Loading...
CC Minutes 10-13-2014Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 TH FRETHAM 19 ADDITION, 6397 AND 6411 BRETTON WAY: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW FOR A FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES FOR HARD COVER AND SETBACK. APPLICANT: LAKEWEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC/OWNER: NAOMI CARLSON. Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. This item did appear before the th Planning Commission on their September 16 meeting. There was residents in attendance regarding this application and had some concerns. I’ll go through those as we go through the staff report. Again the developer, Lakewest and the underlying property is Naomi Carlson. The subject property actually includes two parcels. Two addresses there. 6397 and 6411 and located off of Bretton Way and access, that’s how the access will be gained. I just wanted to give you a little bit of background on the request for the four lot subdivision and that’s. Sorry. Here we go. So the history of this property is 6397 and 6411, the two parcels there. So there is some history on this property and I just want to briefly go through this. th On March 11 of 2013 we talked about the non-conforming uses that were on this property and in 1988 nd the Curry Farms 2 Addition was approved which is surrounding this property so this is a remnant parcel kind of created in that area. So there’s a registered land survey that goes back to 1988 that created those two parcels. Again in 1986 the property was rezoned to Single Family Residential from Residential Agriculture and there was in 1970 a Precision Manufacturing business on the site. So there’s been a lengthy history on this piece of property and now the applicant’s coming forward to plat four lots on this subdivision. So your application then is for preliminary plat review of the four lot subdivision with variances for hard cover and setback. So to create the four lots as shown on here there is an easement to the north which I’ll spend a little bit more time on that. That easement serves other parcels so Mrs. Carlson owns the property underneath but there’s two easements that run. One to this homeowner and one to this homeowner. The easements. So because of those easements, that’s where the hard, the variance comes into play because there’s the hard surface coverage is calculated towards each of those lots. Again the underlying property owns those but there’s an easement over them. So there is a significant amount of grading on this. It’s challenging slopes in the area. One of the other requests then is for a variance to move this house forward. You can see the grading on this site because of the retaining wall along here. The retaining wall’s about 305 feet long and averages 8 to 12 feet in height along that so this property number, this lot right here actually goes up, the only access to it is via this property through here. This easement driveway through here so they need that to maintain the lot area requirement. Mayor Furlong: And can I interrupt with questions as you’re going through? Kate Aanenson: Sure. Mayor Furlong: That little portion of the parcel to the north that you were just highlighting, which of the three lots or four lots, excuse me. Kate Aanenson: It goes with the second lot. Mayor Furlong: Second lot. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: And when we’re talking about lots 1 through 4, as we’re looking at this, is Lot 1 on the left and Lot 4 on the right? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: So Lot 1 is west of the property and Lot 4 is on the east side of the property. 14 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Kate Aanenson: This is correct. Yep. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Okay. Kate Aanenson: So this little remnant parcel then, to get the lot area needs to be attached to this. Mayor Furlong: To Lot 2? Kate Aanenson: Correct, and because of the significant amount of grading and the retaining wall which you can see on there, which is 8 to 12 feet in height, the only way to get to the back of that lot would then be along this easement. Again the underlying property owner owns that property. Mayor Furlong: Right. Kate Aanenson: There’s just easements on top of it. Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Thank you. Ms. Aanenson, can you just re-state for me? You’re talking about a retaining wall. The retaining wall does not exist today, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That is correct. Councilman Laufenburger: This is a planned retaining wall. Kate Aanenson: That is correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. And just one more thing. This, when you talk about in Lot number 2 you talk about getting the lot size. You’re referring to the lot size that is required for building size, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: You’re correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So in the compliance table that we have in the staff report lots are required to be 15,000 square foot minimum and they do meet that and that’s important to have, for them to have the lots to make it work. Councilman Laufenburger: But. Kate Aanenson: So this is a challenging piece. Just to get the four lot yield, we see some of these when it’s infill development. More challenging with some of the encumbrances on it and the change in grade so the wall, which is expensive to put up to make that work, again protecting those homeowners because you have people that are using this easement to access their property. Snowplowing and the like so we did have conditions on there. Engineering did put on the conditions on there for the design of the wall and also for the wall that, because it crosses over property lines they want to make sure that we’re not 15 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 impacting anybody to the negative but they also want to make sure that there’s a barrier. Some sort of fence along that southern side so there’s protection there because of the change in grade. Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Kate the, you’re using the term easement on that northern portion of the property. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: This is a, can you further describe this easement? Kate Aanenson: Yep, I’m going to go through a couple slides and go through that in more detail. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Okay. Kate Aanenson: So just kind of give you why, set up why the, why there needs to be relief on some of the lots to push this house further down. Because of that we talked about the two homes that access here and this property owner, to get to the back of their lot will need to access there, is to push that house further away so you’re not right adjacent to that easement. Again our ordinance doesn’t have a setback from an easement. Just from a property line but we think it makes sense to pull that lot down and because coming off of Bretton Way would make it a tuck under. We think it’s more desirable to have the house shown as is but given a variance and I’ll go through that in a little more detail. So these are the easements so one easement remains on 6305. The first easement goes to that home. Then there’s an easement that goes to 6281, the home in the back. Then there’s a couple other easements that are on here. Oops, a couple other easements that are on here that should also be removed and those are some older easements that when they go to finalize the plats that will also need to be extinguished so those are the easements that are currently on the property. So did you have a question on this? Councilman Laufenburger: I did. Kate Aanenson: Go ahead. Councilman Laufenburger: May I Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Please. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, so the easement that’s on the screen right now which shows the, I’m going to use a different word. It’s access so the owner of the subject property has granted access for a period of time for the property owners at 6305 and 6281 to drive along the private property of the subject property. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: In order to get to their homes. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. 16 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Is that easement a City easement? Is the City a part of that easement at all? Kate Aanenson: No. Councilman Laufenburger: With that agreement. Kate Aanenson: No. No. Councilman Laufenburger: Why not? Kate Aanenson: It’s a private easement. Because the underlying property owner granted an easement to that property and the City was not a part of that easement. Councilman Laufenburger: So we as a City, we have no, I don’t know what the right word is. Kate Aanenson: Jurisdiction. Councilman Laufenburger: Jurisdiction over that, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, we have no jurisdiction over that. So that agreement is between those property owners or those users of that access. Kate Aanenson: Right, and the underlying property owner, correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Kate Aanenson: And that would be the same with the easement that goes to the property. Councilman Laufenburger: 6281. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Is it? Roger Knutson: Mayor and council, just to be clear, what’s happening here if approved will not affect their easement rights. Councilman Laufenburger: Oh it won’t? Roger Knutson: We can’t affect their easement rights. Mayor Furlong: And when you say easement rights you’re talking about the Teton Lane property owners. Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: 6305 and the 6281. Roger Knutson: Right. They will continue to be in effect. 17 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: They will have access within that 14 foot wide. Roger Knutson: We will not take, we don’t have the right to take it away and we’re not attempting to take it away. It will remain. Kate Aanenson: Right. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Kate Aanenson: Right. Right. Right. Todd Gerhardt: And Kate can you switch to the other two easements you were talking about? Kate Aanenson: Yep. Todd Gerhardt: Now those we do have the right to eliminate those easements as a part of the plat. Roger Knutson: Yes. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, we’ve asked that those be extinguished as a part of the plat. Mayor Furlong: As a condition of approval. Kate Aanenson: Because they would, the houses would fit, or actually lie on top of those easements so we typically don’t like to build over an easement so we’d want those extinguished. Councilman Laufenburger: For what purpose were those easements in place? Kate Aanenson: Access easements. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Okay. Kate Aanenson: Again there was a couple commercial uses that are, or a larger commercial use that was in there. The barns that were there. That provided access for those. Councilman Laufenburger: But they’re no longer needed so. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct, with the subdivision so. Okay. So back to the four lots then. The stormwater management is being proposed to be treated with rain gardens so these, there’s two ways that the water would be started on the western side moving towards the east and then ultimately could be tied into an existing private system or then tied into the City’s system so those, we’ll have that resolved by the time of final plat but that’s the direction of how the stormwater will be managed in this area. The landscaping plan, that meets city ordinance. And the variance. As I mentioned the variance for the hard cover is because our ordinance, because it’s the underlying property, counts that hard cover for those easements so they’re being penalized for that as far as the hard cover requirements of the lot so the lot sizes are big enough. It’s just the fact that the hard cover is over the percentage so staff did recommend approval, as did the Planning Commission. Then the front setback as we talked about for Lot 1, we also recommended that that be given a 20 foot front yard setback so that can be moved closer actually to Bretton Way giving greater separation from that private easement on the north. So that was to get it further away from this. So this is again that hard cover that’s counting towards all the lots so you can see 18 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 the property line is up here on that north side so those, all that hard cover is going against their calculations. So with that I’d still be happy to answer any questions, if there’s still more questions. Mayor Furlong: Oh I’m guessing there might be. Kate Aanenson: I’m guessing there’s going to be a few. So we are recommending approval and I think there was specific concerns from the neighbors but I also think there were a lot of neighbors that were happy that it was becoming houses too. Mayor Furlong: Why? Kate Aanenson: Just because there’s been some complaints up in the neighborhood for the use of the barn and the like. Mayor Furlong: And maybe I’ll start, as the property sits today it’s non-conforming. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: With the neighborhood, correct? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: And the uses are not consistent with residential. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Usage and obviously this, there have been matters before the council in the past and I know some concerns but it’s, yet I think you also mentioned it is zoned for residential. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: That’s what makes it non-conforming. It’s a different use. It was a use in place prior to the zoning changing to residential. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Is that… Kate Aanenson: At one time it was permitted. That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: It was permitted. It continues to be permitted as a non-conforming until such time. How do we typically when we’re dealing with, from a planning standpoint and from a zoning and use standpoint, what are we looking for when there’s a request from a non-conforming property owner to make a change? Whether seeking variances or in this case subdivision. Is there some goals and objectives from the City with regard to seeking to eliminate the non-conforming use? Kate Aanenson: Well I think the main thing is to have it fit the character of the neighborhood and I think the challenge here was as I, you know this is infill development which is kind of the remnant piece that was left. It has some nuances, specifically the narrowness and the grading of the slope going up towards the easement. There was other ways to develop some of those properties to the north but they also have 19 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 larger lots so some of those properties to the north could be subdivided into the future so again just trying to maintain the character of kind of the Curry Farms. The lot size there and make it fit in. Mayor Furlong: But isn’t it a goal to try to reduce or eliminate non-conforming uses? Kate Aanenson: Absolutely. Mayor Furlong: From an overall city objective. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Consistent with our Comprehensive Plan correct? Kate Aanenson: Right, yeah. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: But again in this circumstance sometimes you have to be a little bit, give some relief with variances in order to make that happen because of the complexity. Mayor Furlong: There’s some value being received publicly because the non-conforming use is going away. Kate Aanenson: That’s my point, yes. Mayor Furlong: And you’re saying working with the property owner to find a way that fits for everybody. Kate Aanenson: The best we can, exactly. Mayor Furlong: The best we can, thank you. Okay. I probably have some other questions but I’ll defer to the questions of council first. Mr. Laufenburger any questions at this point? Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah just Kate, I think you’re using very good words to describe the situation we’re in. I do want to talk about this setback first of all. The setback on Lot 1, in this case the variance they requested and the picture we’re looking at right now is the existing structure, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, right. The house would actually would be right in here is where. Councilman Laufenburger: So what essentially we’re doing is we’re allowing the builder or the owner of Lot 1 to move their house closer to Bretton Way. Farther away from what will be a retaining wall, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. To give them some clearance. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So the only, what we’re, what the applicants are asking for is that give us the ability to move the house a little bit closer to Bretton Way than the current setbacks allow. 20 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, alright. So now I understand that one. Now talk about the variances. Lot 1, which is where that current house is and then also Lot 3, you’re saying, I think you’re saying that what, the land that is in the private easement, we, are we obligated to count that as hard cover? Kate Aanenson: Yes because their underlying property is still a part of this plat. Councilman Laufenburger: Even though that surface may be a permeable surface? Kate Aanenson: Right. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So we’re saying including that, that adds more hard cover surface to the lots and therefore to give appropriate building platform or building footprint it’s necessary to raise the amount of allowable hard surface on those lots 1 and 3. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Kate Aanenson: And again I just want to add the complexity of working with this narrow lot. Working with the grades. Trying to get the lots, the houses to sit just so. Again looking at this first lot, Lot 1. To give them some reasonable lot area which would really be on the eastern side, that’s probably the more desirable and not having that tuck under so could you have moved the lots? Then it effects where the stormwater is going. How the grading. How the retaining wall works so it’s a lot of details. Councilman Laufenburger: But these four lots in total square footage of these lots meet the minimum requirement of our RSF. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Single family, okay. That was my questions, thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilwoman Ernst: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Ernst. Councilwoman Ernst: Kate can you tell me when, and Councilman Laufenburger referred to this. The permeable surface that we’re talking about and we’re counting as hard cover. Kate Aanenson: Yes, it’s the existing easement. So you can see right now this is where that easement falls but that’s also, this dark line on the north side there is part of the underlying property owner, Mrs. Carlson’s property. So even thought it’s compacted gravel we still count it towards hard surface. Councilwoman Ernst: And has that been common practice? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes. 21 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilwoman Ernst: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Ms. Tjornhom? I have a few and certainly we’ll have an opportunity to hear the property owner and developer at some point here but with regard to the easement and this access easement that we’re looking at here, and I think Mr. Knutson you may have raised the point. The easement provides the two property owners to the north access through this 14 foot strip across the top of the property. But the property owner still owns that property underneath and as long as they’re not obstructing the access to the property owners that have the easement, that’s still their property and they’re free to use it as they choose to depending on, have we looked at, have you looked at the easement agreement? I mean they could still access that and I think that was even mentioned by Ms. Aanenson about the need for Lot 2 to be able to get to their property to the north there. Roger Knutson: Yes we have looked at the easement agreements. I have them with me tonight. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Roger Knutson: And we cannot and will not obstruct their, by what we’re doing here tonight, their ability to continue to use that easement for access to their property… Mayor Furlong: And as long as it’s not obstructed though. I mean that doesn’t, the easement doesn’t preclude the property owner from also driving along that. Roger Knutson: No. Mayor Furlong: Or doing something along there as long as they’re not obstructing the access that’s granted through the easement. Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: With that Ms. Aanenson you mentioned Lot 2, in order for them to gain access up there. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Will likely use the same driveway that exists currently. Is one of our conditions that Lot 2 will have a cross access across Lot 1 so that they’re able to do that? Kate Aanenson: They’d have to go back out on Bretton Way. Come back up this way because there is that 12 foot retaining wall. Mayor Furlong: And so because of that, does our staff report include a right for Lot 2 property owner to access across Lot 1 or along that same 14 foot… Kate Aanenson: Actually all the property owners still have those rights is what I heard the city attorney say because it goes with the underlying properties. Mayor Furlong: Well but as soon as we subdivide I don’t think Lot 4 would have any legal right to access across Lot 1 unless that’s specifically granted. And 3 and 4, obviously Lot 1 can let anybody cross the property who wants to but from a legal access I’m wondering if Lot 2 should have that as part of a condition so that Lot 1, sometimes neighbors don’t get along. Lot 1 can’t keep them from getting up to 22 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 their property. And I don’t need an answer tonight unless we do as part of the preliminary plat to make that a condition. That Lot 2 would have a cross access through this same 14 foot wide easement up above. Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: The easement rights exist today but, before the plat will not be impaired by the plat. Mayor Furlong: Right. Roger Knutson: You want to create additional rights. Mayor Furlong: My question is, should Lot 2 be, have cross access across Lot 1 through the same existing private easement so that Lot 2 can access the northern part of their parcel because there’s going to be a retaining wall obstructing their access otherwise. If they want to mow the grass or do something up there, how do they get up there unless they access across Lot 1? Roger Knutson: It’s my understanding that they can go around and use that access. Mayor Furlong: Well but if it’s a private access, if it’s not a public access how is, what if Lot 1 property owner doesn’t want Lot 2 property owner crossing his property to get to Lot 2’s property on the other side of the retaining wall? On the north side of the retaining wall. Todd Gerhardt: He has underlying rights to go up that way from the original easement. Mayor Furlong: He has to let the properties to the north access because they already have the easement but Lot 2 doesn’t, wouldn’t have an easement at this point. Roger Knutson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: So I think that should. Councilman Laufenburger: Well, Mr. Mayor? Kate Aanenson: Can I just tell you want our recommendation was is that you know really the person that needs to use that driveway is Lot number 2. Mayor Furlong: And for reasons… Kate Aanenson: And that’s where we were trying to go but that’s what I thought I heard the city attorney say, they would still have a right to it but we were trying to minimize those people using the back of there for storage or the like. The only person that really needs to access that would be Lot number 2. Mayor Furlong: Right and Lot number 1 can drive up and down that or do whatever they want as long as they’re not obstructing the access easements that already exist. Kate Aanenson: Right. Mayor Furlong: I’m just saying that, that once this is subdivided Lot 3 isn’t going to have, be a part of, to my understanding. Now maybe it will be but unless it’s a condition, Lot 3 and 4 wouldn’t be able to drive up and down that private easement on Lot 1 or 2. Roger Knutson: Unless they’ve given an easement. 23 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: Unless they’re given an easement rights and that’s why I’m thinking we should probably make sure that Lot 2 has easement rights in that same section so that there’s no more burden to Lot 1 other than what’s currently existing so that they can access, or have that same access easement up to their property line. Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor as you’re talking about this one thing I’m thinking is, today prior to the subdivision the property owner of these four lots, but it’s one lot, that property owner is one entity so the private easement is between that single owner and let’s identify her as Ms. Carlson and that agreement is between Ms. Carlson and the owners of 6281 and 6305 so there’s an easement between those. My question perhaps for Mr. Knutson would be, when those, when this is subdivided will it be necessary for Mrs. Carlson to write in her selling agreements with whoever buys the lots that she chooses not to hang onto, that there will be then for example 6281 on the property on the north to the right, or to the east, will they have to have 4 individual private easements in place in order for them to be able to drive all the way along that private easement? Do you understand my question Mr. Knutson? Roger Knutson: Yeah. The underlying. Mayor Furlong: …public interest. I’m sorry. Roger Knutson: The underlying fee owner, Mrs. Carlson who owns the underlying fee. What the easements are laying on top of can grant additional easements to different property owners. They’ve not inclusive. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Mayor Furlong: And the question I have is, is should as a condition of the subdivision because once it’s subdivided the properties can be sold separate. The fee interest can be sold separate and therefore the purchaser of the second lot, in order to gain access to the northern part of that second lot should have access rights across Lot 1. Roger Knutson: You could condition your preliminary approval on that. Kate Aanenson: That’s what we had in our recommendation. On only Lot 2. Mayor Furlong: Is it in there? Kate Aanenson: Yes. I’m trying to find it. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: That was our recommendation. Only Lot 2 so we’re not increasing that. Mayor Furlong: We’re not increasing that, okay. Kate Aanenson: Or potential conflicts in the future. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. 24 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Kate Aanenson: I just wanted to point out one other thing too that I didn’t bring up is there’s existing buildings on the property. We did state in the staff report that’s a condition that those buildings must come down before anything else were to go forward if the project was to advance. Mayor Furlong: With regard to some other questions that were raised at the Planning Commission, with regard to the demolition of the property. Are we comfortable that we have the resources on staff or can obtain those through an outside consulting firm to appropriately evaluate the… Kate Aanenson: The applicant’s responsible to do that. Do the assessment of the buildings to make sure before they come down. Yeah, that’s their obligation. They do that through the building department. Mayor Furlong: And do we have sufficient staff or can we access sufficient outside advisors as necessary to make sure that that’s done in a safe manner. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, as a part of their building demolition permit they have to give us an environmental assessment of the property. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: And so somebody. Mayor Furlong: By a qualified professional? Todd Gerhardt: By a qualified firm and they would go in and review for asbestos and any other materials. Tanks and what have you and make sure that they’re properly disposed of. Mayor Furlong: The variances that are being requested, one for the hard cover. The other for the assessment, I think this was asked but the setback variance is being requested for Lot 1 only. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: And now is there anything, and perhaps topography would make this impractical but there’s nothing to prevent a house to be built on Lot 1 that would use the existing driveway within the easement as a driveway to that property as well? Kate Aanenson: Well that’s why I think our goal we tried to make a condition. Mayor Furlong: And as I. Kate Aanenson: Make a condition that makes that condition a separate driveway, correct. Mayor Furlong: Well but as I’m saying that, I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to that if that’s the best way to build a house and such like that. At the same time I think for flexibility having that setback variance in place makes some sense as well. Kate Aanenson: Okay. Mayor Furlong: But if the best, if the way the person wants to develop the house utilizes that existing driveway. Kate Aanenson: Sure. 25 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: I just want it on the record that that would be allowable. Kate Aanenson: Yep. Yeah, there’s some. Mayor Furlong: It’s their property as long as they don’t obstruct it and there may be some reasons why that wouldn’t work. Kate Aanenson: There was some clean up that we’re recommending on this because part of the gravel road in this area here. I’m not sure you can see that. Mayor Furlong: I can see it’s outside the easement. Kate Aanenson: It’s outside the easement and we recommended that that be cleaned up but that’s something that we can look at. I’d let the developer speak to that because they would have a better indication of the grades and how that would work with the style home. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And I think this gets back to the issue that it’s a non-conforming property as it sits today and the basis, but the hard cover variance, that’s one of those give and takes I assume, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Because to avoid a precedence here, just because somebody provides an access easement across their property and somebody builds in a driveway across there, that doesn’t necessarily provide them an opportunity to come to City Hall and ask for a variance on hard cover surface. Kate Aanenson: Right. It’s just. Mayor Furlong: It’s a private easement. It’s an impairment that they offer to their own property so, I mean the give and take here is because this is a non-conforming use and we’re trying to bring it into conformance. Is that part of that? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct and just so you know when they first met with staff I, they were told they couldn’t get that relief and there was no way this project was going to move forward. They actually met with some of the surrounding properties to see if they could get, they worked really hard to try to come with some of, this is the only way it could move forward with the four lots. Building these retaining wall to be, to give some relief and not penalize them for that easement hard cover. Mayor Furlong: And so it’s a very specific. Kate Aanenson: It’s unique to this property. Mayor Furlong: Unique to this property. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: And all the circumstances and facts associated with the property. Kate Aanenson: Correct. 26 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: And in the staff report there were questions about the location of that retaining wall to the easement and a request that it be set back from that easement but the staff report doesn’t require any setback correct? Kate Aanenson: Well we wanted, we’d like to see the design of that but again part of that setback is to allow for some sort of barricade so you’re not, a person driving on that easement isn’t right adjacent to a 12 foot drop so you’ve got some room to put some sort of barricade. Whether that be fencing or just balusters or something so we’ll look at that engineering as we get into some of the final plat details. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So that would be something that staff would review with the developer as they look at their grading plan? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Engineering wants to look at that again. Mayor Furlong: Okay. But nothing specific from a condition standpoint at this time? Okay. Kate Aanenson: There is conditions that they put some sort of barricades and fencing and that’s in there. Mayor Furlong: I saw that. Kate Aanenson: Yeah but it didn’t, we didn’t call out the specific designs. I think we called out the type but not a boulder wall. Some of those specifics on the type of wall were put in there but we’d work through that as they submit those drawings. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And can you tell me where that condition is that allows that cross access for Lot 2. I must have missed that one. Kate Aanenson: I was looking for it too. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Maybe you can keep looking and if we can’t find it then we’ll make sure it gets in there. I’d rather be redundant than omit. Kate Aanenson: Sure. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is the applicant here this evening and would you like to address the council this evening? Good evening sir. Ben Wikstrom: Mayor Furlong and council members. Good evening. My name is Ben Wikstrom. I’m with Lakewest Development, 14525 Highway 7 in Minnetonka. Mayor Furlong: Good evening. Ben Wikstrom: Good evening. Thank you to staff for that report and for, to all of you for getting almost all of the questions out of the way or all of my talking points. We, I just want to mention we had a th neighborhood meeting before the Planning Commission meeting on September 11 was our meeting and we’ve also met individually with some of the neighbors about some of their concerns. The response was generally favorable. I think the neighborhood would like to see single family homes there rather than that use that’s there now but we would be happy to meet with individual neighbors going forward as well but I think we’ve satisfied most of their concerns and as I said their reaction was favorable overall. There were some questions in the, at the Planning Commission meeting as well and at our neighborhood meeting about some of the stormwater management and the grading and drainage and things like that and our 27 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 project engineer is here tonight so, Marty Campion. He could come up and answer any specific questions you have about those but I think those were well addressed at the Planning Commission meeting as well. We believe that the easement we’ve been talking about at length here is an evident practical difficulty for this site which of course you need to prove for a variance but if you look at a couple of the tables that are in the staff report you’ll see that that hard surface coverage being used up is over half of what’s allowed on those lots and in fact our proposed house and driveway on Lot 1 are less than what’s impervious in that easement area. Then on Lot 3 it takes up about a third of what is allowed on that lot so, or actually it takes up a higher percentage but it will be a third of what is on that lot. So there are those other easements that Kate mentioned and we will certainly vacate those. Those are old access easements for the use of those manufacturing buildings. The, what we are calling that access easement on the north side, that 14 foot wide easement is from 1969. It’s not very well defined at all but the Story’s and Mr. Rabe and whoever lived there before them have been using it as an access easement and there’s also I believe a sewer line through there and a gas line through part of it so we don’t wish to challenge the use of that easement or something so we’re asking for this relief on the setback. In general we think this will be an improvement to the neighborhood. We think the houses and the builders, the builders we work with and the houses that we would propose would be architecturally compatible with the neighborhood. Kind of the 20 year, 25 year newer versions of what’s in the Curry Farms subdivision. Two story homes. Some of our recent examples are, we have a subdivision in Eden Prairie. A couple in Minnetonka and they are all similar homes to what you see in Curry Farms. Just newer ones and we of course aren’t the builder but we have a good relationship with 4 or 5 builders. We don’t limit ourselves to that if we’re doing a larger subdivision but in this case we have had some interest from some of those same builders so we think the housing types that will be there will fit in nicely with the neighborhood. I will try to answer any questions you have and as I stated our project engineer is here too so thank you. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you Mr. Wikstrom. Any questions for the applicant? No? Thank you and thank you for working with staff and the neighbors as well. Ben Wikstrom: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: We appreciate that. There was a public hearing held at the Planning Commission and I know that there are a number of residents that spoke there. Some of those questions I think have been addressed either in the staff report or this evening. If there are any new information that members of the public would like to address to the council through public comments we’d certainly entertain those at this time. Jerry Story: Good evening. I’m Jerry Story. I live at 6281 Teton Lane. I’m the homeowner that has the deeded easement. I feel that I requested several things at, from the planning, Bob Generous and Kate and I got no response from them. What I would like to see, actually I see no stipulation in the planning report regarding my part of the easement. My coming and going. My property is landlocked. I don’t know if you understand what landlocked is. That means I don’t have owned property on a street and so the only way to get to my property is through either a granted easement or a hostile easement. We do have a granted easement. I’ve been using it by ourselves for 23 years. We’ve owned the property 23 years. No one else has ever used it. I’ve maintained it. Rob has easement down to our property line and he uses the front part of it. He’s never used the back part of it and I’ve maintained that easement all those years. Paid for all the upkeep myself. What I’m requesting is to get some sort of recognition that I have an easement and I don’t see why the integrity of the easement that I’ve had for 23 years should be compromised in any way. Mayor Furlong: And I guess let me ask you that question Mr. Story because clearly that’s a concern. Do you see that this subdivision is obstructing your use of that easement or compromising that easement? 28 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Jerry Story: I don’t see it as obstructing. I talked to Kurt Fretham personally in the beginning when they first sent out their thing. I gave him an alternative. I said if the land is deeded you won’t need it for hard cover. If it’s deeded to me you don’t need it for the hard cover and because I’ve got enough land to take care of that hard cover and he said I have enough. There’s enough property there to get 4 houses and still deed that property away. He told me that and but for some reason they didn’t seem to want to do that so. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Jerry Story: There’s other ways that this can be done I think and not compromise the integrity. I also requested a 10 foot setback of any retaining walls and homes and that was never addressed in the planning report either. There’s papers regarding that, that I submitted to the planning committee or planning workers but none of it was addressed in the planning report. So and the little outlot that goes up into Robbie’s property has a very steep grade. There’s no way you could ever drive up there anyway so it’s kind of redundant. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Jerry Story: You know I know Bob mentioned something about storing boats and trailers but it’s too steep to even drive up let alone store something there so is it buildable that little piece of property? Kate Aanenson: I think there’s a storage building on there right now. Jerry Story: There is, yeah. It’s an electrical building. Mayor Furlong: But I think isn’t it Ms. Aanenson that northern part of Lot 2 is part, would be part of Lot 2 with this subdivision. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: And so it, it is Lot 2 in it’s entirety is a buildable lot. Jerry Story: Right, yes. Mayor Furlong: Right and so as I understand it and Ms. Aanenson correct us, Lot 2 with this subdivision going forward would include that northern most parcel to the north of the. Jerry Story: Yeah. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay. Jerry Story: I don’t have a problem with the subdivision. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Jerry Story: My problem is with maintaining the integrity of my easement that I’ve had rights for 23 years. I don’t think that should be compromised in any way. If you divide it up into four properties, now I’ve got to deal with four neighbors instead of one. It’s totally ridiculous. Mayor Furlong: Well and I guess. 29 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Jerry Story: It can be done in some other way. Mayor Furlong: I mean given the private easement that goes with the property so if this subdivision occurs is the easement still exist? Roger Knutson: It still exists. Mayor Furlong: It would still exist. Roger Knutson: Yes. Jerry Story: But isn’t there a city code that you can only have so many properties on an easement? Kate Aanenson: All these properties would access Bretton Way or unless we wanted to let the other one off you can have three off of a private drive. That was what the Mayor had mentioned earlier but all the other three, Lots 2, 3 and 4 all have access off of a public street. So it’s not. Mayor Furlong: Well and even Lot 1 has access off a public street. Kate Aanenson: Pardon me? Mayor Furlong: All four of them have access off public streets don’t they? Kate Aanenson: Right but I’m saying even if, even if what you had recommended potentially could use existing. Mayor Furlong: That would be an option for Lot 1. Kate Aanenson: That would be an option, that’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Yeah. Jerry Story: The easement was created for my property because it was landlocked when the properties were subdivided back in ’69 so, and they keep saying it’s not inclusive but it is inclusive because it was created for my property and you can’t get to any other properties from that easement except to my property so in my opinion that’s inclusive. And state law says that a landlocked property has dominant possession of the easement. Not the land owner. I’m the dominant. She’s the serbiant. Serviant, I’m sorry. Mayor Furlong: And help us understand what this subdivision is doing that is going to, you said it isn’t going to obstruct your use of that easement so where is the, where is the, what with your right to access your property through that easement, if that’s not going to change. If that’s still going to be available, help us understand where the problems are. Jerry Story: Well for 23 years no one’s ever driven down there until Mrs. Carlson started driving down. Mayor Furlong: Okay. 30 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Jerry Story: I would like to maintain that. Why should, now four other cars, four other properties be able to drive down the driveway that I maintain. It’s ridiculous. It’s, my deed says there should be no encumbrances and to me that’s an encumbrance. And it’s going to devalue my property. Mayor Furlong: Well the underlying property, if I’m mistaken Mr. Knutson. Does the underlying property owner of the easement, that’s still the property owners, right? Roger Knutson: There’s a fee owner and the easement owner. Mayor Furlong: Fee owner. So the fee owner still has use of that property as long as they’re obstructing the easement owner from their easement. Roger Knutson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Which is the access. Roger Knutson: That’s right. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So they couldn’t plant a tree in the middle or somehow obstruct Mr. Story’s ability to access his property. Roger Knutson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. But I mean, I’m not an attorney. I’ve successfully avoided becoming one in my life but if you still have access to your property. Jerry Story: I don’t have a problem with having access. Mayor Furlong: I’m trying to understand what this subdivision does. Jerry Story: I’m having a problem with, if I’ve got one bad neighbor and what if I get four bad neighbors? Mayor Furlong: Well, okay. From our standpoint, and again I’ll defer to the attorney. What we’re looking at here as the city council is, is a subdivision request. Jerry Story: Yes. Mayor Furlong: In looking at it does it meet our ordinances and is it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and are there reasons why if for example this subdivision, part of the condition, or the components of the subdivision were obstructing your private access. Access to your home through your private easements, I think that would be something that we would consider and so that’s why I’m trying to focus. I mean yes there will be four property owners versus one but from a standpoint of what the City Council’s looking at in terms of the subdivision request, that’s what I’m trying to focus on here tonight so that’s where I’m looking for help there. Jerry Story: Well the other thing is, is building a retaining wall right, their first plan was to have it right up against the easement and what about my grandkids? Mayor Furlong: Well and I guess. 31 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Jerry Story: They’re going to fall down a 12 foot embankment? Mayor Furlong: That was a question that we raised earlier and I think city staff is saying there has to be some barrier there and that will be part of the review process with the grading plan. To take a look at that exact issue. Jerry Story: And they put that house on their first drawing right up against the easement. Where are we going to put the snow? Where are you going to put the snow? Is that why you did the setback? To give a 10 foot setback from the easement. Kate Aanenson: Mayor, members of the City Council. Mayor Furlong: Yes. Kate Aanenson: If we were to vacate this, if Mrs. Carlson was to say you know I give this property to the two property owners to the north, the subdivision would look the same. There’d still be a retaining wall there. There’d still be some sort of barricade because the shape of how those lots are. Mayor Furlong: Because of the topography. Kate Aanenson: Right so, I’m just trying to separate those two issues a little bit. I think there’s just some concern of control of that easement and that’s something that’s outside of our control. Mayor Furlong: Understand. Okay. So I think what I understand Mr. Story is, and Ms. Aanenson correct me if I’m wrong, that we recognize that there’s a 14 foot easement there and that there will need to be because of the topography a retaining wall running along side. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Question is how far away so that there can be an appropriate barrier there. 10 feet may or may not be the right distance and what I think Ms. Aanenson is requesting, it’s up to the council to approve or not, but to work with the developer to find what’s an appropriate distance because that’s still, that’s still their property and so to come out further into their property. Now you’re impeding upon their property rights as well. Jerry Story: Yes, I understand. Mayor Furlong: So that’s why it’s all trying to find that right balance as you know and I think what Ms. Aanenson is saying is, let’s look at what’s a distance away from the easement necessary, and the existing driveway. Just because the easement’s there, if the, depending on the location of the driveway within the easement, you may not need any distance at all. There may be some other ones. It looks like there’s some area where the driveway comes outside so all that has to be part of the discussion. Jerry Story: The problem is, is I never get any consideration to even negotiate with them. They decide on their own what to do and they never take my suggestions at all. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Jerry Story: Why shouldn’t I have a little bit of negotiating power here? Mayor Furlong: Well. 32 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Jerry Story: What’s the harm of putting something in this to protect the integrity of the easement? What’s that harm? Mayor Furlong: Put something in the conditions here? Jerry Story: And the planning report. Mayor Furlong: I think with the, as I understand it from the staff report and the planning that clearly there is consideration of that easement along there and dealing with the barrier of some form for the issues that you’ve mentioned. Jerry Story: Okay. Mayor Furlong: With regard to negotiating with the property owner, people are free to negotiate as much or as little as they want and again what we’re looking at from the City standpoint is the subdivision request. Does it meet the ordinances? Does it meet our Comprehensive Plan and does there need to be some relief for some of the ordinances because of the uniqueness of the property? Jerry Story: So I get no consideration at all? Mayor Furlong: I didn’t say that. I think consideration of your private easement across the property has been considered. Jerry Story: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Councilwoman Ernst: Mr. Mayor, a question? Mayor Furlong: Yes, Councilwoman Ernst and then we’ll certainly accept more public comment as well. Councilwoman Ernst: Kate can you, in regards to the comments that were made regarding the consideration and the language in the report, can you kind of spell that out? Where that is and what it is? Kate Aanenson: Well, I can’t agree to, I don’t have the authority to negotiate a private easement. What we did try to put in the staff report, we did try to put a condition in there that tried to limit, because all those lots have access off of Bretton Way but Outlot 2 does need to have access off that private drive so we did try to make some awkward attempt at that and I’ll let the city attorney address whether or not that’s legal or not but we did try to put a condition in there and I did find it on page 285 of your staff report. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Kate Aanenson: It talks about that the neighbors try to work together to clarify that. The easements but again we have no control over that but we did ask, and that was put in the conditions of approval. It’s probably a little awkward and maybe let the city attorney address whether or not but it was just trying to clarify maintenance and use of that easement. Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. 33 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Roger Knutson: I think the language in condition 4 is appropriate. Councilwoman Ernst: In the 285? Roger Knutson: It says. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Go ahead. Roger Knutson: The easement must assure that the property owner of Lot 2 has access to the property. Mayor Furlong: To their property via this easement. Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilwoman Ernst: I just don’t know if that, if that addresses the integrity that he’s talking about. That’s my question and maybe I need to know what he means by integrity. Jerry Story: Well… Mayor Furlong: If I could have you come back up to the microphone so we can hear you at home and on the recording, thank you Mr. Story. Jerry Story: It’s snow removal. It’s coming and going. Today we came home from an eye appointment and Ms. Carlson was in the driveway, stopped on top of the hill. She moved but she wasn’t too quick about moving. Councilwoman Ernst: So does that mean you were not able to get to your house then from there? Jerry Story: Well I had to wait til she got out of the way. Councilwoman Ernst: So. Kate Aanenson: I can only guess that happens on other occasions with the other properties too. Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah. Kate Aanenson: I guess that’s why we were trying to clarify with property number 2 who does have access rights, that they try to work together. We can’t you know just so there’s understanding of maintenance. We’ve been trying to work on this issue for 9 months and I’m not sure that we can solve those problems. The parties that have. Mayor Furlong: It’s still a private. Kate Aanenson: The parties that have an interest have to solve the problem. Mayor Furlong: Right. Okay. Does that answer your question? Councilwoman Ernst: Yeah, and the snow removal I mean the City. 34 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Kate Aanenson: Those are the parties that have interest right. The City doesn’t plow it and maintain it, correct. Councilwoman Ernst: Okay. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Jerry Story: And the fact that I’ve owned it for 23 years and no one’s ever used it ever. Until recently. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Sir, did you have public comment as well? Robert Rabe: I’m Robert Rabe and I live at 6305 up there. And I’ve learned there for 22 years and so there are a few things, and we talked about you know some of them. I do intend to preserve all of my current rights for that easement certainly and it does give me access to the back part of the lot. If you look there’s that key, right. So indeed. Kate Aanenson: This is your house and your lot. Robert Rabe: Right, exactly. Kate Aanenson: So that easement goes all the way to that. Robert Rabe: Correct. Kate Aanenson: To the terminus. Mayor Furlong: To your back property line? Robert Rabe: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Actually Mr. Rabe, do you have access to the entire length? Robert Rabe: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Or only to the end of your property line. Robert Rabe: I’d have to read the easement again. Certainly to the end of the property, my property line. Councilman Laufenburger: As far as you would need to go. Robert Rabe: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: I mean the only reason you would need to go onto the easement farther is if you were perhaps driving to visit Mr. Story. Robert Rabe: Right. I don’t know that for sure. I don’t have any idea. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Robert Rabe: It would seem likely it stops at some point. At about the property line. I don’t know that. 35 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Robert Rabe: I can check. Let’s see, we mentioned that the house is very, that house number 1 is very close to the easement. I think we’re all in agreement that that’s too close if it’s not given a variance to move to the south. Councilman Laufenburger: Do you, excuse me Mr. Rabe. Robert Rabe: Yep. Councilman Laufenburger: Does this picture that’s on the screen, does this depict where the house is right now? Robert Rabe: The house right now? Naomi’s house? Councilman Laufenburger: Yes. Robert Rabe: No. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Robert Rabe: Naomi you’d have to indicate where that is exactly. No, there’s no home there now. Kate Aanenson: Yeah I’d have to look at there’s an underlying one here. I mean there’s a property here. Robert Rabe: Right. It’s down. Kate Aanenson: It’s down so that’s where this would slide to. Councilman Laufenburger: Oh, okay. Kate Aanenson: This is a registered land survey. That’s why it’s showing that as a separate lot. It would slide down. Mayor Furlong: And I think for clarification there, what I heard earlier is the City doesn’t have any setback, as part of our ordinances we don’t require any setbacks from easements but in order to provide opportunities what’s being recommended by the staff and was approved, recommended by the Planning Commission was to provide a setback along Bretton Way, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: A variance. A reduced setback requirement along Bretton to provide that flexibility but I think there’s still, I mean even the property outside of the easement is their property and so if there’s no setback requirement within our ordinances for us to require that I think would be beyond. What we can do is provide relief so that they can move the property, or that home. Robert Rabe: So is the baseline plan to move the house farther to the south? Kate Aanenson: Yes. 36 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: What’s our ordinance requirement Ms. Aanenson with regard to location of homes within, is it buildable area or just as long as it’s within the setbacks? Kate Aanenson: As long as it’s within setbacks. If you look at this lot you can see this is the envelope that it could go into but what they’re requesting is to slide it down closer over here. Councilman Laufenburger: So this picture does not depict? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: What’s going to happen. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: This picture, what does this picture depict? Kate Aanenson: This meets the setback requirements but it’s not desirable. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So this is what the setbacks would require and I’m looking at the area to the south of this picture. That’s what would be 20 feet would be required. Kate Aanenson: I don’t know do you have a drawing of the, of that lot with the revised? Mayor Furlong: And just for clarification, all I’m saying is, and I’m in favor of the setback relief for exactly the reason that you’re commenting but I’m also recognizing that this will be somebody’s property and that as long as they’re within the city setback ordinances, if they wanted. If they didn’t want to take advantage of that relief, they wouldn’t have to. Is that fair? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Robert Rabe: So at what point does that get determined? Mayor Furlong: Well tonight we’re going to be considering whether we give relief or not. If we didn’t give relief, which I would be in favor of giving relief. If we didn’t give relief then they’d have to fit it within the, if you can show the dashed lines there. Where that building kind of sits right now. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Yeah. Mayor Furlong: So we’re. Kate Aanenson: That’s the building envelope. Mayor Furlong: What staff is recommending, and then highlight that line there Kate? Ms. Aanenson, where the relief would come from. Kate Aanenson: Sure. So they’re moving it down. Mayor Furlong: It’s along that one. Kate Aanenson: And the developer stated that’s their desire to move it down that way. 37 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So it’s a better lot so, yeah. I don’t think if they were given that relief that they wouldn’t use it. Yeah. Robert Rabe: Currently there’s no building right up against the easement though. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Robert Rabe: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Robert Rabe: So then assuming that the variance is given, is it essential or mandatory that that be followed or could they stay. Kate Aanenson: Well that’s what I was just saying. It’s their desire to move it away from the road right- of-way. It makes a better lot. A better driveway and… Robert Rabe: So it’s binding then once it’s approved? Mayor Furlong: No. Kate Aanenson: No. Mayor Furlong: No, it’s not binding. Robert Rabe: So the builder could still choose to move it back. And at what point, how does it get determined then with all this discussion you’d think there’d be some resolution. Mayor Furlong: Well, with regard to the location of the building on that lot? Robert Rabe: Right. Mayor Furlong: What’s being recommended by staff and the Planning Commission is that the, is that we approve relief so that they, that setback from Bretton Way is reduced so that they can move the property. Robert Rabe: Right. Mayor Furlong: Which from Ms. Aanenson’s comments is their expectation at this point. But they’re not required to do that and as long as they meet the setback requirements of the city. Now could they build within the easement? No because that would likely obstruct the access of use. Robert Rabe: Alright. So but the plat approval would show the house in the new location. Mayor Furlong: Does the plat include the house? Kate Aanenson: When they come back for final plat we’ll have better identification of kind of the retaining wall and where that’s going to sit and that will give them a better idea but they, they’re asking for the variance because that’s what they believe desires a better lot. They wouldn’t be asking for it if they didn’t think that would… 38 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Robert Rabe: There are two people involved here. Two parties right? Kate Aanenson: Correct, there’s the builder too. Robert Rabe: Right. Kate Aanenson: But I think they’re, they know what makes a good, sellable lot. That’s why they’re asking for the relief. Robert Rabe: But it’s, there’s no builder present. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Robert Rabe: So it would seem that it would be a binding agreement. Once we have this much discussion about it, thought and planning but. Mayor Furlong: What we can do is provide relief if there’s a practical difficulty. Is that correct standard Mr. Knutson? If the council so chooses to provide that variance, that relief through the variance process. Robert Rabe: Just trying to be clear. Mayor Furlong: Right. Robert Rabe: So then should the builder decide not to take advantage of it then we’re right back here again? Is that right? Mayor Furlong: Mr. Knutson first. Roger Knutson: Mayor, members of the council. The variance, if approved, gives them the right to build it in the area shown by the variance. Robert Rabe: Right. Roger Knutson: They also have the right under the ordinance to build it anywhere our ordinance allows them to build it. Robert Rabe: Right. Roger Knutson: They don’t have to use the variance but every indication is they intend to and will use it but are they legally required to use it? No. Robert Rabe: Right, I understand. But we’re here discussing the approval of the plan based on some assumptions so should the assumptions assume that they do build it with the variance or that they do not build it with the variance? What assumptions do we? Roger Knutson: We assume they’ll build with the variance or they’re required by the zoning ordinance. We don’t dictate which they have to do. Robert Rabe: No, I’m not asking that. Right. 39 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Roger Knutson: We’re not making any assumption. Robert Rabe: So then we should take a more conservative approach which would be that that would not be, excuse me, an attractive building site. Because they could build it there, right. So then we would not want to favor the approval based on that. Roger Knutson: But that would not be a basis for turning down a subdivision if they meet all the requirements for a subdivision. Robert Rabe: But that’s why we’re here. Roger Knutson: The question is, do they meet requirements of the ordinance. Robert Rabe: Well not just right? But it is one items. Roger Knutson: Do they meet the ordinance? Do they meet ordinance requirements? Robert Rabe: I agree but it’s not the only consideration because that’s why we’re here. Roger Knutson: No. That’s why we’re here to determine whether they meet ordinance requirements. Robert Rabe: But they already do so why have a discussion? Roger Knutson: But the City Council hasn’t made that decision yet. Robert Rabe: Okay. So then the other items. I’m not sure if, does an easement mean they have, the new property owners have access via vehicle or that they just have access? Do we know? In other words does access mean they can walk from their property up on the easement or does it mean they have to be given a vehicle access? Any idea? Roger Knutson: I have copies of their easements and I believe they’re intended to allow vehicle access. Robert Rabe: Yeah I don’t know, right. Okay. Roger Knutson: But whatever the easement say, the easements, we cannot enlarge or subtract from those easement documents. Those are property rights that are there. Robert Rabe: Yep, makes sense. The property region that has that second lot extension, as Jerry said it is about as steep as a stairway and about as high as the ceiling here probably and it’s directly adjacent to my house and I’ve maintained it for you know a long time and so it’s probably an impediment. It’s probably a problem and I don’t know what to do next about it necessarily but we probably should contemplate it. And kind of a similar item is with regard to the point where the easement hits Teton. Moving that paved area into the area that’s not paved currently is not attractive so it’s been there probably 40 years. I don’t know. So that’s another area that we’ll have to discuss and then of course as Jerry’s mentioned, making sure that the easement is still granted and in force with all the property owners is going to be really important. I don’t know what process. How does that actually happen? What occurs to make sure that that is in place? Mayor Furlong: Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: The easements are of record. 40 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Robert Rabe: Right but after the new. Roger Knutson: They’ll remain of record. Robert Rabe: What’s that? Roger Knutson: They will remain of record. They can’t be extinguished without the, without your approval. Robert Rabe: So are there no, what’s the process though? Roger Knutson: There is no process. Kate Aanenson: He’s asking can they be re-negotiated. Roger Knutson: Oh you can. Kate Aanenson: All the parties that have an interest in it could. Roger Knutson: Could sit down and re-negotiate something if there’s an agreement, sure. Robert Rabe: So that I think has to happen right? Roger Knutson: No. Robert Rabe: So what, there must be some process because it must be a new easement. Roger Knutson: No, there is no new easement. The easement is of record. It’s there. It continues. Robert Rabe: So the existing description just gets amended or attached to each of the properties? Is that how it goes? Roger Knutson: It will, their deeds will have to be subject to these easements. The easements are of record and without your approval they cannot be amended. Those easements are permanent. Robert Rabe: And so I’m just not aware. So each of the properties will have a deed. It will have a legal description. Does the language of the easement just get basically cut and pasted right into every one of those? Is that how that goes? Roger Knutson: Yes. Robert Rabe: Okay without any change whatsoever. Roger Knutson: Correct. Robert Rabe: Okay. Kate Aanenson: But another option could be, the underlying property owner or the new owner if it got sold could meet with the two other interested parties and construct. 41 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Roger Knutson: They can amend it. Kate Aanenson: Amend it. Robert Rabe: And does the City get involved in that in any way? Roger Knutson: No. Robert Rabe: Not. Okay. Okay. I have concerns but. Mayor Furlong: Mister, help me understand. You’ve mentioned the northern most parcel of Lot 2. Robert Rabe: Right. Mayor Furlong: And I think you used the word impediment but I want to understand if there are any aspects of this subdivision that they fail to meet the ordinance or? Robert Rabe: Right. So if you were standing on my back steps it would be what, roughly where that bench is right there. Mayor Furlong: Okay. That’s where the property line is? Robert Rabe: For the bump out. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Robert Rabe: And on that property section, is that a pump house that was? I think that’s why it was made like an aberration. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Robert Rabe: Because that pump house has a well that supplies the big barn building down below I believe. That’s right, right Naomi? Naomi Carlson: Just a little cottage. Robert Rabe: Okay. And so that pump house is right there and it’s you know a story tall and it’s kind of cute and all and so I paint it and I you know keep the animals out of it and stuff like that and I have done so for 22 years so to have another property right there, which is uphill about that distance is going to be problematic. I mean it will just be inherently problematic so it needs attention. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Rabe? Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger. 42 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Rabe, so this pump house that you’re describing that you’ve painted, that you’ve kept the animals out, is that on your property? Robert Rabe: Not officially. It’s on, it’s in my back yard. Councilman Laufenburger: But is it on your property? Robert Rabe: No. It’s within that extension. Councilman Laufenburger: So it belongs to, right now it belongs to Ms. Carlson. Robert Rabe: Correct, yep. Councilman Laufenburger: Thank you. Robert Rabe: But it’s not a usable parcel for the person in house number 2. Councilman Laufenburger: But isn’t that really the determination of the owner of the lot number 2? Robert Rabe: Depends I guess, right. Whether you want a harmonious neighborhood or not, kind of. I mean it’s not wise to plan a neighborhood that might lend itself to a difficulty. It’s just not smart. Plus it’s really unhandy. I mean it’s so far away and higher than the house so. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Could I just ask then what your solution would be to that piece? That parcel you’re just talking about. Robert Rabe: I do have some thoughts. I guess I wouldn’t rather not state them on record but I think they can be addressed. I don’t know who to take it up with though. Is it with Naomi or is it with Ben or the City or how? Mayor Furlong: Well depending on what the thoughts are and not being able to read your mind I think what’s being asked for the council this evening is to consider preliminary approval of this subdivision so if it’s an issue that the City needs to consider with regard to the subdivision, now would be the opportunity. Robert Rabe: Okay. Mayor Furlong: If it’s an issue with the current property owner, you can do that at any time. Robert Rabe: Okay, I did talk to Bob Generous but it wasn’t clear what the right approach would be so Ben and I talked a little bit about the access to Teton being moved which is highly unattractive to me. It encroaches on trees. It’s you know different lot setting, etc. It’s kind of a green space right there and I need it for a buffer against a new house in a large sense but I. Mayor Furlong: And I’m sorry, just for clarification. Are you talking about the same northern part of Lot 2? Kate Aanenson: No, he’s talking about the driveway right here. 43 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay. Kate Aanenson: It’s not inside the easement area. Robert Rabe: Right. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so the portion that’s outside the easement. Robert Rabe: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Robert Rabe: So the road has been over to the left by 10 feet for 40 years and it’s just really unattractive to move that up. The land where, like we’ve been talking about for the bump out is really high and not accessible. And there’s a hedge row in there and everything. The land to the east of there, there’s a steep grade down is lower so I think there could be an arrangement where part of that, keeping the same square footage is taken away from the top of the hill with his proximity and moved down, which would be more usable because it’s got the right grade. Mayor Furlong: Are you recommending a change in the property ownership and the lot lines? Robert Rabe: Moving of the lines maybe. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And Mr. Knutson if there was an issue of moving lot lines would that be a private matter? That wouldn’t be an issue that we could deal with this evening, correct? Roger Knutson: If you want to move a lot line it needs approval of the city. Mayor Furlong: But it would, it would. Roger Knutson: We’re not dealing with that. Mayor Furlong: We’re not dealing with that tonight. Roger Knutson: No. Mayor Furlong: That would be a separate application. Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: And something that would come from the property owners. Roger Knutson: Yes. Robert Rabe: So it would be a more valuable arrangement for lot number 2 because that is kind of a usable region whereas the top of the hill is really not. But I don’t know again how to tackle it. Kate Aanenson: So the impact’s on taking off the, the top hat. The chimney on Lot 2 is that it’s 65 by 42 so it’s like 2,700 square feet. That’s what I talk about it impacts the area of the Lot number 2. 44 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: But if there was, and I’m just saying here that, that’s got to be something negotiated or discussed and agreed to among the property owners, doesn’t it? Kate Aanenson: Right. Yeah he’s got, he had talked to Bob. There’s some things that he can do to work through to resolve that. To still keep that property intact so there’s some options that we can do administratively. Mayor Furlong: With the property owners and work with the property owners. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. That’s correct. And still maintain this whole lot so. Todd Gerhardt: Kate they need it for impervious surface too. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Yep. So he would still maintain that area but it could be accommodated a couple different ways so which is his objective, which I understand is because he’s looking right at it. So he’s saying if I could make that go further to the east. Robert Rabe: Correct. And that. Mayor Furlong: But that would be something that is not part of the subdivision before us this evening. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Mayor Furlong: And it would be something that would be negotiated and discussed among the property owners. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: First. Kate Aanenson: First. Mayor Furlong: And then if the property owners were in agreement, the City could perhaps administratively. Hopefully administratively. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. That’s correct. Throw something out. Mayor Furlong: Could work and help support the property owners. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Robert Rabe: And so that would be in concert with the point at which the easement hits Teton Lane also. Kate Aanenson: Something to work through, yep. Robert Rabe: I mean just in general. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Robert Rabe: Yeah, I appreciate it. Okay. I think that’s it. 45 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Robert Rabe: If there’s any question for me feel free to call. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Robert Rabe: And then so when we say property owners, it’s kind of in flux right now. Who are the right people? Naomi? Kate Aanenson: Well the current owner would have to turn over the rights to the future owner so you kind of have both to negotiate with. Robert Rabe: Okay. Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to provide public comment this evening? Okay, thank you. Let’s bring it back to council then for any follow up questions. Or comments. Any thoughts or comments on this? Otherwise I can start with just a couple and see if anybody wants to add. I think as I started out we’re dealing with a property here that is non-conforming. It’s zoned for residential but it’s clearly not a residential use and that has caused some challenges for the neighboring properties and I know there’s been many discussions here at City Hall as well trying to work with the property owners to try to come up with ways that, to find that right balance as I mentioned before. To me this subdivision is the best alternative to finding ways to illuminate some of the challenges that have existed before. I think we’ve spent a lot of time talking about easements. There are clearly property rights along, within that easement line that are owned by the properties to the north and the key here from my standpoint is to make sure that this subdivision doesn’t infringe upon those rights. Might it change the way the easement or the property is used from where it has been before? Perhaps. That may happen but as long as there isn’t an obstruction to the access easement, I think that’s clearly the decision in front of us this evening. I do appreciate staff’s willingness to work with the property owners and see if there can be some accommodations with regard to Lot 2. The driveway access but again you know the easement provides rights outside that easement. The rights are limited or nonexistent so I think when I look at this, the variance requests are reasonable and appropriate because of the uniqueness of this property and are helping from a public benefit standpoint the elimination of a non-conformity of this property currently so all things considered, and there are many things to consider. It seems to me that this is an overall win for everyone concerned. It may not be perfect. It may not be exactly what everybody might want the property to do but ultimately we’ve talked a lot about property rights this evening and the property owner has a right to develop their property and subdivide it within the ordinances. That’s what we’re looking at here this evening and I think it has been a challenge to get to this point and I thank everyone involved. The developer. Property owners. The neighbors. The staff for slugging through this and trying to make sure that we get, in the end four new homes. Four new families. Four new neighbors that are going to be coming into this neighborhood and being a part of the city of Chanhassen and that’s what I think long term the positive that we’re looking at so from my standpoint I want to thank everybody for their involvement but also recommend to the council that we do move forward with this as being recommended by staff and the Planning Commission. Though certainly I’d be open to other comments as well. Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Mayor. I would agree. I think this is good news for the neighborhood. I do support the variances and I think it’s important just a comment on future presentation Kate. The screen that I’m looking at right now, I believe that the dot dash line that we see in Lot 1. Kate Aanenson: Oh here. 46 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah. The dot dash line that, there. That line. That is the line that depicts the setbacks required with current ordinances, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That is correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah. It would be nice to have a little red line that moves that bottom line down 10 feet to show okay this then becomes the envelope. The buildable area and the truth is once we approve the variance, which I do support, then the builder can build anywhere within that, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, so I think that perhaps might have provided a little clarity for Mr. Rabe when, with his question so that’s just a thought for the future. Kate Aanenson: Sure. Councilman Laufenburger: And just the last thing, and this is I’m probably out of bounds in saying this but, I don’t think we can ordinance harmony in the neighborhood. I don’t think that’s a, it doesn’t mean it’s not a responsibility but I think the primary responsibility for harmony in the neighborhood lies with those in the neighborhood so as much as I listen to and hear the dissonance that is created, I think that this step on the part of the owner to subdivide for residential lots, I think there’s a great opportunity for incredible harmony in the neighborhood and I think that’s probably what the owner and the developer is looking for. And then one last question Ms. Aanenson. You described this current usage of this lot as non-conforming. Legally non-conforming, is that the right term? Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: What action on the part of the City, if anything, made this a legally non- conforming lot? Kate Aanenson: When we rezoned it to residential. Councilman Laufenburger: And when did we do that? Kate Aanenson: In the staff report it was in 1986. Councilman Laufenburger: So there’s nothing that this property owner has done to earn the scorn of the City that they don’t have residential lots there because what they, they built the lot in accordance with the zoning that was in place when they built it. Kate Aanenson: That’s correct. Councilman Laufenburger: Alright, okay. So thank you Ms. Aanenson. That’s all I have Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other thoughts or comments? Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Mr. Mayor, I remember one of my first times on council, I won’t talk about how long ago, sometimes some city businesses like making sausage you don’t always want to know how it’s done but you hope that it turns out well in the end and I think this is a perfect example of what you explained to me. I think we have a parcel that was non-conforming and way back in it’s time it served it’s purpose. I believe it was a farm and then also housed or housed people maybe or it was businesses. 47 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Small businesses so it did have a purpose there and now I think it’s kind of come full circle where now it’s going to become residential and I believe harmony will be found once that does happen but it just, it’s going to take a while to get there. It’s going to take a lot to get through those growing pains and you know a lot of those growing pains come from the unknown and some of those unknown elements obviously are the easements. These are binding easements that you have that you’ve privately used this property for years and years and so hopefully within time everybody will become comfortable with how everything will turn out when it comes to the use of these easements. That everyone will still have reasonable access to their property and let’s hope that at one point all these four houses will use these easements to go visit each other and be a neighborhood. I don’t know when it’s going to happen but I have a, I’m optimistic that at one point this will happen. And so I too am in favor of the variances and I really do look forward to seeing how everything turns out and I look forward to maybe National Night Out 2 years from now checking it out and having a glass of lemonade with everybody so thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other comments? Councilwoman Ernst: Sure. Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Ernst. Councilwoman Ernst: So it’s sounds based on all the information that I’ve heard tonight that some of the neighbors really got caught up in a change that happened some time ago and were, it basically was out of their control but I’m hoping that the neighbors can collaborate and work together to figure this out and it sounds like staff is willing to work with the neighbors once there’s some consensus there and hopefully move forward. That’s all. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Appreciate everybody’s comments and again thank you to everybody that’s been involved in this. It’s been a challenge for all concerned and I know that but we’re grateful for the work that you’ve done because of the comments that you’ve heard tonight. I think long term in the big picture this is a great step forward for the neighborhood. As Councilwoman Tjornhom mentioned that maybe some growing pains still as we go through the demolition and the construction but hopefully everybody can work together for the greater good. With that I will certainly entertain a motion. Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I can do that. Mr. Mayor I’d like to make a motion that the Chanhassen City Council approves the preliminary plat creating four lots, approves the hard cover variance of Lots 1 and 3 of 7.4 percent and 3.2 percent respectively as well as the front setback variance for Lot 1 of 10 feet (20 foot front setback on Bretton Way). Subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Laufenburger: Second. Mayor Furlong: Motion’s been made and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion? Hearing none we’ll proceed with the vote. Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Laufenburger seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approves the preliminary plat creating four lots, approves the hard cover variances for Lots 1 and 3 of 7.4 percent (32.4% hardcover) and 3.2 percent (28.2% hard cover respectively), as well as the front setback variance for Lot 1 of 10 feet (20 foot front setback on Bretton Way), subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact: 48 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 Subdivision with setback and hardcover variances: Building: 1. Appropriate permit(s) required for the demolition or moving of any existing structures. 2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before building permits can be issued. 3. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 4. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. Engineering: 1. The easements per Documents T15149 and T17882 must be extinguished prior to final plat approval. 2. Prior to final plat submittal the developer shall coordinate with the gas company to verify the location of the gas line. If the gas line is not within an existing easement the developer must provide and dedicate the necessary easement or relocate the gas line to lie within an easement area in accordance to CenterPoint Energy’s specifications. 3. The drainage and utility easements on the north side of Lots 1 and 3 can be reduced to 10 feet. 4. Any portion of the gravel surface on the north side of the property that is disturbed with this development shall be paved. 5. It is the developer’s responsibility to coordinate access to the gravel surface with the affected residents during construction. 6. The proposed retaining wall shall comply with the following: a) A building permit is required, b) The design shall comply with the Minnesota Department of Transportation standards for retaining walls, c) The drainage design for the wall shall consider the surface runoff that will sheet drain towards the wall, d) The wall crosses over property lines and therefore it shall be built in conjunction with the subdivision and a homeowners association must be formed to own and maintain the wall, e) An encroachment agreement will be required before the retaining wall building permit is issued if the retaining wall is to be installed within the platted drainage and utility easement. f) The developer shall ensure that the wall construction does not compromise the private sanitary sewer service or the gas line in the area. g) The developer shall install a barrier (fence, berm, landscaping or other barrier) between the private gravel street and the top of the retaining wall. 49 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 7. All driveways within the development shall meet the 10% maximum driveway slope. The developer is encouraged to consider a driveway design that many homeowners desire which includes a landing (typically 3%) at each end of the driveway (at the street and at the garage). nd 8. Sewer and water services to each of the proposed four lots were installed by the Curry Farms 2 Addition developer; therefore, the sewer and water lateral fees do not apply. 9. Prior to final plat approval the developer shall identify which of the four lots will receive the City SAC and City WAC credit. 10. The remaining three lots shall be subject to the City SAC and WAC, 30% of which will be collected with the final plat at the rate in effect at the time of final plat approval. 11. All lots are subject to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Sanitary Access Charge (MCES SAC), which is paid with the building permit. 12. A portion of the private sanitary sewer service to the home located on 6281 Teton Lane will encroach into the platted drainage and utility easement; therefore, an encroachment agreement is required. Natural Resources: 1. Tree protection fencing will be required at the edge of grading limits near any preserved trees. It shall be installed prior to grading. 2. Trees required to be planted are as follows: Lot 1 – 5 trees, Lot 2 – 2 trees, Lot 3 – 4 trees, Lot 4 – 7 trees. Planning: 1. The developer shall perform a phase I environmental audit on the property surrounding the commercial building prior to recording the final plat. 2. The existing buildings on the property, including sheds, house and the long building must be demolished prior to recording of the final plat. 3. A ten-foot building setback from the access easement (Doc. No. 14111 and 14055) is required. 4. The developer shall work with the neighboring property owners to clarify the use, permitted users and maintenance responsibility of the easement. Specifically, the easement must assure that the property owner for Lot 2 may access the rear of their property via this easement. The developer shall ensure that the necessary easement is in place so that the future property owner of Lot 2 can access the northern tip of the property. A revised easement document shall be recorded with the plat. Water Resources: 1. The applicant shall either procure a drainage and utility easement over the entirety of the culvert or they shall install a catch basin manhole in Bretton Way just west of the driveway for Lot 4 and tie this into the existing public storm sewer system. In either event, the applicant shall model the conveyance choice to assure adequate capacity and provide a safe and stable emergency overflow. 2. The applicant must provide clarification to resolve the disparate impervious surface calculations and assure adequate volume reduction. 50 Chanhassen City Council – October 13, 2014 3. The applicant shall provide infiltration/water quality volume adequate to address the volume reduction requirements for the runoff from all impervious surfaces in the development. 4. The applicant must provide a detail of the rain gardens which is consistent with the recommendations and requirements of the Minnesota Stormwater Manual before final plat approval. 5. The applicant shall provide a detailed planting schedule for the rain garden areas. 6. The applicant shall provide a hydrograph showing the duration of ponding is less than 48 hours and shall reduce the ponding depth so the bounce does not exceed MN Storm Water Manual guidance or correct the soils and demonstrate that they are commensurate with HSG A or B soils. 7. The side slopes into the rain gardens shall not exceed three horizontal feet for every one vertical foot. 8. Discharge velocities into the rain gardens shall not exceed four cubic feet per second or the applicant shall provide scour calculations and adequate energy dissipation to assure erosion will not be an issue. 9. Pre-treatment shall be provided to minimize sediment deposition into the rain gardens. 10. Drain tile services must be provided to all properties that will flow from the back to the front of the lot. 11. Erosion Control plan /SWPPP must include all elements required under Chapter 19 of City Code. 12. Engineer estimate of quantities for erosion control and sediment prevention, including those necessary for final site stabilization, shall be provided and used to calculate escrow amount. 13. A Storm Water Management Utility fee estimated to be $9,168.00 shall be paid with final plat. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: Thank you everybody. APPROVE CONTRACT FOR TH 101 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN. Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Let me bring up the power point presentation here that I have. I’d like to maybe just go through a little bit of background on how we came to this point for 101. Back in 2006-2007, if you recall the City entered into a contract with MnDOT and Carver County to help fund the corridor study along 101 south of Lyman Boulevard. This was basically right after 212 was constructed and at that time the City was concerned about you know when 212 came in the additional traffic out in this area and the safety issues that were known at that time with the corridor so that study was completed in 2007. Since then 101 has been improved from Lyman Boulevard down to Pioneer Trail and actually back in August of this year that section of roadway was improved. This was another joint project between Carver County, MnDOT and also federal funds were also available. Made available for this project to make the improvements at that time. We took out steep curves. Blind intersections. Straighten out the road as best as we can. We had neighborhood meetings associated with that project and built it to a 4 lane design. We had a lot of residents and citizens concerned about the project itself. The impacts to the boulevard or to the area with tree loss and how the alignment was going to work. Since that time we’ve heard some really positive comments from the neighbors and others in, that have commented back to city staff how well that project turned out. Just this year we started 51