staff report foxwood 1CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: June 7, 2016
CC DATE: June 27, 2016
REVIEW DEADLINE: September 3, 2016
CASE #: 2016-13
BY: AF, RG, TH, ML, JM, TJ, JS
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Wetland Alteration Permit,
Conditional Use Permit for development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD), rezoning
from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Residential Low and Medium Density (RLM), and a 46-
lot subdivision with variances (Foxwood).
LOCATION: 9150 and 9250 Great Plains Boulevard
APPLICANT: Providence 55, LLC. Jim Wilson & Paul Paulson
1000 Boone Ave. N., Suite 400 9150 and 9250 Great Plains Blvd. Golden Valley, MN 55427 Chanhassen, MN 55317
(763) 432-4500
billcoffman@cbburnet.com
PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential District (RR)
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low
Density (1.2 – 4.0 units/net acre)
ACREAGE: 43.55 acres DENSITY: 1.05
units per acre gross, 2.55 units per acre net
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN
DECISION-MAKING:
The City has a relatively high level of discretion
in approving rezonings because the City is acting
in its legislative or policy-making capacity. A rezoning must be consistent with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
The City’s discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the
proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning
Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a
quasi-judicial decision.
PROPOSED MOTION:
“The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a Conditional Use
Permit for development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD), rezoning from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Residential Low and Medium Density (RLM), and a 46 lot, six outlots and public right-of-way preliminary plat with variance for the use of a private street and a 20 foot
setback variance from the Bluff Creek Primary zone subject to the conditions of approval, table the
Wetland Alteration Permit and adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.”
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 2 of 24
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed
project meets the standards in the Subdivision Ordinances for variances. The City has a
relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The city has limited discretion in approving or denying Conditional Use Permits, based on
whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning
Ordinance. If the city finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a Wetland Alteration Permit is limited to
whether or not the proposal meets the standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If it meets
these standards, the city must approve the wetland alteration permit. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the property from Agricultural Estate District, A-2, to
Low and Medium Density Residential, RLM, to permit the subdivision of the property into 46
single-family lots, six outlots and public street right-of-way.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide two parcels with a total of 43.55 acres into 43 building
lots and six outlots. In conjunction with the plat, the applicant is requesting a variance to permit
the use of a private street and to have a uniform 20-foot setback from the designated Bluff Creek
Primary zone boundary. This private street will provide access to the two homes currently on the
property, one of which is not included in the subdivision. The area is the first area of the area southeast of Highway 212 in the 2010 Metropolitan Urban Services Area to come in for single-
family residential development with urban services. The new, primary public road is a
temporary cul-de-sac until development of the property to the south at which time, street
connections will go out to Powers Boulevard. Water main and sanitary sewer would be extended
to provide for future development.
The applicant is also requesting a Conditional Use Permit for development within the Bluff
Creek Overlay District. Prior to any development the city must review a conditional use permit
for the project.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 18, Subdivisions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 2, Amendments
Chapter 20, Article IV, Conditional Uses Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection Chapter 20, Article XIV, Division 1, “RLM” Low and Medium Density Residential District
Chapter 20, Article XXXI, Bluff Creek Overlay District
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 3 of 24
BACKGROUND
The structure on the Wilson property was originally constructed in 1900. A wholesale nursery has operated on this property since
The house on the southern property was built in 1986.
SITE CONSTRAINTS Wetland Protection
The City of Chanhassen Wetland Inventory indicates the presence of four wetlands on or immediately adjacent to the subject property. Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company performed a field review and delineation on October 2, 2015. At that time, 5 individual wetland
basins were identified. Due to seasonal constraints, staff felt that the area between wetland 4 and
wetland 3 should be revisited in the spring during the growing season. On May 10, 2016 the
Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) was convened and met on-site to review the area in question as well as three recently delineated basins on the Paulson property to the east.
At this TEP it was determined that wetland 3 and wetland 4 were connected. The consultant is in
the process of updating the delineation report so that it can be reviewed and approved or will
need to be further modified. This connection means that the impact for the road will be larger than originally thought. As of today, May 27, 2016, there is no approved wetland delineation. In the absence of an approved boundary, the total impact area is indeterminate. As such, no
wetland alteration permit may be considered for approval at this time.
It is the City’s practice to have wetlands and buffers placed into outlots to implement the no net loss goal. The city requires that all runoff is treated prior to discharge into a wetland. Treatment practices are being proposed for much of the drainage being directed to the wetlands. The only
exception are the backyards of Block 2. This area will have a wide buffer to provide treatment
and only consists of 3 backyards. For this reason, the runoff should not have a deleterious
impact on the wetland water quality. The wetlands on the property are classified as either management classification 1; wetlands 1p,
2p and 3p as well as wetland 1 and wetland 2; or management classification 2. Manage 1
wetlands require a minimum buffer width of 25 feet and manage 2 wetlands require a minimum
buffer width of 20 feet. Both require a 30-foot setback from the buffer edge to the primary structure. The primary zone should be, at a minimum, incidental with the wetland buffer edge for those areas tributary to Bluff Creek.
These buffers must be managed with native vegetation. If they are not disturbed, the existing
vegetation will be adequate. Any buffer that is disturbed must have a planting schedule and vegetation management plan.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 4 of 24
Any impacts on the site will be subject to the following conditions.
1. The applicant must demonstrate that they have met the sequencing requirements of
Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0520. They must first seek avoidance of wetland impacts.
If this is not possible then they must mitigate the impacts to the greatest practicable extent.
2. The applicant must provide the updated wetland boundary, supporting documentation
and a georeferenced shapefile for approval by the LGU.
3. The applicant must get approvals from all other agencies with jurisdiction over
wetlands on the site. This may include, although not be limited too, the United States Army
Corps of Engineers and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
4. The applicant must identify a suitable replacement plan for any unavoidable impacts
and submit to the City and other appropriate agencies for approval.
5. Signage will be required at every lot corner and angle point along the private lots
adjacent to the wetlands not bound by the BCOD. The city has wetland buffer signs
available and the signs shall be at the developer’s expense.
Bluff Protection
There are no bluffs on the property. There are some areas of steeper slopes. Care should be
taken when grading in or near these areas.
Shoreland Management
The property lies beyond the shoreland overlay district for Lake Riley. As such it will not be
subject to shoreland requirements for land development.
Floodplain Overlay
This property does not lie with a floodplain.
BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT
A significant portion of the site lies within the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD). This is intended to protect the characteristics of Bluff Creek from development pressures. The
requirements of the Bluff Creek Overlay District are stated in Article XXXI of Chapter 20 of
City Code.
City staff and the consulting engineer for the applicant have worked together to identify the limits of the Bluff Creek Overlay District. At a minimum the BCOD should include the
wetlands and wetland buffer area around wetlands 1 and 2. Any disturbance within the BCOD
must be re-established with native vegetation and have a planting schedule and vegetation
management plan.
The following conditions apply to the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 5 of 24
1. Infiltration basin IB1 located north of Lots 10, 11, 16 and 17 of block 1 shall be
evaluated for methods to reduce tree loss. The designer shall work with City staff to meet
this end.
2. The Bluff Creek Overlay District Boundaries shall be shown to be incidental with the
boundary of Outlot A.
3. Any grading within the Bluff Creek Overlay District must be restored with native
vegetation. A planting schedule and vegetation maintenance plan of at least 3 years
shall be provided to the city for review and approval.
4. Signage will be required at every lot corner and angle point along the private lots
adjacent to the BCOD. The sign language shall be provided by the city and the signs
shall be at the developer’s expense. These signs shall be placed by the developer prior
to selling any of the lots.
REZONING
The existing zoning of the property, Agricultural Estate District, is not consistent with the land
use designation of the property, Residential Low Density. The comprehensive plan allows less intensive land uses to remain in place. However, any approval by the city for development of the property must be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The following zoning districts would be consistent with a Residential Low Density land use:
Single-Family Residential, RSF, Mixed Low Density Residential, R-4, Low and Medium Density Residential, RLM, and Planned Unit Development – Residential, PUD-R.
Staff and the applicant initially looked at proceeding under the typical RSF zoning regulations.
However, the topography of the site and the natural features including woods and wetlands made it
difficult and inefficient to meet all the standards. Similarly, the R-4 District had the same limitations and constraints as the RSF District. The use of a PUD-R zoning did not seem appropriate due to the fact we were not proposing flexible standards to accommodate unique
housing styles or affordable housing. Furthermore, the applicant and city were interested in finding
opportunities for the preservation of many natural features on the property.
The RLM district is the most appropriate zoning district to rezone this property since the developer is preserving significant upland areas as well as wetlands within the outlots for common open space.
The RLM district permits single-family homes, as well as twin homes, townhouses and attached
housing. This RLM subdivision will be limited to single-family homes. The RLM district requires
that large areas of upland are preserved or created as permanent open space to balance the higher hard surface coverage permitted on the individual lots.
Staff is recommending the rezoning to RLM be approved.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 6 of 24
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The City of Chanhassen established the Bluff Creek Overlay District, BCO, by ordinance in
1998 to protect the Bluff Creek Corridor, wetlands, bluffs and significant stands of mature trees
through the use of careful site design and other low-impact practices. This parcel is partially
encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District. A conditional use permit shall be issued by the city for all subdivisions, site plans, and prior the erection or alteration of any building or land
within the BCO.
Outlots A and C contain the Bluff Creek Corridor primary zone. The Primary Corridor is
designated open space. All structures must meet a 40-foot structural setback from the Primary Corridor boundary as required by Chanhassen City Code. However, since the city is designating
the Primary Corridor Boundary as incidental to outlot A, which is more convenience then actual
boundary, we recommend a blanket 20-foot setback, requiring a 20-foot variance. The developer
may dedicate Outlot A and C to the city.
1. Infiltration basin IB1 located north of Lots 10, 11, 16 and 17 of block 1 shall be evaluated
for methods to reduce tree loss.
2. The Bluff Creek Overlay District Boundaries shall be shown to be incidental with the
boundaries of Outlots A and C.
3. Any grading within the Bluff Creek Overlay District must be restored with native
vegetation. A planting schedule and vegetation maintenance plan of at least 3 years shall
be provided to the city for review and approval.
4. Signage will be required at every lot corner and angle point along the private lots
adjacent to the BCOD. The sign language shall be provided by the city and the signs
shall be at the developer’s expense. These signs shall be placed by the developer prior to
selling any of the lots.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 7 of 24
SUBDIVISION
The applicant is proposing a 43 lot single-family detached housing subdivision served via public
streets.
EASEMENTS
Existing Conditions Survey
The survey shows a 16.5-foot-wide telephone easement through the center of the site. This
easement must be vacated before the City Council considers final plat approval.
GRADING
The applicant proposes to mass grade the site. The site contains three wetlands- Wetlands 1p,
2p, and Wetland 2- where the wetlands are higher than the adjacent homes. Wetland 3p is part of
the Wetland 1p/2p complex and is approximately the same elevation of one of the proposed
adjacent homes.
The existing drainage area to the Wetlands 1p, 2p and 3p is relatively small. Based on staff
experience a portion of the hydrology to this wetland complex may be via groundwater.
Section 18-40 (4) d. 2. i. requires a three-foot separation between the water elevation and the adjacent low floor elevation. The building pad for Lot 4, Block 5 is 50’ from Wetland 3p and the
low floor elevation is approximately 7 feet below the wetland elevation. Similarly, Lot 18,
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 8 of 24
Block 1 is approximately 60’ from Wetland 2, and the lowest floor elevation is 5.5’ lower than
the wetland.
Soil borings were not taken in the area of the Wetland 1p/2p/3p complex or Wetland 2 therefore
staff recommends that the developer install shallow monitoring wells or piezometers. Water
elevations shall be monitored for a minimum of four weeks during a time when seasonally high
water table would be expected. This information will be considered in determining the
appropriate elevations of the adjacent homes and/or infrastructure necessary to meet City Code.
An oversized drainage and utility easement is required at the back of Lot 1, Block 6 as this area
conveys drainage from the adjacent parcel. Staff recommends that the 916’ contour extend into
the drainageway to create a swale versus the sheet drainage pattern that is currently shown; it has
been staff’s experience that landscaping/hardscaping/etc. on the downstream parcel tends to impede sheet drainage.
Per Section 18-40 (4) d. 2. v. a drain tile service is required for Lots 1-4 Block 5, Lot 6 Block 5;
and Lots 1-3 Block 6 as these lots are proposed to drain from the back of the lot towards the
street.
There are several locations throughout the site where the driveway grades exceed 9%. The
developer’s engineer shall ensure that the maximum driveway grades shown on the plan are
calculated such that a 10’ landing is provided where the driveway connects to the street and a
five to 10-foot landing is provided at the garage. The recommended grade at these locations is 3%.
On the grading plan label the existing contours.
DRAINAGE Under existing conditions, the site is divided into three major drainage areas. The northern
approximately 17 acres of upland and about 8.5 acres of wetland drains to the large DNR Public
Water Wetland located north and west on this and adjoining properties. This wetland ultimately
drains to Bluff Creek which is listed as impaired for turbidity and fish indices of biologic integrity. A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) implementation plan was finished in 2013.
This study revealed that low base flows and flashiness after larger rain events are the largest
contributors to the impairments. This makes achieving volume reduction more imperative than it
might otherwise be.
The middle 12 or so acres of upland drains to wetland 3 in the southeast of the property. This
heavily wooded portion drains to the east and ultimately to Lake Riley.
The remaining portion either drains directly to the right-of-way for T.H. 101 or to the most
southerly wetland, wetland 4. In either case Lake Riley is the receiving water body and at 0.3 miles is well within the 1-mile radius pertinent to the NPDES permit. Lake Riley is impaired for
nutrients. Riley Creek, downstream of Lake Riley is also on the 303D list as having a turbidity
impairment. This is just over 1 mile from the site but the site is within the contributing
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 9 of 24
watershed and the development of this site should be considered in regard to the forthcoming
waste load allocation that will be given to the city.
The Stormwater Management Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study (H&H Study), dated May 6th
2016 was reviewed. There are several assumptions and practices employed in this model that
staff does not feel are accurate or meet the intent of code. The first is the assumption that the
entire site has soils that fall into the hydrologic class of a “D” soil despite the USGS Web Soil
Survey indicating that the majority of the soils on the site are in the “B” hydrologic group. The H&H Study assumes that the soils will have the same hydrologic properties after full build out.
This is contrary to known construction practices and resulting increases in bulk density. The
typical methodology of site preparation involves extensive clearing and grading with large
proportions of the development experiencing cuts or fills. High soil densities are desired as this
minimizes settling which can lead to cracking of foundations and paved surfaces. However, the compaction is typically not confined to these areas as the entire site is prepared en mass.
There have been several studies, such as the 2001 study conducted by Ocean County Soil
Conservation District, that show that the accepted NRCS Technical Release 55, (TR-55) Urban
Hydrology for Small Watersheds curve numbers underestimate infiltration rates in wooded areas and overestimated infiltration rates in disturbed soils with high bulk densities. When bulk
densities increase above 1.65 g/cm3, infiltration rates slow and approach zero.
The MN Stormwater Manual references two studies indicating that bulk densities on mass
graded sites increase 0.34 to 0.35 g/cm3 over undisturbed conditions. The MN Stormwater Manual also indicates that “urban fill soils” have a bulk density between 1.5 g/cm3 and 1.9
g/cm3. For all these reasons staff feels it is not accurate to assume that post construction soils
will have the same hydraulic characteristics as the current undisturbed soils as the H&H Study
does.
The model shall be modified to reflect the fact that current soil conditions and vegetative cover will have a lower bulk density and a higher infiltration rate than fully developed conditions.
In reviewing the model, staff noted several instances where the time of concentration increased post development. Given the installation of pavement, curb and gutter and storm sewer pipe
with the specific purpose of quickly collecting stormwater and conveying it to a receiving body,
this is counter to what would be expected. In some cases, such as drainage area D-W4 the
vegetative cover remains unchanged but the distance the runoff needs to travel decreased yet the
time of concentration increased from 1.7 minutes to 10 minutes. Drainage area D-W3 goes from an 11 acres wooded tract of land that spans the entire site from west to east to a 4-acre area that
includes 8 additional backyards and approximately ¼ the travel distance for runoff. However,
the time of concentration increased from 6.2 minutes to 10 minutes. The model must be
modified to accurately reflect times of concentration for each drainage area.
As noted earlier, the soil survey for this area indicates that the area is predominately “B” soils.
Exceptions include the depressional areas where wetlands are located. However, the model
assumes “D” soils throughout yet indicates that they will get 0.45”/hour at infiltration basin #1
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 10 of 24
and 0.20”/hour at infiltration basin #2. These rates are consistent with “B” and “C” soils
respectively. There is a distinct incongruence between these assumptions. It has been staffs
experience that geotechnical borings lack the temporal and spatial resolution necessary to ignore soil survey data. In the absence of measured infiltration rates, the site should be modeled
with conditions similar to what is anticipated given the soil survey and the proposed construction methodologies.
City code requires that rates are not increased at any point where runoff leaves the site. By definition, entering a water of the state, is considered leaving the site. The wetlands cannot be
used to meet rate control. Rate control must be achieved prior to discharge to any of the wetlands, MN DOT right-of-way or adjoining properties. The aforementioned time of
concentrations shall also be modified accordingly in determining rates.
EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
The proposed development will exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject
to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction
Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). The applicant has prepared and submitted a Surface Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the city for review. The SWPPP is a required submittal element for
preliminary plat review. No earth disturbing activities may occur until an approved SWPPP is
developed. This SWPPP shall be a standalone document consistent with the NPDES
Construction Permit and shall contain all required elements as listed in Parts III and IV of the permit. The SWPPP will need to be updated as the plans are finalized, when the contractor and
their sub-contractors are identified and as other conditions change.
Changes to the erosion prevention and sediment control plan that should be made prior to final
plat are as follows:
1. The infiltration basin areas shall be protected from construction traffic and other
construction related activities throughout the duration of the project. This shall be
noted on the grading plan, in the SWPPP and shown with pre-construction silt fence
location.
2. The infiltration areas shall be graded last. The tributary area shall be graded and
stabilized prior to excavation of the infiltration basins.
3. The mass grade phasing schedule shall include stripping and stockpiling of top soil
material.
4. The grading and erosion plan shall include stockpile locations.
5. The SWPPP and erosion plan shall include topsoil quantities necessary to place six
inches (6”) on all disturbed areas to be re-vegetated.
6. A detailed planting schedule and plan shall be included for each infiltration basin.
7. Redundant perimeter controls are required for all disturbs soils draining to wetlands.
This may be silt fence, biologs, wind-rows of salvaged and stockpiled topsoil or other as
approved by the city.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 11 of 24
8. The developer shall be responsible for procuring the NPDES construction permit and
providing proof to the city prior to any land disturbing activities.
RETAINING WALLS
The plans identify 10 retaining walls that are proposed to be constructed with the project.
Location Maximu
m Height Length Comments
Lot 1, Block 1 3’ 52’
Lot 2, Block 1 3’ 70’
Lot 6, Block 1 Side yard 3’ 85’
Lot 6, Block 1 Back
yard
8’ 107’
Lot 17, Block 1 5’ 90’
Lot 5, Block 2 6’ 50’
Lot 2, Block 4 8’ 100’ Must be moved out of the
drainage and utility easement.
Lot 7, Block 5 4’ 40’
Lot 10, Block 5 6’ 60’
Lot 11, Block 5 4’ 55’
STREETS
The development will construct a minor collector road, Road A from TH 101 to the project
limits. This street will ultimately extend to Powers Boulevard when the property to the south
develops. A temporary cul-de-sac will be installed at the end of Road A. The grading plan must be revised to eliminate the 3H:1V slope within the temporary cul-de-sac. The developer shall
dedicate an easement over the temporary cul-de-sac; the easement exhibit shall be submitted
with the final plat application.
The streets shown in the preliminary plat are 31’ wide within a 60-foot wide right of way; cul-de-sacs are shown at 90’ diameter within a 120’ right of way.
The developer will install a private street to the two existing homes at 9250 Great Plains Blvd
(Lot 5, Block 5) and 9350 Great Plains Blvd. The private street will extend from Road A within
Outlot B and must be built to a 7-ton design.
Pedestrian curb ramps from the sidewalks to the street are required must be ADA-compliant.
Based on the road profiles submitted the developer should ensure that the ramps at the
intersections of Road A/D and Road D/E will meet ADA requirements; issues have been
encountered in other developments where it is difficult to construct ADA-compliant curb ramps
when the street grade at an intersection exceeds the maximum grade allowed by ADA.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 12 of 24
SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN
The well on the property must be properly abandoned.
This site lies within the service area of a future, permanent lift station that will be located on
Powers Boulevard between Highway 212 and Pioneer Trail as shown on the map below. The
City will not reimburse for the cost of the temporary lift station and force main that will service
Foxwood as the developer has elected to proceed with developing the site prior to installation of
the City’s trunk lift station and force main.
The cost of the trunk lift station and force main will be assessed to the properties that will be
serviced by the system. Staff is mapping the service area to determine net benefitting area. At a
future council meeting a feasibility report will be presented and will recommend an area sewer
fee for these utilities. The Foxwood development would be subject to this fee, which would be
paid with the final plat.
The temporary lift station will be installed at the southern end of Road A and must be located
outside of the temporary cul-de-sac. The temporary force main will connect to the existing
gravity sanitary sewer on the south side of Lyman Boulevard at Crossroads Boulevard. These
temporary utilities will remain until the property to the south develops and extends gravity sanitary sewer to the site. The developer must work with staff to ensure that the invert elevation
is at or higher than the invert elevation established during the concept planning of the
undeveloped parcel to the south.
Subject property
Future force main
Future permanent
lift station
POWERS BLVD
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 13 of 24
The developer proposes to extend eight-inch C-900 water main from the 12” trunk main within
TH 101. The water main will be stubbed at the temporary cul-de-sac and will be looped to 16” trunk main within Powers Boulevard when the property to the south develops.
On Sheet 18 modify Note 2 to state that 10’ horizontal separation is required between water and
sewer lines and modify Note 11 to state that sanitary sewer services shall be 6” diameter.
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
Article VII, Chapter 19 of city code describes the required storm water management
development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be
reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site
plans, subdivisions and water management features.”
Storm Water Utility Connection Charges
Section 4-30 of city code sets out the fees associated with surface water management. A water quality and water quantity fee are collected with a subdivision. These fees are based on land use
type and are intended to reflect the fact that the more intense the development type, the greater
the degradation of surface water.
This fee will be applied to the new lot of record being created. It is calculated as shown in the table below:
ASSESSMENTS
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. The remaining partial hookups fees are due with the
building permit.
LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION
The applicant for the Foxwood development has submitted tree canopy coverage and
preservation calculations. They are as follows:
Total upland area (excluding wetlands) 29.648 ac. Baseline canopy coverage 58% or 17.38 ac.
Minimum canopy coverage required 35% or 10.37 ac.
Proposed tree preservation 27% or 7.86 ac.
The developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage for the site; therefore, the applicant
must bring the canopy coverage on site up to the 35% minimum. The difference between the
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 14 of 24
required coverage and the remaining coverage is multiplied by 1.2 for total area to be replaced.
One tree is valued at 1,089 SF.
Minimum canopy coverage to be replaced 2.5 ac Total number of trees to be planted 120 trees
The applicant has proposed a total of 124 trees throughout the development, which satisfies the
reforestation requirements.
The applicant is required to provide bufferyard plantings along Great Plains Blvd.
Bufferyard requirements are as shown in the table:
Landscaping Item Required Proposed
Bufferyard B – South
property line, Lake Lucy Rd., 178’, 30’ width
2 overstory trees
3 understory trees 5 shrubs
2 overstory trees
8 understory trees 5 shrubs
The applicant meets bufferyard landscaping requirements and has also provided a bufferyard planting area along the stormwater pond to the north of the entrance.
MISCELLANEOUS
Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before building permits will be issued. Buildings may be required to be designed by an architect and/or
engineer as determined by the Building Official. Engineered design and building permits are
required for retaining walls exceeding four feet in height. Submit proposed street-name(s) to
Building Official and Fire Marshal for approval. Each lot must be provided with a separate
sewer and water service. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures. Proper removal, abandonment or sealing of storage tanks, on-site septic systems,
wells, etc. is required. Permits are required, as applicable. If applicable, existing home(s)
affected by the new street will require address changes. The applicant and or their agent shall
meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit
procedures.
A three-foot clear space must be provided around the fire hydrants. No burning permits will be
issued for tree, brush removal. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official
and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Street signs (temporary allowed) shall be installed prior to building permits being issued. Fire Marshal must approve signage. Prior to combustible
construction fire hydrants shall be made serviceable. Prior to combustible home construction fire
apparatus access roads capable of supporting the weight of fire apparatus shall be made
serviceable. Additional fire hydrants will be required.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 15 of 24
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
The quality and number of recreational facilities in a community directly contributes to its quality of life. For this reason, the City of Chanhassen places a strong emphasis on parks and open space. As
the City of Chanhassen has developed and increased in population, more pressure and attention has
been given to providing recreational opportunities for our residents. Increased leisure time, health
awareness, greater mobility, and high disposable incomes have all contributed to the increased
demand for recreational activities. The challenge of the next century will be to provide facilities for a growing and diverse population.
Parks can be defined as public areas that provide active or passive-oriented recreational facilities. A
significant characteristic of parkland is its accessibility to its users. Open space is any parcel that is
not used for buildings or other structures and is left in a natural state. Parks and open space perform diverse functions such as: meeting physical and psychological needs, enhancing and protecting the
resource base, enhancing real estate values, and providing a positive impact on economic
development.
Park Plan
The city’s comprehensive park plan calls for a neighborhood park to be located within one-half
mile of every residence in the city. The park service area of community parks extends to a
distance of 1-2 miles. The proposed Wilson Tree Farm Subdivision is located directly adjacent to
the 58-acre Fox Woods Park Preserve and directly across Highway 101 from the 45-acre Bandimere Community Park. Bandimere Community Park offers a wide and growing array of
recreational amenities and has been open to the public since 1999. Development of public access
points to the Fox Woods Park Preserve, through a combination of vehicle and pedestrian touch
points as well as the installation of a series of nature trails within the preserve, will begin
concurrent with the development of the Wilson Nursery property.
Additional acquisition of public open space
through the application of park dedication
requirements is not recommended as a
condition of the subdivision. Trail Plan
Residents purchasing homes within the new
Wilson Tree Farm subdivision will have convenient pedestrian access to area public park
facilities through careful planning and
construction of some key pedestrian
improvements:
Planning and construction of
interior sidewalks within the
subdivision.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 16 of 24
Planning and construction of two planned 10-foot wide trail connections leading from
two cul-de-sacs into the Fox Woods Preserve.
Planning and construction of a Highway 101 trail connection between the current trail
terminus at the Bandimere Park Pedestrian Underpass and the northern terminus of the
plat adjacent to and along Highway 101.
Dedication of an outlot adjacent to Lot 32 and across the southern portion of Lot 46 to
accommodate future construction of a trail.
The granting of a permanent 20 foot wide trail easement across the rear of lots 8
and 9, Block 3.
Trail right of ways within the subdivision shall be provided within outlots as a condition of the
plat. Acquisition of trail easements outside of the plat shall be the responsibility of the City of
Chanhassen.
The Developer shall be responsible for the installation and payment of the two planned 10-foot
wide trail connections leading from two cul-de-sacs into the Fox Woods Preserve.
For those sections of the Hwy 101 trail situated north and south of their property boundaries, the Developer shall be reimbursed by the City of Chanhassen for the full cost of planning,
engineering and construction of a planned 10-foot wide Highway 101 trail connection between
the current trail terminus at the Bandimere Park Pedestrian Underpass and the northern terminus
of the plat along Highway 101.
For that section of the Highway 101 trail located within or adjacent to the Developer’s project
boundary, the applicant shall be reimbursed by the City for the cost of the aggregate base, trail
surfacing, retaining walls and storm water systems utilized to construct the trail. 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 for the trail surface and design, and engineering and testing services for all
components of the Developers section, are not reimbursable expenses.
All trails shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with asphalt and constructed to meet city
specifications.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 17 of 24
PERMITS
At this time staff has determined that the developer must contact the following agencies for
permits:
a) Minnesota Department of Health for the water main.
b) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for the sanitary sewer system.
c) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for the NPDES storm water permit.
d) Minnesota Department of Transportation for a Work in Right of Way permit for the force
main installation.
e) Minnesota Department of Transportation for a drainage permit.
f) City of Chanhassen for building permits.
FEES
Based on the proposal the following fees would be collected with the development contract:
a) Administration Fee: if the improvement costs are between $500,000 and $1,000,000, 2%
of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs exceed $1,000,000, 2.5% of the first
$1,000,000 plus 1.5% of the remainder.
b) Surface water management fee: $218,662.84
c) A portion of the water hook-up charge: $2,065/unit
d) A portion of the sanitary sewer hook-up charge: $691/unit
e) Park dedication fee: $253,000
f) GIS fees: $25 for the plat plus $10 per parcel
g) Street light operating fee for one year: $300 per light
h) Area sewer fee for future trunk lift station and force main: Amount to be determined.
COMPLIANCE TABLE
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Lot Width Lot Depth
35 %Maximum Site Coverage (sq. ft.) Notes
Code (RLM) 9,000 50 110 3,150 Single-Family Detached
Housing
Blk 1,Lot 1 12,600 90 140 4,410 Wetland
Lot 2 15,147 100 130 5,301 Corner lot
Lot 3 16,091 85 130 5,632 Cul-de-sac, show 10’ side
setbacks, Wetland
Lot 4 14,525 85 123 5,084 Cul-de-sac, wetland, show
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 18 of 24
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Lot Width Lot Depth
35 %Maximum Site Coverage (sq. ft.) Notes
30’ front
Lot 5 15,123 85 118 5,293 Cul-de-sac, wetland, show 30’ front
Lot 6 14,718 85 118 5,151 Cul-de-sac, wetland, show
30’ front
Lot 7 17,581 103 146 6,153 Corner lot, wetland, show 30’
front
Lot 8 11,739 90 121 4,109 Wetland
Lot 9 12,799 90 126 4,480 Wetland
Lot 10 14,240 90 130 4,984 Wetland, show 10’ side setbacks
Lot 11 15,306 90 132 5,357
Lot 12 11,688 92 123 4,091
Lot 13 14,974 103 127 5,241 Corner lot
Lot 14 12,133 120 127 4,247
Lot 15 11,980 102 196 4,193
Lot 16 18,390 72 139 6,437 Cul-de-sac, show 30’ front
setback
Lot 17 17,136 82 218 5,998 Cul-de-sac, Wetland, show
40’ front setback shown
Lot 18 15,244 106 202 5,335 Cul-de-sac, Wetland
Blk 2, Lot 1 12,599 110 124 4,410 Corner lot, Wetland
Lot 2 11,652 91 133 4,078 Wetland, show 10’ side
setbacks
Blk 3, Lot 1 13,500 90 150 4,725
Lot 2 15,253 128 121 5,339 Show 10’ side setbacks
Lot 3 17,814 106 139 6,235 Corner lot
Lot 4 11,430 90 127 4,001
Lot 5 12,958 116 127 4,535
Lot 6 13,843 116 145 4,845
Lot 7 16,669 88 150 5,834 Shows 30’ front setback
Lot 8 19,487 86 143 6,820 Cul-de-sac, Wetland
Lot 9 17,911 91 158 6,269 Cul-de-sac, Wetland
Blk 4, Lot 1 13,255 135 133 4,639 Wetland
Lot 2 12,340 125 130 4,319 Wetland
Blk 5, Lot 1 14,995 107 145 5,248 Wetland, Adjacent to private
street
Lot 2 11,200 81 132 3,920 Wetland
Lot 3 12,105 108 132 4,237 Wetland
Lot 4 14,557 158 130 5,095 Wetland
Lot 5 # 120,342 216 507 42,120 Wetland, Paulsen residence
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 19 of 24
Lot Area (sq. ft.) Lot Width Lot Depth
35 %Maximum Site Coverage (sq. ft.) Notes
Lot 6 13,634 100 130 4,772 Wetland
Lot 7 12,096 85 136 4,091
Lot 8 13,598 82 153 4,759
Lot 9 15,699 82 179 5,495
Lot 10 15,214 100 204 5,325
Lot 11 16,829 82 204 5,890
Lot 12 13,683 90 151 4,789 Wetland
Blk 6, Lot 1 21,204 122 177 7,421 Corner lot90
Lot 2 16,551 90 182 5,793
Lot 3 17,317 113 186 6,061 Adjacent to private street
Outlot A 531,348
12.2 ac., Open
Space/Wetland, Bluff Creek
Primary Zone
Outlot B 5,531 0.13 ac., Private Street
Outlot C 58,500 1.34 ac., Open Space/Wetland
Outlot D 243,114 5.58 ac.,Open Space /Wetland
Outlot E 68,876 1.58 ac., Open Space/Wetland
Outlot F 6,602 0.15 ac., Open Space/Wetland
ROW 203,861 4.68 acres
Average Lot
Size * 15,321 Excludes Lot 5, Block 5
Total 1,896,980 43.55 Acres
# Remnant of the lot surrounding the existing home to remain. * Lots range from 11,200 square feet to 21,204 square feet.
RLM Setbacks: Front: 25 feet, Side: 10/5 feet - House/Garage side (minimum 15 feet
separations between structures), Rear: 25 feet. Wetland Setback: Buffer 20 feet, buffer setback 30 feet. Bluff Creek Primary Zone Setback: 20 feet subject to approval of a 20-foot variance.
VARIANCE
The applicant’s variance request is for the use of a private street. This access will be for the two existing homes on the site. It will eliminate a shared driveway access on to Highway 101 and allow them to access via the new, local public street, which will be a safer access. The new street
will line up with the access to Bandimere Park, creating a fun intersection. Staff believes this is
a reasonable resolution for the access to the two existing homes that will remain.
Outlots A and C contain the Bluff Creek Corridor primary zone. The Primary Corridor is designated open space. All structures must meet a 40-foot structural setback from the Primary
Corridor boundary as required by Chanhassen City Code. However, since the city is designating
the Primary Corridor Boundary as incidental to outlot A and C, which is more convenience then
actual boundary, we recommend a blanket 20-foot setback, requiring a 20-foot variance.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 20 of 24
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT
Staff cannot recommend approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit at this time. There is
insufficient information to determine the extent of wetland impact let alone to determine if the required sequencing argument is met. At the time that sufficient information is submitted to make a determination the following conditions will apply:
1. The applicant must demonstrate that they have met the sequencing requirements of
Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420.0520.
2. The applicant must provide the updated wetland boundary, supporting documentation and a
georeferenced shapefile for approval by the LGU.
3. The applicant must get approvals from all other agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands on
the site.
4. The applicant must identify a suitable replacement plan for any unavoidable impacts and
submit to the City and other appropriate agencies for approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit for
development in the Bluff Creek Overlay District (BCOD), rezoning from Agricultural Estate
District (A-2) to Residential Low and Medium Density (RLM), and a 46-lot preliminary plat with
variances for a private street and a 20 foot Primary Corridor Boundary setback, plans prepared by
Alliant Engineering, Inc. dated 5-6-16, subject to the following conditions, table the Wetland Alteration Permit and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
Rezoning:
1. Contingent on final plat approval.
Subdivision:
Building: 1. Final grading plans and soil reports must be submitted to the Inspections Division before
building permits will be issued.
2. Buildings may be required to be designed by an architect and/or engineer as determined by
the Building Official. 3. Engineered design and building permits are required for retaining walls exceeding four feet in height.
4. Each lot must be provided with a separate sewer and water service.
5. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 21 of 24
6. Proper removal, abandonment or sealing of storage tanks, on-site septic systems, wells, etc. is
required. Permits are required, as applicable.
7. If applicable, existing home(s) affected by the new street will require address changes. 8. Provide a 1:200 “clean” plat drawing.
Engineering:
1. The 16.5’ wide telephone easement must be vacated before the City Council considers final plat approval.
2. The well on the property must be properly abandoned.
3. Label the contours on Sheet 2 of the Existing Conditions Survey.
4. The grading plan must be revised to eliminate the 3H:1V slope within the temporary cul-de-sac. 5. The developer shall dedicate an easement over the temporary cul-de-sac; the easement
exhibit shall be submitted with the final plat application.
6. The private street within Outlot B and must be built to a 7-ton design.
7. Pedestrian curb ramps from the sidewalks to the street are required must be ADA-compliant. 8. The developer will install shallow monitoring wells or piezometers in the area of Lots 1-4, Block 5 and Lot 18, Block 1. Water elevations shall be monitored for a minimum of four
weeks during a time when seasonally high water table would be expected.
9. An oversized drainage and utility easement is required at the back of Lot 1, Block 6 as this
area conveys drainage from the adjacent parcel. Staff recommends that the 916’ contour extend into the drainageway to create a swale versus the sheet drainage pattern that is currently shown; it has been staff’s experience that landscaping/hardscaping/etc. on the
downstream parcel tends to impede sheet drainage.
10. Per Section 18-40 (4) d. 2. v. a drain tile service is required for Lots 1-4 Block 5, Lot 6 Block
5; and Lots 1-3 Block 6 as these lots are proposed to drain from the back of the lot towards the street. 11. The developer’s engineer shall ensure that the maximum driveway grades shown on the plan
are calculated such that a 10’ landing is provided where the driveway connects to the street
and a five to 10-foot landing is provided at the garage.
12. On the grading plan label the existing contours. 13. The retaining wall on Lot 2, Block 4 must be outside of the drainage and utility easement. 14. The temporary lift station must be located outside of the temporary cul-de-sac.
15. The developer must work with staff to ensure that the invert elevation is at or higher than the
invert elevation established during the concept planning of the undeveloped parcel to the
south. 16. On Sheet 18 modify Note 2 to state that 10’ horizontal separation is required between water and sewer lines and modify Note 11 to state that sanitary sewer services shall be 6” diameter.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 22 of 24
Environmental Resources:
1. Prior to any grading, the applicant shall install tree preservation fencing using metal stakes.
The fencing shall be placed fencing at the grading limits. Tree #2524 shall be included in the
fencing area rather than fenced separately. These protections shall remain in effect until
construction is completed. 2. Signage identifying outlot natural areas will be posted at property corners on lots 1, 3-6, 8-9,
17, 18, block 1 and lots 1, 2, block 2 and lots 8, 9, block 3 and lot 1-2, block 4.
Fire:
1. A 3-foot clear space shall be maintained around fire hydrants.
2. Submit propose street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Official
for review and approval.
3. Street signs (temporary allowed) shall be installed prior to building permits being issued. Fire Marshal must approve signage.
4. Prior to combustible construction fire hydrants shall be made serviceable.
5. No burning permits will be issued for tree/brush removal.
6. Prior to combustible home construction fire apparatus access roads capable of supporting the
weight of fire apparatus shall be made serviceable. 7. Additional fire hydrants will be required or relocated.
Parks:
1. Full park dedication fees shall be collected per city ordinance in lieu of requiring parkland dedication; and
2. Dedication of an outlot adjacent to Lot 12, Block 5 and across the southern portion of Lot 5,
Block 5 to accommodate future construction of a trail.
3. Planning, engineering and construction of two planned 10-foot wide trail connections leading from two cul-de-sacs into the Fox Woods Preserve. 4. Planning, engineering and construction of a planned 10-foot wide Highway 101 trail
connection between the current trail terminus at the Bandimere Park Pedestrian Underpass
and the northern terminus of the plat adjacent to and along Highway 101.
5. Trail right of ways within the subdivision shall be provided within outlots as a condition of the plat. Acquisition of trail easements outside of the plat shall be the responsibility of the City of Chanhassen.
6. The Developer shall be responsible for the installation and payment of the two planned 10-
foot wide trail connections leading from two cul-de-sacs into the Fox Woods Preserve.
7. For those sections of the Hwy 101 trail situated north and south of their property boundaries, the Developer shall be reimbursed by the City of Chanhassen for the full cost of planning, engineering and construction of a planned 10-foot wide Highway 101 trail connection
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 23 of 24
between the current trail terminus at the Bandimere Park Pedestrian Underpass and the
northern terminus of the plat along Highway 101.
8. For that section of the Highway 101 trail located within or adjacent to the Developer’s project boundary, the applicant shall be reimbursed by the City for the cost of the aggregate
base, trail surfacing, retaining walls and storm water systems utilized to construct the trail.
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 for the trail surface and design, and engineering and testing services for all components of the Developers section, are not reimbursable expenses.
9. All trails shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with asphalt and constructed to meet city
specifications.
10. The granting of a permanent 20 foot wide trail easement across the rear of lots 8 and 9,
Block 3.
Water Resources Coordinator:
1. The model shall be modified to reflect the fact that current soil conditions and vegetative
cover will have a lower bulk density and a higher infiltration rate than fully developed
conditions.
2. The model must be modified to accurately reflect times of concentration for each drainage
area.
3. In the absence of measured infiltration rates, the site should be modeled with conditions
similar to what is anticipated given the soil survey and the proposed construction
methodologies.
4. The wetlands cannot be used to meet rate control. Rate control must be achieved prior to
discharge to any of the wetlands, MN DOT right-of-way or adjoining properties.
5. The infiltration basin areas shall be protected from construction traffic and other construction
related activities throughout the duration of the project. This shall be noted on the grading
plan, in the SWPPP and shown with pre-construction silt fence location.
6. The infiltration areas shall be graded last. The tributary area shall be graded and stabilized
prior to excavation of the infiltration basins.
7. The mass grade phasing schedule shall include stripping and stockpiling of top soil material.
8. The grading and erosion plan shall include stockpile locations.
9. The SWPPP and erosion plan shall include topsoil quantities necessary to place six inches
(6”) on all disturbed areas to be re-vegetated.
10. A detailed planting schedule and plan shall be included for each infiltration basin.
11. Redundant perimeter controls are required for all disturbs soils draining to wetlands. This
may be silt fence, biologs, wind-rows of salvaged and stockpiled topsoil or other as approved
by the city.
12. The developer shall be responsible for procuring the NPDES construction permit and
providing proof to the city prior to any land disturbing activities.
13. The developer must meet the requirements of MN Rules Chapter 8420 and the Federal Clean
Water Act.
Planning Commission
Foxwood – Planning Case 2016-13
June 7, 2016
Page 24 of 24
14. The development shall meet the CUP conditions for the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
15. Signage will be required at every lot corner and angle point along the private lots adjacent to
the wetlands not bound by the BCOD. These must be installed prior to selling the lot.
16. Any grading within wetland buffers must be restored with native vegetation. A planting
schedule and vegetation maintenance plan of at least 3 years shall be provided to the city for
review and approval.
17. The Storm Water Utility Connection Charge due at final plat is estimated to be $218,662.84
Conditional Use Permit:
1. Infiltration basin IB1 located north of Lots 10, 11, 16 and 17 of block 1 shall be evaluated for methods to reduce tree loss. 2. The Bluff Creek Overlay District Boundaries shall be shown to be incidental with the
boundaries of Outlots A and C.
3. Any grading within the Bluff Creek Overlay District must be restored with native vegetation.
A planting schedule and vegetation maintenance plan of at least 3 years shall be provided to the city for review and approval. 4. Signage will be required at every lot corner and angle point along the private lots adjacent to
the BCOD. The sign language shall be provided by the city and the signs shall be at the
developer’s expense. These signs shall be placed by the developer prior to selling any of the
lots. ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation
2. Development Review Application 3. Property Survey Sheets 1 & 2
4. Preliminary Plat Sheets 4-6
5. Site Plan Sheet 7
6. Grading and Drainage Plan Sheet 10
7. Grading Profiles Sheet 13 8. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Sheet 14
9. Erosion and Sediment Control Notes and Details Sheet 17
10. Utility Plan Sheet 18
11. Wetland Management Plan Sheet 22
12. Tree Canopy Coverage Plan Sheets 23 & 24 13. Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan Sheets 27-29
14. Memo from Scott Barr Engineering to Bob Generous
15. Memo from Michael Corbett, Minnesota Department of Transportation to Bob Generous
16. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing List
g:\plan\2016 planning cases\2016-13 - foxwood cup, rezoning & subdivision\staff report foxwood.doc