The URL can be used to link to this page

Project Narrative 9-17-04 PINEHURST PROJECT NARRATIVE CITY OF CHANHASSEN A Proposed Single Family Neighborhood Submitted to; By; ~lvq~~!!~~K§ . ~'" -- P.~$;JI'J.H,OC 9/17/04 Bob Generous City Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 To all concerned parties, Plowshares Development, LLC. is pleased to introduce Pinehurst, a new single family neighborhood in the City of Chanhassen. Dramatically rolling topography with beautiful stands of trees lay the canvas for our latest neighborhood design. Historically an old tree farm, the +/-26.72 Ac. site now holds two single family residences. Our goal is to create a sensible neighborhood that takes advantage of the site's qualities and charaèter while minimizing the impact on the natural environment. We have spent months researching, analyzing, planning and re-planning the site to get to the neighborhood we are submitting for approval. Through this long and arduous period, we have come up with a wonderful plan that all of us can be proud to have in the City of Chanhassen, now and in the future. The neighborhood we are submitting consists of 42 homesites located along a mix of public roads and private drives that have been laid out in a way to be as compatible and compassionate to the existing topography and natural amenities as possible while meshing with the adjacent communities. Throughout the design process our priorities have been tree preservation, wetland preservation, neighborhood character and integration within the existing adjacent land uses. We hope you enjoy this submission and recognize the preparation and planning involved with it. We look forward to the continued work between ourselves and the City staff and officials throughout the approval and construction process to ensure the highest quality development. Sincerely, cnv OF CHANHA!;¡S~N RECEiVeD Todd M. Simning Chief Manager Plowshares Development, LLC. SEP 1 7 2004 GfAf{HÁSSEN PLA'NNlN~ ÖBPT ~"'= PLOWSHARES '" DEVELOPMENT, LLC .Y -- 1';~S!J'ns.h: I PINEHURST ~ -~ INTRODUCTION SITE LOCATION The proposed site is located off of Galpin Boulevard (County Road 117) just north of the intersec- tion with Lake Lucy Road. Ideally located between Highway 5 and Highway 7 and just a short distance to Highway 41, the site offers enough distance for privacy and comfort while close enough to be convenient. Adjacent land uses include a newer single family neighborhood to the south and west with a more established single family neighborhood to the north the Minnetonka West Middle School is located on the northwest corner of the site. Lake Minnewashta - Source: Aerials Express. (2003) SITE HISTORY -~ ~t~~§!!~~&§« Floi!s.;I:NSð'<W..h:. In the early 1920's the site was purchased by Alfred Slocum and turned into a tree farm. The site remained a tree farm until 1941 when it was purchased by the Andrews Family as a country home. The Andrews Family subdivided the parcel to allow a family friend to build a home next to theirs. The site has changed over time and probably the most noticeable area of change is the westerly wooded area. As you can see on the Historic Aerial Photographs located on the next page, a large portion of the wooded area used to be farmed. The farmed limits followed the natural topography of the site and as you'll see this plays a major role in our neighborhood design. I RJNEHURST ~ , :t'"'i;1'" ",.I,~ ..':~'~.. '~:."'~: '*'. .' :IP"'," ,r' ~',t,t '.: , ,.,". :,,',',. \'@ '. ...... '.'.', .,'..jIj¡;',' ","" ' ,,' '''fI' ,"~': -'~~' ,-' " " ,:!\It ~ 'I\._¡~ ._ ~ I . ....¡,'. ~~ ",-" ,~, I .'!I" ... "1 \', '~- I "';,: I: ~"I~.,¡¡. , ..., "~, ";iJ,' I \~'" x.~ , " ·....w~¡:- 41" ....' "I"',.~ ," , " '.~ :",'~;t,' '~''j,;·L£d Data Source: USDNFSA Aerial (2003) As seen in this aerial taken last year, the open areas in western cover calculations for tree preservation calculation purposes, EXISTING CONDITIONS .0l~ 1,1 'fol~ : "'II Ii,:' "", ., .. .., ....,. .!~\õ::. '.. ,,.¡, ~, .;: it."":' ,. . . '" . .~,;,.... . "":",, >',.' ". \ . ".,,,,ji"i,,'"'" J "..., . ~... ........ ~~~" ;~', "~i" .". '.' ' . :"','¡,\~,-,'':~~' - '~ .. "*' _ _. .tL .1 1...1. Î, ;f ~".,,~. ~~.,- '~ .' "",,!",,, ~¡,", , '''" .,,, õ "~,,,~,. """""-'" '¡, ...~ I ~~·~,.;r1t1 ~ " ~ '" f,i ,"'" ~,,~,~~ 1 .¿'~ Î ,~,. , " .~I' .. :: ".,.,.,..,~',~~ -f,-;I"'~' ,,~I;¡ -~ ,. ~"'!',t .11"" ~ ,jJ:~' ~ '~..... .", ',,~ .",. " ·~i. ~~ .1-.. ~- , "'" '. . -~;. M j'¡ " " ,.,.L , , .oj ~.'.¡1.·'.~,··· ,,:,:,' ¡~"" . ' :.r:.-" ~,,','';' ': "I~ ~~} ;' :';:".;{ f~1ì~~¡~~~! ...... ....!:',., '~~L '"'1 0- >, ." .*, ~ " ,l"\,,'" -... .' 'Do', 1'~ b~~it~ !1~~":2·'·;~~:r~~:~.I;'5~~;}, \::: .,b,. ,'~~. - '''''''',''''':'1' ,J'\- :01' ,~, ~~, ",' ,~ -,' '~ ~ ,·\1,"),/1 ,'7'. 'i~'~i -' ,., 0' A,,·....J .~ J!C JFlIJiIBILTICC '~)])JLm ", ",' .~>~~~'·!,:;:~)~;:'f~~~' !\'I',', :'~' . ~'_:' ,0::, ~~" t~"n'_'" ""'~",,", "1111~~.:~"" ::.,:,'''' '. "1.~~,'~ :¡¡j¡\I}'''~'''' ¡;øIþ " .' ,. , ''''~ IIf ~ ,"'1 "' ~.~,1,~"; ~~I ~+ "1'¡'~' ~~i;""f;r ., þ. '.' " r , ',I' ~~Il~ -")) '\, J:;õ\'~ if';;:; 'I~I '" ., ~,,1! .~¡¡£\ ','I ., ~"= 'i """'rjJ' t ... ~..,. ", ',',¡, .~ h~iC'''' 1"¡¡¡¡', '~~, ..' .' I I t is off this aerial that we based our canopy PINEHURST .. its current condition of almost completely woode~ slowly filled in over the years to page. side of the property have as you will see on the next .a. ~ "'~ -- P¡~SovIcus,hl HISTORICAL PHOTOS Aerial Photograph, 1980 Source: Historical Information Gatherers, Inc. (1 980) ~"'= PLOWSHARES ~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC W p.~Sa:~t"C. .---~---- ~~-~~- _Aerial Phgts> graph, 1991 Source: Historical Information Gatherers,lnc. (1991) ¡PINEHURST ~ -.-- -- NATURAL ELEMENTS ---- - Canopy Cover and Tree Locations (6~' o~?-DB:RL Wetlands ~"'- PLOWSHARES .if.~ --.d DEVELOPMENT, LLC ~ fI~$¡'ri:M.h:. r.~ ~r::,~ ..., ' '-,- -. "~1 -... ~'I't ~ ;;- " 'e..>fiJ'":..' '- t~~. J"- " 0- \it~~~~~~:~, \ - I .~ ~. ~.œl~"1~~"'~'.:-~ ,~~ _~-,~. -"'- ~.9 ~,11f~ ,,,~ c!J" /.r' ~ - ffj. ~'c ~~~~;.t .,'_ ~-L';- \ w-~....::;: ,!~7··' r . =-.. ... ......... F :#,t __.~1P£~. oci."'· '_ Data Source(s): USDA/FSA Aerial (2003), WPS Tree Inventory (2004). There are three wetlands delineated on site. Our proposed plan has no removal of wetlands, but we are exercising the wet- land buffer averaging option in the ordinance on the two westerly wetland areas. I PlWEHURST ~ DESIGN DEVELOPMENT From the beginning, our goal has been to create a quality neighborhood while preserving as much of the site character as possible. Our first concepts, seen below, were based off of the general information we were able to gather in the beginning of the project. As our site data became more accurate you'll see our concepts becoming more refined. You'll also notice on this first concept that the Ronning Property was not included since there was no purchase agreement at the time. ~-;-:. ..-.. - .. -- .- L ~S.TVIEVI ~>I ix")'-' I '>C ')034.1 oc! ~ ADD,tT'O_ðN -,,---- f ,,(~ ¡¿"J.e ~t :1 1 2 2:).0034700 Î ,<0:-' Nt \ : , "1'86 - ---~c-.1'--o--:~-::--4..¡Jt--.~ \_t.~l : 'if .-;. f-.~ . ·'\;1; . fAflM' Ii ~À ~~~~"~. . e/ .. .J-r~ . . . ,". ~ ~~~,~ L--L~ Lj;J.:~,,: ¡ ~'l'I'V::'7- ftlf>'-/f' F<>A!? _ !J~' . -\ ~ ' ¿~: .; ~! ~ T~T~T(·==t·~0 r~\~0 $~ \" . _ :' ')'i/. ;~ HiND' .. -~/ \.. 0.\__ no. ....._m·_n_______ -- -J,----nn-~h--..-.-m..,--- -~-.~:m_h-':¡;::';;" ~rT _ ______n, ' ' :1 \' \ - \ 5 ljJu ¡.¿ (j r 2 /1 . II .[/ ] ¡ t ¡ I 3 ~ \ -- ---+--- A ' .C:::: ~ 5 Ii' i ._/,<O~<' y/~~~ ,~=~t+KE--~TÃlDÐQFj/Dqr:: -~ -I ~I :- //j 11.1 The next concept includes the Ronning property as well as the surveyed topographic data. With the addition of the Ronning property we were able to create a grid pattern layout. While the grid pattern is very efficient, it also is very destructive when it comes to tree loss. On the next page, you'll see the concept we based our final design off of. ~ - - -..------- -. ~ C;Vr/.pí (+1- 3-' A~) v !>'5 - -._-~-- ....._"'-v- \, ~F:;:~~;~,,;,~,i~¡':rl ' L~~" -... - - I (1 '~--'.---'~~:J¿~~~~}2, : , ." ;:?, .... ·,5"_ 1,:. I I ." '("- ---___J u I II II g<¡ Ji 'i ¡ -j:,1 ! i v. :~)-~ [I'U'O -~~'l ~_J<1 ¡PINEHURST ~ ~"'- PLOWSHARES ~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC ~ FI~$¡J«i:I,.to:. I !~,\ ~:1ß~~~, )'\>~ :;--~~ I~">-r )-{''''~~ ("" ,{' -' ,-- '. (}.J:~ 1'(r ;.::;::,:; I ),)~ ( '; . r r r~-'( 4 1':\ 11\\,: ". \' I: I' III ~, II "'. \, . i" ,;' : Il'..:.,~~, -. -\t\¡tt' \\\\..\' : '\ !i:\\::,:\:,\~\::\,,:\: ~' ¡; \ , \ I ¡, ì: ¡ ,.../ ; I \ ~ .I ''-1.. / ;' I ¡., !, 'Ii i !~ .! 'I';J; l i I C1·) I .Q~!,? I I .- . ¡ ~,r «~. \ d~J ~tJ.:i:\ ,_ J! '~f'~\" ! ! t!l "" (". _, 1\ j Ui, \m.,L If, f?;,) f~~ '[ I I,' Ii;!:' ~\~, ~'J ,¡l~ i ,,\ / " II I ,; Ii'./ -, r < I / :\¡ ~'\ Ii/l'- )\ ,f!r ((3J~ ! i ,I , ,~. I II i ..J..Q£. 4/ I t' r- ~, , r-': , .~,. ¡ I "; ,b \;~~;, ----1 ~" - !~.< / I .~" ~/,/ ... / ",, . i ; /i~/:; .::::,:.;> I~~·.. / /i/.//i,':/ I ' / / / " ... i ii, ¡' :-"/:i/~/::':':>.~~/' ·1-"'//:"';/// " ,i/ /,/1//,./ ,:./ I I, ,) ,.! \ . ~'~- -." I l' ,I, / II \ ; (/.'/,' \ \ Irq:,,, , , '¡ f"i''/ ~ i// / ,i --..' I f .4--. :;.,,¡,r " \.. II '( 11 ,I " Ji' I; I I I , I :/ ../..._, ,I , CONCEPT PLAN " ~\ ~ :' ( ,/ .I'.I'\'.........'..,...j/'1 rlU,''/:.' Iv'{ \/ ¡ .. ~ C58· --~ ~. and drainage impacts. The lots felt forced and we decided that not developing any lots off the private drive would be best for all parties We also noticed that the cui de sacs on the western side created significant tree loss due to their size and location. Since we were removing the private road from the western side, we saw an opportunity to add private drives in lieu of the southern cui de sac and be able to shorten the northern cui de sac on the west- ern end of the development. With this change we are able; to save more trees and better match existing grades. It also allows us to save an area of mature pines that we had designated a priority from the begin- ning of the project. ' In this concept we made an effort to get away from the grid to create a more intimate neighborhood de- sign. With this more organic layout we are also able to respond to the slope of the land more sympatheti- cally and have more opportunities to create special areas for tree preservation. Our goal with this type of layout is to save select areas of tree masses, mostly in back yards, to create an established feel to the neigh- borhood it will also break up the typical large open area seen in most developments \r:.,'\j'è~. After further analyzing this concept we came to some conclusions that guided us to our final design. One of the primary concerns we had were the three lots that had access off the private road coming from the west Putting any lots off of the private drive would cause significant tree loss as well as wetland rem ova PINEHURST ~ "'~ -- Pt~I$QcvICII:.hr;. PROPOSED PLAN After the lengthy concept planning process we came up with a wonderful plan that we are submitting for your approval today. The proposed plan has 42 single family lots arranged to allow maximum tree preservation and give each area of the site it own unique character. Along with the trees we are saving we are proposing 177 additional trees to the site to add to the character and intimacy of the site. We are creating a neighborhood that will give it's residences a sense of community while maintaining a private feel on each lot. In the planting design we took great measures to enhance the existing stands of trees that are remaining and buffer backyards to give everyone their privacy. Numerous retaining walls and rolling slopes will add to the unique experience when going through the neighborhood. SITE DATA Total Site Area: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Proposed Homes: Gross Density: Wetland Area: Wetland Removal: Baseline Canopy Cover: Required Canopy Cover: Provided Canopy Cover: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Minimum Lot Area: Minimum Lot Width (at setback): Minimum Lot Depth: Average Lot Area: Front Yard Setback: Side Yard Setback: Rear Yard Setback: Wetland Buffer: Wetland Structure Setback from Buffer: ROW Width/Road Width: Cui de Sac ROW Radius/Road Radius: * See Waiver Request Page ~"'= PLOWSHARES ~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC _ f'¡~~tç -- - --- --------- ------------ - ------------ +/- 26.72 Ac. Rural RSF 42 +/- 1.52 D.D./ Ac. 0.14 Ac. None 17.92 Ac. (64.9%) 12.64 Ac. (46%) 13.38 Ac. (eq.)(50.1%) ------- ------------- - -------------------- --- 15,000 SF 90' (100' on Private Roads) 125' +/- 20,580 SF 30' (25' on select lots) * 10' 30' 10' Minimum (20' Avg.) 40' 50'* /28' Back to Back 56'*/45.5' Back of Curb IRIWEHURST} 1 [;,.., '~r""r, -', ~ w:m., _ __ ,~,.'\~ d~ Data Source: USDNFSA Aerial (2003), Rendered Site Plan WPS (2004 Here we have superimposed the proposed plan over the aerial to give a more realistic representation of how concept plan. Also notice the use of proposed landscape trees used to enhance the existing stands of trees as "'I~ ~ "" .".,iIîi '\ , , ,."...,' " ,,)"1," . ·.,,::t1l I ''I "'," , .,. :~ , " ¡¡,ì" f·"",·;,,~·,;' ,':" , 'I '. ,,;¡, ,,";'. , ;<L,t·'! ',","",',', ~",'I I,;,,:: ~~; . , " 'fi:\¡:' ;:~:':::~ ~ .' ;,' t ~ . , ~ tt ,k f '^ ~~~ .. '~ ]" '-;0\' J~.. " .' ~\ij' PROPOSED PLAN ',l~: ,~,~~,~; ~~~::',;~i~~;, .'J!.", ,¡~;.~...: · 21i;: '\~ :~~~:~:~!~~~~ft.~~,'~::'~~~~:~ :'\'#i!\ l' . .,¡" 'l,; ::;,. ·l':¡.T",1 ,,, ;.,';' "i'~h'1..,c 1- .,~;~ ,::1 'ï~ ~,- ,~ ~..- ¡,¡ <111-' .~,. :;jI' '1,-:-;1, ..? .;:;, ., ""* " ,,. ~, " ,:-..,,- ·~',\f 'LÎ;¡¡"~' [ I Notice the amount woodlands preserved on the western end compared to the previous between them. PINEHURST the site will turn out well as fill in the gaps ~ ~ "'~ -- floIOS!IOOaISOMoI$,h, WAIVER REQUESTS Out of the desire to save as many trees on site as possible we are requesting some of the waivers sug- gested in the tree preservation ordinance. As we'll demonstrate these waivers make a small difference in the appearance and function of the neighborhood, but make a large difference in preserving trees. The adage, "A little goes a long way" is very appropriate when considering the waiver requests. There are a total of 4 waivers we are requesting for tree preservation; Use of Private Roads over Public, Reduced ROW Width to 50'(56' R on Cui de Sacs), Reduced Front Yard Setback to 25' on select lots and Maximum Street Grades to 10%. Below we'll have a more detailed description of each. Reduced ROW & Front Yard Setbacks We are grouping these two together for the purpose that one alone does not do much good without the other. We are proposing that the Right of Way be reduce to 50' wide and streets and have a 56' Radius on cuI de sacs and the front yard setback be reduced to 25' on lots where it makes a difference for tree preservation. It is important to note that the reduced right of way does not reduce the width of the road or cuI de sac. What these two waivers essentially do is create 10' more room for us to move walls and reduce grading. As you can see in the graphic above, that 10' can make a huge difference when it comes to tree preservation. On Lot 1, Block 1 alone it saves 9 significant trees. In the Comparison Plan on the next page, you'll see it makes a difference of almost an acre of additional preservation of tree canopy. Private Road Instead of Public ROW If you look at the Concept Plan fold- out a few pages back you can see the difference that a private drive makes over a public right of way. Public streets with cuI de sacs require an enor- mous amount of clearing and grading when compared to private roads, which in this case you can see makes acres of difference in tree canopy preservation. We are also only proposing three lots accessing off each of the private roads which is within the allowed number ac- cording to ordinance. Trees Removed , with No Waivers Existing Trees ?~- 10% Maximum Road Grades Given the amount of slope on the site 10% grades help match up to existing slopes faster which allows us to save more trees. One area in particular is on the south side of the property where we have our ponding. This is the low area of the site and also holds specimen quality Hemlock trees. Using 10% grades we are able to get down the existing elevation and save the Hemlocks and maintain enough storm water storage for water quality treat- ~"'- PLOWSHARES .~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC V 1'!~.:fSø>US.h:_ I PINEHURST ~ , 4 ',:..' '..1;, ,. , """'·'''1 "''''-'"',, . ~I .¡¡.¡i 'I· -,~, -, ,"J)., :;Il¡.:, )t'~',··',',·"".,,"J',,', .' . ' , , " -I -,- - '" 1 . "1\ ~- ,r.:-' ':~ " , 1¡j¡, .~~': SITE PLAN COMPARISON J ;". -~------ >¡;, .. ~",1','" "l"· : I ' ,'" 1,- .~,- "~I" '1 ,.,', ~, l, _i "" ~'. ¡~. 'Ii ~""" , ' . , '..",.~. fÎ-'; .~i , " \('n,~" ..... ~' :~ ~' i Ii f ¡j 1 'i ->~\¡, that can be attributed to the waivers comes to about an listed in the ordinance PINEHURST root zone removal. The total estimated extra tree preservation area we meet the spirit and intent of the suggested tree preservation waivers __~C" __::L.IIIIL Data Source: USDA/FSA Aerial (2003), Rendered Site Plan WPS (2004) As seen in this graphic, without waivers the areas in red would be additional canopy and critical acre of wooded land. Given the amount of positive impacts the waivers produce we feel that "': -- -~~ ..,. ;\~',jr EXAMPLE ARCHITECTURE&. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER ~~:::..:~ ~~;f-~_r- ._1....-...<- ~~~-~ ~"'- PLOWSHARES .~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC ~ f':~.tSŒI'(fS,h:.. ~..... ~-----==- .~ !RIN"EHURST ~ CONCLUSION We hope you have enjoyed this illustrated narrative and are as excited about the project as we are. We are looking forward to continue working with city staff and officials through the development process to ensure the high- est standards and create the best possible neighborhood. We also feel this proposed plan fits in well with the adjacent land uses and city comprehensive plan while meeting the expectations of a development on such a beautiful piece of property. We feel we have shown without a doubt that the waivers requested save trees, meet the intent of the tree preservation ordinance and have no adverse effects on the proposed or adjacent neighborhoods. Thank you for reviewing our project. ~"'- PLOWSHARES .~~ __ DEVELOPMENT, LLC ~ FI~S!WZtx- I PINJlHURST ~