CC Staff Report 3-23-09
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Administration
Phone: 952,227,1100
Fax: 952,227,1110
Building Inspections
Phone: 952,227.1180
Fax: 952.227.1190
Engineering
Phone: 952,227.1160
Fax: 952.227.1170
Finance
Phone: 952.227.1140
Fax: 952.227.1110
Park & Recreation
Phone: 952.227.1120
Fax: 952.227.1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone: 952,227.1400
Fax: 952.227.1404
Planning &
Natural Resources
Phone: 952.227.1130
Fax: 952.227.1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone: 952.227.1300
Fax: 952.227.1310
Senior Center
Phone: 952.227.1125
Fax: 952,227.1110
Web Site
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
'1~
.'il'!~5~~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
FROM:
Angie Auseth, Planner I
DATE:
~J
March 23, 2009
SUBJ:
Senn Metes and Bounds Subdivision and Variance for a Private
Street - Planning Case #09-02
PROPOSED MOTION:
"The Chanhassen City Council approves Alternate B for Planning Case 09-02
with a variance to allow a private street with a width of less than 20 feet and
.less than a 7-ton design, and approves the subdivision creating two lots as
outlined in the staff report subject to conditions 1-18 and adoption of the
attached Findings of Fact and Action."
City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a two-lot metes and bounds subdivision to create a
second building lot and a variance to allow a private street to serve the parcels.
Plannin2: Commission Update
A public hearing was held at the February 17, 2009 Planning Commission meeting
for this item. The Planning Commission voted 4 to 0 to approve the request for a
metes and bounds subdivision and variance for the private street. City Code requires
a public hearing at the City Council meeting for a metes and bounds subdivision.
Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant contacted staff and agreed
to Alternate B, which eliminated all Zoning variance requests. The applicant is
therefore requesting approval of Alternate B. A variance to allow access via a
private street is still required as part of the subdivision request.
The Planning Commission discussed the current drainage issues on the west side of
the cul-de-sac for Willow View Cove. Several neighbors stated the area is often
flooded and under water. Staff visited the site and did not observe any drainage
issues or obstructions within the street or from the north. Runoff to the street was
draining to the catch basin at the low point of the cul-de-sac. Off-street drainage
from the north was flowing through the existing culvert under the driveway and
ultimately into the storm sewer. The applicant is required to submit a grading plan
for review and approval prior to recording of the subdivision, at which time staff will
evaluate the proposed drainage to ensure that it does not negatively impact the
adjacent properties or stormwater system.
Chanhassen is a Community for Life. Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
Todd Gerhardt
Senn Metes and Bounds Subdivision
March 23, 2009
Page 2
The Planning Commission also discussed the aesthetics of adding an additional lot and home within
the neighborhood. Without a tree survey, it is difficult to know how many trees are located on the
site and where they are located. Additionally, it is unknown what trees will be removed during
construction. The Planning Commission added a condition requiring the applicant to work with
staff to provide landscaping to screen the adjacent properties.
The Planning Commission minutes for February 17, 2009 are attached.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the following motion:
"The Chanhassen City Council approves Alternate B for Planning Case 09-02 with a variance to
allow a private street with a width of less than 20 feet and less than a 7-ton design, and approves
the subdivision creating two lots as outlined in the staff report subject to conditions 1-18 and
adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Action.
2. Planning Commission Staff Report (Revised) Dated February 17,2009.
3. Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated February 17,2009.
g:\plan\2009 planning cases\09-02 senn subdivision & variance\executive summary 3-23-09 .doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND ACTION
AL TERNA TE B
INRE:
Application of Mark and Suzanne Senn for a two-lot subdivision with zoning variances to create a
second building lot and a variance to allow a private street to serve the parcels.
On March 23, 2009, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the application. The City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposed
subdivision with variances preceded by published and mailed notice. The City Council heard
testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential- Low
Density (1.2 - 4.0 units per net acre) uses.
3. The legal description of the property is: Tract A of Registered Land Survey 109.
4. The city council may grant a variance from the regulations contained in this chapter as part of
the plat approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist:
The subdivision variance is required to allow a private street to serve the subject development.
a. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience.
Finding: The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The proposed private street preserves
site features. Reconstruction of the private street will cause environmental impact.
b. The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or typographical
conditions of the land.
Finding: The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape and
topographical conditions of the land. The subject parcel is the largest lot within the Kurvers
Point subdivision.
c. The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to
other property.
1
Finding: The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally
applicable to other properties due to the unique site features.
d. The granting of the variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is
in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan.
Finding: The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public
welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance,
and comprehensive plan. The applicant is proposing to access the site via a private street.
This option will minimize grading and tree removal.
5. SUBDIVISION - FINDINGS
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
Finding: The applicant's proposal is inconsistent with the requirements of the RSF
district. The proposed lot can comply with the minimum zoning requirements
b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans
including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the comprehensive plan and
subdivision ordinance if the private street standards variance is approved.
c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified
in this report
d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure.
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage
subject to conditions of approval. The proposed subdivision contains adequate open areas
to accommodate a house pad.
f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record.
2
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather
will expand and provide all necessary easements.
g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
2) Lack of adequate roads.
3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will have access to public utilities and streets.
6. The planning report #09-02, dated February 17,2009, prepared by Angie Auseth, et aI, is
incorporated herein.
ACTION
"The Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case 09-02 with a variance to allow a
private street with a width of less than 20 feet and less than a 7-ton design, and approval of the
subdivision creating two lots based on these findings of fact for Alternate B."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of March, 2009.
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
BY:
Its Mayor
3
CC DATE: March 9, 2009
IT]
PC DATE: February 17,2009
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
REVIEW DEADLINE: March 17,2009
CASE #: 09-02
BY: AA, JM, JS, ML, TJ
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS:
A.. "The Plan..Jing Commission recommends appro',al ofPlar.ning Case 09 02 as shown in plans
dated received January 16, 2009, with variances to pennit a lot area less than 15,000 square
feet, lot depth less than 125 feet, and front yard setbaok less than 30 feet as measured from
the 100 foot lot width and a 10 x 60 foot house pad, allo'll a priyate street with a width of
less than 20 feet and less than a 7 ton design, and approval of the subdiyision creating two
lots as outlined in the staffreport subject to conditions 1 15 below and adoption of the
Findings of Fact f-or i\lternate fL.
Or,
B. "The Planning Commission recommends approyal of City Council approves Alternate B for
Planning Case 09-02 with a variance to allow a private street with a width ofless than 20 feet
and less than a 7-ton design, and denial of the lot area yariance to create a lot less than 15,000
square feet, lot depth less than 125 feet and front yard setback less than 30 feet as measured
from the 100 foot lot width and a 10 x 60 f-oot house pad, and approves approval of the
subdivision creating two lots as outlined in the staff report subject to conditions 1-17 below
and adoption of the findings of fact for Alternate B.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a two-lot metes and bounds
subdivision with variances to create a second building lot and a variance to allow a private street
to serve the parcels. There are two alternative motions:
1. i\pprove the applicant's proposal (f.Jternate .^..).
2. Approve staffs recommendation (Alternate B).
LOCATION: 7160 Willow View Cove- Tract A of Registered Land Survey 109
APPLICANT: Mark and Suzanne Senn
7610 Willow View Cove
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: Single-Family Residential (RSF)
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential-Low Density (1.2-4 units/acre)
ACREAGE: 3.66 Acres
GROSS DENSITY: 0.54 units per acre
NET DENSITY: 0.54 units per acre
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 2 of 14
I
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 and Subdivision Ordinance for a variance.
The City has a relatively high level of discreti6n with a variance because the applicant is seeking
a deviation from established standards. This i~ a quasi-judicial decision.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a metes and bounds subdivision is limited to
whether or not the proposed subdivision meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision
Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meet~ these standards, the City must approve the
subdivision. This is a quasi-judicial decision. :
APPLICABLE REGUATIONS
Chapter 18 Subdivisions
Chapter 20, Article XII Single-Family Residential District
Sec. 20-615. Lot Requirements and Setbacks.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a metes and bounds subdivision to subdivide a parcel into two single-
family lots with variances. A metes and bounds subdivision is permitted when the resulting parcels
meet the minimum requirement of the zoning ordinance. The applicant's proposal does not meet
the zoning ordinance requirements (area, depth and setbaclcs.) The proposal does not meet all
subdivision ordinance requirements (60'x60' house pad). In order to proceed with a metes and
bounds subdivision, the city must approve these variances. The applicant and Staff is are
proposing an alternate design (Alternate B) that eliminates complies with all zoning variances.
Both the applicant's request and staffs alternate design The proposal requires a variance to allow a
private street to serve both parcels.
I
_ ___ _ J
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 3 of 14
The property is a riparian lot, zoned RSF, Single-Family Residential District and gains access via
Willow View Cove. The current site density is 0.27 units per acre. The site is guided Low Density
(1.2-4 units per acre). The existing site density is well below the density permitted in the district.
The lot area is 3.66 acres (159,429 square feet). The RSF district requires a minimum lot area of
15,000 square feet for a non riparian lot, and 20,000 square feet for a riparian lot. The existing lot
area far exceeds the minimum requirements of the zoning district.
There is currently a single-family home located on the parcel. The existing structure meets the
requirements of the RSF and Shoreland Management Districts ordinances.
The applicant and Staff is are proposing an Alternate B with a variance to allow a substandard
private street with conditions outlined in the staff report. A metes and bounds subdivision requires
City Council action only; due to the nature of the request the Planning Commission should review
the complete application.
SubJect ale 3.'8 ac
2-'11 ac
BACKGROUND
The subject site is a riparian lot located on the east
side of Lotus Lake and is part of the Kurvers Point
Subdivision. The Kurvers Point Subdivision was
created in 1987 and consists of 42 single-family
lots.
The subject site is the largest lot within the
subdivision with an area of3.66 acres.
When the subdivision was originally approved the
subject site was platted as Lot 4, Block 3. In
November 1989, the City Council passed a
resolution to approve an administrative
subdivision of Lots 4 and 5, Block 3, transferring
a portion ofland from Lot 4 to Lot 5.
Kurvers Point
Subdivision
iL"ClU1"t1l1 Prop.,1)" Lint
o
~
~
~
:0
o
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 4 of 14
SUBDIVISION
The applicant is proposing a metes and bounds subdivision to subdivide a 3.66 acre site into two
single-family lots served by a private street. As previously stated, a metes and bounds subdivision
is permitted when both resulting parcels meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance
(area, width, depth, etc.) and abut a public or private street. The applicant's proposal (...~.lteroate .A.)
does not meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting approval of several variances in order to be able to create a metes and bounds
subdivision.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
p.../JCI'..,ti ~:;': ,V~';f:"- S1;3{)I;
-/Wo,;" I".~ 0' ',rxf ,I.
. ,~ ,.". If
101l'S
L.IA;'!"
.A.lteroate .A. (.A.pplieaot's Layeut):
Regulations go':eming lots served by a private street:
The applicant's proposal requires the follov/ing variances:
. Lot area variance The private street
serving the parcel must be located within
a 30 foot easement. The area of the
Zoning Variaoees
calculated as part of the total lot area.
. Lot Depth Variance.
. Setback variances.
8ubdhisioo Variaoees
. 60x60 house pad
. Private Street
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17,2009
Page 5 of 14
Alternate B (staff's proposal)
Staffhas developed an alternative layout that will meet the minimum requirements of the zoning
ordinance. Staff proposes extending the easterly property line to the north edge of the private
street. The lot will achieve a width of 100 feet 35 feet west of said line. The front yard setback
and lot depth are measured from the 100- foot line. The lot depth is increased from 96 feet to 131
feet. By extending this property lines, all zoning variances are eliminated and the only variance
request necessary is for the private street. The applicant has agreed to go along with staff's
design (Alternate B).
Zoning Ordinance Regulations - All Requirements Met
Minimum Lot Area. The City Code requires a minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet.
private street serving the parcel must
be located within a 30-foot easement.
The area of the easement and the
private street may not be calculated
as part of the total lot area. Staffs
layout proposes a parcel with an area
of approximately 15,500:1: square
feet. Since the driveway access to
the proposed Tract C is not shown
on the plans, staff is unable to
determine the exact area of the
private street. The lot area must be
adjusted accordingly to maintain a
minimum of 15,000 square feet as
required in the RSF zoning district.
.
The
The front setback of a lot served by
a Ilriv.\te street begins where the
wi(hh achieves 100 feet
· Lot Depth. On lots served by a private street, the front property line is measured where the lot
achieves 100 feet in width. The front yard setback and lot depth are then measured from the
front property line. All plans must demonstrate that a 60x60 house pad can be accommodated
on a newly created parcel. Staffs proposal shows a lot width of 100 feet. The lot depth is 131
feet. The buildable area on the site can easily accommodate a 60 x 60 house pad leaving room
to accommodate improvements.
. Setbacks. A structure must maintain a 30-foot setback from the 100-foot front property line.
Staffs layout maintains all required setbacks.
Subdivision Ordinance Regulations
. The City Code requires a minimum 60' x 60' house pad (3,600 square feet) be shown on the
plans or the proposed house type. Staffs proposal reflects a 60' x 60' house pad.
I
i
--
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 6 of 14
STREETS
The plan proposes accessing the lots via a private street utilizing the existing private driveway.
The existing driveway gains access from the cul-de-sac located on the easterly side of the parcel,
Willow View Cove. Once the commonality of the private street ends, any portion of the private
driveway serving Tract D, located on Tract C, shall be placed in a cross-access easement. An
easement over the private street must be provided.
Section 18-57 (p) ofthe City Code requires private streets to be constructed to a 7-ton design,
with 20-foot pavement width and located within a 30- foot easement. The applicant is requesting
a variance to maintain the existing width of 10 feet. The intent is to minimize disturbance to the
mature trees on the site. Staff is recommending approval of the variance.
Private Street Criteria
Section 18-57. Streets. (s) Private streets serving up to four lots may be permitted in the A2, RR,
RSF, R4 and RLM (when less than four units per acre) districts if the criteria in variance section
18-22 are met and upon consideration of the following:
(1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a
public street. In making this determination, the city may consider the location of existing
property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands.
(2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street
system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to provide a
street system consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(3) The use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources,
including wetlands and protected areas.
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 7 of 14
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Compliance Tract C Existing Lot
.\lterBate A Alternate B Tract D
15,000 sq ft 15,500 sq ft 142,500 sq ft
Lot Area Non-Riparian Less than 15,000 sqft (less private street (less private
20,000 sq ft access and easement street access and
Riparian sq fl) easement sq fl)
Lot
Frontage 100' ~ 78' 95'+
(Private
Street)
Lot Depth 125' g::p. 158.61 ' 682'+
Front yard 30' extends 11 feet outside of 30' 470'
Setback buildable area
Rear Yard 30' non riparian ~ 30' 320'
Setback 75' riparian
Site 25% Msy not exeeed 25% May not exceed 25% 11.5%
Coverage
*There are a number of items that are needed in evaluating a subdivision that the applicant has not
addressed. They include:
. Location of existing and proposed utilities.
. Location of the proposed driveway access to the proposed lot.
. Tree survey.
. Necessary easements.
. House Plan.
These items must be addressed and submitted prior to recording.
WETLANDS
The property abuts Lotus Lake, a DNR Public Water. In addition, a review of topographic data,
historic aerial photography, the Web Soil Survey Data and the City's Second Generation Surface
Water Management Plan indicates that a fringe Type 1/3 wetland exists adjacent to Lotus Lake.
Based upon the proposed lot split as submitted, it appears that no wetland impacts will result
from the proposed activity. In addition, the proposed new lot is located well outside of any
wetland buffer areas or setbacks required under City Code.
LAKES and BLUFFS
The proposed project is located within the shoreland district for Lotus Lake. Lotus Lake is
classified as a recreational development lake. Riparian lots must have a minimum lot size of
20,000 square feet while non-riparian lots within the shoreland management district must have a
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 8 of 14
minimum size of at least 15,000 square feet. Both proposed lots as shown in Alternate B will
meet the pertinent area requirement.
Based upon topography provided by Carver County, there does not appear to be any areas which
meet the criteria to be classified as a bluff.
Erosion and Sediment Control
In the event that a building permit is issued for the property, adequate erosion control best
management practices will need to be installed to prevent sediment from being discharged off the
site or into any water features such as wetlands, lakes, or stormsewer.
Silt fence should be provided in areas where sediment may otherwise be carried off-site. All
upland areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed
covered with mulch or sodded according to the following table.
Time
(maximum time an area can remain unvegetated
when area is not activel bein worked
7 Days
14 Days
21 Days
Daily scraping and sweeping of streets shall be completed any time construction site soil, mud,
silt or rock is tracked or washed onto paved surface or street that would allow tracked materials
or residuals of that material to enter the storm water conveyance system. Construction site
access points shall be minimized to controlled access points with rock entrance and exit pads
installed and maintained throughout construction.
Water Quality Fees
Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this
proposed development are based on residential development rates of$3,41O per acre. Total area of
proposed Tract C equals 0.344 acres. Therefore, the water quality fees associated with this project
are $1,173.04.
Water Quantity Fees
The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average
citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition,
proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Single
Family Residential developments have a connection charge of$2,360 per developable acre. This
results in a water quantity fee of approximately $811.84 for the proposed Tract C.
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17,2009
Page 9 of 14
SWMP Credits
This project proposes no on-site water quality features. Therefore, no credit will be applied to
the proposed subdivision. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at
the time of recording, is $1,984.88.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
A grading plan was not submitted with the proposal. If the subdivision is approved a grading
plan must be submitted for review and approval. The grading plan shall adhere to the
requirements set forth in the City Code.
UTILITIES
A utility plan was not submitted with the proposal. According to the utility as-built information
for this area, sanitary sewer lies along the shoreline of Lotus Lake and within Willow View
Cove. It appears that the sanitary sewer service to the existing home on proposed Tract D
extends from the sewer along Lotus Lake. The as-builts do not show a sanitary sewer service
stub for proposed Tract C.
According to the utility as-built information, the water service for the existing home on proposed
Tract D extends from a six-inch lateral on the property to the south. The as-built does not show a
water service for proposed Tract C.
If the subdivision is approved, a utility plan must be submitted showing the existing sanitary
sewer and water services to the existing home, the existing gas, electric, cable and telephone
services to the existing home, and the proposed sanitary sewer and water services to the new lot.
A drainage and utility easement must encompass any portion of the new services that cross
another property. The easement width shall extend minimum of 10 feet from the service.
If the sanitary sewer and/or water service are extended from the utilities within Willow View
Cove, an escrow must be posted for the restoration of the street. The escrow amount will be
determined when the utility plan is submitted since the extent of excavation is unknown at this
time. The escrow will not be released until it is deemed the area is in satisfactory condition after
one freeze-thaw cycle.
The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges for Tract C shall be paid with the building permit
application at the rate in effect at that time. The 2009 rates are $5,087 for the City water hookup
charge, $1,893 for the City sewer hookup charge and $2,075 for the Metropolitan Council sewer
charge. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment ofthese hookup
charges.
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 10 of 14
PARK DEDICATION
The nearest neighborhood park to this
subdivision is South Lotus Lake Park. South
Lotus Lake Park is 7.42 acres in size and
features a playground, boat access,
tennislbasketball court, and an open field. Off-
street parking is available at the park. No
additional parkland acquisition is being
recommended as a condition of this
subdivision.
TRAILS
The subject site can access the Highway 101
North pedestrian trail. No additional trail
construction is being recommended as a
condition of this subdivision.
It is recommended that full park fees in lieu of
parkland dedication and/or trail construction be
collected as a condition of approval for the
metes and bounds subdivision. The park fees
shall be collected in full at the rate in force
upon subdivision approval.
TREE PRESERV A TION/LANDSCAPING
Lotus Lake
The applicant has not submitted tree preservation calculations or survey. If this subdivision is
approved, the calculations and survey will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Even without specific calculations, it is evident from aerial photos and a site visit that the
applicant will not exceed canopy coverage limits for the subdivision. It appears that the
proposed lot will have significant tree removal.
Existing conditions within the proposed lot (Tract C) include mature, native sugar maple-.
basswood woods on the east and central portions of the lot and lawn and mature spruce on the
west side of the lot. The proposed location of the home will remove a significant area of existing
trees due to grading and construction activities.
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17, 2009
Page 11 of 14
Staff strongly recommends the preservation of the wooded area for the following reasons. The
wooded area provides greater diversity and is self-sustaining (younger trees growing and
replacing older). It also provides greater environmental benefit by producing more oxygen,
sequestering more carbon, alleviating more urban heat island effect, providing wildlife habitat,
and sheltering a greater area of land thereby reducing runoff, an important consideration for a
lakeshore property.
Due to the location of the proposed building pad in relation to the wooded area, tree preservation
seems most applicable around the edges of the lot. The wooded area lies between the road
access and the house pad. The equipment used for construction will need a perimeter of access
around the building pad which is generally 15 - 20 feet. The northwest comer of the house pad
lies 21 feet from the driveway. This proximity will lend itself to the most convenient and
efficient access to the house pad and placement of the driveway and therefore will be cleared.
The picture below represents the tree removal on the proposed lot; the area is outlined in red.
Staff recommends that, at a minimum, the applicant be required to preserve all trees outside of
the red area. Reducing the size of the removal area should be a priority in order to retain as
many trees on the lot as possible. Additionally, staff supports the recommendation to allow the
private street to remain at its current width. Widening the private street will necessitate
additional significant tree removal. The tree loss will be greater than the benefit of a short
section of a widened drive.
__J
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17,2009
Page 12 oj 14
The applicant must submit tree preservation and removal calculations and survey for city staff
approval prior to recording.
All trees proposed to be preserved shall be protected by fencing throughout the construction
process. The fencing must be installed prior to any excavation or grading. No trees on Tract C
or Tract 0 shall be removed unless approved by the city.
RECOMMENDATION
Staffrecommends the Planning Commission adopt one of the following motions:
f.. "The Plan..1ing Commission recommends approval of Planning Case 09 02 as shown in plans
dated received January 16, 2009, with variances to permit a lot area less than 15,000 square
feet, lot depth less than 125 feet and front yard setback less than 30 feet as measured from the
100 foot lot width, a 10 x 60 foot house pad and allow a private street v:ith a v:idth of less
than 20 feet and less than a 7 ton design, and approval of the subdivision creating t\VO lots as
outlined in the staff report subject to conditions 1 15 below and adoption of the findings of
fact for Alternate A.
or,
B. "The Plar.ning Commission recommends approval of City Council approves Alternate B for
Planning Case 09-02 with a variance to allow a private street with a width ofless than 20 feet
and less than a 7-ton design, and denial ofthe lot area ':ariance to create a lot less than 15,000
square feet, lot depth less than 125 feet and front yard setback less than 30 feet as measured
from the 100 foot lot '.vidth and a 10 x 60 foot house pad, and approves approval of the
subdivision creating two lots as outlined in the staff report subject to conditions 1-17 below
and adoption of the findings of fact for Alternate B.
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17,2009
Page 13 of 14
Conditions of Approval
1. Approval of the metes and bounds subdivision is contingent upon approval of the private street
vanances.
2. A grading plan must be submitted for review and approval and shall comply with the City
Code.
3. A utility plan must be submitted showing the existing sanitary sewer and water services to
the existing home, the existing gas, electric, cable and telephone services to the existing
home and the proposed sanitary sewer and water services to the new lot.
4. A drainage and utility easement must encompass any portion ofthe new services that crosses
another property. The easement width shall extend a minimum of 10 feet, on center, from
the service.
5. If the sanitary sewer and/or water service are extended from the utilities within Willow View
Cove, an escrow must be posted for the restoration of the street. The escrow amount will be
determined when the utility plan is submitted since the extent of excavation is unknown at
this time. The escrow will not be released until it is deemed the area is in satisfactory
condition after one freeze-thaw cycle.
6. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges for Tract C shall be paid with the building
permit application at the rate in effect at that time. The 2009 rates are $5,087 for the City
water hookup charge, $1,893 for the City sewer hookup charge and $2,075 for the
Metropolitan Council sewer charge.
7. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment ofthe hookup charges.
8. Environmental Resources Specialist Conditions:
a. The applicant must submit tree preservation and removal calculations and survey for
city staff approval prior to recording.
b. All trees proposed to be preserved shall be protected by fencing throughout the
construction process. The fencing must be installed prior to any excavation or grading.
c. No trees on Tract C or Tract D shall be removed unless approved by the city.
9. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of recording, is
$1,984.88.
10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering)) necessary and comply with their conditions of approval.
11. All disturbed areas shall be mulched and seeded or sodded according to following table:
Senn Subdivision with Variances
Planning Case 09-02
February 17,2009
Page 14 of 14
Time
7 Days
14 Days
21 Days
These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance
system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage
ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
12. Full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected in full at
the rate in force upon approval and recording.
13. Submit a revised survey showing the following:
a. Drainage and utility easements.
b. All utilities must be shown and relocated if necessary prior to recording.
c. Driveway access to the new parcel must be shown on plan.
14. Submit a 30-foot wide private cross-access easement over the shared portion ofthe private
street.
15. A drainage and utility easement must encompass any portion ofthe driveway serving Tract D
and encroaches on Tract C.
16. Tract C must meet the minimum criteria for a non-riparian lot within the shoreland management
district as described in Chapter 20, Article VI.
17. The applicant shall revise the lot lines as shown in staff's layout (Alternate B).
18. The applicant shall work with staff to enhance landscaping on the north side of the
property. "
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact Alternate A.
2. Findings of Fact Alternate B.
3. Application.
4. Email from John Gleason dated February 6,2009.
5. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing.
6. Survey dated received January 16, 2009.
g:\plan\2009 planning cases\09-02 senn subdivision & variance\staff report. doc
o q - 0:;;--
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
AL TERNA TE B
INRE:
Application of Mark and Suzanne Senn for a two-lot subdivision with zoning variances to create a
second building lot and a variance to allow a private street to serve the parcels.
On February 17, 2009, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
the proposed subdivision with variances 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 Single-Family Residential (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential- Low
Density (1.2 - 4.0 units per net acre) uses.
3. The legal description of the property is: Tract A of Registered Land Survey 109.
4. The city council may grant a variance from the regulations contained in this chapter as part of
the plat approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist:
The subdivision variance is required to allow a private street to serve the subject development.
a. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience.
Finding: The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The proposed private street preserves
site features. Reconstruction of the private street will cause environmental impact.
b. The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or typographical
conditions of the land.
Finding: The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape and
topographical conditions of the land. The subject parcel is the largest lot within the Kurvers
Point subdivision.
c. The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to
other property.
1
SCANNED
Finding: The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally
applicable to other properties due to the unique site features.
d. The granting of the variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is
in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and
comprehensive plan.
Finding: The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public
welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance,
and comprehensive plan. The applicant is proposing to access the site via a private street.
This option will minimize grading and tree removal.
5. SUBDIVISION - FINDINGS
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance;
Finding: The applicant's proposal is inconsistent with the requirements of the RSF
district. The proposed lot can comply with the minimum zoning requirements
b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans
including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the comprehensive plan and
subdivision ordinance if the private street standards variance is approved.
c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils,
vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm
water drainage are suitable for the proposed development;
Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified
in this report
d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage,
sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this
chapter;
Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure.
e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage;
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage
subject to conditions of approval. The proposed subdivision contains adequate open areas
to accommodate a house pad.
2
f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather
will expand and provide all necessary easements.
g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the
following exists:
1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage.
2) Lack of adequate roads.
3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems.
4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems.
Finding: The proposed subdivision will have access to public utilities and streets.
6. The planning report #09-02, dated February 17, 2009, prepared by Angie Auseth, et aI, is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDA TION
"The Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case 09-02 with a variance
to allow a private street with a width of less than 20 feet and less than a 7-ton design, and
approval of the subdivision creating two lots based on these findings of fact for Alternate B."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of February, 2000.
CHANH7EN PLANNING COMMISSION
/.'
Its Chairman
3
Planning Case No.
Oq-o~
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
':~::--;'\' cr: Ctlr,r jH/\,~)(~;"~
r;:::r:':I\ir::r:>
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
Jt\N I fl 200~~
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
,11 ttR~ "SC:-,v,v
7/ too LJILUlW J}/ ~(,J Cu v E
CtfflAJHIt-~SC(:N MN S-S3/7
Contact: Nt'tn.le:. .5 ~..v
Phone:<1rz.. -'( tf~ - 2- Z- 7'- Fax: q~z -qD l, -oq 7.</
Email: WI. se 1')1"\ 8 me hc;,. t"o JY'\
.':r-I,~J;:"~.~S:;::~,~ .. \~~",(~ rJ~:;-'
Owner Name and Address:
MA-t2.k. A tV () Sq 'Z.."'} oJ A..I f '> <;"1\1-0
"7 I f, 0 (.th U...{/IA./ U/ €, uJ GeJvE
Ctl.t1AJ lI~s<e. N I A N ~S-3/7
Contact: ~/c:.- S-CNN
Phone:qrz. C/Vf z-z. 72.- Fax: 9J:z 9 tJ6 09 l-'/'
Email: m.YenJ1@)JIC)S/.C0111
NOTE: Consultation with City staff is reQuired prior to submittal, including review of development
plans
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC)
--L- Variance (V AR) 2c0
Non-conforming Use Permit
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
X Notification Sign ~
(City to install and remove)
Site Plan Review (SPR)*
x ~.. 0.":' w for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost**
~UP/SPRNACNARlWAP/Metes & Bounds
~inor SUB
TOTAL FEE $ I ,L144 cu
X Subdivision* i.\-oO
I
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant
prior to the public hearing. '-18 -pc..r cR Is "A It; 3 ::: u'\4t.t-C.E
*Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11"
reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
**Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for
each application.
SCANNED
PROJECT NAME:
LOCATION: 71" 0 Wi Lt... u (.J J l 'LW Co V F
LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PID: P, D f? Z:S ,'8 SO" / 0
TOTAL ACREAGE:
3.(.; AC;l-ES
WETLANDS PRESENT:
PRESENT ZONING: R 5' F
REQUESTED ZONING: (zSf"
YES
X NO
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: L-ow [) ~ 5( 7 Y r(..E5 i e:?z:.1/ 7l.rr L-
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: L.O I..\J 0 EN S'I T Y R..s;s I 0 <..-v' r,l') l-
REASON FOR REQUEST: s~t::. ttTfftcrt-'i,j) .
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees:
and new employees:
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertailling to (his application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership
(either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person
to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
~ ' ... ~,
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and ihforir\atio~ 11lave,submittep are.true and correct to the best of
mY)~RL
Signature of APplicap,t 1/ ..
~/
)/t~" L
Signature of Fee ner
/-/ ~- () 7'
Date
/. /~ 07
Date
SCANtlt!t)
G:\PLA~form~\peve'opment Review Application.DOC
..._,.~:\ l ,,4,,(;""
Rev. 1/08
VARIANCES REQUEST 7160 WILLOW VIEW.COVE
We purchased this property approximately 20 years ago. Our property is just shy of 4
acres and has approximately 430 feet oflakeshore on Lotus Lake. Our long term plan was
to always place one if not two additional structures on the property to accommodate
future family needs. When we purchased this property there were no rules which
prohibited us from doing so. My mother is now 85 years old and wishes to maintain her
independence, something that we support. It is however now necessary to get her closer
to us so we can better help her. She is now ready to move so I subsequently contacted the
City and was told that ordinances had now been put in place that prohibited us from 1).
adding additional dwellings to the property, or 2). do a lot split to construct another
dwelling. It is our strong preference to always keep the property as one, and in the family,
because we never want to nor intent to dispose of any property created by a split. The
City suggested the only possible way to proceed was to request variances to allow us to
subdivide. We were then informed that other ordinances passed even more recently
prohibited us from proceeding without variances unless we upgrade the driveway to a
city street and remove a lot of significant number of mature trees and vegetation which
would negatively alter the character of the property. Rather than argue over the effective
taking caused by new ordinances being put in place that we were not notified of, in the
spirit of cooperation we proceeded down the track to subdivide. We ate willing to
cooperate and do so even though it is our strong desire not to subdivide. We have had a
updated survey completed and sited the proposed structure keeping in mind all things
considered important about the character of the property.
Subsequently, we are seeking approval of several variances which will allow us to
maintain the character of the property, place the structure where it best fits without
destroying a lot of mature vegetation, and likewise not allowing construction to do the
same.
These more recently passed ordinances don't allow private driveways any longer serving
multiple lots without being constructed to the standards ofa city road. To do so would
wipe out and destroy a large wooded area surrounding the current driveway which by the
way is over a thousand feet long.
Another more recently passed ordinance does not allow lot splits with less than 100 feet
of street frontage and while we have just shy of four acres we only have about 70 feet of
street frontage.
Again due to a more recent ordinance passed, our proposed lot size of 15,000 square feet
and house pad size (60'x 40') or 2400 square feet require variances only because of
where we placed the structure. To move the structure from the current proposed location
would either wipe out a lot mature woods one way, or a cluster of approximately 100 foot
pines the other way. If we move the structure approximately 30 feet to the west to avoid a
variance it would wipe out the above mentioned pine cluster.
SCANNED
In that none of the variances impact setbacks from existing neighboring properties,
we seek the approval of all necessary variances due to hardships at any number of levels.
First, if our property right to add additional dwellings to our acreage had not been taken,
no variances would be necessary. By cooperating with a lot split instead these variances
are created. Each of these variances then necessitated by the split are being caused again
by the elimination of or taking of our property rights through ordinances passed since we
have owned the property, which we were never made aware of.
Most importantly, to proceed with any plan other than the proposed would substantially
alter and destroy much of the character of the property through the elimination and
damages to mature wooded areas and vegetation. What we are proposing, given our
acreage, will have no practical spill over effects to anyone else other than us. Our current
hard surface coverage is 10.4% overall. Splitting off the lot changes the coverage on the
primary lot to 11.4%. On the split lot or secondary lot the coverage would be 16%.
SCANNED
UHIl.:iINAL.
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO.
109
R.L.S. FILE NO. 97
R. T. DOC. NO. T63214
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
'5Hot<eLf}./t 0 F LOTUS.
LAKe A5 of )UN61,
''7'07 -_
-iUS h
",0 ~
L-p.~
t:" (~7l_ (_11^//~"~ l_
(~.; IC:! C) L,/ E-
/I-r
/-1 I
I /.... -,-I I r'"
L \_, I t_,~)
L ,!?r /( [:-
........
N138" Zq.'ZO"W
-----B49.Q9 ---'-
- --- be".~,_u
-~-'\-----
~ ...1--""
"" \ '"
~ <.
~\l" :-
\S>\-Il. ~
- \'<f ~
~ ~ ~
~\~ ~
:t..\
\
\
"
~/L
TRA.CT
---~~ 54,001Ib6.00 -
A ~:D TN..ACT. It\ ~
V; N a ,(-.lI~ Cl Cl "
~ (\' CJ\ l\ \ I~';.,: a' -:a ':l
Nb6'7.77_ ~ \.'-' r-;~"~l\l
~o"T8'z~'4>-..~__'" \ ',... ~(X)~....... 0
, I" l-~ 11"'f N'\
('1 r~, '4o':.w':-.' - ~"O~ ~
I'" ,Js~'1t4 ~;_ i"..
, 30'('tt.,h---:' 42.64 ' '.
M ,] ,\ "'-...~: t1-~.':.LCf0";"'-
6S00.00 -_.::.-- ~ ~ ~~,'/:'"/
8' <:7" $""::' -,,,
..?6"'leu .0 "" ~ <5"0'0 C.,Ci/,/.r..-
.~. t!>,.;> . cS .:r 0 L.
\ So oJ'? ;S-i,
'o.s<- o.
o 06 __ {,
'1 I" " ,j)
'l-~ " 4-l
04" ,.....
~(p1 r 1..../
q L-
L.....
I'
'-,
'32 >.7"3-
,'I83"04'OS""",
1/, ,.--
, ....i '-~)
,.... 1-<""-
I I..... I
, , t,....
r; 'J
, : ('
t..'
I I
iI'-.
,
BeNGI-t MAR.!<': ToP OF NUT OF HYOR.AIJ.T
Ai ~E: QUAO"A~T- VALLEY view ~OAD e
~lATe HWY. \01. ~L-ev.: "31.54FEE-T, Nbvo-I"Z.9
1-\\6l-\EST KNOWN LAKe. ELEV. : 6%.:' FEeT
c.u~R.e:N.1' WAiE.f!- EL-E.V. ~ B"'7.? FEEl' (1\11,/'0'1)
T~E. NOR-if-! t..INe:. OF LoT? 4, <;, 6Loc.K :3, KURVE:~S
POINT HAS AN ASSUMED BeARI~6 Of N eso 24' z.o" w
00 100
I I
SCRLE
200
I
IN
300
I
400
I
FEET
. OENOTe;.,. IRON MONUMENT FouNO
o PE/IlOTE7 Y2. INcH x 14- \NC-l-\ \ RO lot PIPE
~ET MARKeo E!>Y L.lceNSE NO. \4'"700
I hereby certify that, in accordance wilh the provisions 01 Chapter 508, Minnesola Statutes 01 1949, as amended, I have surveyed the
following described property in the County of Carver, State of Minnesota to wit:
Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 3, KURVERS POINT, according to the recorded plat thereof.
-rJ. That the survey shown hereon is a correct delineation of said survey.
CHMI-iASSB'l, MNlESOTA
This Registered Land Survey was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota at a regular meeting
thereof held this (p'1\-\ day of NIN~r1"r..tZ. , 19..etl.. _
~ CITY~~ILOFTHEClTYOFCHAN~EN, MINNESOTA
B ~ . Mayor By . ."'- ...... ....
COUNTY SURVEYOR, Carver County, Minnesota
Pursuant to Chapter 395, Minnesota Laws of 1971, this Registered Land Survey has been approved this~day 01 !fovemb~r.
19~.i. .
. Manager
BY~~~______
Theodore Kemna, Carver County Surveyor
COUNTY AUDITOR, Carver County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that there are no deli<jJ1ent taxes for all years porlor to 19.f2. for land described on this Registered Land Survey and
transfer entered. Dated this...zL-oay of 1!...f!'7d~~~.u ,19..f:t,.
~.A~~ ~/(~:~y Auditor By_~_~d.&---'__
COUNTY TREASURER, Carver County, Minnesota
I hereby certify thai the taxes PJlyable for the year 191'1 for land described on this Registered Land Survey
have been paid on this~ay of ';;01"" , 191Z....
D. F. Dahlke, County Treasurer By <&~
REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Carver County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that this Registered Land Survey was filed this..d.2... day of 17~, 19m
SCHOBORG at .l.i..lJa.o'clockJl..M.
ND SURVEYING Carl W. Hanson, Jr., Registrar of Titles By {;j~a~
INC.
Auseth, Angie
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
John Gleason [John.Gleason@dnr.state.mn.us]
Friday, February 06, 2009 4:27 PM
Auseth, Angie
Request for Two-Lot Subdivision with Variances at 7160 Willow View Cover
Dear Ms. Auseth,
I am writing in response to the memo you sent me dated January 26, 2009 on the subject II
Request for Two-Lot Subdivision with Variances [....] at 7160 Willow View Cover [...].
We are opposed to this lot subdivision if either or both of the resulting lots result in
non-conforming lot dimensions (area or width). If a non-conforming lot results, please review
the City' s code regarding lot subdivisions and non-conforming lots in the Shoreland
District. Although I saw no reference to an easement in the information you provided, should
that be included in the proposal, we also recommend that no easement to the lake be granted
to the non-riparian lot owner as non-riparian lake access can negatively effect water
quality.
Thanks you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. If you have any questions, please
let me know.
Regards,
Jack
John (Jack) Gleason,
Area Hydrologist -West Metro
MN DNR Waters
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
651-259-5754 (W)
651-772-7977 (F)
John.Gleason~dnr.state.mn.us
Visit our website at:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/index.html
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
February 5, 2009, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for the Senn Subdivision with Variances - Planning Case 09-02 to the persons
named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to
such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail
with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those
appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by
other appropriate records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this ~ day of<=; bl\lDfl.{ ,2009.
c:.
~I
~~i~;~0:~~ KIM T. MEUWISSEN
~... & Notary Public-Minnesota
I '.,\,..1>' M, Comm"",," ,,"., Joo ", "'''
C'I
I::
:;:;
Q)
Q)
2
C'l1::
I:: 0
.- U)
m U)
Q) E
J:E
o 0
.cO
::::JC'I
a.1::
-I::
o I::
Q) ca
.~ a.
-
o I::
ZQ)
U)
U)
ca
J:
I::
ca
J:
o
C'I
I::
:;:;
Q)
Q)
2
I::
C'l0
.= U)
a.. U)
~ E
J:E
o 0
.cO
::::JC'I
a.1::
-I::
o I::
Q) ca
.~ a.
-
o I::
zQ)
U)
U)
ca
J:
I::
ca
J:
o
(5
c
>-
ell .
Ei:'l
O)C :E
.~ ~ .~
2l: <5
~.s-ci=
:co>ro
I-~CO 6
Ei~ ~
. (I) ..... "0
0. .c ro ro
o-~ c
<:=! 50 ro
1"-00 OJ
Ci:i :5 I"- .~
c I"- Ci:i
~g~~
o~ Q.) U
C\lQE6
r-.:.!: ro '00 c
..- a5 .c 'S; a5
C:- 5) U '6 en
ro (I) .0
2 .s'o ~ ~
-g.!: 5 ro @
LLCiiO..... N
-U.E :J
~..'.':! = _ ~ en
{g~ro~Uo<:l
(/)3I:J@~
Q.) t:: ;:>: 0-.- .....
:Jell~Q.)Coro
I-tlua:>~
CI)
E
i=
~
CI)
-
~
o
C
o
:;;
~
U
o
..J
~
III
o
0..
o
..
D.
(5
c
>-
ell .
Ei:'l
Ole -5
.~ ~ .~
ell ell _
(I) (I) 0
~.s-ci=
:Co~~
I-CiiCOo
E~~ ~
ci.~ Co -g
o-~ c
<:=! 50 ro
I"-goOJ
Ci:i:5~:E
c ro
O>~(/)~
8(1)05u
C\l ""0..0 C
r-.: g E .9 c
..-'c ro .~ c
(I).c > Q.)
C:- 5) U '6 en
ro (I) ._ .g Q.)
2.sg(/) c
-g.!: :J ro @
LL~O"'" N
~,*U.E(/):J
>-- - _ Q.) Cf)
{g~ro~Uo<:l
(/)3I:J@~
Q.) t:: ;:> 0-.- .....
:Jell~Q.)Coro
I-tlUa:>~
CI)
E
i=
~
CI)
-
~
o
C
o
:;;
~
U
o
..J
~
III
o
0..
o
..
D.
.;.; ..
C >- C
~t::o
UCI):;;
c.g.~
c... 0
<tD...J
.;.; ..
C >- C
~t::o
UCI):;;
c.g.~
Cl."O
<tD...J
al
.!:!
o
c
.!!!
oS
-
o
Cll
""0
'Iii
Cll
Ul
Qj
>
Q.)Cll
>~
OCll
uoS
~g
.~ Ul
>.-
c.
~~
oE
;:::c
~~
o~
cog
..- -
I"-<l:
Q.) -g ~ (/)
.c0- Q.)
-.c"O (/)
+-'''-ro (j)
:JOQ.) :J
0.0_ ~ U
.o.c ~ (/)
ro OJ= Q.) OM
:J 'lD ~ '0' - ~
..... U C
o C .= 0. Q.) .0_
>-Q.)ro ~
E .c .c "0 'e (/)
..... - U ~ 0. "~
.EEQ.) OQ.),gE
.~ e E ~ g- E .g E
'+- Q.)..... 0. 0
0_ 0,- o.C U
-:Jc(/) OQ.)
.~ 0.:;:; OJ ~ (/).c Q.)
OJ'~ Q.) C _ C - E
c c Q.) .~ '+- ~ E "0
.;:: .- E 0 0 0. 0 C
m~Q.)o~c-=ro
.c 0 E '+- .~ Q.) "0 "0
U Q.) ~ (/) Q.) Q.)
= .8 g>.c Q.) ~ .2: (/)
.0 "0 .;:: - > 0. Q.) ..Q
:Jc:J.co_~u
O'rooOJc=.....(/)
(/) - 5 ro ~ Q.) .~
E ~ t5 ..c Q.) c Co .~
'+- :J Q) +-' .::: ctS rJ) '- ...:
o 0-'0' OJ OJ.S:;! _ ro U
Q.)Q.).....c-Ci.cQ.)Q.)
(/) ..... 0.';:: = 0. Q.) .c '6
o_(/)(/)ro~roEu=
e-"E:.cQ.)::::Q.)E:E1-l.
:Jro-.cro.cO:JQ.)
o.,g-S,gU5l-ua...E
Q.) 0.0.0
~ g.-g ~~NCt)-.:t
1IlC)
C C
CI)._
0..-
o..CI)
~ CI)
J::E
_CI)
~.c
..c-
3:16
.8 c.!E ~ Q} '0 '0 .~ <D (J) ~
+-"' .c .g~ 0:5 g3:~ c.c (f) w s~
-s rJ) C = -0 ~ <V ~ ~.~ ~ ~ 15 c ~.~ g- ~ ~ .c C
Q.) .~ .~ E c ~ ~ ~ ~ 4:-0- ; ~ -g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <( ~ ~ i 1! '~ ,g
(/) 0 OJ..... ::::Q.) _ _ - ~ _ <lJE 0 - :5 > Q. <IJ m _ '-> !'J m
c: '- """s:: c,Eg rn~ra>->. COa>g>""" ::Ju
ro ~<( 0.;:: ro 0 Cl)1- m<IJ E.oo<IJ!:,"" .<lJCi~ ai~ ~~:g
~ +-' ~ ;: g-;.c CD :a; ~ 2 ~ ~ e ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 B ~ := g
....; U Q.)- 3:c.8 ~mQ.E~EUlU5uE -<IJ <IJ-<IJ
0; E ~c c E "0 05. ~ S u>'~ 2 co <D Q) -g ~ Q) .g ~ B t: ~ ~ ~ g 5
c ....... ~ .0 ~ 0 Q) ~ ~ ~ 'w -g '5, = rn =g a. ~ 5 1? ~ '0 ~ ~ ~ 6
'-Q.)- .cOc:J-uE>c :Juu m_:oE.cEO;Ul-<IJ ~ii; ,U-o
C\l U Q.) (/) 0 Q.) CI) 0:;; E ii ,!!!. C ~ 0 2 ;: 'w'o i; 5 0 - 0 Dc _~_ <lJE
Q) 0 Q) (/) +-' ... .0 (1) 'C::J .n g _ .g 'n; ~ ra ID "0 Eg>o .!!!.
E . (/) en 0 >- ~.- - CI) 2 Q. ~ m - ~ -- <IJ E 0 - m Ul U m
O>roro-o.>IIl'''E -"m<IJ E!'Jm:515~Eco~'c UUl <IJ<IJc
Q.) e Q.).c Q.) 0 0.- "C -0 <IJ.c (; Ul. 2i. ~ E !'J 0 ,~ <IJ ~ !'J :;: .g :5 ~
.c_ c 0. C (/) " 0. ..c CI) C 5 .~ =0 'E Q) en ::J '- ~ u ..c ~ a.. C rn - 0 (I)
- 0""""'-...... .".~ ._~o{)Oco:=:(/) 0_ '(3-03
Q.) ~ - ro 0 Q.) - .. III 0 - g - Ol C Q; - ,!!? E <IJ - ;: <IJ ~ U CIl C 1:: C
'- __~ +-'.c.r= c== 0.--- ~""'<UcQ)Q)()u,-E(ij'U.:::L:_ ro. 60-
o -- ~ c..> () 0 ;: ~ - tn .2 .e? $ i3 .~ E:3 -g ~ -g '"E ~ 19 :5 ~ ~ ()~]!
Q) ~ Q.)~ 'o~'d :J Q.) :::: t:: g 'E~ '5 ai 8 <IJ ~ 5 5. m . <IJ ~ ~ i;~ ':; 0 ~ <IJ ~
.0 '" 6'<1 > ro 0 .A C E L{) E Q.,,,, <IJ Ol 2l E 'w u E ~ 12 g. ;':5"
Q.)(/)Q.1::jI0 _ W O-OC<ll-U5.cc~m<IJo u Q.~ ~,~
~ OJ u; (/) E ~ ~ en g-.o E U ai ~ :5 (ij 'E -::: ';;j ~ ~ ~ Q.,~ 1! 0 ~ ~,~ 2
ro ro ~ :.c Q.) -: 0 ... ~ 0 t E '~"O ~ E ~ 1! ~ 8 5 E ~ ~ ~ '(jj -. ijl ~
-0. c.. C +-' CfJ C\J..... C>~_ ;> 0 Q}<t >-ffi -g ou 0 >--0-= oc..s ID-::; ~ua..
..c::J P"tI ':; Q) t :::: 13 () ~::B roE C (I) ..... E 0 g Q) ';:: ~ ~
Q.) Q.) E -S ro Ct) "S .~ ~ U~, <IJ -0 <IJ m C Ol <IJ:o m C Ul 0 .c ~ C m C _
.c "'" c. 0 ctS ~ '+-0. -Q.) iii CI) .C_ a:,~ g- B :::.S a. 0.13 Q) Q) 5 ~ rJ) g E ~.- t5
>. c~..... rocO<l>c(/)E~.-(/) Urn <Urn
...... Q)..QCii I (i5Q.>cu.ot: ~-g~~=;a~:5~~-g~~~rn~~ J:?~c
~$ (/) ro ~.c E..c" c [Lm(ij'j;cO::=<lJuC<lJli~g'EUl~ .g~8
(/) U ~ Q.) 'iii C\l (/) I- 0.. ~ 2 .l'l ~ ,~ ,g <IJ'~ 8 >-~ E Q. - Q. <ll ,- -0 Q. C <IJ
'~..c C E . .- ~ 4) a.. U5 ~ '5 .~ .~:5 E 13 0 ui ~ ~ ~ Q) E ~ ~ ~ .g ~
.8ec~ C\l.'!::_c..c cn""Eg>-Ci;;{2?:<lJg'UlI1l-o:5=m~ -m.!'!
+-' 0.. ('tj Q) to ........... 0 ... C1) C "0 '- t a. .- ~..c 'c ::I U) en ..c U C .8 ~ g c
c CJ).c E ~ ~ ~ O'w c oS Q) ~ ~ [~ ui ~ ~ ~ 2 -g ,g;.2 g> 5 ~ ~ . (5 8: t
ro - ~ 0.0 ro C Q.) (/) 0 0 !5.E gijl ~ ~f-'w"" <IJ!'J 5-rn 128 ~'Q;U;-~ m Q
:s: ~ '0 en ..c C1> (.) 'E- G,)... 0 ex: ('IJ ..... :c u . en g a: "'0 Q).~..c a. Ceo Q) Q)
:J u'- . 0 +-' CD E C s: '- ID c:: ,S; ~ :J ~ 5 'E::J . C ..... c.. ..... ~ ~ Q) 0 '(f.j :5 .....
o ~ - Q.) C E ro E .- 0 ij; ~ 'E Qj Ul >-"" E 0 5 m ~ g- ~ U c:5 e? ,!!? Ol~
>- Q.) ~ ~ gJ ~ 0 ii 0 c'- 0 [L 0 - <ll.o m 0 U "" ~ oi ,to <IJ O.c <IJ E,~-
_'+- .c_ "'" _ro <( 0. " '" U 0 ~ "" ~ ~,~ :5.!'! -g U ~.g,~ - ~ C :5 ~ ,to .g- E 'E.~
> "-'~v ~ c'-B>-c~IDIDDcc~o~~~~~o~~
.. => ~ ~ 0 ~ E..c Q) 2 2 UJ ~.9 (I) ID en U 2' Q)
~ -g J:? c ."E'~ ~ I- :E E ~.a . g rn ~ ID ~ ~ ~ -g
~cID.Qrn~rno~oE_S~o~oE~._~TI
-g ~ c. ~ ~ ~ t1> ~ ~..... 8 g-UJ.g -; -5 5} B.~ ~ c.~
g~E~'~~~rng~~~2c~ID~~~~~~
~ oE (I)(I)~~~(I)w~rnc..coQ)c~c
~~uo.5~~c~rn~=~~~~~~~IDOS
:: .~ ~ u g ~ 8. ~ ,~~.~ g 19:E .~ -g 0 :J:E ~ ~ g
~.~c~~~~o~E.~g~""'~rn~8~m~~
>.~'E'-~~Q)~Q)EEuQ)~c(l)~cu~o.....
~~2~=~~~..coE>C,~~2.ffiID~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~8o~~~~~~K~~g
u.. ...
~..
1Il~
C C
o CI)
:;;E
III E
~ 0
ou
.8 CI)
Q.)-g~ (/) -.c E ~>-
.co- (/) (/) - ~~
-.c"O Q.) - "'" c:"c
-.....ro (/) > ~Q.)>- Q.)Q.)~1Il
:J 0 Q.) (/) Q.) :J .- .0 C E .c > ..
0.0_ ~ :J (/) oOJ.....Q.)t-~~
-g~~ U ~ ro >-~o~roOCl)~
:J 'lD ~ Q.) '6 Q.) := en ~ 0. - .0
OC~ ~t5 c Ci. ....;E:J_Q.)~_CI)
>- Q.) ro 0. Q.) .Q Ol E ~ cE 'E ~ '0. ~ -=
E .c B "0 'e- (/) c 1: . .0 .c 0 CI) g,
.....- Q.)o..(/):m 8c:J-uE>c
.EEQ.)~~Q.),g~ Q.) ~,Q.)~(/)gQ.)S~i
CeEo.o..c.oE E (/)enO>-~-~CI)
0';: ~$e-:Jo.o O>roro-o.>1Il E
-:JOJ(/)o.c U Q.) eQ.).cQ.)oo~"C
(/)o.c OQ.) E CCi.C(/)ouQ._Sc
.- c :;:; OJ Q.) (/).c Q.) ro ~ ro 0 Q.) - .. III 0
OJ-~EEc-E ~ ~E~.cc=o=~
.2 .~ E $: '+-0 ~ E"O 0.. ~ Q.).-" U 0 ~ - CI) III
roS ..Q o.ec ~Ci:ifu~u:JQ.)~t::~-
Q.).o~o ~c'+- ro .0 Q.)~ Q.@) g,~en- &.~ EE
.cO_'+-~Q.)"O"O ~OJ(/)(/)E,+-.c CI)-
,ggg>~~~~~ ro~:J:.cQ.)-o "~uo
.0 "0 .- - Q.) ..... 'CD 0 Ci. C - en N - cil:= ...
:Jc~.c~o.u~ Q.)-gE-S~Ct)"SESu~
~~o~c~~~ E~cBro~a~IIl~~
:.c(/)~ero_~OJ Q.)(/)Q.)roCi:i~mQ.)CI)oC
-Q.)u.cQ.)croC Q.)-~ _C\l.cE..c"C
,+-:JQ.)->ro - (/)~ro~~C\l~Q.)I-~-D.~
o 0-'0' OJ'o, u $ Co ~ o'~.c 0 E' .c ...
Q.)~""'E==cQ.)~-ecQ.)Q.)~~-c-=CI)
~ _(/) o.(/) Co .:;; fr Q.) .c '6 c 0. ~ E >- 0> en '0 .Q ..c
0. -.- Q.) "'" ro E () = ro (/) u 0.0 _ - (/) C -
.....c.c.c'+- E=....~.>-.(/) roa5Q.)(/)oo
:Jro=uE~o.gro ~~oEQ.)Eg~CI)-
0.,g:J=Cf)l-ua...E5u~-Q.)c roE~~
Q.)o.o.o >-Q.)","~~oE>o-c-
.co..o:J "'"-~.co"O =
I-roroo."-NM~ :=E~S<(o.urouo~
al
.!:!
o
c
Ul
~
'0
Cll
""0
iii
Cll
Ul
'-
Cll
>
Q.)Cll
>'-
OCll
uS
~g
.~ Ul
>c..
~ ~
oE
;:::c
:s:~
o~
cog
..- -
I"-<l:
1IlC)
C C
CI)._
0..-
o..CI)
~ Q.)
J::E
_ CI)
~..c
..c-
~i6
~
1Il~
C C
o CI)
:;;E
III E
~ 0
ou
~ Q) ~~ .~ID ~
,2 :: g ~ 1ij ~ -5 ..... '-.~ ~ -g ..c
co 0 .- ID ~ !::! 0 cErn ~ ID co S
~t1>~ ~'~rn ~t1> rn C o..c c..c~
~~ID -gID(I) ID..... g<~ ~i ~.~.Q
~~~ ID~~ ~~ ~ID~ IDID co>ro
~oo E~~rn>> i~rn<IJro ~'5 ~~o
co~c E~5tl>~~ .IDli~ ~~ ~~~
~.c 25 ~ ~ e~ ~.~~; ~ ~ ..... B (I) - C
3:g'.8 ~mQ.E~EUlUlUE 6<IJ <IJ '<IJ
~.~~ coQ)ID-g~tl>.g~B~ i-:g ~g~
(I)..c(l) -g.~~rn~li~~~~ .G~ ~g~
~oo rn_~E..cEm(l)""'ID tl>> o~
E tl> c:os; 0 Q) ~ 'w.u r; 5 0 f; COo <5 >. Q)
'C :g :0 ~ ~ .g ~ z.. rn ID ~ Eg>o .!!1 C ~ E
!~~ ~~t~I~~~I~ i~ I~~
5.~=0 ~~(I)~~~o~tl>~ coE ~u-g~
'Vcr ..;:~O~OCS3(1)tl> uen c-~
- tl> - en C Q) -.- E tl> _ > Q)..c ~ \-ol.
~~~ctl>Q),2~.~Ero~~"'" co g8.~
.Q~-~.5E~~~-g~mS-5 ID~ Utl>~
-co~t:C~COroIDID(I)~';: ~(I) >- UJ
~Q)OEIDo~rn~E~m~ '~R -~~
gE~ ~'wIDcwrnwgE~ ~o 6Sc
u~~~~.~~.~~~~~~~ ~~ ~.~.~
~E'~~~E~Q)~oEm~o -'ffi ~~~
~ <( >- ai -g 0"0 ~ >-~.g ~ li~ ~:5 g>.g Cl.
.-tl>~=-UQ)=rncw""'Eo 00 .c-tl>
~~Q)rogrn~~E~cwo~ ~c cogf;
0: 8 g..9 :;:.~ a. 0.13 ID ID g ~ (I) 5 ~ ~.- 0
~~c.~~~~~~~~~.~~ .g~ .2~S
~c=~-~~-o~C.2S~~IDID ~EC
Q) ~ ~'E: 5Cl.E mu ~ IDli,g e~ .~~ 5.~ 8
~-.~.-~ID~O~-~~Q)a.~IDO em
~~~.~~~E~G~ID=~~E~~ ~2~
(l)EID~li<Q)~IDCWCO _-co~ COID
C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c'c ~ (I) g? ..c '0 C .8 ~ .2 C
ID~~~~~~~1-2~.~.Q~~~~.~~~
[Eg"O~~I-.~~ID~~~e8~.~~..cC08
~~.~~~~g.~~~-g~~~~~~~.~~~
ii>!::!"E w (I) >-~ E 0 g ro ~ g- ~ U C: -5 ~ .~ rn~
o~OcID~~oU~~ci ~mo..cmE.5-
~~~.-S~cU~.g.5~~cS~~~E~.~
c'-D>C~Q)IDGcC~oro~a.~mo~~
.. => ~ ~ 0 ~ E ..c ~ 2 2 (J) ;:.E (I) w Vi () g> Q)
Q)"OWc -e'mE~~E~ ~ ..Qo~wQ.) rn~-g
~~~.QciR~8~~E~~"E~.SoE~.5~TI
-g ~ c. ~'E ~ <1> ~ ~ ..... 8 g- UJ .g -;:g 5} B.~ 2 C.s
g~E'~'~co~~gg~~2c~<1>~"O~~~~
~ ~ 8 E c ~ ~ -g ~ ~ .~ ~ &5 ~ .s TI g & ~ ~ g 0
c . 8'- m 0 ~ rn"O o"u (I) -5i en t ~ ~ ..c a.::
::.Q~ g~~t.5~'~cS~.i~O~j-~~
.!E .~.5 g>',;:: ~ ~ 0 ~ E.~ 5 ~ - ro ~ 8..... ~ t: ~
t~g'c~~~g-J:?EEoQ.)~5~.g~~~8~
~~~~~~J:?~tl>8~~.~.~~ro~~'~~~~
~UJrr~~UJ~SS~UO~~a.en<co~rncow
u.. ...
ALFRED BERRY & GINA BERGAMINO
BERRY
7023 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
BRAD L & PAMELA S HARRISON
7018 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9504
CHARLES L & KATHERINE J HIRT
7007 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
CHRISTOPHER R MCGINTY & JANE
A MCGINTY
7010 SANDY HOOK CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9315
DALE H & NANCY A JOHNSON
7120 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
DOUGLAS H & JEANNE E MACLEAN
7280 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7518
FRANKLIN J & MYRNA A KURVERS
TRUSTEES OF TRUST
7220 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7518
HENRY NEILS
7012 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9583
JAMES A & MARILYN J CONNELLY
7008 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9504
JAMES S & M CAROLYN ERNY
7008 SANDY HOOK CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9315
BARBARA A BURKE
7009 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
BRADLEY A & ELIZABETH HAMILTON
7011 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9583
CHARLES L & STACEY A MEHR
7022 DAKOTA CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9581
CRAIG A & SANDRA A CARLSON
7271 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7520
DANIEL J & KRISTEN A RYAN
7004 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9504
ERIC & SOPHIE CHABIN
7130 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
GARY A & RUTH E ARENS
7140 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
HERBERT A LEPLATT & ELIZABETH J
LAPLA TT
7012 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9504
JAMES HENRIK QUACKENBUSH
JOANN M QUACKENBUSH
7241 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7519
JASON G & JODI L RADEL
20 TWIN MAPLE LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7523
BENT V & ANNE-LISE PAULSEN
7013 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9582
BRIAN & KIMBERLY L1EBO
7025 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
CHRISTOPHER K LARUS & HEIDI M
GARCIA
7018 DAKOTA CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9581
CRAIG R & LAURIE K BURFEIND
7150 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
DAVID M & LAURIE C SUSLA
7008 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9583
FRANK W JR & MARGARET M
HETMAN
7014 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9582
GERRY & SHIRLEY HUMPHREY
7251 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7519
JACQUELINE 0 KURVERS
7240 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7518
JAMES P WIRE
7024 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9582
JEFFREY A & PIA E SCHUTT
40 TWIN MAPLE LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7523
JEFFREY B & KATHLEEN M GROVER
60 TWIN MAPLE LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7523
KURVERS POINT HOME OWNERS
ASSN
7160 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
MARK S & SANDRA L CHRISTENSEN
7019 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
MICHAEL J & MAUREEN D GREBIN
7151 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7515
ROBERT P BIRDWELL & KIMBERLY A
BIRDWELL
7016 DAKOTA CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9581
STEPHEN K & ELIZABETH LIEDTKE
7231 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7519
WILLIAM L & SHERRI L HILLE
7131 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7515
JOHN D & MARGARET A ADIE
7011 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
LEE R & JENNIFER A WALDRON
7020 DAKOTA CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9581
MICHAEL & LYNN J MARRA
7007 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9583
PAUL H LUEHR & KATHRYN M
WOODRUFF
7012 SANDY HOOK CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9315
ROBYN N & BARBARA S MOSCHET
7006 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9504
STEVEN M & MONICA M POSNICK
701 0 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9583
KENNETH A & ANN H BLOCH
7015 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9582
MARK 0 & SUZANNE SENN
7160 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
MICHAEL J & LISA J FARLAND
7261 KURVERS POINT RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7519
PETER J SPERLING & TRACY A
WRIGHT SPERLING
7021 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
SCOTT M & MARCIA A HIPPEN
7017 CHEYENNE TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7513
STEVEN T MESTITZ & PEGGY L
NAAS
7200 WILLOW VIEW CV
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7514
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 17, 2009
Chairman Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kurt Papke, Kathleen Thomas, Debbie Larson, Denny Laufenburger,
and Dan Keefe
MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Dillon and Mark Undestad
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and Angie Auseth,
Planner
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Steve Mestitz
Regina Herron
Mark Senn
Nancy Laplatt
Cathy Velko
7200 Willow View Cove
1380 Thrush Court
7160 Willow View Cove
7012 Cheyenne Trail
40 Basswood Circle
PUBLIC HEARING:
SENN SUBDMSION: REQUEST FOR A SUBDMSION CREATING AN
ADDITIONAL LOT WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7160
WILLOW VIEW COVE. APPLICANT: MARK & SUZANNE SENN. PLANNING
CASE 09-02.
Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item.
Papke: Okay, questions for staff. Dan, start with you.
Keefe: So really looking at one variance, right?
Auseth: Yes.
Keefe: And you had indicated that they're willing to go with Alternate B, is that correct?
Auseth: Correct.
Keefe: And so are we still kind of deciding between the two or are we really just focusing on B
in the variance? It isn't clear to me.
Auseth: We're focusing on B.
Keefe: B alone?
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17,2009
Auseth: (Yes).
Keefe: Okay. And okay. So if you don't know exactly where this house is going to go, I mean
how can you say that you're actually going to save a bunch of trees because the one area that's
on your, you know it's got a lot of trees. It looks to be right where this pad is but how do we
know? We don't at this point do we?
Auseth: We don't know exactly where it's going to be but it'll be in the buildable area which is
more west onto the property.
Keefe: Okay. That's it.
Larson: Okay, can you go back to that picture? That one. Okay. Where it has the white
buildable area and where this proposed road widening would happen. Would that, if they go and
widen the road so the, well people can access, or the other people, the Senn's, does that change
the buildable area?
Auseth: No. What really, the driveway would stay exactly as is. That's one of their.
Larson: Okay, where the hash marks are.
Auseth: That's just the easement and so the lot lines will stay in that dark black and then that's
just showing that that lot area will have to be removed from the calculation. So it won't impact
the buildable area at all.
Aanenson: Mr. Chair if I may. I think Angie's done a pretty good job. I just want to clarify
again, there's 3 components of a private street. One is that it has to have a 30 foot wide
easement, which we are going to require. The other is the 7 ton design, and the other is a 20 foot
pavement width. And the 20 foot pavement width and the 7 ton design is the area that we're
agreeing to support a variance on. Not the 30 foot easement but what Angie is saying is that the
easement area can't be included in the lot area. So we believe there's adequate, the driveway
could come off quite a ways sooner so we're just building in that flexibility. We want to see how
the house fits on there so the only portion that would be the 30 foot is the portion that's, once the
driveway starts, then the 30 foot goes away. We don't know so what was looked at there was the
worst case scenario.
Larson: Well my thought was, you know you've got it plunked right here. What if they put it
closer to that road. That's what I was wondering ifit would be too close then because your
buildable area is in where the hash marks, you know they meet.
Auseth: Right and the driveway could come in up there.
Larson: Okay. That's all I have.
2
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
Laufenburger: I did have a question. Angie, does the gray on this depict the present driveway?
In other words is the present driveway, will that be used as the same corridor for the private
driveway?
Auseth: Yes. It will be as is as shown on this drawing.
Laufenburger: Okay. And then a couple other questions. The private street, as we call it. That
will be, the maintenance of that will be the responsibility of the owner of which lot?
Auseth: They'll have a joint agreement for the private street.
Laufenburger: Okay. But it will be maintained totally by.
Auseth: Privately.
Laufenburger: By privately. Okay. Are there requirements, does the 20 foot requirement meet
code for movement of emergency vehicles and stuff like that? On the private street.
Aanenson: The fire marshal did, to talk about it right now, that's how it's servicing that property
so if you had to service that property today, the fire truck would be at the hydrant at the end of
the street so that was one of the issues that we looked at. If they did have to go to the driveway,
that's how it'd be serviced today. I think the measure that we want to look at is where that new
driveway comes in and it's not impeding stacking. We've had some of those issues so that's
certainly something staff would want to look at. Where that tie comes in I think and that's where
Commissioner Larson is looking at too. Where's the best place for trees and access so you're not
plugging that driveway. One place has additional guests that there's adequate, so those are
something that we would work on with the house plan as that was evolved.
Laufenburger: Okay, thank you. I think one last, actually two last questions. The while, what's
called the buildable area, that's an area defined by appropriate setbacks within current code.
Auseth: Yes.
Laufenburger: Okay. So that building pad could really be positioned anywhere within that as
long as it's a 60 by 60 or a 3,600 square foot pad, it could fit anywhere in that white buildable
area. Is that correct?
Auseth: Correct.
Laufenburger: Okay. Alright. Then the last question that I had, I noticed it in this, in the
information that was sent to us, there was a statement sent to you by an area hydrologist. Can
you just explain that a little bit for me?
Auseth: Get to that real quick. This was based on the original design.
Laufenburger: Original A?
3
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
Auseth: Yes. Where it did not meet the 90 foot width.
Laufenburger: Okay. So this really doesn't come into play since we're really focusing on B.
Auseth: Yes. Because the 100 foot width supersedes that 90 foot that's required within the
shoreland.
Laufenburger: Okay. Do we have, what's going to be the property address? If this is approved.
Auseth: That's determined by.
Aanenson: The building official.
Laufenburger: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you Chairman.
Thomas: I just have one little question Angie. This property at the moment, it's being, the
subdivision is for, they're going to subdivide it and potentially the second building could be
owned by anyone at any time but at the moment isn't it owned by, going to be family, is that the
plan or the reason they're subdividing it? It's not.
Auseth: I believe that's the intent but it could be sold as an individual lot.
Thomas: As an individual lot on the cul-de-sac. Okay.
Aanenson: And for the record I think it's always best to look at it, it can always change hands
and make it the best lot you can and that's why we proceeded with making it meet code as much
as we could. You never know.
Thomas: Thank you.
Papke: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Alright, if we have an applicant here tonight, if
you'd like to step up to the microphone and color in the lines for us. That'd be great.
Mark Senn: I don't have a whole lot to say. I mean we're.
Papke: Could you state your name and address.
Mark Senn: Oh I'm sorry. Mark Senn, 7160 Willow View Cove. We're in concurrence with
staffs Alternate B. Kind of came up at the last minute and once we saw it, it was very similar
and solved most of the problems so we were fine with it so. Other than that I'd be happy to
answer whatever questions you have.
Papke: I think you were last so why don't you go ahead first.
Thomas: Yeah, actually I don't. I'm good.
4
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
Laufenburger: I'm good too.
Papke: You know the subject of tree removal with respect to where the house will actually be
place came up as an issue earlier on. Do you have, can you shed any more light onto that at this
point? Do you have any idea yet?
Mark Senn: Yeah if you could, if Angie can throw up the, if you look at the lot there, it's a little
hard to tell with the differences in the shading but essentially where the house is going to go, the
only thing we're really going to be taking out mature wise is a one mature tree that's about 3 ~
feet wide and 20 feet tall because it's been hit 3 times by lightning and it's just a big mess.
That's the only tree we're really taking out, and that's one of the reasons why we're positioning
the house where we're positioning it. We wanted, a lot of the early discussions between us and
staff and the whole jogging over the lot. We have a couple of 100 foot pine trees you'll see there
just kind of to the left side of that and we do not want to impact those and that's one of the
reasons why we were having some problems sliding that back and forth and getting it in the right
position to accomplish that and that was a big consideration that we just didn't want to mess with
those. Other than that I mean there may be a few small scrub trees or something like that along
the existing edge ofthe woods or whatever but like I say, the only one that will really be
impacted will be that one that kind of needs to be out of there anyway.
Papke: Sounds good. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. Appreciate
it. Okay. At this time we'd like to open the meeting to the public. If you'd like to give us your
opinions. Your thoughts. Your feelings on this case, please step up to the microphone. State
your name and address and let us know what you think.
Nancy Laplatt: Hi, my name is Nancy Laplatt. I live at 7012 Cheyenne Trail and I wanted a
cookie. No.
Papke: Please do.
Nancy Laplatt: We, in that picture you can kind of see the back of our house opposite the
proposed. Right there. So naturally we're concerned about our view and when we bought our
home in '92 we came to the city and we looked at how things were drawn out and potential of
anything happening and we never expected that we'd be looking into another house so we're
fairly upset about it but we recognize you know it's someone else's lot so, but I just want to go
on record that it might be challenging for us. We're looking at whether to sell or big trees. I
don't know what but thanks so much.
Papke: Thank you.
Cathy Velko: Hi. My name is Cathy Velko and I live at 40 Basswood Circle, which is part of
the Kurvers Point community. I am a member of the neighborhood board. Okay? Newly, I'm
new at this kind of stuff. ...surprise, first project here so, I'm here to make a statement on behalf
of the Kurvers Point community and board that I know Jason has been in contact with Mr. Senn
but it would be nice if we could state our comments to the Planning Commission that we do
5
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17,2009
support the split so long as neighboring residents support it, and I think there's a few here
tonight, and that they would need to comply with the architectural requirements that are stated in
the neighborhood covenants. I'm very glad to have other neighbors here to help with. . .
Papke: Now you realize that the city has no hand in enforcing those covenants. I mean that's up
the homeowners association.
Cathy Velko: Okay. But then I can have it on the record too, right?
Papke: Yes. Yes. That will certainly be part of the public record.
Cathy Velko: So, I think that was the intention that...
Papke: I just didn't want any misunderstanding about what the city's responsible for.
Cathy Velko: We all agree to the covenants when we move into the neighborhood and just to
state that we would ask that those be respected and followed and respect given to the neighbors
as well.
Papke: You bet.
Cathy Velko: Thank you.
Papke: Okay. Those are excellent comments. Please, step up.
Steve Mestitz: My name is Steve Mestitz. 7200 Willow View Cove. The property immediately
south. Just one question that I have, and maybe it's a concern as we plan and this is about
drainage. Every year we have a problem with, if I can go over there and show you.
Papke: Please do.
Steve Mestitz: This area right here is much lower, it's about 5 feet lower and the storm sewer
comes in right here. You can see the line. This is a drainage line I think that comes from the
other neighborhood and this whole area is under water whenever we have a large rain storm, and
I know I go out there and just put my hand in and try to de-clog it. It's a big mess. So with the
addition of a new parcel I'm just wondering whether that drainage is going to be adequate and
whether there needs to be some looking from the standpoint of the city to see if there needs to be
either a wider mouth or some sort of a better way to drain those areas because I think we're just
going to have more under water with the silt coming in from construction and stuff. That would
be my only concern about that. Because it backs up. It puts my property under water.
Papke: Excellent observation. Is the City aware of any grading or drainage issues on this?
Aanenson: No, but we can certainly look at that and be prepared when it goes to City Council to
provide additional information on that. If it needs a bigger culvert or something like that. . .
6
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17,2009
Laufenburger: Mark, do you have any comments about that? Had a problem.
Mark Senn: Well it floods my property more than anybody's but it only happens when there's a
severe storm, and most ofthe flooding is actually not on that side ofthe cul-de-sac. It's, or on
that side of the driveway. It's on the north side of the driveway because all the drainage comes
through from the neighborhood to the north.
Audience: I have a comment about that.
Mark Senn: And it drains basically to the south at the point there where it's on our property line
and Steve's property essentially there's...
Aanenson: Mr. Chair, for the record he's not at the microphone.
Papke: Okay. If you'd like to step back to the microphone and make a comment on this. We
want to make sure we capture this for the public record so.
Nancy Laplatt: It's just a quick, I don't, I don't know what changed but that drainage area used
to stay wet at our place for quite a lot of the summer and about 5 years ago it started just running
through a lot quicker and we don't know what changed and we wouldn't mind ifit stayed a little
wetter to the north and then flowed slower on down so they don't get inundated but something
changed and we don't know what it is.
Papke: Okay, thanks for your observation.
Aanenson: We can do some looking.
Papke: Would you like to step back up to the microphone.
Cathy Velko: For the record.
Papke: Yep.
Cathy Velko: Observation. I walk the neighborhood 4 times a week. It is more than just in
storms. It is wet. I think we had a wet year last year and it was, that end of the cul-de-sac was
standing water quite a bit. Thank you.
Papke: Thanks. Great comments. Anyone else like to, have any comments or questions or
observations? Okay. Hearing none I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the
commission here for comments and discussion and a decision.
Keefe: You know I just had one additional question, and maybe staff can help out with this.
You know for a subdivision I assume we typically have landscaping requirements. Like if
they're going to take out trees, don't they need to re-plant. I mean is that something that would
apply in this case or not? I know it's just a single lot.
7
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
Aanenson: Yeah. Let me give you some background on that. Because the original application
was so divergent and the request that we weren't sure where you were going to go with that so
some of those things were not put in place. As Ms. Auseth showed you there's a list ofthings
that we need to get before it can be done. This is also a little bit different. It's not a straight
subdivision. It's a metes and bounds so technically there will be another public hearing. It's at, I
believe it's set for March 23rd so it will be noticed again for a metes and bounds subdivision but
those things will be required before the permit's issued. We need to see where the driveway's
going to go. Check those drainage, where the utilities are coming in so we want the additional
information. Regarding the trees itself, because there is a large lot, it has a significant amount of
trees, we do allow some tree loss but we would, normally we would have it staked and then we'll
verify that too where the house pad's going to see ifit matches up with the trees that were shown
so anything beyond that would be required for a normal lot would have to be replaced so those
are all the things we would do before building permit.
Keefe: Would it require additional, and now I'm going a little bit to the comment you know, just
in terms of any sort oflandscaping, screening, anything along those lines.
Aanenson: Yep. Yeah. And I think that's something that we can work with to provide the best
screening to see how, it is heavily wooded on the front end but to the.
Keefe: North.
Aanenson: To the north, yes. That we, if that's a place to put it too so we'll look at that.
Keefe: Right. That assuming that we could require it through the next, I mean is that something
we would...
Aanenson: If you want to make it as a condition, you can attach any reasonable condition that
you think's appropriate for mitigation. Sure.
Keefe: Right. But would that occur now or at the next one?
Aanenson: Well I think this is going to go up to the City Council so I think you should put this
on. If you want to make sure that you know landscaping. Any replacement be in a good place to
provide buffer, if that's kind ofthe direction you're going.
Keefe: Right. That's the direction, yeah.
Aanenson: Yeah, yeah. That'd be fine and then certainly we'll look at the drainage issue too
before it goes up to council. I think there's a broader issue in that neighborhood that's certainly
parochial to this end ofthis cul-de-sac we would look at that too.
Keefe: And is the drainage from this particular house, does it drain back towards the street or
does it drain. . .
Aanenson: Well because we don't have the elevation on the type of house plan yet.
8
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
Keefe: Right. Yeah.
Aanenson: You know because again we were pretty divergent on the original request and where
the staff was going. We weren't sure where you were going to go with that so we will look at
that too and to look at what's the finished floor elevation and where that's going so we'll provide
that too and make sure we're not causing water to run off onto somebody else's property.
Keefe: Okay. Other than that you know I support it. I think for the most part it meets what
we're trying to do so I'm fine with it.
Larson: I think I concur, yeah. Moving the house building pad over to where it's not going to
have much effect on anything other than you know if we could somehow resolve the Ms.
Laplatt's.. .having some sort of screening. I think maybe if everybody can come to terms with
that, I would be in support of this too.
Papke: Sounds good.
Laufenburger: It appears that the applicant has worked with staff to come to a cooperative result
through Alternate B so I would be in support of that too.
Thomas: I too am in support of it.
Papke: Okay. Yeah, I'm always happy when an applicant and city staff comes to a meeting of
minds before the public hearing and we don't have to grind that out so that's fantastic. So with
that, I will entertain a motion.
Thomas: Sure, I'll do a motion. The Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning
Case 09-02 with a variance to allow a private street with a width ofless than 20 feet and less than
a 7 ton design and approval of the subdivision creating two lots as outlined in the staff report
subject to conditions 1 through 17 below and adoption of the Findings of Fact for Alternate B.
Larson: I'll second that.
Keefe: Can I friendly amendment?
Thomas: Okay.
Keefe: That the applicant works with staff to enhance landscaping on the north side of the
property.
Thomas: Yeah, I accept your motion.
Papke: Okay.
Mark Senn: Mr. Chairman, could I address that?
9
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17,2009
Papke: I'm sorry. The public hearing is closed at this point. That's what I warned about early
on. Once the public hearing is closed, it's closed. So I apologize for that but that's the way we
conduct the meetings. So with that we'll take a vote.
Thomas moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Alternate B for Planning Case 09-02 with a variance to allow a private street with a width of
less than 20 feet and less than a 7-ton design, and denial of the lot area variance to create a
lot less than 15,000 square feet, lot depth less than 125 feet and front yard setback less than
30 feet as measured from the 100-foot lot width and a 40 x 60 foot house-pad, and approval
of the subdivision creating two lots as outlined in the staff report subject to the following
conditions and adoption of the fmdings of fact for Alternate B.
Conditions of Approval:
1. Approval of the metes and bounds subdivision is contingent upon approval of the private street
vanances.
2. A grading plan must be submitted for review and approval and shall comply with the City
Code.
3. A utility plan must be submitted showing the existing sanitary sewer and water services to
the existing home, the existing gas, electric, cable and telephone services to the existing
home and the proposed sanitary sewer and water services to the new lot.
4. A drainage and utility easement must encompass any portion of the new services that crosses
another property. The easement width shall extend a minimum of 10 feet, on center, from
the service.
5. lfthe sanitary sewer and/or water service are extended from the utilities within Willow View
Cove, an escrow must be posted for the restoration of the street. The escrow amount will be
determined when the utility plan is submitted since the extent of excavation is unknown at
this time. The escrow will not be released until it is deemed the area is in satisfactory
condition after one freeze-thaw cycle.
6. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges for Tract C shall be paid with the building
permit application at the rate in effect at that time. The 2009 rates are $5,087 for the City
water hookup charge, $1,893 for the City sewer hookup charge and $2,075 for the
Metropolitan Council sewer charge.
7. The party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment ofthe hookup charges.
8. Environmental Resources Specialist Conditions:
a. The applicant must submit tree preservation and removal calculations and survey for
city staff approval prior to recording.
10
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2009
b. All trees proposed to be preserved shall be protected by fencing throughout the
construction process. The fencing must be installed prior to any excavation or grading.
c. No trees on Tract C or Tract D shall be removed unless approved by the city.
9. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of recording, is
$1,984.88.
10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for
dewatering)) necessary and comply with their conditions of approval.
11. All disturbed areas shall be mulched and seeded or sodded according to following table:
7Da s
14 Days
21 Days
These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance
system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage
ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
12. Full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected in full at
the rate in force upon approval and recording.
13. Submit a revised survey showing the following:
a. Drainage and utility easements.
b. All utilities must be shown and relocated if necessary prior to recording.
c. Driveway access to the new parcel must be shown on plan.
14. Submit a 30-foot wide private cross-access easement over the shared portion of the private
street.
15. A drainage and utility easement must encompass any portion of the driveway serving Tract D
and encroaches on Tract C.
16. Tract C must meet the minimum criteria for a non-riparian lot within the shore1and management
district as described in Chapter 20, Article VI.
17. The applicant shall revise the lot lines as shown in staffs layout (Alternate B). "
18. The applicant works with staff to enhance landscaping on the north side of the
property.
11
Planning Commission Meeting - February 17,2009
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS: None.
Papke: Thank you very much. With that we're offto the Fountain Conference Room I guess.
Thomas: Don't you have to close the meeting?
Papke: Oh! Actually we should approve the minutes quickly before we adjourn. There are no
minutes this time to approve because we had just a working session last time so we don't have
anything there. We have no commission presentations that I'm aware of so with that, we'll
adjourn the meeting at 7:29.
Chairman Papke adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 7:29 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
12