PC Minutes 09-15-2015Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
PUBLIC HEARING: ARBOR GLEN, PLANNING CASE 2015-16: REQUEST FOR
REZONING OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT (A2) TO
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (PUD-R), CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK CORRIDOR, AND
SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES OF 8.49 ACRES INTO 21 LOTS AND 4 OUTLOTS
ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9170 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD.
APPLICANT/OWNER: ARBOR GLEN CHANHASSEN, LLC/GIANETTI
PROPERTIES, LLC.
Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Planning Case 2015-16 is Arbor Glen. The
applicant is Arbor Glen Chanhassen LLC and Gianetti Properties LLC. The meeting tonight is
the public hearing. This is scheduled for council on October 12, 2015. It entails a conditional
use permit, a planned unit development rezoning and preliminary plat with a variance. While
our report says subdivision, subdivisions require two phases. The first phase is preliminary plat
approval. It’s to look at it for compliance with city ordinance. The final phase would be a final
plat approval which includes the approval of any construction plans so at the preliminary level
they don’t have all those construction details available and done and so we look at it and say this
is what you have to do to clean up the plat. The property is located at the southwest corner of
Lyman Boulevard and Highway 101. It currently is a vacant field. At one time there was a
house on the property but that has been removed with the upgrading of 101. The PUD rezoning
is from Agricultural Estate District (A2) to Planned Unit Development Residential. As part of
this approval we are looking for the actual design standards within that which includes uses,
setbacks, site coverage, things like that. The conditional use permit is required because this is
development within the Bluff Creek corridor. This is a wing of the Bluff Creek corridor. The
wetland complex to the south and west of this contributes water to the Bluff Creek corridor. The
preliminary plat approval with a variance from the westerly property line setback requirements.
Under the PUD the standards are generally a 50 foot perimeter setback. They would like to go to
20 feet to accommodate the first two lots on the northwest corner of this property. That’s
partially required because of the location of the existing access into the property and to create
that horizontal curves that go in there. The planned unit development ordinances within the staff
report, the design standards are on pages 4 and 5 of the development. The uses would be limited
to the detached townhouses that they’re proposing which are single family homes on smaller
lots. They’re generally narrower in design but they may be longer. And it would also address
any accessory uses that would be permitted as part of the overall development, common areas,
things like that. Gazebos. Shelters. It would allow them to have that that are normally
associated with single family subdivisions. Again the permitted uses would just be limited to
these 21 townhouse units. The lot requirements and setback requirements are all established as
part of the ordinance and that future building permits would be required to submit or comply
with that. Again the conditional use permit is required as part of the Bluff Creek Overlay
District. Because this is within the corridor we want to make sure that we look at it’s potential
impact on it. There are some issues that we have as part of the current design and there’s
conditions in the subdivision approval to require the applicant to mitigate that and improve,
enhance the overall development. There is a 40 foot setback from the Bluff Creek primary zone
26
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
required as part of the development and that would be continued. Additionally any alterations
within that corridor within the buffer area would be required to be restored and enhanced with
more native planting. Again the subdivision request is for 21 single or 21 villa lots. There’d be
4 outlots as part of this development. One of the conditions of approval would be that they
incorporate the Trident stormwater system within a separate outlot. The City in the condition of
approval for the CUP and the subdivision would require dedication of Outlot C which is the
Bluff Creek primary zone and the buffer area to the community for perpetual protection. The
grading, drainage, erosion control plans it shows that they will provide a stormwater system.
There are some issues with the, to verify that their stormwater system actually provides the
abstraction that’s required under new watershed district regulations and things that the City
needs to impose. Additionally the stormwater pond encroaches into the required buffer area of
the watershed district so they’d have to redesign that area of the project. The minimum buffer
area under the watershed district is 30 feet and the edge of that pond would be closer to that so it
would have to be redesigned as part of that. Again the stormwater system incorporates the
Trident containment building and the pond as well as the conveyance for stormwater and the
like. There is an emergency overflow in the middle of the private street that they’re proposing as
part of this development. The applicant’s engineer has looked at making a revision that would
eliminate that overflow area and force it down to the end of the private driveways to the south, in
the southeast corner of the development. Again the current, the plan that they permit does not
meet the City requirements or the watershed district requirements. The detention ponds that
they’re proposing does not maintain the 30 foot buffer. Minimum 30 foot buffer from the
wetland which the watershed district requires so that would have to be resolved. Additionally it
doesn’t provide abstraction holding the first 1.1 inches or 1 inch of water onto the property and
so that would have to be redesigned before they could come back for the final plat approval.
Again the Trident system or the storage system that they’re proposing as part of this plan does
not meet the abstraction requirements in there and so they’d have to through engineering show
that that can be done. Staff believes that the site is conducive to meeting these requirements.
However they may have to revise the plat to accommodate that and potentially losing a lot if they
can’t redesign that stormwater pond and make that Trident system work appropriately. We did
look at, suggest one option which would be to provide a stormwater system down along the 101
side of that. That would actually provide areas for water to be held on site. That’s something
that they can look at in conjunction with going forward with the final plat. And then they need to
do the due diligence for geotechnical expiration on site to make sure that the water can be held
on the property. City sewer and water services are available to the property and would be
extended as part of the subdivision so every house would connect to the city’s system. And
again the stormwater system would be installed as part of the subdivision. Landscaping is
proposed around the perimeter and in the front of each of the homes. One of the conditions
would be that they become forward with their restoration plan for the Bluff Creek corridor so
they’re going to make alterations down there. We want to see that revegetated with more natural
species. And with that staff is recommending approval of the PUD-R rezoning, the conditional
use permit and the preliminary plat approval with a variance from the western property line
subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopting the attached Findings of Fact and
Recommendation.
27
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
Aanenson: Mr. Chair I was just going to add a couple other comments that maybe Bob just kind
of glossed over a little bit and that’s, there’s some challenges to this site in of itself and that is
that the William’s Pipeline runs along, you grabbing the mouse from me? Yeah I was trying to
get the laser pointer there. The William’s Pipeline runs through the northern part of the property
so it’s a bit challenging right through here and how they looked at laying out those lots. And
then there are some retaining walls and maybe I’ll let Alyson Fauske go through maybe a little
bit about the retaining walls that are between the site and how that works out with the grading
and some of the challenges to get this project to work.
Aller: So Alyson while you’re hitting that my first question was going to be, is this going to be a
total grade or are they going to do it in piece?
Aanenson: Mass grading.
Aller: Yeah.
Fauske: It would appear Chairman Aller that this site would be mass graded. I think the
applicant could probably speak to that but just taking a look at the grading plan and the amount
of grade that it drops from the north to the south it would appear to be a mass graded project. As
Kate had mentioned there is some retaining walls along the southern side of the proposed
development. Looking at the combined, pardon me. The combined height of the walls between
the upper and lower tiers it looks like it could be upwards of 10 feet tall in that area so there’s
some significant grades that they are working against in trying to maximize the developable area
of the property as well as being cognizant of the wetland buffer to the south.
Aanenson: Then a couple other things I’m just going to touch on. There is a trail that will
connect along 101 so that will be a completion of this segment here so I think there was some
discussion then about relocating that trail slightly. The redesigning that a little bit there. And
then just briefly I think Bob touched on this too but we do have the narrower street coming to the
public streets to make that work. Again that's the design is being driven by some of those
parameters. The Bluff Creek to the south and the retaining walls to make those grades work.
Getting the sewer and then the push on the north side then would be the William’s Pipeline and
so very challenging site and the applicants worked really hard to make a project. Put a project in
there which is single family detached which we think would be very nice there but make it work
so that was the challenges.
Aller: Great, thank you. Any additional questions at this time for staff? Hearing none we’ll
have the applicants come forward and make your presentation. If you can state your name and
address for the record, tell us about your project please.
Mark Eklo: Sure, Mark Eklo. 3360 Bavaria Road, Chaska.
28
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
Aller: Welcome.
Mark Eklo: Thank you. The proposal, I don’t have a formal presentation other than what the
City has done in terms of that. The idea and what we felt the need was in the city of Chanhassen
is for detached villas for what we wouldn’t call it a senior project but basically they are people
50 or older are the majority of people that purchase these properties and what it is is it’s down
sizing for a lot of these people from their two story homes type of thing and this project is
designed to be one level living on the main floor so there are 2 or 3 bedrooms plus a den and
there are 2 or 3 baths all on the main floor. They all have a covered porch on the main floor so
not a deck or something out the rear. It’s actually under the roof section of it so it could be
screened in and be a nice exterior amenity to the property. That’s part of the structure of the
property itself. And then the whole idea is that they’re cared for from an exterior standpoint so
that lawn maintenance, snow plowing, everything is taken care of so people can lock their door
and go to Florida for 5 months in the winter or whatever they want to do or go visit the kids for a
month somewhere else around type of thing and we just don’t see a lot of product like that
currently available in Chanhassen. There’s some but on a limited basis and so we thought there
was a real need on this south side to provide something like this. Obviously too it has great
access to 212 so it’s convenient for families to get to and for people living there to get to and
from and so we just felt it was a real nice property for that. We did want to do detached single
family because we felt that that was the best use of the property. I know there’s been proposals
for attached townhomes. For apartment buildings potentially. For I know at one time there was
a Harley-Davidson proposal that was floating around you know and so we thought in terms of
what was across the street to the east and to the northeast and then also to the neighbors to the
west that detached single family was the best type of property to put in here that would enhance
everybody’s values in the area and provide an enclave of 20 people that own their homes. Not
renters or anything like that that hopefully will keep the property values and everything up. The
proposed price point in these, the least expensive units will be in the high 300’s and I’m sure the
ones that are walkouts on the pond side, on the wetland side they will I’m sure push 500 and
somebody will do enough goodies in it I’m sure to push over 500 so we’re not talking about you
know subsidized or reduced housing. Either it’s values that will be in the you know high 300’s
to probably pushing the high 400’s in terms of the value of the properties of the people that will
be purchasing them. We have worked extensively with staff in trying to incorporate the lots that
we can get in there and we’ve tried to incorporate 3 different styles. The 5 lots that face Lyman
are, will be without walkout or look out basements. They will have a full basement but they will
not have any look out’s so they in essence will feel like a slab on grade even though there will be
a basement there. The 5 properties to the east or that face 101, those 5 properties will have look
out’s so they will have basements and they will have daylight windows. And then the 11
properties that are to the south and the southwest, they will be walkout basement properties so all
of those will have that so we’re trying to again offer features for somebody who just wants to get
by and just have the one level and not have a lower level space that’s finished or walked out and
then we also have for those people that want to maybe expand the lower level and add an extra
bedroom or two so if the kids come home type of thing they’ve got a place for them so there’s all
3 different sizes. The properties all have 2 car attached garages. No 3 car garages. The site
29
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
doesn’t allow the width to have a 3 car. The garages do all face the street. They aren’t a side
entry because again we don’t have the size of lots that we can do it so the garage doors will face
the streets. I know in one of the stipulations here they’ve asked us to tell us exactly how we’re
going to flip the houses so they know exactly where the garages are. The roads all pretty much
go downhill as we go into that cul-de-sac and so more than likely all the garages will be on the
high side obviously as we’re going downhill in order to work from a flow standpoint. The
garage has to be on the high side so more than likely pretty much all the garages will be on the
west sides of most of those properties. They will be stone, brick. Some kind of additional
feature on the front of them with real wood or real semitatious type finish that we see today.
They probably will be vinyl on the other 3 sides that we see fairly common in today. Again we
want to try and make them as maintenance free as possible given the age group that we’re
targeting so to speak so again there’s not a lot of 60 year old people climbing ladders to paint and
clean gutters type of things so we’re hoping that that’s the type of thing. The insides of course
will be all the amenities that you see in all the new homes today. You know 9 or 10 foot
ceilings. Very open living space. Probably no formal dining rooms. You know just the big
gathering area and then bedrooms and bathrooms so any questions that you folks have of me that
I can try and answer?
Aller: Commissioner Hokkanen.
Hokkanen: Of the 21, how many different front elevations are there?
Mark Eklo: We’re planning on having 3 sizes so roughly 1,500, 1,750 and 2,000 square feet on
the main floor so that’s not counting any lower level or walkout and each of those sizes would
have a minimum of 2 if not 3 elevations.
Hokkanen: Okay.
Mark Eklo: And that helps us hit our price points too in terms of where we want to try and be so
if someone wants, and basically if you look at it, and I don’t know if any of you have seen these
homes somewhere else, the 1,500 square feet basically is a 2 bedroom, 2 bath, very simple. It
can be, and it might have a small study type thing. The 1,750 is a 3 bedroom or a 2 bedroom
plus a den. And then the 2,000 square footer ends up being 4 bedrooms or 3 bedrooms plus a
den and then they of course they all have a little laundry room, the kitchen, the gathering area
and the dining area. And then like I said all of them and I think, I don’t know if it got included
in the reports. I know I submitted some rough sketches of some plans that have, they’ll all have
a covered porch and that’s, we don’t see that here too often. We haven’t seen that and again we
feel that’s an important ingredient to offer because we all have lived in Minnesota and know how
the bugs can be in the evening and these people will be enjoying these homes for sure in the
summer time and on the wetland area will probably add more bugs to their life so the idea of
having a porch on the back that can be screened in and that type of thing so they can still enjoy
the outdoors but have a screened porch we think is a real nice asset to have to these homes so
they’ve all got that covered porch area. Any other questions?
30
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
Tietz: …illustrations, are these just illustrations for ideas or are we really going to see Florida?
Mark Eklo: No. No those are, but those are the floor plans. We’re stealing, I’m not…
Tietz: Well I’m just asking about the facades.
Mark Eklo: …plagiarizing from Florida the floor plans.
Tietz: The architecture.
Mark Eklo: What we wanted to do and of course it’s you know, you guys understand this, it’s a
dollar decision. Until we get some preliminary approval we don’t want to spend $10,000 and go
out and design plans until we have a preliminary approval. We’ll be glad to submit our plans
you know whenever you want to see them but we are plagiarizing, yes. It’s not an original idea.
We’re just hopefully bringing an idea that’s worked well elsewhere to Chanhassen.
Tietz: Yeah just to follow up on the discussion about the stormwater control. Because it is a
difficult site and you’ve used that extreme southeast corner for the ponding area and then you
have 10 and a half, two tiered 10 and a half foot wall. I mean it’s right adjacent to that ponding,
proposed ponding area. I think it’s going to be really interesting to see how you follow up with
that and control the issue of stormwater on and off site.
Mark Eklo: Well again it’s my understanding the system that we’ve proposed that you see as the
pink square along the side there, that particular system according to our engineer, given the space
that we have there we can design that to handle any amount of water flow that we need and again
I’m a layman speaking I won’t pretend that I’m an engineer but my understanding is that’s
basically a filtration system and so the water will be collected and it will come into that system
and it will flow through that filtration system and again if you look in the conditions that are
required we have to submit to the City an operational plan for that filtration system and the
homeowners association will be responsible to clean it and prove to the City or give whatever
documentation is required by the City that it is being maintained. The people that have designed
the system tell us that the water comes out to the pond side there is, meets all standards and will
meet any standards that are required by all these different watershed districts and so on and so
forth and they stand behind it and they are the ones that are the engineers and have done the
testing and will be able to prove it. Obviously we’re trusting them at this point and we have to
go as part of this deal we have to of course go get our permits from the watershed district and so
you know they’re going to have to step up and prove what they’re saying to the watershed
district in order for us to get the permit.
Tietz: No I understand. It just looks like you know that corner gets really difficult and in a
severe grade to begin with and then we’re cutting back and putting two tiers and then a large
31
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
pond in front. It just makes your whole construction and engineering process a bit more difficult
so just looking at it.
Mark Eklo: There’s no doubt about this site being a challenge.
Tietz: Yeah.
Mark Eklo: Absolutely no doubt. We agree with you 100 percent there.
Tietz: Good.
Aller: Great. Any additional questions at this time? Thank you sir. At this point I’ll open the
public hearing. Any additional person that wishes to speak either for or against the item before
us can come up and do so at this time. Any comments? Welcome sir. State your name and
address for the record.
Steve Friedrichs: Steve Friedrichs, 8955 Southwest Village Loop in Chan and I was here in July
I think when this got deferred. I’m the HOA President for Southwest Village so obviously I’m
here to represent you know my 38 residents interest and I guess the first thing for the applicant,
we’re all for growth. We understand the importance of growth so we really wanted to know just
kind of conceptually. We’ve got a board meeting next week, what’s going in there. You know
villas. Townhomes. Apartment buildings. So my question is just traffic flows. Is all the traffic
flow on Lyman? Is that the proposed?
Aanenson: That’s correct. Do you have that other drawing? It T’s into the driveway coming out
by the Primrose there.
Steve Friedrichs: Got it, okay.
Aanenson: It will be a T intersection.
Steve Friedrichs: Okay so nothing on 101.
Aanenson: Correct.
Steve Friedrichs: Okay. Alright. Great. And I’m one of those 50 plus people and I still do go
up on a ladder so just so you know.
Aanenson: …edification here so this is where that driveway will come out. It T’s right into.
Steve Friedrichs: So right where you go into the shopping center or whatever.
Aanenson: Correct. Correct.
32
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
Steve Friedrichs: Yeah Kwik Trip, all that stuff. Great, excellent. So that was really the
purpose of me being here. I guess the other point is, I’ve been here for 8 months at Southwest
Village. Don’t know the appropriateness of this but just comments and I would say this to the
applicant to really follow through on what you say you’re going to do because I can tell you that
as the HOA president Ryland Builders has done a D minus job on following through. On our
exterior issues, on common area issues, things from siding falling off. Not following up on
landscaping. Caulking. No on site supervision. We have this smoke alarm, CO2 alarm recall
issue, which we’ve gotten no support from the City so I guess I don’t know if this is appropriate
to even tell you about it but I hope that you’re behind. I understand growth. I’m all for it.
That’s why I moved here right but the process management and dotting all the I’s and crossing
all the T’s. The dead trees. The dead bushes. The sod. Irrigation design problems are things
that I think we as a homeowners association take ownership for but could certainly use some
support from the City in that regard.
Aller: Thank you very much sir, appreciate it. Any additional comments? Yes sir, state your
name and address for the record.
Jim Wilson: I’m Jim Wilson and I’ve got the nursery just to the south. I don’t live there. My
address there is 9150 Great Plains. I’m a co-owner. I haven’t seen anything really that you
know puts the warning signals up until the previous gentleman spoke but those are things that are
between them and their builder I would guess and maybe they need to hire a lawyer. The one
thing that does cause me a little bit of concern, and it’s just a little bit is that Bluff Creek primary
zone from what I understand in the presentation there’s going to be a two tier 10 foot retaining
wall along that south edge and the one thing that concerns me, and I don’t know if you can
require this. If the engineer can require it but the type of material that’s used to build those walls
can be very industrial looking, if you know what I mean so if I was going to be living over on the
other side, my side facing that I would prefer to look at like a boulder wall scenario which would
fit into that area better because that is a natural area and to put a brick or a concrete formed type
of material, you know of stacking block, you see it all over, I don’t think that would fit in good
there. Do you concur with that or what do you think?
Aanenson: I’ll let Alyson address that because we’ve changed our standards for retaining walls
based on failures in storm events so.
Fauske: Thank you Kate. If I may Chairman Aller.
Aller: Please.
Fauske: On page 10 of the staff report an excellent question brought up by Mr. Wilson is with
regards to the retaining wall and the type of material that can be used. As Kate had mentioned
we’ve had some issues with boulder walls in some developments with some failures so we are
looking at restricting the use of boulder walls. That being said we also restrict smooth face
33
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
concrete walls that have that more industrial look to it. There’s a lot of different materials and
methods to build retaining walls nowadays. There’s some, you know there’s a variety of colors,
textures, size of block so I would feel quite confident that the developer has a variety of materials
to choose from but we do restrict certain types of materials for retaining walls.
Jim Wilson: And boulders, you are, you have a restriction on the use of boulders?
Fauske: Correct if it’s over 6 feet tall.
Jim Wilson: Probably because of the way it’s constructed.
Fauske: Correct. What we’ve had issues with in the past, and we tend to try to learn from the
errors of the past is that just the construction, the construction oversight. We’re not out there
inspecting the wall every boulder that goes down and the challenge being that there’s just, the
structural strength of those retaining walls is a challenge so the applicant I think could probably
speak better to what their intent for type of retaining block would be but we do have certain
requirements.
Tietz: Alyson I noticed on the plan there’s one that’s proposed to be roughly 3 feet and one that
would be 4 feet. Would they fall within the acceptable height limit for a natural stone wall?
Fauske: Yes.
Tietz: It’s the 6, the 6 foot or the 5 ½ foot wall that would not?
Fauske: Correct and the challenge with retaining wall designs and I’m not a retaining wall
designer but my knowledge of retaining walls is that they have to be a certain distance apart in
order for them to not to, to influence each other so so long as the retaining wall designer has
provided that and there is a tiered wall that is under that 6 foot threshold, and then certainly that
would be an appropriate material.
Jim Wilson: That’s all I had.
Aller: Thank you Mr. Wilson. If you’d like to come up.
Mark Eklo: May I add something?
Aller: Absolutely, that’s fine. I was going to say that the reason that these public hearings are
great is it gives everyone an opportunity to discuss it.
Mark Eklo: …everyone understood that it is a tiered wall and the reason we wanted to do a
tiered wall is first of all we don’t want to have to have a 10 foot wall and a guard rail, a hand rail
of some kind up there from a safety standpoint so, and the idea is again in looking at again at the
34
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
conditions is we’re going to be planting in that interim level if you will so there will be a wall
that comes up from the buffer area and then it will be flatten or have a slight slope to it. It has to
be less than 3 to 1, and then there will be the second wall and we will be planting, putting plants
on that tiered area plus we have to replant the buffer area as well so I think when, as we all know
as landscaping grows up it wouldn’t be initially but as landscaping grows up I really think you’ll
see very little of that wall in terms of the vegetation from the wetland will cover the lower
portion of the wall and what we put on the interim will cover the large portion so we really don’t
want to see the wall either but we have to build it for that. The other comment I would have is
that, I know technically there is a way to engineer bouldered walls but we have to provide an
engineered plan for these walls and bouldered walls are very difficult to engineer because there’s
no way to calculate what’s sitting on top of what so again the fact that the City requires us to
provide engineered walls it makes boulder walls very difficult to do if not impossible.
Jim Wilson: I didn’t realize that.
Mark Eklo: Yeah so have to provide engineered walls so chances are, I mean they won’t be
boulder walls. We’re not planning on doing that but we certainly want to make them disappear
and we want to have them so that they’re not a visible obstruction because we want to sell
houses. People don’t like looking at walls, I understand. Appreciate that.
Aller: Great, thank you. Any additional comments? Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the
public hearing portion of the item and open it to discussion.
Hokkanen: I think it’s good use of the land for a difficult piece of property.
Aller: I think everybody realizes how difficult a site it is and that there might be some changes
coming but the items that we’re going to be, if we approve the PUD rezoning and conditional use
aren’t going to be covered by those conditions and they’ll come back with dot your I, cross your
T kind of scenario where we can take a closer look or the council can take a closer look at it so
for final. Any other comments? I’ll entertain a motion.
Tietz: I’ll entertain a motion the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve the PUD rezoning, conditional use permit and preliminary plat approved with a
variance from the western perimeter setbacks subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the
Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Madsen: Second.
Yusuf: Second.
Hokkanen: Second.
35
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
Aller: I have a motion which has been seconded. Any further communication or discussion?
Tietz moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends
that the City Council approvethe PUD rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Subdivision
with a Variance from the western perimeter setback subject to the following conditions of
approval, and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
REZONING
1. Contingent on Final Plat approval for the Arbor Glen Development.
SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCE
Building:
1.Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
2.Engineered design and building permits are required for retaining walls exceeding four feet
in height.
3.Each lot must be provided with a separate sewer and water service.
4.Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures.
5.Proper removal, abandonment or sealing of storage tanks, on-site septic systems, wells, etc. is
required. Permits are required, as applicable.
Engineering:
1. There is an existing field entrance (curb cut) on 101. The curb cut shall be removed since
access will be from CSAH 18.
2. The drainage along the corridor right-of-way should remain in a similar flow direction. It
appears from the contours that with the building of the berm there may be an area that does
not drain.
3. Any grading or other work within the road right-of-way will require a permit from Carver
County.
4.The City shall require a drainage and utility easement to be granted over Outlot A.
5.A 10-foot easement is required on the rear lot lines of Lots 1 through 9, Block 3.
6.The topography must show 100 feet beyond the property boundary to the west, including the
first floor elevation of the building on the adjacent lot.
36
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
7.The grading plan must be revised to include the house pads and driveway locations
8.The low floor elevations of these proposed homes must be revised to comply with a three-
foot separation from groundwater encountered during construction.
9.The lowest building openings of Lots 5 and 6, Block 3 must be adjusted to a minimum of one
foot above the emergency overflow (EOF) elevation or the EOF must be relocated.
10.A standard lot benching detail shall be included in the plan set.
11.The grading plan must be revised at the back of Lot 5, Block 2, between Lots 2 and 3,
Block 3 and between the retaining walls to be no greater than 3:1.
12.The Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan with all elements required by the NPDES
Construction Permit shall be prepared and supplied to the city for approval with the final plat
and prior to any earth-disturbing activities.
13.Proof of the NPDES Construction Permit having been procured by the applicant shall be
supplied to the city prior to any earth-disturbing activities.
14.The entire buffer area shall be placed into Outlot C and the outlot shall be dedicated to the
city.
15.The trident underground storage and filtration system shall be located in a separate outlot
from Outlot C.
16.A detailed planting schedule, including types and size of plants if plugs are to be used or the
seed composition, source and application rate and method if the area is to be seeded, must be
provided to the city for review and approval before final plat. Yellow tags for the plant
source must be provided to the city. The plants shall be native and free of neonicotinoids.
17.A detailed maintenance schedule for establishment of vegetation within the primary zone and
buffer shall be provided to the city before final plat.
18.The soils within the buffer area shall be prepared by ripping to a depth of 12 inches to loosen
them and shall meet MnDOT Specification 3877-3 for Sandy Clay Loam Topsoil Borrow.
19.All residential lots shall have a minimum of six inches of topsoil meeting the specifications
for MnDOT Specification 3877-1 for Common Topsoil Borrow placed on all areas to be
seeded or sodded.
20.Monuments indicating the Bluff Creek Overlay District shall be placed at every other
property corner and at an angle of deflection greater than seven percent, but in no case shall
they be greater than 150 feet apart. The signs shall be installed immediately subsequent to
completion of final grade below the wall and before any building permits are issued for
Lots 2 through 11, Block 3. The plans shall be changed to reflect this requirement before
final plat.
37
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
21.Retaining walls shall be owned and maintained by a Homeowners Association (HOA). The
plan set shall call out the material for these retaining walls.
22.Walls over six feet tall (Wall B) shall not be boulder walls. Tiered boulder walls with a
combined total height greater than six feet tall must have adequate spacing between such that
they do not structurally impact one another.
23.The vegetation between tiered walls shall be low or no maintenance.
24.The emergency overflow (EOF) between Lots 5 and 6, Block 3 flows towards Wall A and
Wall B. Staff will work with the engineer designing the stormwater system and the structural
engineer designing the walls regarding conveyance of the water or relocation of this EOF.
25.A vertical curve is required for the transition between +3.14% and -1.57% grade on the South
Private Drive.
26.The curve and line table for the horizontal alignments of all streets must be revised to be
consistent with the plan sheets.
27.The specifications for this project must be revised to match the current City of Chanhassen
Standard Specifications and Detail Plates and the proposed plan set, including but not limited
to the pavement design.
28.The applicant’s engineer shall submit documentation for the design speed selection and show
turning movements in the plan set to demonstrate that larger vehicles will be able to navigate
the roadway curvature.
29.The applicant must obtain permits from Carver County for construction of an access and all
other work in their right-of-way. They must also comply with the comments received from
the Carver County Engineering Office.
30.An ADA-compliant pedestrian ramp shall be constructed where the trail intersects Lyman
Boulevard.
31.The City of Chanhassen Standard Detail Plates for pedestrian ramps shall be added to the
plan set.
32.The applicant must obtain a permit for any work in the MnDOT right-of-way.
33.Profile grades shall be shown for the sidewalk and bituminous trail.
34.The plan must have a design grade that developer and engineer are confident that the
construction process will achieve the minimum of 0.40%. If the grade is flatter than 0.40%
at the time of acceptance, the city will require the sanitary sewer be excavated and
reconstructed to meet the grade requirement. Staff recommends use of 0.50% minimum
design grade.
38
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
35.The 8-inch watermain pipe plans shall be revised to call out C900 as the pipe material and
shall be installed per the City of Chanhassen Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
36.The watermain connection to Highway 101 shall be relocated away from the stormwater
infiltration system.
37.The proposed sanitary sewer and water main shall become city-owned after construction and
acceptance by the city council.
38.The applicant must meet the storm water management standards prescribed in Section 19-144
of city code which incorporates the NPDES construction permit by reference. This requires a
volume reduction of 1.0 inches of water quality volume from all new impervious surfaces or
provide evidence that the site, in its entirety, meets the criteria by which infiltration is
infeasible as discussed in the NPDES permits. If adequate evidence is provided that
infiltration is found to be infeasible, then the applicant must evaluate other methods of
abstraction.
39.The proposed storm water management system must meet the required reduction in total
phosphorus and total suspended solids.
40.The stormwater catch basins inside the cul-de-sac bubble shall be relocated to the curb line
and comply with the Chanhassen Standard Detail for cul-de-sacs.
41.A Homeowners Association (HOA) must be established that is responsible for the
maintenance and operation of the trident system if it is approved.
42.The city-authored maintenance agreement for stormwater management facilities shall be
revised accordingly, executed and recorded against the property.
43.The applicant shall develop an operations and maintenance manual which shall specify
anticipated inspection and maintenance, as well as schedule, necessary to ensure there is not
significant decreases in the practices’ efficacies. This operations and maintenance manual
shall be referenced in the maintenance agreement.
44.SWMP fees estimated to be $33,346.50 are due at the time of final plat.
45.The applicant is responsible for applying for, procuring approvals from and meeting the
requirements of all other agencies with jurisdiction over the project including, but not limited
to, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
District.
46.Water and sewer partial hookups are due at the time of final plat. The partial hookup fees
will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time.
Environmental Resources:
1.A total of 18 additional overstory trees shall be planted throughout the development. The
applicant will submit a revised landscape plan.
39
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
2.A wetland buffer restoration plan shall be included in the revised landscape plan.
3.The applicant shall submit a tree inventory and tree preservation calculations as required by
ordinance prior to final plat review and approval.
Fire:
1.Provide/maintain three-foot clear space around fire hydrants.
2.The two private driveways will be required to have address signage which shall be submitted
to the Chanhassen Building Official and Fire Marshal for review and approval.
3.Relocate the proposed fire hydrant located by Lot 1, Block 2 to the property line between
Lots 3 and 4, Block 2.
4.Prior to combustible home construction, fire apparatus access roads capable of supporting the
weight of fire apparatus shall be made serviceable.
5.Street signs (temporary allowed) shall be installed prior to building permits being
issued. The Fire Marshal must approve street signage.
6.Prior to combustible construction fire hydrants shall be made serviceable.
Parks:
1.Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of requiring parkland
dedication.
2.Construction of Great Plains Boulevard trail from the southwest intersection of Lyman
Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard traveling south for approximately 675 feet to the
southern terminus of the property. The developer shall provide design, engineering,
construction and testing services required of the Great Plains Boulevard trail. All
construction documents, including material costs, shall be delivered to the Park and
Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of construction.
The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with asphalt and constructed to meet all city
specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed by the City for the cost of the aggregate
base, trail surfacing, and storm water systems utilized to construct the trail as well as for
redesign of the plans if necessary. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon
completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs
for the construction materials noted. Labor and installation, design, engineering and testing
services are not reimbursable expenses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1.The developer may dedicate Outlot C to the City.
40
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 15, 2015
2.The developer shall prepare a restoration plan for the Bluff Creek Corridor.
3.The buffer will be required to have a vegetation management plan and soil amendments.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
th
Aanenson: Just for the record then Chair, this item does go to the City Council on October 12.
Aller: October 12, 2015 yes so those individuals at home that wish or here that wish to follow
the item to City Council for final action it will be October 12, 2015.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Hokkanen noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 18, 2015 as presented.
COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS.
Aller: I would just like to remind everybody that the engineering department has come out with
notification. I’ll wait until that door’s closed. With a notice and reminder that highway 101
th
river bridge is closed from 6:00 on Friday the 18 to 9:00 in the morning on Saturday for their
additional pours and I think that the notice also said that that would be occurring just about
Friday until it’s done so plan on some closures in that area but we’ll all be happy in the spring
when it’s completed and the water level doesn’t come anywhere near the roadway surface.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Aanenson: Thank you Chairman, members of Planning Commission. We will have a meeting in
2 weeks. We do have a grading permit, Interim Use Permit for Minnetonka Middle School West
and we also have a conditional use for a shooting range so those 2 items will be on your October
th
6 meeting. We are working on a couple other projects so this Friday is a deadline for the
th
October 20 so we’ll know if we get that couple other things to come in or not. A few things
floating out there. And I think that’s all I had for that. When we adjourn then we’ll go into kind
of a work session to talk about some of these code amendments.
Aller: So there’s no correspondence, I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn.
Hokkanen moved, Yusuf seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was
adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
41