datia located in vaious cny. count, state and fede(al ofices and olher soorae3 reg6dino the area shotn and is to be used br refereoce puryo6es only. The City does nol warant that the Geograoic lnbmatiofl System (GlS) Data usod lo prepare this map are eno( free, and tlE Crty does not epresent that the Gls Data can be used for navoational, lracking or any other pu.po6e requidne eEcling measuement of distance or dirc(ion or preciSioi in the depictbn of gcogEphic featuies The ptecedino disdainE is provrded purguant to Minnesota Statnes s,l66 03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user ol thas map actnorliedges afl the City shall not be liable ,or any damages. and e&re$iy waives all claims. and aorees lo detend, indemnrt. and hold hamless the City tom any and all daams broooht by User, its employees or agents, o. third partjes which adse otit of the us€/s access or use of data 9rovided. N -- rh, il i--,. *H rlt 2'.' i It "r i I I ( Et I I, I .'t ! Ir,4 \'/ JI I I , ]tr . I lt-.1 !i \ r i PJ 1 t '7 -.r-. - ,, IY T',+ r;l;Esis :EITEEE€ EBt qA;e gEIfEEEE =;H c'gf E f;$ eE;sgtr?E e F r! > P9;Eel:3; b;bF€ =uijc, No6l 6 : i(,ooo o q ot;; c;c o 11) E c).c Eo iu-o co o- ()E o o) o E(Ui:,o = o vo o .9.! fo Eo(, E o oo E E oo .q. ID o ll.,o (o oo,oo, ! n)i oq) oa =o o).c o.J) o) Eo-o E 0.) o)o o) o oc L o p peog BE5eo!@c;rOo6 izBoEqa oE ol-or< 0)-c rl) .9 -q P o E E o .2 F E c!o9F. ([ c!oN d a(!:,co j (ot, 0) =F O E .>dt o) o =ooF.t- o) -o E(oEo oEfoo o- o,c =.!4. ,q,Cco(E Ee =Eo ttEo eFoo8P oo'Ep([(E ET s6 ct= 9.6oP ocot'6o 8E LL @( U) E rl)coN 0) Eo ..E Ec c) =ot Eot! 0., o oo oi -orl) = '6 o)G o E o)poo o-f 0) (5 o o)p Ec(5 o, .g 6 0) ooo c .o oo =oc o o !c(o o Eo (lJ ,z o,o E o oac,9a =UJz utoEcoo,o o,c () o, Ec o)E ' c ?c Eco (!Eco-cq q B,; lc o C) E t g E E Ig E .9s a i e E ! E 6 - ,! c E s a E P .c ea s t E E B &a E E 3 5 !tg 89 E I E q 3 II I E E 9 E ,96E E 6 5 o E Et I E E E 6 8 ts d,9 t a E 8e c a 6 € e € q .o !E 36 E 9 q 6E ,! I a R6 6z E_8 E I E E Eag t E 8€E p -q 5 e ga -P s E e E? P&E I a 9 E !IE I E E E 9 € 3 E e IE! a t3E EE !J n 3I e & I E T€ 9 q EaE Ep 6g 3 I g q ;b. E _9 I E 3 EE 6 a 6...o9ECOo o=OE =ooo t!.J eo iii9 ;o (,oo o. >Et.o o.osto-J I ii) a, .=o.:l f'g eO,r! .E =; a; Ei: c, (, (lo .9 t! .JoJ CDt oo =gcro.=oi.9.tEIE .9oEo3CDo. .EbEc, l!.9E otrza t,(E tr agEo CDc ooE P5 ooo'=-E.JE =o9o ^-a5.:or eEEo.ze 66a! -cE(Eso E C; ,E : s E .D o .9 F E cioo t- o NoN rrt -([)co oE o,)F !2dl 0, (5 =oo r-..F o) -o EocO clo(.) oI o LLo E. o c IDp ot Eol! o @ ! r1.)coN o) Eo o)cE.a 'q)ccotEtro (E! E9o t,E!9.\rao8E (!E'-'ooo e; .', 196 d=E6oP) ocET'qB 8E .J --J o) EoI o E q) Eo o) o) U> d o L o = E6 (E9 BE =o55toE ;.O -Q -siiF O'E a6 oS N-o< o o,)-c O'BEiD '.H5 :9" E ,e EE oo$ g EEE BreEE p'- 35€ E :iEE *"ig! HEB E3E;; XE ==E 6:E.P 9ETX-.o.o bEi* E;E EE Ee iEg iEEi EEi a#E.EFiin-c O)(!c(JoFC.{ot rl)E fo-o([ fo E o .= o .9 (,)c ([oE .96,o, .!2 o d) oo- fo- o) F oo Eo oo E Eoo G o- o,E o o e t/'l lD-'6 _e rl qx- s ;e E|EEEEE EiEHE;aEE E-El;;liacE= igEIEllEEgi 6Jc.sith o ; E oc ?c Ec o) o.c,E(! Eo o 3; ' o c c)o,odro E!EOEoEg EE;g 9q,EA6ooo)i= -c'a-qo XE -oo-qE!+cr(!ol'6o b8(l)E.zt8eE6 eEo< trEO'L6g =_9fiP2d- =! E E, .E E ! t6I 3 a iiiiiliisiiii EiiEgEfieigii tiiiEtEigliii EgEEiE!EEEiEEE 4 a-Ecotx5 d9E !Ea €'Pc EE' Et; 3! aE36 E9P PPp ctihE9 l!e 6lEe EE! efrE €;e EE' 6Eg 5i8IF:{:iEis!i 9 358 id Ei: .6 (, lllo o it,ooJ -oooeo o- Gl) =CL CI rD io ro CIIG >E8.9 cL i!eto-J I ii) 6r .=+6i= -Oa! .g =E c6 ..o9trtoo o=A.lErooo E, tro o- o o o o !* U9 -O) .: .J i,EE sg E EE-rf- aE;; IEEE gEgE EE?ip EiiEp ;Egi EEEEfEEa sEHi =gf;E 9ETE, Ig*E+ EgE;lq.9 .c.= oU)F()(Llo 6..9 A Rt.cdd)+:lg lF o tr(J @FN(r)t ;r!. !i ?E h,E> Ei EE FE :5 Esb9 E.i5E I ::ooo(L oq QA O OO Oe)O O OO Q n9 e e O OO Q O O A O O OO O OA O OO OO O ON Er .{ @ l:r..r oo sl q)ll,t t (.oi qr \o F @(D o nt !-r N (n i @F 6 qr6 - rn < 66 o 6Ei Q Er n e) < < e) e, e) e, O o A r.l O c, c) c) .r .{ !.r ..r H F{ r< .-r . : {. ..r N ri i 6 6 6oQOoOOAAOOoOQe)Qooooooooooooaoooooo=o5@ O O .O O O O O O O O O ql O.O Or Or Or Or Or (o !n rn rrr rrt r/t r^ 6'n.n !n rn l.rr < S - -F\ ..1 r.l F\ ?r .{ i ri !.- -r r- F. l.\ l.\ l.\ F\ F. Ot Ot Or Or Ot 6 Oi or Ot ( Oi Oi .i .i .i riN cO cO F @ aO @ (. cO (D (b oQ l: @ r. N t\ t\ l.\ F- F. F. - r. N F F- F. F i\ F. F. F- Ct O O 6ln l/) l,) rrl l^ r/) t/) O rA !n Ln !a !/l l/) lJ) l/1 rn La Ln ra !n r, u) ul rn !ir, !n !/l ur sl ra !A !a !^ 6 ut rarN C! a! N a! N N N a{ N a{ .\t N a! a! N a\l a! N a! N a! a! N r! a{ a{ a! N C.l c\i .\i r\i N aV a.t N x*4*cc59999999999999 Ii ii iiiEiiiiiiiiiiii ddd dO>>>> >>!t== == - -= = =====F FF5 > > > > > > e a d. d. a aa aa aea aa < < <*t22222=i E v Y E E e u e e E E e E = = =E;;;;;;H3333=333i==i=999 - rr Ul <tr m i\ d rn r.t t\ O) Ft !^ F- ..,t t t Or Ft !n F Ot r{ !-t !-{r:i (n ur l^(O \O F. @ r.r r",r -{.!.! N rn (r (ntl $ tl - u1 @F.g n n ! n ir .i .{ .\t 6t N r! r\t N l\t a! N .\l.\ N a! N N.!an ol o ( or o ot or o or o o or or (h (h or ot or <tr (h qr or or zd 9<lan$<l 9rlrl<t{ ro Nf!N Nr\ro sl <t stt <tstst\lot<tv1 rnQ()l!|AQooooQ lY, m.n,yr .n.n.{ !^ !6 6'n|i|n66rnur-r .-r(9(o(o\o@io{o@@(9 (o r^ !a Lo urr^(r, (g \g O6666(ri(!itriio i6i66r-6o@6e@@ or @@a co.o r. -@ @-@co-66@@ 6,: .: t: ,r. ,\ r: + i r: F F. r: r.. r., r.. n * r.. r'. * d r- d d n n .I .I * A r'. I I I I - IFr H .< !-'r .i r-r !-r r-.t !-.t r-l t< r-l .i ri ..1 r{ r-.t !-{ ..1 .i d .-{ i i r-r .r .r i ;-,rlrl (n ai dl (n m an rn rn at lll lll llr l1l .(| l1t (r1 an an rn (n (n m ln an .n (n.n att (n (n .n (n an an tn .vil,l lJl ra !,r ra ra La !n rrt rrt qr qr qr qt ',l Ln L/t rri ut rrt !n L,t ut rn lrl rn Ln rrl !,1 (,) 'rt rn rri irt iri iri irir/l Ln r.'! L/t (^ !,t !/t !n !n ul ul u) ra (^ ut rn lJ) ljl rn r/t Ln L,1 v) r/l rn Lai !n lri '/r ut lai rri ...i lri '/i lri rriz z z zz zzz zzz z z z z z zzz zz zzz z zz z z zz z z zz zz dz zz z z z z z z z zz z zz zz zz z zzz zz z z zz z z z Z iii i 6 6 6 ei \rl v) u.t t^ t\ t^ th ti tll vl \h th th \h .h vl 6 a t^ th .h ql .t1 .rt.h tt.\' tr) vl q) q u\ v'! u! ul v1 t4t!a ttt^ v1 vl t.t ttt ui 6 d v1 t^ t.t t_.t a aAt 6i da ini i ai i;;rrr-rrrrr-r-r-r---rr-rr-r--rrrrr---i.atz z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 2 - - = - - = - = Z = = = Z 2 Z = 2 2 - - = z <---rrrrrrrrr-rr--rrr-rr-r-rrr-i-.iiiiF u u L, u 9 u u (',) (J u u u u u (J (') (J (J (J u L, (J (J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O d,o 2n nn eee*ooooooo6ooo66H J J H = o o o o o o:: = = l:::: = I z::v t G. \J c. d. d. d.d c i t tr r r @ cl (D d, .o dt dl 6) @ ao dt d, d! @ @}EI= IEEEEII II ==????=E;;;iiiiaiii,-iendj;8 8;8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 s I I I = I I E = = i].iii]-ii d d = ! ! re'EEEXE PEeEEE ".*2riiti2iuuEsuEsE99---;BB6(Jurr!OBrurr! r!uJ=f tl=llta - !! e-u r eJ !s !! ,= ee ,= = y-r er < ,, v\t^t^,^ -.3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3I < I I I-l v) (J o (, tl aJ IJ tl IJ u (J LJ (J .j t{ vl (r\ ar1 N.a !,l d F or < rn F...r l,l o} -r ,.l1 N or H -a dx !/i o !-{ Fr o r.,l Fr o o tiO d c) F\ rr} 'rt rrr 6 ro F. - ,-{ -r :t ..1 l..i i\ ro 6ri ii s{tt,r,or.,< or O O O N .! (n $ \o (o (a cp O .{ r< d H - - i ri ..r N c.t ^i ^i..i i\i i\i i.i d tir r"{ c.r c! N r.,rF N.n (n (n (r1 (n rn .n ot an lY' ln € oo or ( q| 0r ot o) <tr ot <h o1 ot ot or <h (h o,t or ot .h oll oi oi ari I =f, =fr-6rao nE *59 g 3 E a3 Y "E=; z-zZgF EE_E Z E :EEEI,EEi=;EEIg3EgEIiEEEEEiEIEiE:E:E lJJl\J d, e, lJeG6E C,EC d,>Ft-sFFFFFFFF 2Tt-iFFFFFFFF-*oo=ooooooooT00zoooooooo =4r!=-.. !!dE=ceeGc,d,d,daJ L' trJ r! (J r! r! UJQ;EB;EB33E66B!u !,t o .{ F{ c, F{ F{ o o -{ o .. =oioooAra!antl(o{o6@ul 6r an an an an an an dt rn (n rt an o =- o @o o' z0 ? or .{ o (o 2 @ o PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject Approval of Planning Commission Minutes dated December 1, 2020 Section APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No: C.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the verbatim minutes from its December 1, 2020 meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated December 1, 2020 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 1, 2020 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steven Weick, Mark Randall, Doug Reeder, Laura Skistad, Eric Noyes, Michael McGonagill, and Mark Von Oven MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; Robert Generous, Senior Planner; Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer; and Matt Kerr, IT Support Specialist PUBLIC PRESENT: Bala Chintaginjala 8982 Southwest Village Loop Roger Frerichs 6648 Lake Lucy Drive Ken Ashfeld 6480 Yosemite Duke Zurek 9451 Foxford Road John Wicka 2547 Bridle Creek Trail Weick: Before we begin I would like to just call a quick roll call to make sure we do have a quorum. When I announce your name, just say here for the commissioners on the Zoom call. Commissioner Randall? Randall: Here. Weick: Good. Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: Here. Weick: Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Here. Weick: Commissioner Skistad? Skistad: Here. Weick: Yes, thank you. Commissioner Noyes? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 2 Noyes: Here. Weick: And Commissioner Von Oven? Von Oven: Here. Weick: So we have a full house, seven commissioners tonight, and a quorum. Thank you for that. Just quickly reviewing the guidelines for this evening’s meeting. This is a Zoom meeting. Please be patient with us as we work through that and make sure that everyone is heard that wants to be heard. Also, for the commission members please don’t hold side chats or text messages discussions. We just need to make sure that all of our discussions are public and for the public record. Again, there are three items on tonight’s agenda. The items are presented as follows: Staff will present the item. We will then have a moment for clarifying questions from the Planning Commission. I did want to just take a moment to clarify the process. I would ask that the Commission members consider the type of discussion we have following the staff presentation and limit that conversation to clarifying questions only. By that I mean, I actually grabbed an example that I had in our previous meeting from the transcript where I asked for clarification about the number of recreational vehicles that were allowed on the property, which was great and I got the answer to that and then I went on to sort of give an opinion about that, about what I thought about the number and what I thought that would do to the amendment. That’s really not the appropriate time to have that type of debate or opinion. We really just want to ask clarifying questions of staff. The reason for this is twofold. First and foremost, it’s our responsibility to allow staff, the applicant, and all of the public participants to be heard through an unbiased ear. We’ve all done a lot of research, we’ve looked at these items in a lot of detail and preparation, and the time for us to discuss is really after we’ve heard from all of the parties that are present tonight. Second, it will help expedite the process ultimately by limiting repeated discussion that might be had throughout the evening. So you’re not getting graded, you’re not getting corrected, and you certainly won’t get interrupted, but just keep that in mind as we work through the process. We want an opportunity to ask each group questions and then at the end bring all of that information together and then have our discussion about the item. After staff’s presentation and clarifying questions, the applicant can make a presentation and we can ask clarifying questions of the applicant as well, I will then open the public hearing. It is a little bit different in today’s world. We have received emails, those will be summarized for the record and noted for the record. Anyone here in person who would like to make a comment about an item may come forward and be heard. We are practicing social distancing within the chambers and we are taking telephone calls so if you are listening the phone number will appear on the screen and you may call in and be heard for the record as well. Once we’ve heard from everybody we will close the public hearing and then the Planning Commission can discuss, clarify things with staff and then work on a motion and a vote. Thank you for hearing me out on that. With that, I will present our first item. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 3 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CHANHASSEN GATEWAY PUD, MODIFICATION TO PUD-SPECIFIC DESIGN FEATURES, AND AMENDMENT TO CROSSROADS OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,100 SQUARE-FOOT AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SHOP LOCATED AT 8941 CROSSROADS BOULEVARD. Weick: I will give it to Sharmeen. Al-Jaff: Thank you Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. The application before you is for a site plan to allow an automotive repair shop within the Crossroads Development. The site is located southwest of Crossroads Boulevard. It has an area of .79 acres and is zoned Planned Unit Development. Just a brief background on this. The 2030 Land Use Plan guided the site mixed-use. The area surrounding 212/101 intersection has been guided mixed use. These are the types of designations for uses that will meet the daily needs of the surrounding area. They also will accommodate high-density residential developments. In 2005 the City approved a concept plan for this area overall location and basically the area located north of Highway 212 was guided residential. The southern portions was a combination of commercial as well as office spaces. Again with the intent that these are neighborhood types of commercial uses that will meet the daily needs within this vicinity. We began working with Christian Bros. approximately six or seven months ago. This is an auto repair facility. Auto repair shops are not a permitted use within the Crossroads Development. As part of the work that we asked of them we needed a complete design that they submitted. The request is for a 5,100 square-foot building. Because this is a Planned Unit Development the overall site coverage is calculated as not to exceed 70%. In this case the total hard surface coverage within this entire development is 43.8%. The architecture of the building and design is attractive. All four elevations of the proposed building have received equal attention. Materials used on the building are of high quality. It is proposed to include brick, block, EFIS, as well as metal. The garage doors (there will be nine of them) are proposed to be made of glass and metal. They are fully screened. The overall design of the building is compatible and harmonious with existing buildings as well as future proposed buildings. This is accomplished through using compatible materials, complementary design elements including parapet walls, pronounced entryway, use of canopies over the windows, awnings over the windows, and glass windows throughout this development. Parking for this building is buffered from views through evergreens and landscaping. The total required parking for this development (there is a shared parking agreement for all of the buildings) and the total should be 247 and this entire development is proposing 278 parking spaces. Signage is proposed to include two wall-mounted signs facing northwest and southeast. Signage is in compliance with the ordinance. They do need to apply for a building permit but these are individual letters, backlit. There is one monument sign proposed along the northwest corner of the site and it may not exceed 24 square feet. Trails and sidewalks are intended to allow for connection between the subject site and the surrounding area and it will separate pedestrian from vehicular traffic. The landscaping plan is in compliance with ordinance. The shrubs along the east side of the site will fully screen the parking lot as well as the garage doors on this side. The applicant is proposing to Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 4 have a bench at the entrance in the southeast corner of the building. Lighting plan is in compliance with ordinance. What you see along the right side of the screen is existing light fixtures. What the applicant is proposing is very compatible with this development. This development was permitted a maximum number of 71,500 square feet of total building area. With this building the total number is going add up to 67,271 square feet. As I mentioned earlier, the current standards for the planned unit development do not list auto repair shops as a permitted use. Staff has prepared ordinances that regulate the automotive repair shop. The site plan cannot be approved without approval of this planned unit development amendment. We are recommending approval of the application with conditions. I’ll be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thank you, Sharmeen. Very thorough as was the staff report. At this time I would open it up for commission questions. You can go ahead and just speak up if you have them. McGonagill: Sharmeen, the question I have go back to the site plan. Walk me through, I have two areas of curiosity. One is how the effluent will be handled inside the bays. What are they doing to wash down the bays, clean up, because there is oil and stuff leaking every day? How will that be handled inside the facility itself environmentally? Does it go to our stormwater? Does it go to sewage? Where is it going? The second one is out in the parking lot, the slope of the parking lot. Which way does it go? For example, if someone brings in a car and its leaking oil as they do and they are bringing it there for maintenance in rain, snow, whatever, which way will it go? Will it go to the stormwater pond that you have there? I’m just curious about that. To keep the contamination as I would call it on that site? Aanenson: Sharmeen, do you want to let the applicant answer that question? If that’s all right, Commissioner McGonagill? Al-Jaff: Sure. McGonagill: Sure, that’s fine. Or we can wait until the applicant presents. Aanenson: I think they are probably more technically… McGonagill: We can do that. What about the overall site grade? Do you know that? Henricksen: Sharmeen, I can butt in here if you guys can hear me. This is Erik Henricksen. I’m with the Engineering Department. I’m the Project Engineer. I did review of these plans. To kind of go back to your previous question, if I recall in the plans, and I would leave this up to Kimley- Horn too, but I believe they have a coalescing oil water separator. It’s a system that is pretreatment prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. I believe I did see that on the site plan. As far as slopes or grades it is relatively a flat lot. When the PUD was built out as mass graded, this lot was a part of that mass grading so it is relatively flat. As far as the parking lot itself, it does grade and drainage does go to the storm that’s going to be collected there so it Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 5 would be routed to catch basins in the parking lot. As far as the issue when cars are leaking in a repair area there is really no pretreatment on the storm that it goes directly to but the main focus again is how you deal with the pits and the drainage inside, which again is that pretreatment. It did appear adequate from our review. Again, I think Kimley-Horn knows more about the ins and outs of the, or the minutiae of that part. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s what I was expecting was some sort of a water coalescer. Usually that’s what you will see. Thanks. Wakefield: This is Jonathan Wakefield. I’m the property procurement director for Christian Bros. Automotive. I’m more than happy to answer the first part of the question regarding how we handle the internal cleanliness of the shop. We are not a wash-down shop at all. Modern EPA standards wouldn’t allow that and we’ve been compliant since we started operating in 1982. The way that we operate we have a Zamboni-style machine. It looks like something you would see on a small-scale hockey rink. It is a daily clean and scrub of the particulate matter that drops from the cars. That includes snow melt, so on and so forth. There are trench drains within the shop to take snow melt, rain, and so forth. That’s carried to the 750 gallon sand and oil separator that the Engineering folks alluded to earlier. I can go into a deep dive of our environmental compliance but we literally have a three-level containment system that more than exceeds state and federal containment requirements. Again, if you want me to go deeper into detail I certainly can, but we are as above and beyond as can possibly be imagined. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I have. Weick: Thank you. Great. Other questions from the commission or clarifying points? Von Oven: This is Commissioner Von Oven. On the staff report pages 13 and 14 is where you’ve got the PUD amendment and there you indicated staff had some concerns. In the bullet points below that, two bullet points I wanted to call out and just understand if they are somehow related or if they are not at all related. Bullet 2: All repair, assembly, disassembly… shall occur within a closed building. The second to the last bullet point is all service garage doors shall be screened. Is a garage door with a screen on it considered a closed building? Al-Jaff: No. The screening of the garage door is through landscape purposes. Von Oven: So we’re not talking about screens that allow noise through. We are talking about like blackout? Al-Jaff: No. Visual screen. Weick: Like the trees. Al-Jaff: So the trees along this… Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 6 Von Oven: Thank you. No further questions. Al-Jaff: Thank you. Aanenson: If I may, Chairman, I think that was one of the things that we contemplated when we looked at the orientation of the building for noise. This is adjacent to kind of the frontage road adjacent to 212 and so looking at that orientation the bays internally, but then that screening, the landscaping screening provides an additional visual impact and the noise attenuation. So that’s, it was kind of a twofold thing. We’ve had other auto repairs that there was conditions put on that the doors had to down the whole time. That is really onerous. For one, staff to try and enforce, and then seasonal times of the year that there may be some ambient noise. We have confidence that the way this operation is going to go that it would fit in. Again, we know there’s a demand fr this type of service in the community, and this seems like a good site. Kind of a transition when you are behind the existing gas station with that Kwik Trip and working on that orientation. Weick: Thanks, Kate. Reeder: I’m Mr. Reeder. Does what we’re doing here is a repair business and not a collision repair business? Does our ordinance distinguish between those? Al-Jaff: Yes, it does. What you have here is basically the equivalent of changing tires, oil. It’s not a body shop. It is actually engines and the running of… Reeder: So you would not expect to have a car that’s missing a front end or a … or whatever sitting in this parking lot? Al-Jaff: Well it depends on what type of damage has… Aanenson: Let’s let the applicant answer that. Wakefield: Again, this is Jonathan Wakefield. We don’t do anything to the exterior of a vehicle at all whatsoever. We don’t even do touch-up paint to a bumper. No window replacement. None of that. We are strictly internal and with a modern vehicle, a very high percentage of the work that we do is electronic and electronic diagnostic. Most vehicles have 32 on-board computers and/or sensors and that’s the vast majority of what you fix anymore. The mechanical aspect is still very important but our technicians are really accomplished at working with both a wrench and a laptop. So, all the work happens within the bays and happens to vehicles that, they are not there to have any kind of body work at all whatsoever, they’re just there to be repaired and put back on the road. Does that answer your question? Reeder: It does for you. My question for staff is whether or not the subsequent owner of this building would be restricted to that kind of repair? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 7 Al-Jaff: Yes, they would be. Reeder: How? Al-Jaff: The city code defines auto repair shops and differentiates it from body shops. What the applicant is requesting is an auto repair shop, not a body shop. Reeder: So if somebody wanted to put a body shop in this building, they would have to go through an amendment to the PUD? Al-Jaff: That is correct. Reeder: In this current proposal are there any regulations on how many cars they can have sitting in their lot waiting for repair? Al-Jaff: No, there isn’t. There’s a limit on the number of parking spaces, there’s a limit on the square footage and how many bays there are so I’m assuming that if they reach capacity as far as vehicles that need to be fixed, they just will let their clients know that their appointment would have to wait to a later date or time. Wakefield: If I may I can elaborate on that as well. So there’s also is a stipulation in the restrictions that we have accepted with staff and those restrictions require that any vehicles that are in our parking lot, especially for overnight, must be operable. In other words, they can drive under their own power. If they can’t, they are in the bays overnight. They also have to be licensed. That keeps derelict vehicles from staying for extended periods of time. We don’t want that. A, it’s a bad look. This is a high-end neighborhood. We want to look like our neighbors and be attractive to them. That’s Item 1 and the other, somewhat self-serving here, when the cars leave, that’s usually when we get paid. So there is no incentive for a vehicle to stay long term, overnight occasionally as maybe somebody has to work late and they can’t pick up their vehicle until the next morning and so it forces a courtesy. The first nine vehicles we have go in the bays overnight, and if there happen to be some stragglers, we’ll put them in a lighted part of the parking lot and they will be picked up or worked on the next day. Aanenson: Chairman, if I may? Weick: Yes. Aanenson: That’s condition number 9 of the PUD and that’s what regulates it and that’s what Ms. Al-Jaff was talking about. We do differentiate it in the code but it is further spelled out in the PUD ordinance what was specific to this zoning district. Weick: Thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 8 Reeder: Mr. Chairman, I’m not sure if I heard all of that but everything he says sounds super to me. Is that our requirement or the decision of the company that’s coming into this building at this time? Aanenson: It’s our requirement in the PUD. It says no vehicles that are inoperable can be parked there and that also they have to be licensed. That’s pretty much universal throughout the zoning district in the city. All other places that would do repairs. Reeder: Super. Weick: Great questions. Do you have more, Commissioner Reeder? Reeder: I think I’m good. I’m just looking for the trash receptacle. I assume it’s on the end of the building, is that correct? Al-Jaff: That is correct. It is along the north, right here. Weick: Which is towards Kwik Trip I think, right? Reeder: Super. Thank you. Al-Jaff: Northeast. Weick: Great. Other commissioners with questions? Hearing none, I would ask the applicant to rejoin us and if there is something to add. I know we’ve heard from you a couple of times already and we certainly appreciate that. That is very helpful. But we’d give you an opportunity to speak about the project and the neighborhood if you would like. Wakefield: Absolutely. So again, my name is Jonathan Wakefield. I’m the Property Procurement Director for Christian Bros. Automotive. I also have representation from Kimley-Horn. Christian was kind enough to give up an evening to back me up if you ask anything too terribly technical. Our Chief Development Officer is also on the call so you’ve got a Director and a CDO. That hasn’t happened before and hopefully that speaks to how important this project is to us and how taking root in your community is something that we dearly want to have happen. Also, a representative from the current owner of the property is here. We are in the process of buying it, developing it, and it is our goal to bring it to fruition. In looking at the history of this site, the lot that we are occupying was original designed for a bank. There are some things about Christian Bros. Automotive that I want to get into; some advantages that may not be too apparent. One of them is that our traffic count is extraordinarily low. As compared to a bank, we will reduce the traffic that it would have generated by 60-80%. So, at worst 60%. At best, 80%. The McDonald’s that’s already there and operating, we do less business by volume from a traffic standpoint all day than they do in 30 minutes. It’s stunning. There’s a value add in having a very low traffic generator. That’s really speaking to the transactional side of Christian Bros. coming in Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 9 and becoming part of this development. From a noise standpoint, that wasn’t brought up here in this particular forum, but it was brought up by staff. It was a detracting letter that was sent in an email. Somebody gave their voice and had a concern I wanted to address that as well. As staff alluded to our building orientation places the bays facing inboard and away from the street. The only people who might hear anything out of us might be the Kwik Trip, at worst. We’ve done two acoustic studies in other locales for other municipalities and we know, without any shadow of a doubt, that by the time the sound reaches our property line and crosses into somebody else, our loudest noise, which is the air hammer which takes the nuts off of a tire, is 74 decibels at the door and is attenuated out to somewhere between 40 and 50 decibels at the street. For reference, my speaking voice, I’m told, is somewhere between 50 and 55 decibels. I can talk all day as my staff will tell you, but we’re not running an air hammer all day. We work on about 17 cars a day, and that’s it. We are a true repair shop. We are not a tire and lube shop. That’s not our bit. We don’t need 200 cars a day to come through to have a viable business. That’s not what we’re there for. We see some real advantages. There was a line in the staff report that I really enjoyed and it was talking about neighborhood commercial uses: “Those uses that meet the daily needs of the residents.” That’s exactly what we do. A gas station does that. Having a childcare facility there does that. Across the street, although not part of this development necessarily, the Park and Ride does that. McDonald’s does that. Businesses that may or may not be liked in what they do but have a strong and positive impact on the community in the way that they serve it. Christian Bros. Automotive certainly does that. There were some environmental questions. I think I answered those. Lighting has been talked about. Again, that’s the transactional part of our presentation but I also want to move into the relational aspect of Christian Bros. and who we are and why we do what we do. We’ve been in operation since 1982. We have over 230 stores across the nation approaching 30 states. We may have 30 states. I’ve actually lost count in the 10 years I’ve been with the company. This is not our first rodeo by any stretch of the imagination and it’s not our first store in this particular area or your state. We are also in places you may have heard of: Maple Grove where incidentally we are part of, we are actually in their parking lot, for Parnassus Preparatory Charter School, so we play very well with others, even educational facilities like Primrose who is directly adjacent to us. Also in the Maple Grove facility, there is a Tender Time childcare facility as well and our Lakeville location we are one lot over from a KinderCare and actually we are directly adjacent to a KinderCare in Clive, Iowa. We’ve got another location coming up in Inver Grove. Two more in development: one in Woodbury and one in Savage. Actually a couple more that are too early to talk about. I say all that to say this: We are a highly professional company. Extremely reputable. Incredibly clean. I would challenge anyone and we offered this to staff as well, at least I told Christian to offer it to staff. Feel free to drive and look at any of our other facilities, the way they are operated, way we handle cars, the way we treat our customers, the shuttle vehicles that we have and then we take them to work and back, which helps reduce the car count. We are excited about the Park and Ride, that somebody could conceivably drop their vehicle off and before they hop on that mass transit vehicle, drop it off with us. We will fix your care while you are at work and come pick you up at the parking lot and take care of you. That’s a service that very few can offer. Again, I can’t stress enough how deeply embedded we are in the communities that we serve and service. We don’t look at our customers as customers or clients. They are friends. I know that sounds a little bit salesy but we Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 10 are a faith-based company and we are very proud of that and we feel that if we’re allowed to be a part of this community, a part of this development, we will have a lasting impact. I don’t know if I said it or not but since 1982 we have not closed a single location. Our business model is sound. Automotive repair is an essential business and during this time of COVID where we are all coping and doing strange things like having meetings in your home office, we have continued to shine. We had one down month and then it picked up immediately. Actually, the month after our down month was the best month we’ve ever had. We’re survivors and we’ll do well here and are very much looking forward to being part of what you already have and possess here: a great community. Again, I’m open for any questions. I’ve been with Christian Bros. for 10 years. There’s not a whole lot that hasn’t been thrown at me before and I can take it. Weick: Well, thank you very much. It’s a great presentation. You answered quite a few questions of mine. In that presentation, and I will certainly turn it over to our commission members if there are any clarifying questions they need to ask you or your team. We’ll give everyone a second to gather their thoughts if they would like. Wakefield: This is usually the part where I say I’ve flown in from Houston, Texas and my time is your time, but obviously we are not doing that right now. So I’m actually going to get to have dinner after this with my family so that’s kind of cool. Weick: That is a good side of it, yes. Wakefield: Anything you’ve got. We’re an open book. Very transparent. Weick: Are you working on something over there, Commissioner McGonagill? Okay. I wasn’t sure if you were turning or not. Okay. McGonagill: I’m good. Weick: I can see you. I can’t see everybody else. It doesn’t sound like, it sounds like you’ve touch on everything and you’ve certainly answered a few questions, throughout the staff presentation as well, so thank you very much. I appreciate the detail you provided and it certainly left our Commission members speechless so it must have been thorough. I will now open the public hearing portion of this matter. I will say that we did receive a couple of emails, or at least two and those are in the record. I think one was in favor and one was opposed to the building of the item. Al-Jaff: Correct. Staff has received phone calls. Weick: Okay. Al-Jaff: Mainly inquiries about what is the development and we just were able to answer all of their questions and ensure that if they had any comments or any concerns to let us know. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 11 Weick: Okay. Great. Anyone here present this evening who would like to come forward and speak an opinion on this item may do so at this time. Just please state your name and talk as loud as you can because the microphone is covered with plastic. Thank you for coming this evening. Chintaginjala: Good evening. May name is Bala Chintaginjala. My address is 8982 Southwest Village Loop. That is a townhome. From my home this proposed project is 800 feet away. By the way, I spoke to Sharmeen earlier today about this project. She tried to explain. Actually, I went through this project last weekend. It was very good. I am also a civil engineer. I worked for 10 years in the construction field but for the last 20 years I’ve been working in IT. I want to thank the applicant for investing in our city. He created jobs and also he will fulfill the needs of neighborhood residents. My request is, as long as we can keep the noise levels low as for the allowable limits, as for the core, and pollution is under control as for the limits. I don’t have any problem. I welcome this project and I want to vote yes for this project. Thank you very much. Gentlemen, thank you. Excellent job. Weick: Thank you so much and thank you for coming this evening and offering your views on this project. Very important. Anyone else present who would like to come forward on this item? We also have the call-in number on the screen. Is it lighting up over there? Al-Jaff: Nothing is happening. Weick: All right. So I mentioned the emails have been noted and are in the record and thank you this evening for speaking. Your opinion on the item as well. We’re just checking the phones. We’re just making sure anyone who wants to call in, can. I know it’s weird. We’ve done this a couple of times but it still is a challenge to get used to the new way of doing things but we will perfect it, I’m sure. With that, I will close the public hearing portion of this item. We’ve heard from staff, our applicant, as well as members of the community in person and via email, and telephone calls earlier. So thank you to everyone who has expressed their views and opinions on this item. At this time the item is open for the Planning Commission to discuss the item amongst ourselves, voice any opinion, concerns, and certainly would be open to a motion and a second as appropriate. Yes, Commissioner Skistad. Skistad: I am Commissioner Skistad and I appreciate all the work that went into this proposal and I’m excited about having it. I do think it’s something we need for the community and it’s very well done and very well thought out. The building is beautiful, so this would be something that I would definitely support. I appreciate all of the parties that worked so hard on this project. Weick: Awesome. Thank you. I concur. Some things that were touched on that I had written down. Certainly people had mentioned noise a lot and one thing that I had sort of, I know Commissioner Reeder had mentioned it, is it like, could it be a body shop and it’s not like that. My big question was, is it like one of those quick-change oil places where you got like you mentioned. They make money by turning cars. Turn and burn. Turn and burn and that’s where I Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 12 think you can start to get into unsightly potentially traffic patterns, noise patterns. They’re not as concerned with limiting those things, right? They need to get in and out. That’s clearly not what’s going on here and so I think that’s great. In fact, having seen that area and, I don’t think it’s the number one probably noise unsightly or detractor, if you will, in that area. That Kwik Trip is packed and like there’s cars everywhere, and people pumping gas and going in and out of the store and running through the car wash. All this stuff. I just think it’s a good use of the land and I think it will be a, I honestly believe it will be a good neighbor for the area. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I would agree with you and I think the thing that I think about with their effect is true. I mean a third of the price of your car these days is electronics. Weick: Right. McGonagill: And you’re not, everybody guarantees their drive trains for 100,000 miles but the electronics are the ones you’re working on so I think it’s good. I appreciate the way they thought it out. I do also appreciate staff’s conditions that you put in there on the fact of it has to be drivable, things like that have to be kept sitting out there and there are some conditions to try and keep it up as nice as possible and I think it would be a good add. These kind of facilities, if you think about it, it will probably hire 12-15 people that will be good, permanent jobs by the time you go through it all, not counting the suppliers, not counting anything else that goes through there. It’s a nice extension so I’m in favor of it, Mr. Chairman. Weick: Awesome. We would certainly entertain a motion if there weren’t… Reeder: Mr. Chairman? I’m prepared to make that motion. I think it’s a good project in a good place. I’m pleased with the operation suggestions that they have so I would make the motion. Reeder moved, Noyes seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Site Plan consisting of a 5,100 square-foot automotive repair shop and Planned Unit Development amendment for Chanhassen Gateway allowing automotive repair shops with standards, Planning Case 2020-21 as shown in plans dated received October 30, 2020, including the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation, subject to conditions. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Weick: The motion passes unanimously 7-0. Again, thank you for all your hard work Sharmeen. I know this has been a long one and detailed and it’s very important any time we are amending PUD and adding a new neighbor. We want to make sure that its right for the neighborhood and this feels like a good one. Thank you for your hard work. Thank you to representatives from Christian Bros. as well. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 13 Aanenson: I would just like to make a reminder Chairman that this item does go to the City Council so for anybody that’s following along, that will be scheduled for the December 14th City Council meeting for final action. Weick: Thank you and thank you for coming and speaking this evening as well. Appreciate that. We do have a couple other items on the agenda this evening. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY AND SUBDIVISION OF A FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION (DEER HAVEN) WITH VARIANCES LOCATED AT 6480 YOSEMITE AVENUE. Weick: With that I will turn it over to Mr. Generous? Yes. Generous: Thank you Chairman Weick. Commissioners… Randall: Chairman? I’m going to recuse myself from this… Weick: Okay. Just for the record Commissioner Randall has recuse himself from this item and this item only which means he will not offer opinion or vote on the item. Thank you, Commissioner Randall. Generous: Thank you Chairman and Commissioners. Planning Case 2020-22, Deer Haven Addition. Tonight’s the public hearing. This goes to City Council on January 11, 2021. The applicant is Kenneth and Barbara Ashfeld. I just noticed that my title, it’s a rezoning as well as a subdivision approval with variances for the 33-foot right-of-way, 24-foot street, and a private street for a four-lot single-family residential development. The property is located at 6480 Yosemite Avenue. This is north of Lake Lucy Road about halfway between there and 63rd Street. It’s on the easterly edge of the Pheasant Hills development. The right-of-way for Wood Duck Lane runs to the north of this property but the road stops a little bit to the west of this property. There is a small right-of-way access onto Yosemite that was dedicated with previous plats, 16.5 feet each time that they platted something. There’s only 33 feet of right-of-way. On page 5 I see there is a typo in the report that says 31 feet but it should be 33 feet. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District. It’s guided for Residential-Low Density development which permits densities of 1.2 to 4 units per acre. Part of my PowerPoint, I didn’t go into the rezoning a lot but Rural Residential District is not consistent with the Land Use designation for the property; however, our Comprehensive Plan allows that zoning to stay in place until a development proposal comes forward. At that time the rezoning must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Under the Residential-Low Density land use designation there are four consistent zoning categories: RSF which is single-family residential, R-4 which is mixed-low density residential, RLM which is residential low and medium density, and PUD-R. The property to the west is a Planned Unit Development-Residential. It has smaller lots and smaller setback requirements. On the northeast and south sides of this development are properties that are zoned Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 14 RSF which is single-family residential. They’re requesting rezoning to single-family residential which would be consistent with the three sides of this property plus they are smaller than the minimum criteria for PUD-R zoning, so the most appropriate zoning and what we are requesting approval of is the RSF rezoning of the property. The existing site is approximately 2.8 acres with access via a private driveway that uses city right-of-way to get out to Yosemite and then the driveway down to the home. The site is partially wooded. There’s one single-family home on it. It’s served with sewer and water service that runs to the northwest between two of the homes in the Pheasant Hills development. The proposed subdivision request if for 4 single-family lots. Access would be via our public street, that doesn’t show up here, out to Yosemite and then direct access to the individual lots would be via a private street. Within the development public sewer and water would be extended and they’re going to provide stormwater treatment. They’re currently in for preliminary plat approval so we don’t have any of the final construction plans. Erik will actually go into those a little bit later. As part of this development there is currently approximately 59% tree cover. Ordinance allows 30% to remain after development. They estimate currently under their preliminary plans that they would meet that 30% tree preservation. The tree preservation shows up as these cross-hatched areas on this map. With the final plat we want them to verify that they are in fact meeting those tree preservation requirements and that they install appropriate tree preservation fencing. With this, Erik will actually take over. Hendricksen: Thanks, Bob. Thank you Mr. Chair and Commissioners for the opportunity to present Engineering staff’s review of the proposed preliminary plat for the Deer Haven subdivision. It will be a little bit of what Bob kind of went into but try to get into some of the minor minutia beginning with the grading for the subdivision. It has been proposed to be accomplished over two phases which is common when the goal would be to have custom-graded lots. The first phase of which the extents are highlighted in purple, would accommodate the installation of public utilities such as water and sanitary sewer. It would also accommodate the buildout of the stormwater BMPs along with public road and a private street The second phase highlighted in yellow, would be the individual lots which will be custom graded and would ultimately be reviewed during building permit submittal. The provided grading plan and stormwater narrative appear to be feasible. While both illustrate how surface water requirements and subdivision ordinances would be met such as erosion control measures or drainage being routed away from buildings and routed to stormwater BMPs for treatment. Ultimately, the applicant will be required to provide a geotechnical report and updated plans when the final plat and final construction plans are submitted for review. Sanitary sewer and water main will be extended from the existing public utilities adjacent to the proposed subdivision. Sanitary sewer will be extended roughly 550 feet from an existing manhole located at the end of Wood Duck Lane and water service will be extended from an existing main abutting the subdivision. Based on the existing topography and the existing pipe invert elevations at the manhole within Wood Duck Lane, a gravity sanitary sewer system is being proposed and while the water main will be extended resulting in a dead-end main, the applicant is proposing to connect the existing home’s water service to the newly extended main. Currently it’s had from a different water main to the east. With that proposal it will promote a higher level of water quality for the future of the property owners of the subdivision. Lastly, the applicant is proposing an 8-inch water main to be Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 15 extended while the minimum diameter of water main that the city will allow per our standards is 6 inches. If feasible, based on fire flows and pressure, the city will require a 6-inch line be installed instead. A 6-inch water main would promote lower maintenance costs in the future along with the additional water quality benefits as the volume of the water in the dead-line would be less. It would cycle out or refresh more often. Access to the subdivision is being proposed off Yosemite Avenue via a newly extended public street with individual lot access being had from the extensions of the private street as Bob indicated. The image shown illustrates this combination of public and private street extensions with the green arrow being the portion of the public street, and the yellow arrow being the portion of the private street. Because the current right-of-way extending from Yosemite Avenue does not meet the 60-foot wide standard set forth in Chapter 18, the applicant is requesting a variance for both right-of-way width and public street width. After much review by City staff of the multiple options of providing access to the proposed subdivision, staff finds this request to be the most reasonable and prudent approach. If the applicant were to extend the existing Wood Duck Lane cul-de-sac, which is illustrated by the red arrow, it would further exacerbate a non-conforming cul-de-sac, which is already 1,100 feet long as illustrated in the orange. Additionally, the City cannot grant approval of a private street through public right-of-way with the extension from Yosemite being a private street all the way into the subdivision is not feasible. As such, staff believes that the proposed 24-foot wide public street located within a 33-foot wide right-of-way will adequately serve the subdivision of the 4 lots. However, the applicant will be required to secure additional right-of-way from the property to the north in order to construct the street which was highlighted in the staff report for this agenda item. The applicant has already engaged that property owner and is working towards the grant of easement which will be a condition to be recorded currently with the recording of the final plat. With that, Bob, I turn it back over to you. Generous: Thanks Erik. The provision of private streets and right-of-way and street width variances are covered under the subdivision ordinance. Private streets may be permitted if they meet the criteria in Section 18-22 of the Subdivision ordinance. The applicant is proposing to use existing right-of-way to provide the public street connection; however, that right-of-way is only 33 feet wide. Our current standard is 60 feet. However, all of that is off site from this development and their existing right-of-way so we are allowing them to use that. Additionally, new street design requires a 31-foot street back to back and they’re proposing a 24-foot street back to back which would fit within that 33 feet of right-of-way and give us enough space on either side for snow storage and stormwater attenuation. As Erik said, we believe that it meets all the criteria variance findings for Section 18-22. Use of the private street provides additional potential benefit, reduces the amount of impervious surface that will be in that development as well as potential for additional grading. Additionally, they’re going within existing right-of-way that’s off the property and that’s the variance for the substandard street width and right-of-way width. The hardship is due to the existing circumstances within this area. There’s only 33 feet of right-of-way existing for a public street and there is not a need to access the other properties with the service private street into the development going to the south off of Wood Duck Lane. However, Wood Duck Lane would be public within the Stoddardt development if they wanted to develop an additional lot off the south end which is north of Wood Duck Lane. There is a Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 16 potential for doing that onto a public street. This site is very unique in the community. As Erik pointed out they can’t go Wood Duck Lane to the west and extend that right-of-way because we have an overly long cul-de-sac. This provides a cul-de-sac that is shorter and it won’t be detrimental to the public welfare because the public access off of Yosemite would be a public street and it’s just the four lots within this development that will have direct access onto the private street. Staff believes they meet all the criteria and findings for a variance under the subdivision ordinance. With that, staff is recommending approval of the rezoning from Rural Residential to Single-Family Residential, approval of the four-lot subdivision and this is for preliminary plat approval with a variance for the use of the private street as well as the 33-foot right-of-way for the public street and a 24-foot wide street design, and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that, I would be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Thank you. I appreciate it. Great report and great presentation. While our Commission gathers their thoughts and questions, I did have couple. It relates to the grading and I was out there and there’s like a road there. I was afraid to drive it because I thought it looked like a private drive so I didn’t want to drive back there and look at it. I went up on that (63rd) and you can kind of peer in between the house and you can see the property. It’s a pretty significant hill, I call them hills, the grade is fairly significant and it sounds like that is going to be graded down. I guess my question would be when that gets graded down does that create any type of like a bowl situation with the homeowners that are on Yosemite and then maybe the homeowners to the west. You know what I mean? When the purple area and yellow area get graded out to the east and the west then does that create an area that’s significantly lower than the areas to the east and the west? I call it a bowl, right? Like everything comes down into that development. I’m just curious if it creates that situation. Hendricksen: From the proposed grading plan the… on the west side, they’re going to have to tie in to the existing grades at their property line. What the custom-graded lots and this preliminary grading plan showed was essentially kind of backyard swales that would pick up any kind of drainage and direct it north to right where your cursor is, Bob, is where the stormwater BMP is. So that’s kind of a stormwater basin essentially. Conversely, on the west side it’s kind of more or less sheet flowing with the private drive and the front yards directing all the drainage to that stormwater. I don’t know if that adequately answers the question but I don’t anticipate. Stormwater from what we saw in the preliminary grading plans was being accounted for and routed appropriately. There will have to be some refined design with the public street section as that was conditioned. It’s definitely feasible. We have stormwater infrastructure off Yosemite that this can be tied into because this will be public stormwater and public drainage but I, that’s kind of the general overall grading. Weick: I think that answers it. I didn’t know if we were creating some kind of a weird sort of backyard situation. Henricksen: Right. With preliminary and final plat, especially with custom-graded lots we definitely ensure that the original proposal is feasible. The purple section is what would be Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 17 graded first to get all the infrastructure and everything teed up and then I don’t know the actual ins and outs if the lots will be sold individually or how that will be done, but when a builder comes in for custom-graded lots, we ensure that whatever lot is sold that the grading plan that they’re proposing because they can alter a little bit where the house pad is, how they’re building out the lot, we ensure that the drainage, that’s one of the main things to look for on these building permits on the grading plan, is consistent with the overall plan of the subdivision. It’s not lost along the way. Weick: Cool. Okay. Then I have one other quick question I think I know the answer to but the straight city street that comes into the private then joins at the bend to the private, we (the City) maintains it. Plows it up to the bend? Okay Henriksen: Currently with what’s being proposed there’s not really adequate space for a full cul- de-sac so what we are anticipating seeing and what was kind of shown on the preliminary plan would be kind of that modified hammerhead approach and that’s again for snow storage. That kind of shows it. When get more refined plans we’ll probably condition that to maybe move. We’ll talk to our Street Superintendent to see what the best kind of plowing operations would be but that would be owned and maintained a city, a public street. Weick: Okay. Thank you. That’s the only other question I had. I would open it up to other commissioners. Skistad: I have a follow-up question to Commissioner Weick’s question. When we did that custom grading I’m just reminded of that other project that we looked at where they had a serious problem with the drainage, which is I’m sure what the other Commissioner is speaking about as well. How do they ensure that they are following that custom grading plan? Do they have like a before and after review of some kind? Henriksen: That’s a really good question. When the preliminary and final plat get approved by that time we get the final construction plans which shows the overall intent of the grading plan. When a builder comes in for a building permit they also have to provide a survey with proposed grades in which we review to make sure that the drainage is adequately being accounted for and relatively reflects what the overall drainage intent was with the subdivision. Once a building permit is issued the builder will go out and grade, and by the time the lot is built out they have to do what is called an as-built grading survey and that will go to our building permit specialist and they’ll kind of take a look at it… They’ll look at what the proposed plan was from what the as- built is showing, see if it jives. If it doesn’t, obviously they have to do follow up and then inquire with the surveyor but then we’ll actually go out on site and do a visual inspection to make sure it’s graded as, generally as the intent of the building permit. So throughout the process there is a lot of checks that are involved. That the Engineering Department and Water Resources will even be looking at erosion control and go through to ensure that the buildout is per the permit. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 18 Skistad: Okay. That makes sense. So there’s a couple of different survey requirements that happen through the process? Henricksen: Correct. Reeder: Two questions. One, I’m not a proponent of private roads. I would like to hear a little bit more of why we’re not proposing a public road all the way down. And secondly, what happens to the ownership of the outlot? Who will own and maintain the outlot? Generous: The primary reason for not going with a full public street for the private street section was the additional hard cover that would be created on site and the additional stormwater improvements that would have to be put in place as well. There’s addition maintenance requirements for the City. Public streets are generally intended to connect multiple properties. This is going into one property so it doesn’t make a lot of sense to continue a public street down there. We looked at the opportunity. They could put in a public street but then we would get an additional 11 feet of pavement within the roadway section and additional grading to the side property lines. That’s the primary impact between the public and private street. The maintenance of the private street goes with the benefitting properties. It’s either through an access and maintenance agreement or in the staff report we recommend that they establish a homeowners association to address the maintenance and long-term care for that private street. Reeder: What about the outlot? Generous: The outlot could be association ownership or it could be an individual ownership but they would. On top of that it’s the easement and access agreement that would cover the maintenance of the street itself. It may also address the maintenance of any landscaping that is installed within there and the mowing of the property. The applicant may be better able to express his intent with the outlot itself. Reeder: Okay. That’s a good question because it seems like somebody needs to be in charge of that outlot for the future is somebody stores a junk car or something. Weick: Fair enough. We’ll leave that for the applicant to answer when they present. Thank you, Commissioner Reeder. Any follow up that you have on that or are you okay? Reeder: I’m good. Weick: Okay. Commissioner McGonagill? McGonagill: Bob, I’ve got two areas of questions. The private street, looking on page 10 of the staff report… My first question on a private street and this is something we’ve seen private streets before by I don’t recall one that was this long with this many homes on it. This has got four homes and I noticed that the fire hydrant is at the bottom of that street so you get a fire truck Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 19 down in there what’s he going to do? He can’t get out. He can’t get around. I mean the hydrant’s right about where cursor is. We try to be pretty rigorous about having conforming cul-de-sacs or a way a fire truck can get in and out and we can still have access. There is four homes along her now and that’s one area of concern that I have. How does the private road allow it to be that way? Where the other way we’re always in there trying to be sure we have fire truck access and turnaround access. Henricksen: So the fire hydrant was something we noticed and Public Works kind of looked at it through the lens of well someone’s going to have to plow that and they’re probably going to push that snow all the way down that private road and it’s going to hit that hydrant and that’s going to be a nuisance to maintain and the like. So we, on the construction plan review which we provided to the applicant and their engineer commented on the possibility of relocating that hydrant. When it comes to access for emergency services and fire, the Fire Department, the Chief, they do review of placement of hydrants. At this time there wasn’t necessarily a comment or condition because that’s something they will assess and review in greater detail on a final plat and final construction submittal. At this point we’re kind of looking mainly for feasibility. Function over the form of it right now but to your point, with private roads there are details within the fire code that show placement of let’s say a hydrant where is says Outlot A on this exhibit here which would require a little bump out and maybe a little more clearance for the Fire Department. With this being a dead-end too they take a lot of that into consideration. Where the hose runs. Access for vehicles going in and out during an emergency situation. I hope that answers the question but essentially that is something that staff, both Public Works/Engineering and the Fire Department do those types of reviews. That was also caught by fire comment here. McGongaill: I understand but we’re now, I realize you’ll do that perhaps when they go through and plat it but you’re going through the process now I believe of approving whether you have a private road or not and that’s one of the concerns I have, particularly able to have access to turn around. The second thing with that is those four houses that are in there, I know what’s going to happen. The garbage trucks are going to go down there and he’s going to have to back all the way back out again. He’s not going to be able to turn around. Same thing if it would snow or winter. Again, it’s the whole issue of being able to access it. I understand your comments about not wanting to widen the right-of-way to make the public road with the amount of time it would take up, but that solution for this many houses down in there does concern me. Generous: If I may, Commissioner? The ordinance does provide for the provision of a hammerhead turnaround which is what this area would be and I believe it’s 70 feet but I’m not, 60 feet in length. McGonagill: I never hear that one. Henricksen: It’s a 20-foot radius which again was assessed for feasibility to meet the turnaround. That’s again for a dead-end fire apparatus road. That would ensure something as large as a fire truck would have the ability to turn around rather than backing up all the way. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 20 Generous: Which would also accommodate a garbage truck. McGonagill: Next question areas is tree cover, on the map on the tree cover, I think it was purple almost, where all the trees were left. Yeah. That one. Basically, what’s happening, they’re having to clear cut and grade the whole thing except for that bottom right-hand corner? Generous: Any place that shows hatches preserve canopy area. As Jill has pointed out, we think that they may be to provide additional preservation and we want them to verify that. Under the preliminary plan they complied with ordinance. We always push them when we do the final review to see if we can additional preservation. McGonagill: When I was looking at the staff report, let me see if I can find it here. It talked about the fact that it wasn’t going to be planned. There were going to try to maintain, get within the plan, by working with them, but we were concerned trees being damaged by construction… Here it is. It’s on page 14. Generous: In the back of Lot 3? McGonagill: Yes, we’re talking about the back of Lot 3 which is going to take out all those. Then again it’s, we spend a lot of time trying to preserve tree cover here. I realize it’s one lot that they’re going, one big area we’re going for 30% but I kind of go back to the fact of that it’s a private drive/streets, would be wanting to look at almost the 30% per lot, but that’s just my opinion. It is not a clarifying comment. I apologize. Weick: So, in answer to your question is, yes, most of the trees will go out. Generous: Unless they can revise the plan to show additional preservation. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I had, Mr. Chairman. Weick: Thank you. Skistad: I have one more question. When you were talking about, I’m sorry I can’t remember who, but the, actually I think Bob it was you, was they wanted an 8-inch PVC water main versus the 6-inch. Why would they want an 8-inch versus a 6-inch? What would be the purpose of that? Hendricksen: That was me who had addressed that. Typically it’s to provide more flow. My assumption, and I won’t speak for them I guess, my assumption would be that in some cities that may be the minimum so they were just, when they doing the design they were thinking that 8- inch might be minimum size… In the City of Chanhassen we do 6-inch C900 PVC, the plastic stuff, and I think we’ve checked the static pressures in the area here so it should have adequate, the fire flows and pressure with the 6-inch main. What I was alluding to with the water quality is Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 21 because you have a smaller pipe. On a dead-end main, you’re dependent on the people drawing the water and kind of flushing the system for you. Granted, it is a public main and we would flush it, that hydrant yearly. With a smaller volume of water and people drawing from it you’re going to have some higher quality of water than the 8-inch. There are no commercial or industrial facilities here that might require that higher fire suppressions or sprinkler systems or anything like that. But I digress, I would I guess let their engineers let us know why they want this. Skistad: Okay. Thank you. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner Skistad. Other questions? Those were great. Hearing no more, thank you Bob, and I will invite the applicant to make a presentation. Thank you. I repeat, just be sure you speak loudly into that plastic-covered microphone. Thank you. Kenneth Ashfeld: Thank you Mr. Chair and the rest of the Commission. Thank you for allowing me to approach you this evening with this application. Firstly, I would like to thank your staff for doing a very thorough review and providing any guidance on what is truly a pretty property. I have an opportunity to work with very great guidance from him. I say this tongue in cheek that I may live there but I think your staff, as many years as Kate and Sharmeen and Bob have worked on this project, they probably know it better than I do. I am here to answer any questions that you may have. There was a few raised that I think I can address. Mr. Chair and the rest of the Commissioners, feel free to dive in at any time. Weick: Okay. Thank you. Ashfeld: I invite you to do that. It’s a very unique piece of property but a very nice setting in through there. I made note of at least three questions that came up. Commissioner Reeder asked about the ownership of that outlot and it would be intent to create an HOA of the four of us. Not a large HOA. And put covenants on the properties for the maintenance of the roadway and maintenance of the stormwater BMPs as well the mowing. The entire property has been mowed all these years. It’s been mowed like a park and at the end of the day, that’s what I would still like it to be. I’m going to continue to live there. Related to the tree cover, I was very fortunate to have the opportunity for the City Forester to come out and visit with me on some of the trees. Actually, some of the trees that we were really thinking of saving, after she had a chance to look at it and advise me, she felt that they should go. They’re damaged over the years. They’re sickly. There’s a couple of pine trees that they’re dead all the way up to the very tops so there like a, I can’t remember what a tree in Florida is, but. So she was advising that those trees go. Weick: Okay. Ashfeld: When we, our first step was to come through with a preliminary plan just to get your opinion, your feedback on whether this is all going to work and then on the final plat bring all the details back together. Like I say, Erik and Bob have been very thorough in providing us guidance Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 22 on that. On the 8-inch water, I do work for a municipality, the City of Maple Grove, and 8-inch is our minimum so that’s we were assuming, but to Erik’s point, and it’s a very good point, that for water quality purposes it would be better to work with the 6-inch. We would make that change. With that, that’s all I have really to say and I would stand for any questions that the Commission may have of me. Weick: Thank you, and I’ll open it, Commissioner Members can just jump in if you do have any further questions for the applicant. We’ll give folks a chance to collect their notes. Hearing none, thank you. Thanks for bringing this project forward and being able to answer our questions. We have heard from staff and the applicant. At this time I will open the public hearing. The phone number is on the screen. 952-227-1630 if anyone is present and would like to speak about this item may come forward at this time. I don’t believe we received emails. Generous: I haven’t… Weick: I didn’t see anything in the packet either. I’m mumbling a little bit but there were no emails submitted on this item. There is no on present coming forward, and unless the phone is rattling off the hook over there, I will close the public hearing portion of this item. With that, Commission Members may comment, offer some opinions, some concerns, and anecdotes? Anything you would like. We certainly would consider a motion as well as appropriate. I guess I’ll kick off if people are sort of gathering thoughts. I try and compartmentalize things and the thing that kind of went unsaid in all of this I think, if I read this the correctly, the homes themselves meet all of the RSF codes. There’s no variances on the lots themselves and the homes which to me is nice. Now, there is significant consideration around how you access the homes so I get that. But I don’t want to lose sight that the homes themselves meet all the lot setbacks and lot coverage. Having looked at the property it’s a nice little carving of land in there. I think it looks attractive. But again to your point, Commissioner McGonagill, I think access is the biggest thing in making sure that it’s safe, first and foremost, for the folks that choose to live there. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. That’s my concerns. I realize too that people…the property now…but after we do the grading and take out the trees. I know that those are over trees and they will go…to recycle them but it change that whole look down through there. I do appreciate the fact the homes meet the code. That’s all the same thing…they’re not doing something crazy here. But I do question because…the density qualification for three homes. It was two and worked something else out I would probably be, that way I would more room for a road and cul-de-sac. I sit here long enough that I really come to try to be pretty rigorous about being sure that we always really good access to places…school buses, cars, fire trucks, and ambulances. All that. They’re on a narrow private drive even though it does have a hammerhead, I think about in the wintertime. People plowing snow where we know…that access problems will be a problem. I don’t have a solution for that, obviously. It’s an area of concern, I guess. Tree cover loss, grading and the access for utility and commercial vehicles. Three areas I’m having trouble getting over and not seeing a solution for. I thought of that…cut through, if you connect, if it’s a cul-de-sac to the south, you can cut through it versus cutting through the owners’ Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 23 property for that, come straight through that way. There’s not an easy solution for this. There’s right-of-way. There is owners to the south. Difficult… Weick: Thank you. Skistad: I have a comment. When I first looked at it I thought it looked, just looking on the plat, it looked too small have all of these homes on it but then you calculate the acres out. There all .35, .35 acres, .41 and 1.1 acres so they are not on the smaller sizes. They are actually on the larger sizes, even with the road there. So there’s more space there than it appears when you are looking at the drawings, for instance. Weick: I would have been interested to hear from affected neighbors. Having not heard opinion one way or another I can only assume these people are okay. I give folks the benefit of the doubt so I like to think that they sense that this fits and is okay. Other thoughts out there? I know Commissioner McGonagill raised some very good questions and concerns. Any other opinions on that? Von Oven: I think mine comes actually as a combination of those two. I’m not terribly crazy about the combination of things that Commissioner McGonagill brought up. At the same time, if I try to put on my prediction hat, those things are more likely to pose problems for the future residents of that private street then they are of the existing residents who are in the vicinity of it and did not offer comment or any kind of reason for this not to happen. I think, had we received a bunch of comments from the surrounding property saying why this private road would be a bad idea, I might be more inclined to push back, but given the fact that this seems to be the best solution to a tough-to-solve problem, I actually do not see any reason to deny it. So, I am in favor of what we are doing here. Weick: You said that a lot better than I did. Thank you. Which isn’t hard to do. Believe me. Reeder: Mr. Chairman, I think there is a practical solution to this piece of property and complete the development in this area and I think the private road is fine. There is no sense in building asphalt that is not needed which would be the public right. So I’m happy with the way this is presented. Weick: Great. Maybe you could put the motion up. I’m not pushing anyone in this direction but I certainly invite other comments or a motion. Skistad: Can I just ask one more question before we go? I look at the road. It’s 24 feet and I know we heard all the presentation for this but there’s no. I prefer a little bit wider roads in general also, but there isn’t anything in the City that allows you to move a little bit more into that outlot and make it a little bit greater, at least along the trunk of that line? Could the owner decide to do that if they chose to have it a little bit wider? I can see that there is no parking or anything Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 24 along that, I mean there won’t be parking on the road because they can’t. Because they have to have room for the emergency vehicles or the garbage or whatever. Henricksen: Is it okay for me to speak up to the Commission? So, for private streets or private roads, they are signed no parking. That’s a fire code or a fire requirement. There is no parking on private roads. For the portion of the public right-of-way that would be installed at the proposed 24 feet, speaking with Fire, we would sign that for no parking on one side at a minimum. Whenever a road is installed or has kind of that sub par or a little less wide than our 31-foot back-to-back, that’s typically the case when we sign it for no parking and that would be a potential condition on the final plat. That’s still, obviously, that has to be passed by Council, no parking ordinances like that. It would be something that would be assessed once we get the actual plans to look at what the cross-sections... Skistad: Okay. So the answer is really no. That’s what this area allows based on what you’ve looked at and 24 feet, and then you just have to deal with the 24 feet. Okay. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I guess as I continue to go through this, someone said it and I think they expressed my opinions pretty well. There are several issues I have with it that when I look at them in total I can’t get over it. I must be honest. I’ll be voting against it. That’s not to say the product shouldn’t be developed, but…I just don’t have a solution here where I can say it’s palatable to me. I worry, I think about the houses to the east and houses to the west, but also just the access in there and how traffic patterns are going to be and I just don’t like it. That’s the best way to describe it. I just don’t. Sorry, but that’s where I’m at. Weick: You do not have to apologize. I want to be respectful of your need to consider and that’s why I’m sort of allowing some moments here to reflect and think on this item, but certainly speak up if you have other questions or comments or if Commissioner McGonagill sparked something in your mind. Reeder: Mr. Chairman? I am prepared to make a motion. Commissioner Reeder moved, Commissioner Von Oven seconded to recommend approval of 1) Rezoning from Rural Residential District (RR) to Single Family Residential (RSF); and 2) Subdivision approval to create four lots and one outlot with a variance for the use of a private street to provide direct access to the four lots and a variance to use the 33-foot right-of-way and 24-foot street section subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report; and 3) Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. The motion passed with a vote of 5-1. Commissioner McGonagill voted against the motion and Commissioner Randall recused himself and did not vote. Weick: This item will go January 11 in front of City Council if you are following. Again, all comments, all notes are in the record for City Council and they will consider certainly all of our Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 25 questions and concerns. Thank you to everyone who prepared for this item. We have one more item on tonight’s agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1601 LAKE LUCY ROAD FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (LOW DENSITY). Weick: With that I will turn it over to Sharmeen. Thank you, Sharmeen. Al-Jaff: Chairman and members of the Planning Commission, the application before you is a request to rezone from rural residential to planned unit development. Briefly, the site is located south of Lake Lucy Road. It is surrounded by Lake Lucy in its entirety. The site has an area of approximately 9.03 acres. It is currently zoned rural residential. Access to the site is gained via Lake Lucy Road. The 2040 Land Use Plan guides the subject site for low density residential. Within a low density you can have 1.2 units per acre but no more than 4 units per acres. This category can be either zoned into single-family residential, R-4 which is a mix of low density, residential low and medium density, or planned unit development-residential. Rezoning this property into any of those categories would allow the site to be consistent with the 2040 Land Use Plan. Brief background. Back in 1993 the owners of the island at the time came in for a wetland alteration permit for the purpose of constructing a bridge and a driveway to access the driveway. There were multiple extensions granted to this. The work was completed on the bridge as well as the driveway in 1999. Some of the things that have taken place that we also need to point out is that since 2018 staff has been working with the applicant very closely. This site is truly unique. It is the only island that has building rights within the City of Chanhassen. The applicant’s goal is to build a single-family home for their family and an accessory dwelling unit for his mother. The site contains bluffs and wetlands. It is located within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Lucy and it has 100% tree canopy cover. The access driveway off of Lake Lucy Road connects the island to Lake Lucy Road via a bridge. The length of this driveway is approximately 1,600 feet and this is just the distance between Lake Lucy Road and the bridge right here. Looking at the different options, we know that this is a lot of record, it is entitled to the building of a single-family home. The applicant’s request was to have a principle structure with an accessory dwelling unit. This can either be achieved via subdivision or rezoning the site to planned unit development. We looked at the impact of subdividing the site versus rezoning it to planned unit development. With a subdivision, you will be able to accomplish the additional home; however, you will have to widen the driveway to 20 feet. There is additional grading, tree removal, hard surface, potential for two additional home sites rather than the two that the applicant is requesting. Also, there is more potential for grading with the extension of public utilities. Through a planned unit development, the applicant would be able to use the existing driveway. There is a septic system that is proposed on the site as well as a well. We are able through the planned unit development regulations to cap the size of the accessory dwelling unit. We can require the use of a single internal driveway and the planned unit development governing the site would establish additional limitations on the site. The applicant selected to move forward Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 26 with a planned unit development approach. With that, staff directed the applicant to put together a concept, bring it before the city to allow us to evaluate the request, and bring it before you. It is important that we point out this is a concept. It was intended to give us an idea of what it is the owner of the property’s intentions were and how to write proper ordinances that address concerns, improve potential development of the site, add regulations and improve the quality of development. Some of the things that we’re able to accomplish is that the total permitted site coverage is 20%. What the applicant is proposing is going to be below 15%, 14.5% with this concept. We sent this concept to multiple agencies including the watershed, the DNR, and staff at the city, and there was one reoccurring theme that was pointed out by the different agencies and different staff members and that had to do with the amount of grading and what can be done to reduce the grading. So we had a discussion with the property owner and the initial proposal basically looked at serving the main home via one driveway. At the southern portion of the island the driveway would split to serve the accessory dwelling unit. We recommended that the applicant unify those driveways and share access, basically eliminating everything that you see in the hatched red and the applicant can talk about that further but he did agree to this request and understood that this was a concern to many different departments and different staff members. What some of the other elements that this planned unit development will regulate is the fact that you can have one single-family home and one accessory dwelling unit. The ownership of those two homes; they cannot be sold separately. These will remain under single ownership. There is no short-term lease and with short term we are defining it as less than three months. We are limiting the size of the accessory dwelling unit. There are measures in place to ensure fire prevention. We are requesting that the driveways be combined. The applicant was directed to continue working with staff to promote preservation of natural features of the site. We are limiting the size of the accessory structures which also include water-oriented structures for the island. We are also regulating dock rights within this development. Staff is recommending approval of this application of this request because I had mentioned earlier, yes it can be subdivided but this is a mechanism for the city to regulate the future development of this site. This is the type of development when basically a one-size-fits-all ordinance was difficult to implement on a parcel such as this one. We are recommending approval with comments in the staff report and as an adoption of the attached ordinance. One thing I do need to point out is that staff received three emails in addition to the emails included in your staff report. They were from Gregory Fast, Kathryn Randall (also goes by Betsy), and Kim and Tom McReavy. The emails basically included comments requesting minimizing grading, concerns with potential light pollution on the island, impact to surrounding habitat. Other comments involved support of the project, commending the applicant for removing buckthorn from the island. With that, we will make sure that these are incorporated as part of the public record when this items appears before the city council. I’ll be happy to answer any questions. Weick: Great. Thank you. I will open it up for commissioners to ask questions. McGonagill: I have the same questions I had before on the previous item and it’s about fire. They’re going to have a well and other fire suppression sprinklers inside the structures? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 27 Al-Jaff: Correct. McGonagill: So there’s not a hydrant or anything down there? There’s no sewage down there? They have their own septic system? Al-Jaff: Correct. And there was a rather lengthy meeting that took place between the fire chief and the applicant. They walked the site and they agreed upon a consultant that specializes in fire suppression. The applicant would be able to speak to this matter further. McGonagill: In the conversations with the fire chief is it his intention, as I just sit here looking at the bridge, will the bridge take a fire truck? Al-Jaff: Yes, actually it would. McGonagill: So they could get equipment down there. Al-Jaff: Correct. So what we are waiting for is official certification that the bridge will be able to handle the truck. Preliminary investigations tell us that yes, it will be able to handle it. McGonagill: Under the conditions of the PUD can you put in a requirement that the bridge always be able to handle a truck? Bridges age. To meet that. I don’t know if there is a code for that but I just want the ability to get an ambulance down there. At least to get one small piece of equipment in there. If there was an emergency, that’s whose going to respond and I don’t want to see the fire truck go blasting down through there no knowing if the bridge won’t take it and it ends up in the lake. Aanenson: I’m not sure you mentioned this Sharmeen but the house will be fire sprinkled. McGonagill: Yes, she said that. But they respond. Like a 9-1-1 call, somebody calls and has a heart attack or something and the fire guys, they respond. What I’m looking for is can in the PUD you put requirements similar to commercial bridges. That it’s maintained at a certain standard to allow fire equipment access. Al-Jaff: Specifically from a safety standpoint and emergency management, that will be the intent. Staff will check with the city attorney to ensure that…It is staff’s intent to ensure that this requirement is part of the planned unit development. We will check with legal counsel. McGonagill: The second question is similar to that. Is access for other commercial vehicles, garbage trucks, etc., they will have the same? Aanenson: Can I just clarify that, too? I think oftentimes in situations like that you have to bring your garbage up to the street. That’s actually a private driveway so typically you take your trash up to the end of the driveway, but we can clarify that. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 28 McGonagill: Okay. Very good. Because it’s, I just think about natural activities, landscaping, and construction. People are going to always be doing something down there. There’s going to be a weight requirement on that bridge? Aanenson: Yes, when they are constructing the house for sure. McGonagill: For sure and then as you go down the road it will be there too. I just want to ensure that it’s maintained safely. I realize it’s a private drive. It’s not our responsibility. But with a PUD it is. I mean we could put that in the PUD if that’s the way we want it to be done and just ensure that it’s safe. Okay. That’s all the questions I have. Weick: Great. Thank you. Other questions? Noyes: I have a little bit of a follow up question to kind of the previous one and it’s related to that private road and the maintenance of it. I would imagine the property owner is responsible for the plowing of that road in the winter? The plowing of the snow? Are there any restrictions related to use of road chemicals on that road given that this is a bridge over a lake. Al-Jaff: So back in 1993 when the wetland alteration permit was approved for the construction of the driveway one of the conditions was limiting chemicals used on the driveway. Noyes: Thank you. Skistad: I’m going to assume that flooding is not really an issue. It is an issue? Al-Jaff: It is…the island sits over 30 feet above the ordinary high water mark of Lake Lucy so it’s fine. It will be okay. Skistad: Okay. The other question I had was the accessory dwelling unit. It says it has a maximum of two bedrooms and it may not exceed 1600 square feet. I’m just wondering why we are limiting it to two bedrooms because like a typical apartment would be 1200 to 1300 square feet for a three-bedroom and this would be 1600 so it seems like…I was just curious about that. Why we would be limiting it specifically to two bedrooms with 1600 feet? Al-Jaff: So the 1600 feet was requested by the applicant. Number of bedrooms within the structure, a couple of things came into play. The first one was the capacity of the septic system that is proposed out there. This site will take in the sewage from the main house as well as the accessory dwelling unit. The intent is to provide a place for mom to live as well as a potential caregiver. So these are the two reasons why we limited the number of bedrooms, directly relating to the septic system that’s going to serve this site. Also, we needed to ensure that this was not a full-fledged detached single-family home but rather truly an accessory dwelling unit and it was reasonable to limit the size. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 29 Skistad: Thank you. McGonagill: Follow up on Commissioner Skistad’s septic system question, has any sort of percolating test been done on the island to know if the septic system will work out there? Aanenson: Just a second. Can you make sure you are speaking into your microphone? McGonagill: Sure. I’m sorry. I’ll just repeat the question. Follow up on Commissioner Skistad’s question on the septic system. Has any sort of percolating test been done on the island to give a high degree of certainty that a septic system will work and not effluent go into the lake? Aanenson: The Building Official looked at that, just cursory soil types, and they believe there is a couple different types of systems but they are confident that one of those would work. McGonagill: Okay. Thank you. Von Oven: We’ve been very specific about this accessory dwelling unit so as not to make it a sellable total home. I guess, given my unfamiliarity with those things, is there anything about an accessory dwelling unit that makes it less safe than the requirements on a normal single-family home? Aanenson: No. It would still have to go through the building permit process. Be inspected like a regular one. Again, the goal was, there’s no limit to the square footage of a home so you can have one large home. In this circumstance they have identified a home and want to have an ancillary one instead of saying you are going to get two lots. We want to cap those so it doesn’t become two separate lots as Ms. Al-Jaff indicated. But it has to go through the same rigorous. It would have to meet as Sharmeen indicated there would have to be sewer and water which would be through the well and septic and in addition, all of the building codes. Von Oven: I understand that it was the request of the applicant to make that accessory dwelling unit a maximum of 1600 feet. I’m still confused on the max of two bedrooms. Sharmeen, I know you said part of the reason for this was to ensure that it doesn’t turn into a single-family home. Given that that’s covered in other areas, I’m going to make the assumption that the actual single- family home to be built can has as many bedrooms as it wants, right? Al-Jaff: That’s correct. As long as the number of bedrooms can be served via public or private utilities. Von Oven: Okay. I guess then my question ends up being this: Between these two structures, is there a maximum number of bedrooms that the proposed sewage system will be able to handle, and is that governed through some sort of inspection process? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 30 Aanenson: Correct. It is. They have to demonstrate that and it’s actually based on bedroom space to your septic and well. Let’s just go back to the two separate dwellings again. If you have enough to make it two complete homes then you have different traffic patterns, different use of the property. So when it’s intended to be ancillary and regulated by the homeowner, it’s a different feel than two separate homes with cars coming and going, two sets of trash being hauled up to the end of the driveway, that sort of thing. We are looking, it says one structure with something ancillary that is related to that principal structure. Von Oven: Thank you. Skistad: I guess I’m just going to ask a future question then. So if, let’s say that someone in the future, a new person has purchased the property. Perhaps they will probably have to install a new septic system so they won’t be able to increase the bedroom. The land won’t be able to have a three-bedroom instead of a two-bedroom unit unless they come back to us and ask for a variance? Aanenson: Yes. Or amend the PUD. Typically, if you add additional bedrooms, you have to demonstrate that you have sewer capacity. Could they oversize it to begin with? That’s potential. I’m not sure. That is something that would have to be looked at at the time when they are putting together the system. Any changes to the plan as laid out would have to come back. Any modifications, which would have to come back as a PUD amendment. That’s why the PUD was put together. To regulate all that’s being used. Skistad: I understand what you are doing. I understand what you are saying, but let’s say that they have an office and it just naturally becomes a bedroom at some point. I don’t know if there is a better way to write that. Because the goal is to just make sure obviously that we don’t overcome the sewage capacity because we don’t obviously want to spill anything into Lake Lucy. Weick: There is a septic field sizing attachment which is really long actually. They specify, and there’s two different options. They specify seven bedrooms and then they sort of explain how they can. It really comes down to the bedrooms. They explain how they can appropriately fit one or two mounds or septic systems to support the seven bedrooms where they can build one for the main house and one for the accessory structure. But there’s only so much space to be able to have the runout fields and all that kind of stuff. I think what they are saying is it sounds like they want that primary structure to be five bedrooms and honestly, I think all that’s left is just size. Aanenson: Capacity. Weick: Thank you. That’s a better word. Capacity. Is two bedroom. I think they are fully limited by septic and nothing else. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 31 Aanenson: So if one of the bedrooms in the accessory building was being used as an office, that’s fine. It wouldn’t affect. Weick: Right. Skistad: Okay. Weick: Great. These are great questions. It’s awesome. It’s really important. Reeder: Under normal regulations, is it possible for this accessory dwelling unit to be rented out or would that be illegal? How would be control that? Al-Jaff: They can rent it out but it cannot be a short-term lease. It has to be three months or more. Reeder: So we essentially have two residences on one lot? Al-Jaff: Correct. Which is permitted under a planned unit development. Aanenson: It was proposed, it was originally intended to be an accessory structure for a grandparent. Could it be used for something else? We always as planners try to anticipate something in the future. So if you’re doing a weekly rental, you have a different capacity whether there is two bedrooms. How it’s being used is different that someone who might rent it for the summer or something like that. That’s how we looked at that it. Looking at having a three-month as opposed to renting it out by the week. Reeder: So there’s no requirement that the accessory building, the person that lives in that building, be related to the main building? It can be anybody? It seems like we had one of these accessory buildings I think about two years ago that we approved and I can’t remember what the requirements were. Aanenson: Right now we have a variance requirement that you can finish your basement off and have someone living with you but that has to be related to you. It’s a different requirement. It is certainly a requirement that you could put on this property. That’s certainly under the PUD. You could say that the person living there has to be related. That’s an option. We gave a different option. Reeder: What is the intent of the proposed property owner? Aanenson: I would have to ask the applicant to speak to that. Skistad: I’m just going to look at this from a lease perspective again. I’m just going to assume that, let’s just say it sold and they want to lease this secondary area. I’m going to assume that you Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 32 could do a typical lease which runs 12 months and then possibly it turns into a month-to-month lease but that wouldn’t cause any problems here because they would have met the minimum. Aanenson: Yes. Skistad: Okay. Weick: Great. More thoughts or questions on this one for Sharmeen? Just holler if I’m rushing you as commission members. If you need some more time to read or think, just holler at me. I don’t want to push anybody. Von Oven: Hey, Commissioner Weick! Weick: Yes. Von Oven: I’m hollering at you. I’ve been sitting here trying to figure out how to ask this question so it’s not going to come out right. At the very beginning, Commissioner McGonagill talked about the bridge and it was very clear to me that an existing bullet, there is not an existing bullet in the PUD that says, “Hey, this bridge has to be safe.” So I think my question is more procedural. For us as a Planning Commission tonight, moving forward with this. If there are those of us who would like to see a bullet point in that PUD, is that be an amendment possibly? Is that a motion? Is that something that can be done after the fact? How does that work? Aanenson: I would recommend that you make it, if someone wanted that in the conditions, that you make that an amendment to the motion, that that be added. Von Oven: Okay. McGonagill: Following up to his question procedurally, does that happen after the first motion or can you make an amendment before then? Aanenson: You can make it as part of your original motion. Weick: As part of the motion. Aanenson: So what we’re checking on is the legality. It is a lot of record so they could build on that lot without going through this process and you would have the same jurisdiction. But we’ll follow up on that and have that answer if you want to amend that motion and get that clarified when it goes up to city council. McGonagill: Very good. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 33 Von Oven: Got it. Okay, sorry. I’m going to repeat what you just said to make sure I understood it. If the applicant was just going to build a single-family home, they could just do that in its current state? Aanenson: Yes. Von Oven: The reason why our concerns about the bridge holding an ambulance could be met is because they are asking for this variance. I’m sorry, this rezoning, in which case we have the ability to amend what is being proposed right now as the PUD? Aanenson: That is correct. Von Oven: I think I’m getting this thing down. Thank you. Weick: You’re killing it. But a motion is premature at this point because we have not heard from the applicant or the public hearing. So unless there are other… I will move at this point to, and we certainly have an opportunity to follow up with staff as questions come up. I would invite the applicant if they are on the Zoom call to make any comments or a presentation. Wicka: I am and thank you very much. Weick: Welcome! Wicka: Thank you. And thank you to all the members of the Planning Commission for considering this rezoning request. My name is John Wicka. I live at 2547 Bridle Creek Trail in Chanhassen with my wife and five daughters. We’ve been, I don’t know if this qualifies, in Chanhassen as long-time residents but we’ve been here is this house for 17 years. At least we’re not newcomers. I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you all and offer you a little additional information and commentary for your consideration as you consider this rezoning request. The first time my wife and I experienced the island was in June of 2018, just over two years ago and it was just recently put up for sale by Al and Mary Weingart who live on the adjacent property and still do. It was their dream to build a home out on the island. They’re the ones that oversaw the building of the bridge so I’ll come back around and talk more about that and I will be happy to answer any questions pertaining to the bridge. I understand there is a lot of concern in and around that. When we first experienced the island in June of 2018 I think our first reaction was I guess we couldn’t believe it was available. It’s sizeable. It has some acreage to it. It’s unique. It’s an island but it’s even better than an island. It’s an island with a pre-existing, very capable bridge that is intended to support fire trucks and construction trucks and so forth. It was really an ideal find for us. If you’ve had a chance to consider the topography map there, the top graphic map, it’s very interesting topography. It’s flat around many of the edges but it has this elevation in the center of the island and there are bluffs there. There are bluff setbacks there. There are wetland setbacks so there is a lot of dynamic things happening on the island but it is indisputably breathtakingly beautiful. We were excited about the opportunity because of the size Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 34 of the property and it had been our desire for several years to build a home for my mother who is now 86 years old near us. My dad died 21 years ago so this has been kind of something that we’ve been thinking of considering and planning for some time now. My mother is fiercely independent but she is 86 years old. She now really relishes or welcomes or is excited about the opportunity to maintain her independence but still have us just a moment’s notice away. So this was one of the big motivations for us to purchase the island because we thought it gave us the elbow room, if you will, to build a separate structure for her. Just two months later we purchased the island and at that time the first order of business was to eradicate the buckthorn. I think about it as kind of freeing the island because the buckthorn had a choke hold on the island. I think it was a neighbor’s comment that Sharmeen referenced a few moments ago that they were glad that we took out the buckthorn. I worked with Jill Sinclair. Walked the island with her over two years ago. She made some recommendations on some experts that could remove the buckthorn and treat it. It transformed the island back to its natural state. So it was very important for us to get the balance back to the island, and it doesn’t surprise me that the neighbors were in favor or positively affected by that because they all look at the island. It makes the view of the island so much more interesting because you get depth. It looked like an overgrown bush. You couldn’t see into it. You couldn’t penetrate it. Frankly, when you were on the island you couldn’t see the water from the interior of the island. So that was important to us. I don’t know what your experience is with buckthorn but I didn’t realize they grew into trees. Sizeable, 14-inch diameter type size trees. So it was not a small undertaking. At the same time in August of 2018 when we undertook the eradication of the buckthorn, we ran off full speed with an architect to build our dream home and with an attached, if you will, living structure for my mother. We intended to do that via connecting it by a skyway or a tunnel so that we met all of the city requirements. But, the things that make the island beautiful and unique and magical also make it a very challenging piece of property to build on. Again, there are bluffs. There are bluff setbacks. There are wetland setbacks. There was only one sensible place to put the septic system. There is a lot of elevation in the interior of the island so getting the grading right to get up that high is tricky business. Sadly, about five months later after spending a fair amount of money in architectural fees, we bagged it. We were demoralized. We couldn’t get it right. It was like putting together a puzzle and we couldn’t seem to kind of crack the code to make it work, so we stopped. We let several months go by. I did reach out to city staff and I had all sorts’ questions about variances and every time we turned around we hit another complication and we just couldn’t get it to work. But after kind of a cooling off period we took a second attempt at it but we stopped again because it just was overwhelming. It was an emotionally overwhelming, and I know you may be thinking how can it be so hard when there is that much space to work with? But again, all of the complexities layered on top of each other make it a very challenging task. So I circled back with city staff another time looking for more out-of-the-box solutions, if you will, and that’s when I discovered that single-family residential was an option. So, we started looking at that and we realized that that was a really big undertaking. As Sharmeen, the road coming down that services the island from Lake Lucy Road would have to be widened considerably. There were, I think, nine or more agencies that were involved in the original construction of the road and bridge in 1998-1999 and so to bring sewer and water down, the only way we could get our head around that would be to involve a developer and go through the whole subdividing of the island and that’s not what we Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 35 had in mind for the island. We were enamored with natural beauty of it and this felt like we would have to get very creative and create lots and the size of the roads and the cul-de-sacs and the infrastructure just made this a very undesirable option. That led us to the option to consider the PUD which, the way I understand it, is it provides some flexibility in creating exceptions that we are talking about here today but also requires, if you will, something in return, meeting the higher standards, sprinklers, or the turnarounds for the fire trucks, the higher building standards. We intend to build a green, being environmentally green with solar and geothermal and high building standards, and high-quality windows, and recapturing rainwater for reuse, that type of thing. So we intend to meet the higher standards in the conditions put upon the PUD request. This seemed to be a much more sensible solution, not only for what we were trying to accomplish, but really for all parties involved. The impact on the island is much lower than going for single-family residential. It’s better for the community, for the neighborhood, for the island, and so it seemed to be much more sensible and while I suppose the single-family residential is an option, it’s not a very good option. We would like to preserve the integrity of the island, not only now but into the future and we think this is a way to do that. I only have a few more comments if you can bear with me for just a few more moments. I did have a chance to meet with the city and county experts on some of the challenges that the island offers. I was able to walk the island with Fire Chief Don Johnson… (coughing). I just got over COVID so pardon the cough here. Weick: Thanks. Wicka: I’m in the clear now but I can tell it is still affecting my throat. I was able to walk the island with Fire Chief Don Johnson and he understandably had some concerns, some of them that you stated. That’s why we had gone through, I went back to the bridge builder and designers and it is and always was designed to carry not only construction trucks, but emergency vehicles and fire trucks. I’ll come back and be happy to answer questions about that. We also incorporated turnarounds for the fire trucks. I heard some of that commentary and concerns in the previous PUD that you were discussing. So we have accounted for that. I also was able to have a Zoom meeting with Terry Jeffery, Watershed Planning Manager with Bluff Creek. I also learned quite a lot in my conversation with Terry and was very pleased because I know this is high on everybody’s list, keeping the integrity of the water and the cleanliness of the lake. That’s certainly a concern of ours. I was very pleased in that conversation with Terry. He was very matter of fact. He knew exactly which five concerns he had that we needed to meet and we went through them together. I won’t put words in his mouth because I’m sure he’s commented on his own, but by the end of the conversation I think we, I think I can say both agreed that the island actually handled all of these requirements very well, actually. We didn’t have any concerns there. I’ll trust that he gave his own report and that it’s consistent with what I’m saying. The driveway, the purpose for that driveway that runs further to the south that forks off was to service the accessory dwelling unit. The reason for that, and I have a little bit of heartburn giving that up I’ll be honest with you, but I’m willing to make that a condition is because it’s flat. If you can see those topographic lines there it doesn’t climb the elevated area of the island. It runs along the south side and is largely flat. That was intended to make it easier for my aging mother to be able to go out and walk and get outside, frankly, and enjoy the island. But, as I said, we have agreed Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 36 to make it a condition. There were multiple comments on that assuming that’s still desirable we have agreed to have the one driveway service both dwelling units. My final comment is I did initiate some outreach to the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association and that consisted of all lot owners on Lake Lucy and they are the ones most impacted by any development that we do on the island, whatsoever. So I did initiate some outreach there. Because of COVID we weren’t able to organize any in-person meeting, but I did encourage them all to bring any questions or concerns with me. I did hear from three of the parties. I was able to answer their questions. Most of them were curiosities and clarification. I believe I have all of their support, at least I’m not aware of anyone that doesn’t support it. I was able to provide them with clearer maps than were available on the city website so they could get a better understand of what we were after. So, I feel pretty good about engaging the neighborhood and as I said I heard from some of them but I think it was all positive interaction and I hope and I believe that I have their support. Again, I would like to thank you all for your consideration here and I’m happy to take any questions you might have. Weick: Wow. Thank you so much. That offers a lot of color and clarity on what you’re trying to do and thank you for hanging in there with your cough and giving us that. That’s really helpful. I will open it up though. I know there were several questions that commission members had raised that I know would have been properly answered by you. I don’t know if those have already been answered but we’ll open it up to the commission members to either ask follow ups on those questions or ask new questions. McGonagill: Thank you for a very good presentation and walking us through this. You walked with the Fire Chief so I would assume, talk to us about the bridge that there is a certain design standard the bridge has been designed to and it was for construction equipment and for fire equipment and it is your intention to maintain that standard in the bridge going forward? Wicka: Yes it is Commissioner and thank you for the opportunity to come back around and address the concerns around the bridge. Fire Chief Johnson was, we had quite a lot of back and forth via email after our meeting and he was able to provide me with the specifications on the two, I believe they are the two largest trucks, but they are also the two primary trucks that would service the island in case of a fire. I did share that with the company that built the bridge. They went to their engineers and shared with me that the bridge was designed and built to support trucks of that size. That answers I think the question in terms of when it was originally built. I think your question is a fair one in terms of ongoing upkeep and maintenance and as long as it’s a reasonable interval so that, because I am sure there are cost implications that come with this, but as long as there is a reasonable interval to recertify it with an engineering firm that it is still capable or operating as designed, still capable of supporting those trucks, I would be happy to incorporate that. McGonagill: Thank you. I appreciate that because just like you I’ve got some elderly parents and when I call emergency services I want them to be able to get to them, and it’s very true to you, too. On the design, one of the questions I have for you is, I didn’t see it. I may have missed it Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 37 because I just probably missed it. There’s a two-story guest house and there is also an accessory structure at the end of the first driveway. Is that a garage? Wicka: I think it’s ultimately going to be a multi-purpose structure. It’s put there because as someone was pointing out earlier we’re going to be responsible for a lot of private driveway here. So I’m envisioning a plow in there and probably other utility-type tools and needs for the island. We put it there so it was kind of closer to the access point of the island and also a little bit out of the way although we intend to design it such that it’s equally attractive to the rest of the structures on the island. McGonagill: Thank you. That’s all I had Mr. Chairman. Weick: Great. Thank you. Any other questions for our applicant? Skistad: I don’t have a question I just have a, I guess a statement. My goal, my questions about the limitations of the bedrooms was just to make sure we weren’t putting a limitation over the property unnecessarily. That was the only goal with that. I think it sounds like a great project so I’m for it so that was the reason for reason for those questions. Weick: Great. Thank you. Wicka: And thank you Commissioner for that thought. I appreciate it. When it was suggested that it be limited we were agreeable to it because as previously stated the concept is just a space for my mother and perhaps a caregiver. So thank you. Aanenson: Mr. Chair, if you want to open the public hearing. Weick: I will. I was just giving people a second in case they wanted to speak. I always feel like I’m talking over somebody. Thank you Commission members and thank you for, again, a really thorough and honest appraisal of how you are going to use that beautiful piece of property so thank you very much for joining us. At this time I will open the public hearing portion. If anyone would like to come forward and speak and opinion on this matter may do so now. Sharmeen, you already. I might be mixing my cases but I think you already summarized the emails for us, right? Al-Jaff: I did. Weick: Yes. Thank you. And those will be in the record and the telephone number has been up on the screen for a little bit. Would you like to? Yeah, absolutely. So we have someone joining us here in chambers. Again, as you’ve heard, just please speak very loudly into the microphone. Frerichs: Thank you very much. I’m Roger Frerichs and we are neighbors on Lakeway Drive, the street right over next to it. I didn’t come here with any particular speech in mind but I came with less knowledge and so after hearing the discussion of the owner, it sounds like he’s trying to Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 38 maintain the beauty that that island has and that’s why I think it should be something that we should favor. Weick: Thank you so much. I’m happy to agree. I do think it’sa , considering the alternatives, I think it’s certainly a good use. Any phone calls? Al-Jaff: I haven’t heard so far. None. Weick: None. With that and with no one else here in chambers I will close the public hearing portion of tonight’s matter and open to commissioner comment, discussion, and motion. And I pre-empted a little bit there. It is getting late, I have to admit and I’m maybe getting a little dreary. I offered my opinion there a little bit too soon but I am certainly in favor of this PUD. I imagine that if there is concern from neighbors or public like myself, I was envisioning a typical development that we look at where they come in and they grade it down, they clear out the trees, they build four houses and four docks. You know what I mean? That option I think would be disappointing at least to me and I imagine for some of the local residents as well. I would imagine once seeing and hearing these plans it puts to rest those concerns of dramatically changing the view of that island which I just don’t think will happen. I am certainly strongly in favor of the PUD in this instance, and if things want to be added to it, we can certainly do that as part of the motion. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you to stick with the other, just to the small amendment we talked about on the bridge just for emergency access. I’m also there with you because, let’s face it. This is privately owned. It’s property that someone has owned and purposed. They have the constitutional right to develop it and they worked through the process and I think it’s about as nice as one could imagine if he carries out the plans that he’s talking about it would be great. So, yes I think it’s a good use of the property for a very unusual one. Weick: Yeah. Sure. McGonagill: It will add a lot to look of the lake in many ways. But I will be proposing the, some amendment on the, just so the bridge remains within a certain level of usability by fire, by emergency equipment. I’ll say it that way. And I’ll let staff sort out what it needs to look like. Weick: Fair enough. How do the rest of you feel? Von Oven: And therein lies the experience of Commissioner McGonagill because I’m sitting here racking my brain trying to figure out how we amend this thing on the fly and get that all in and he knows he can just rely on staff to do that. I’m in the same boat. It’s funny. One, what a fantastic project both from the standpoint of I’m super jealous of what you are doing. This is beautiful and what a great project. Two, it’s probably the first project that’s come through where as a commissioner I have zero fear of us setting some sort of a precedent here because we’re never going to see another property like this so, variance away here. It’s great. The third part is Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 39 that I’m not at all worried about the applicant and his any lack of letting that bridge deteriorate. He will have every reason in the world to ensure that emergency personnel can access that property. The reason that I will support, however Commissioner McGonagill gets this done, is for the next owner. For that owner down the road who might be renting the property out, which I am also in favor of for long term and I’m glad that provision was put it there, to just ensure that we don’t end up with a situation many, many years from now where someone is renting out the property to someone else and they’re letting the bridge deteriorate. I do not want to put any undue burden on Mr. Wicka for yearly engineering reviews of the bridge. I just don’t know how that works. But finding a way where we ensure that for the long term that very unique structure maintains safety standards without putting the undue burden on Mr. Wicka is what I would be in favor of. McGonagill: I support you in that regard. Five daughters, he’ll have 15 grandchildren pretty soon and he will want emergency personnel in there. Weick: Great. Those are great thoughts and great viewpoints. Go ahead. McGonagill: Are you ready for a recommendation? Weick: Sure. McGonagill moved, Skistad seconded for the Planning Commission to recommend approval of rezoning of the property located at 1601 Lake Lucy Road with an approximate area of 9.03 acres from Rural Residential to Planned Unit Development-Residential incorporating the attached standards and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision recommendation, including an amendment that staff will work with the property owner to develop appropriate safety standards for the continued maintenance of the bridge. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner McGonagill. We have a valid motion. Do we have a second? Skistad: I’ll second that. Weick: Thank you Commissioner Skistad. We have a motion and a second. Any last minute comment? Hearing none we will have a roll call vote and I will start with Commissioner Randall, if he returned. Weick: Again, thank you to everyone who prepared and good luck with the property and I think this item does go to City Council. Aanenson: Correct. Actually it goes on the 14th. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 1, 2020 40 Weick: December 14th. If you are following this item at home, December 14th in front of City Council. Again, thank you to everybody and that is our final public hearing for this evening. Would someone please note the Commission minutes from November 17th. Our last meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Skistad noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 17, 2020 as presented. Weick: Thank you, Commissioner Skistad. Kate, are there any administrative presentations? Aanenson: No. We did not have any City Council updates but I just wanted to apprise you of something. I did receive an email from someone on 63rd Street, Mr. Meyer, who said he wasn’t able to, he didn’t see the number flash across the screen. That was on the second item. So he gave me his phone number and I will contact him tomorrow and get his concerns because that item goes on the January City Council meeting. We’ll make sure that those concerns are addressed and he may have an opportunity to speak so I’ll follow up on that. I appreciate the fact that he emailed me right away and could catch it. I just wanted to let you know that this is our last meeting of the year so we will be gathering January 4th and actually, we have four items that will be in for sure. We have some other ones contemplating be we try to hold back once we get to four just because it ends up being a long meeting. These were very different items, all of them, and had a lot of complex issues. I appreciate your due diligence on that. So yes we will have a meeting on January 4th. With that, that’s all I had Mr. Chair. Weick: All right. I don’t have anything other than to say I thoroughly enjoy, I was going to say love, but maybe that’s too strong. But I thoroughly enjoy working with this Planning Commission. You guys are a lot of fun and make a very difficult Zoom-meeting effort very pleasurable so thank you all of the Commission members. You guys are prepared and funny and it’s awesome, so thank you. With that I would entertain a motion to adjourn, Skistad moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Kim Meuwissen PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, January 5, 2021 Subject City Council Action Update Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Item No: D.1. Prepared By Jean Steckling, Senior Admin. Support Specialist File No:  ATTACHMENTS: City Council Action Update City Council Action Update MONDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2020 Ordinance XXX: Approve Code Omnibus Amendment Addressing the 1) Definition of Street; 2) Administrative Duties; 3) Administrative Septic Variances; 4) Earthwork Fee – Approved MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2020 Ordinance XXX: Approve the Rezoning of 1601 Lake Lucy Road (Island) and Approval of Summary Ordinance for Publication – Approved Approve Final Plat, Development Contract and Plans and Specifications for The Park 3rd Addition – Approved Consider a Request for an Amendment to Chanhassen Gateway PUD, Modification to PUD- Specific Design Features, and Amendment to Crossroads of Chanhassen Site Plan with Variances for Construction of a 5,100 SF Automotive Repair Shop Located at 8941 Crossroads Boulevard; and Approval of Summary Ordinance – Approved Ordinance XXX: Approve a Code Amendment Regulating the Outdoor Storage of Boats, Trailers, and Recreational Vehicles on Residential Properties – Tabled until further notice Minutes for these meetings can be viewed and downloaded from the city’s website at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us, and click on “Agendas and Minutes” from the left-side links. g:\plan\forms\development forms\city council action update.docx