CC Staff Report 9-23-19CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Monday, September 23, 2019
Subject Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of the
Bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane
Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.
Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner, AICP File No: Planning Case 201912
PROPOSED MOTION
"City Council approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for
the construction of a septic system, and a deviation from the 50foot bluff setback for septic systems in Section 19
67 (6), subject to adopting the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Decision and the following Conditions of
Approval:
1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, as
applicable.An engineerdesigned plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted
by the proposed SSTS.
2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.
3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. a
geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should be
required. All trees 6 inches and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacement
planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by
the city.
6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area."
Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.
SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to replace an existing, failing septic system with a system that encroaches into the Bluff
Creek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback.
BACKGROUND
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, September 23, 2019SubjectConsider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of theBluff at 1181 Homestead LaneSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner, AICP File No: Planning Case 201912PROPOSED MOTION"City Council approves a variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone forthe construction of a septic system, and a deviation from the 50foot bluff setback for septic systems in Section 1967 (6), subject to adopting the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Decision and the following Conditions ofApproval:1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings for the project, asapplicable.An engineerdesigned plan is required to divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impactedby the proposed SSTS.2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS (e.g. ageotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree removal should berequired. All trees 6 inches and larger in and around the construction area shall be shown. Replacementplanting will be required in areas cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved bythe city.6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the construction area."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.SUMMARYThe applicant is proposing to replace an existing, failing septic system with a system that encroaches into the BluffCreek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 17, 2019 to review the request. The Planning
Commission voted 60 to approve the requested variances subject to the six Conditions of Approval. The Planning
Commission believed that the applicant had investigated all possible alternatives and the proposed septic location was
the most environmentally sound alternative.
While staff had recommended denial of the variance, the applicant provided additional testimony which addressed
some of staff's concerns and requested justifications.
DISCUSSION
The applicant shall submit detailed construction plans for the septic system, engineered drainage and erosion control
plans for the realignment of the ravine around the septic tanks and drain fields, and a tree survey in and around the
proposed construction area.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the
Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system, subject to the Conditions of Approval in the staff
report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Findings of Fact and Decision
September 17, 2019 Planning Commission Staff Report
September 17, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
City Code Sec. 1967 (6)
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the
Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural
Residential District(RR) - Planning Case 2019-12.
On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments,met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by
published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District(RR).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Large Lot Residential.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 10, Block 3,Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota
4. Variance Findings—Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The installation of a septic system in this location will have a minimal impact
on the bluff and the Bluff Creek primary zone. Once installed,the site can be revegetated
to maintain the environmental benefits of the area.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: The applicant cannot install a compliant septic system on the property without a
variance.
1
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does
not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the
minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The lot's substandard size and pre-
existing house placement means that a two-car garage cannot be situated on the lot
without a variance.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The property is located in a large lot residential subdivision. The proposed
construction of a septic system in the Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback
will not alter the essential character of the locality and will provide a working septic system.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report#2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous, et
al, is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance from the bluff
setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic
system, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat
drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to
divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS.
2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.
3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a
location for an SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is
fill/disturbed soil).
4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
2
5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize
tree removal should be required. All trees 6" and larger in and around the
construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas
cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city.
6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the
construction area."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019.
CITY OF CHA HASSEN
BY: /Ai i y
even Weick, Cha.; an
g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead In(approval).docx
3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
REPORT
Tuesday,September 17,2019
Subject Consider a Request for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom of the
Bluff at 1181 Homestead Lane
Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:B.1.
Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,Associate
Planner
File No:Planning Case 2019-12
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff
Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system,adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision and
directs the applicant to:
Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the subsurface sewage treatment
system (SSTS)being installed in the front yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a
location for an SSTS e.g.a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is proposing to replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches into the Bluff Creek
primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback.
APPLICANT
John Jensen II,1181 Homestead Lane,Chanhassen,MN 55317
SITE INFORMATION
PRESENT ZONING:Rural Residential District,RR
LAND USE:Large Lot Residential
ACREAGE:2.5 acres
DENSITY:NA
APPLICATION REGULATIONS
Chapter 19,Water,Sewers and Sewage Disposal,Article IV,Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3,Variances
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,September 17,2019SubjectConsideraRequest for a Variance to Replace and Move a Septic System to the Bottom oftheBluffat1181HomesteadLaneSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case 2019-12PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment into theBluffCreekprimaryzonefortheconstructionofasepticsystem,adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisionanddirectstheapplicantto:Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the subsurface sewagetreatmentsystem(SSTS)being installed in the front yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of suchalocationforanSSTSe.g.a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisproposingto replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches into the BluffCreekprimaryzoneaswellasintotherequiredbluffsetback.APPLICANTJohnJensenII,1181 Homestead Lane,Chanhassen,MN55317SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:Rural Residential District,RRLANDUSE:Large LotResidentialACREAGE:2.5 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATION REGULATIONS
Chapter 19,Water,Sewers and Sewage Disposal,Article IV,Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3,Variances
Chapter 20,Article XI,RR”Rural Residential District
Chapter 20,Section 20-1401,Structure Setbacks Bluffs)
Chapter 20, 20-1564 Structure Setbacks Bluff Creek primary zone)
BACKGROUND
Pioneer Hills was platted on February 4,1985.The house was built in 1986.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance to permit construction of the septic system within the
bluff setback and Bluff Creek primary zone since a feasible alternative that conforms to ordinance may be installed,
adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision and directs the applicant to:
Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS being installed in the front
yard,or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location for an SSTS e.g.a geotechnical report or
perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report
Findings of Fact and Decision Denial
Findings of Fact and Decision Approval
Development Review Application
Narrative
Survey
Septic Site Sketches
Public Hearing Notice
Affidavit of Mailing
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: September 17, 2019
CC DATE: September 23, 2019
REVIEW DEADLINE: October 15, 2019
CASE #: 2019-12
BY: RG, EH, JS, ET
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is proposing to replace an existing septic system with a system that encroaches
into the Bluff Creek primary zone as well as into the required bluff setback.
LOCATION: 1181 Homestead Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer
Hills, Carver County,
Minnesota
PID 256100190)
OWNER: John Jensen II
1181 Homestead Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential
District (RR) and Bluff Creek Overlay
District (BCO).
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Large
Lot
ACREAGE: 2.5 acres DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed
project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. 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.
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the bluff setback and encroachment in
to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system and adopts the attached
Findings of Facts and Decision.”
Note: A motion for approval and appropriate Findings of Fact are also included at the end of the
report.)
Planning Commission
1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12
September 17, 2019
Page 2 of 6
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant would like to install their septic system within the Bluff Creek primary zone as
well as encroach into the bluff setback zone.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 19, Water, Sewers and Sewage Disposal, Article IV, Subsurface Sewage Treatment
Systems
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20, Article XI, “RR” Rural Residential District
Chapter 20, Section 20-1401, Structure Setbacks (Bluffs)
Chapter 20, 20-1564 Structure Setbacks (Bluff Creek primary zone)
BACKGROUND
Pioneer Hills was platted on February 4, 1985. County records indicate that the house was built
in 1986.
Bluff Creek
Primary Zone
Planning Commission
1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12
September 17, 2019
Page 3 of 6
SITE CONDITIONS
The property is zoned Rural Residential District and is located within the city’s Bluff Creek
overlay district. This zoning classification requires lots to be a minimum of 2.5 acres and that the
primary zone be preserved as permanent open space.
The exiting septic system is failing and must be replaced.
SITE CONSTRAINTS
Wetland Protection
There is not a wetland located on the property.
Bluff Protection
There is a bluff on the property.
Shoreland Management
The property is not located within a shoreland overlay district.
Floodplain Overlay
This property is not within a floodplain
Bluff Creek Corridor
The property is located within the Bluff Creek overlay district.
Variances within 500 feet:
Variance 2007-28, 951 Homestead Lane, variance to permit a 1,177 square foot accessory structure
on November 20, 2007.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing a septic system to be installed in a naturally wooded area within the
Primary Zone of the Bluff Creek Watershed District as well as near a bluff. The existing site has
100% tree cover from the home to the Powers Boulevard right-of-way. Locating the septic field in
this area will permanently affect the wooded area and primary zone. A number of homes own a
share of the continuous wooded area and have protected the area since the development of the area.
Staff recommends that protection of the wooded area continue. Ideally, an alternative location
Planning Commission
1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12
September 17, 2019
Page 4 of 6
could be found on the property for the system. If not, then a tree survey showing the system located
as to minimize tree removal should be required and replacement plantings be approved by the city.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the Variance submittal for 1181 Homestead Lane.
These comments are divided into two categories: general comments
and proposed conditions. General comments are informational
points to guide the applicant in the proper planning of public works
infrastructure for this project, to inform the applicant of possible
extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings.
Proposed conditions are requirements that Engineering recommends
be formally imposed on the developer in the final order. Note that
references to the “City Standards” herein refer to the Standard
Specifications and Detail Plates.
General Comments/Findings
1. Any and all utility and transportation plans submitted with
this application have been reviewed for the purpose of
determining the feasibility of providing utility and
transportation facilities for the project in accordance with
City Standards and City Ordinances. Recommendation of a
variance approval does not constitute final approval of
details, including but not limited to alignments, materials and
points of access, connection or discharge, that are depicted or
suggested in the application. The applicant is required to
submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings
for the project, as applicable. The City of Chanhassen
Engineering and Public Works Department will review plans,
in detail, when they are submitted and approve, reject or
require modifications to the plans or drawings based upon
conformance with City Standards, the Chanhassen Code of
Ordinances and the professional engineering judgment of the
City Engineer.
2. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the
proposed subsurface sewage treatment system (SSTS)
variance should not be approved as other locations on the
subject property would allow for the SSTS to function
properly while not creating the need for a variance from bluff
and slope setbacks based on the information provided.
a. Upon submittal of the variance request, the
applicant’s justification for not locating the SSTS in
the front yard was discussed under point 3.c. “Moving
Planning Commission
1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12
September 17, 2019
Page 5 of 6
the entire system to the front yard would also be problematic as there is not enough
workable space to install a system.”
b. After review by staff it was determined that there was enough room to install the
SSTS between the existing garage and existing house. As currently designed, the
treatment area requires 1,600 square feet, while the front yard provides over 2,400
square feet of workable area outside building setbacks and slope/bluff setbacks.
c. Staff reached out to the applicant to obtain further justification to point 3.c. and
received a follow-up e-mail on September 5, 2019 in which the contractor
concluded: “there is no room in the front due to the well setback and all cut and fill
or compacted soils, and the contours do not work either.”
d. After re-reviewing the setbacks (well and slopes) from the provided plans, staff
determined that there was enough room as discussed in item 2.b. of this report and
that if there are concerns regarding compacted soils, a type 3 system should be
proposed and subsequent perk tests provided to ensure feasibility.
3. Staff will reassess the recommendation for denial of variance if further justification is
provided for the infeasibility of the front yard location for installation of the SSTS. See
Condition 1.
Proposed Conditions
1. Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS
being installed in the front yard, or, provide further justification of the impracticability of
such a location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is
fill/disturbed soil).
SUMMARY
The applicant’s proposed project does not comply with city ordinance. Based on staff’s review,
an alternative system compliant with City Code could be installed. The Building Department
supports any comments or concerns that the Soil & Water Conservation District and Water
Resources has concerning the placement of the septic system.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance to permit construction of the
septic system within the bluff setback and Bluff Creek primary zone since a feasible alternative
that conforms to ordinance may be installed, adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision
and directs the applicant to:
Planning Commission
1181 Homestead Lane – Planning Case 2019-12
September 17, 2019
Page 6 of 6
Submit plans showing conformance with City Ordinance and City Standards for the SSTS being
installed in the front yard, or provide further justification of the impracticability of such a
location for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
Should the Planning Commission approve the variance request, it is recommended that the
Planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached Finding of Fact and Decision:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the bluff setback variance and
encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system as shown
in the plans shown on the Certificate of Survey by SISU Land Surveying dated 8/19/19, subject
to the following conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.
1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings
for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing
drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS.
2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.
3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location
for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree
removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the construction area
shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the
septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city.
6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the
construction area.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Finding of Fact and Decision Denial
2. Finding of Fact and Decision Approval
3. Development Review Application and Narrative
4. 1181 Homestead Lane Survey
5. Septic Site Sketches
6. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List
g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\staff report-1181 homestead ln-pc.docx
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
DENIAL)
IN RE:
Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment into the
Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural
Residential District (RR) - Planning Case 2019-12.
On September 17, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Large Lot.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The intent of the city’s bluff protection and Bluff Creek Overlay District
ordinances are to protect the city’s natural areas and aquatic resources by establishing a
minimum bluff setback as well as preserve the Bluff Creek corridor. These two
requirements are designed to work together to prevent excessive development that could
generate unnecessary alterations which could potentially degrade the bluff area as well as
Bluff Creek.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
2
Finding: An alternative system compliant with City Code could be installed without a
variance.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: While the septic system has failed and must be replaced, an alternative system
compliant with City Code could be installed.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The property is located in one of the city’s large lot residential subdivisions.
The properties within 500 feet of the parcel have septic systems that comply with city
ordinances. The proposed encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone and bluff
setback could lead to other alterations to the natural area of the neighborhood.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous,
et al, is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow a
variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the
construction of a septic system.”
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Steven Weick, Chairman
g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead ln (denial).docx
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of John Jensen II for variance from the bluff setback and encroachment in to the
Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic system on a property zoned Rural
Residential District (RR) - Planning Case 2019-12.
On September 3, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by
published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Large Lot Residential.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 10, Block 3, Pioneer Hills, Carver County, Minnesota
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The installation of a septic system in this location will have a minimal impact
on the bluff and the Bluff Creek primary zone. Once installed, the site can be revegetated
to maintain the environmental benefits of the area.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: The applicant cannot install a compliant septic system on the property without a
variance.
2
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does
not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the
minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The lot’s substandard size and pre-
existing house placement means that a two-car garage cannot be situated on the lot
without a variance.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The property is located in a large lot residential subdivision. The proposed
construction of a septic system in the Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback
will not alter the essential character of the locality and will provide a working septic system.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2019-12, dated September 17, 2019, prepared by Robert Generous, et
al, is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance from the bluff
setback and encroachment in to the Bluff Creek primary zone for the construction of a septic
system, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat
drawings for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to
divert the existing drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS.
2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.
3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a
location for an SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is
fill/disturbed soil).
4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
3
5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize
tree removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the
construction area shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas
cleared outside of the septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city.
6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the
construction area.”
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2019.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Steven Weick, Chairman
g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\findings of fact and decision 1181 homestead ln (approval).docx
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
IlkPlanningDivision—
7700 Market Boulevard
CITY OFCHANIIASSENMailingAddress—P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952)227-1300/Fax: (952) 227-1110
1 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Submittal Date: [ , ( l(.r 1 ( 9e`)PC Dat ' I I I gCC Date ` I-)3 1 1 60-Day Review Date: ! '
t
k`S.- I, n
Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply)
Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application)
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 600 El Subdivision (SUB)
El Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers $100 El Create 3 lots or less 300
Create over 3 lots 600 + $15 per lot
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) lots)
Single-Family Residence 325 El Metes & Bounds (2 lots) 300
All Others 425 Consolidate Lots 150
ElInterim Use Permit(IUP)
CI Lot Line Adjustment 150
El In conjunction with Single-Family Residence..$325
Final Plat 700
Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)*
425AllOthers Additional escrow may be required for other applications
through the development contract.
Rezoning (REZ)
Planned Unit Development (PUD) 750 El Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way(VAC) $300
Minor Amendment to existing PUD 100 Additional recording fees may apply)
El All Others 500
El Variance(VAR)200
Sign Plan Review 150
El Wetland Alteration Permit(WAP)
Site Plan Review(SPR) Single-Family Residence 150
Administrative 100 All Others 275
Commercial/Industrial Districts* 500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:
El Zoning Appeal 100
thousand square feet)
Include number of existing employees:
CI Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 500
Include number of new employees:
Residential Districts 500 NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently,
the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
Plus$5 per dwelling unit (units)
18 Notification Sign (City to install and remove) 200
Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre-application meeting) 3 per address
y addresses)
Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) 50 per document
Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Site Plan Agreement
ElVacation
6
Variance Wetland Alteration Permit
Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) Easements ( easements) El Deeds
TOTAL FEE:
Section 2: Required Information
Description of Proposal: Asking to alloy m right to the edge of the e.a ement Eas eet on
w- ..' . . ..- .. r.• : _ e . ture.
Property Address or Location:
1181 Homestead Lane
Parcel#:
10
Legal Description: Section 26 Township 116 Range 023
Total Acreage:
2.5
Wetlands Present? Yes No
Present Zoning:
Mixed Low Density Residential District(I
Requested Zoning:
Not Applicable
Present Land Use Designation:
Residential Low Density Requested Land Use Designation: Not Applicable
Existing Use of Property: Single family home
Check box if separate narrative is attached.
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application
should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this
application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I
further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to
any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Signature:Date:
PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of
the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may
be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the
study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name:
John Jensen
Contact:
Address:
1181 Homestead Lane
Phone:
612-790-3614
City/State/Zip:
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Cell:
612- 790-3614
Email:
jjensenii2@msn.com
Fax:
Signature:Date:
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist
and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural
requirements and fees.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A
written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
PROJECT ENGINEER(if applicable)
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Section 4: Notification Information
Who should receive copies of staff reports? Other Contact Information:
El Property Owner Via: 0 Email Mailed Paper Copy Name:
El Applicant Via: Email El Mailed Paper Copy Address:
El Engineer Via: Email El Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip:
El Other* Via: El Email Mailed Paper Copy Email:
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select yt..rORIV to save a copy to your I
device. and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT ;to send a digital
copy to the city for processing.
SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM
f\-)
Variance Request 1181 Homestead Lane
1. The septic system at 1181 homestead was found to be failing during an inspection of the
property.The septic system needs to be replaced because there are no available sewer lines.
2. A Variance is being requested to put the septic system at the bottom of the bluff. Any septic
system that is installed within 50 feet of the bluff with 25%grade requires a variance. Because
of an easement on the property extending 75 feet into the property,the septic system has to be
installed closer to the bluff.
3. This placement of the septic system at the bottom of the bluff is the optimal placement
a. Installing the septic system at the top of the bluff would also require a variance
b. This will be an optimal place as it will allow for ease of connection to a future sewer
system.There is sewer pipe along the property, but it is not currently connected to the
city sewer system.This will be a future development.
c. Moving the entire system to the front yard would also be problematic as there is not
enough workable space to install a system.
d. The easement of 75 feet, does not allow for the septic system to be installed further
away from the bluff.
e. The septic system when installed will still be 75 feet from the property line due to the
easement.
f. Several properties along Homestead lane have Septic systems at the bottom of the bluff,
however they have additional flat land and may not have needed a variance.
IIMMINIMIM
I
00
ac
111
2
N" [ / , ,. /..,..
v..„../''7. -_ _.------ _ --
t
f
s„,,,,,_,
i , i
ds
11111
s'
ti 7
f 1:'--
t
Px
til
Ik/
ZE
tilt
y
w.. I .
t ,
r
CIV
r
j
y
I.--,F
P.
4
f .
Ill—r
C
Q
d
1 Nr
A flk ii , ilk
C ---7---)1 ti
s ,7,'..."CZ. . . ,
s, tk, ; fil.
11110.,
1 ZA)
1- ;{ .c._ •
1>
f r,
i
7.
44444‘
4 ' •Cah
emsodoompe
N_,
t..-
113 ) I
97-
7/7 I ,•
etirn _...._ 41 \
t' • - ,I
1
ac,.._. i /• /0...
IIll*
IZ,- k
i 0 L,4,
t
I
k kvii1
i1ol ..,. .4
t. . ..._:____ I1 1
N.„,
m i;
7.-: t 0-
1r,
I14N
f
ii
i -:_.....
iz. ite-
I. .
1 ICI Ai .1
I
IR
1-
411 4 ri•
1... . . - , ?
t.1 4
i
4i 0.51 1
fii ,
10,..... , . , ;•,,,.:,
r--
4
ti L • ..' -_ ,.:, -.,./,-- •
4. trtt •'*:-'---.1...' -' ---:-... _______,
4z .&..
P. /
oixasA- /ago - Aasz.
is
1
1, 7:S7
N.,...
s....L., ......
m.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-12
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request
for a variance to replace and move a septic system to the bottom of the bluff at 1181 Homestead
Lane. Zoned Rural Residential (RR). Owner: John Jensen.
A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the city’s
web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2019-12 or at City Hall during regular business hours.
All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with
respect to this proposal.
MacKenzie Young-Walters
Associate Planner
Email: mwalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Phone: 952-227-1132
Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on September 5, 2019)
g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-12 1181 homestead lane var\ph notice to villager.docx
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 17, 2019
Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Mark Undestad, Mark Randall, Michael McGonagill,
Doug Reeder, and Laura Skistad
MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner
Weick: Welcome to everybody here and watching. For the record we do have a quorum this
evening with Commissioners Undestad, McGonagill, Skistad, Reeder and Randall. Thank you
for coming this evening.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO REPLACE AND MOVE A SEPTIC
SYSTEM TO THE BOTTOM OF THE BLUFF AT 1181 HOMESTEAD LANE.
Weick: Tonight we do have a single case. I do not have the number in front of me so Bob I’ll let
you say that when you introduce the item and with that I will turn it over to Mr. Generous.
Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. Planning Case 2019-12 is a variance request
for a bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone. There’s a secondary
variance that you’re not reviewing is from Chapter 19 of the City Ordinance. It’s a sub-surface
sewage treatment system ordinance which requires setbacks from bluffs also. The property is
located at 1181 Homestead Lane. The property backs up to Powers Boulevard and accessed via
Homestead Lane. There’s a significant hill on the back of this property. It’s zoned Rural
Residential. Minimum lot sizes are 2 ½ acres. 50 foot front and rear setbacks and 10 foot side
yard setbacks. This property has 2 ½ acre on it so it is fairly large. Part of the issues with the
property is that there’s a bluff on the property. The rear of the property is located within the
Bluff Creek primary zone and there’s a drainage swale on the south side of this property that
runs down the hill that staff was concerned about. This is the area of the bluff on the property.
The applicant is proposing to replace a failing septic system which is located back here I believe
and run the line down and have some tanks and then some drain fields. However this whole area
on the, from the top of the slope down is in the primary zone. Another constraint on the property
is the right-of-way for Powers Boulevard is 75 feet into the property so all this is actually road
right-of-way. The drain field sites are here and here and the tanks are there. The Bluff Creek
primary zone requires that the area be preserved as permanent open space and so no development
is supposed to take place in that. Again the applicant is proposing to put their septic system
within the primary zone. Be approximately here on the property. And also the drain fields
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
2
would be right at the bottom of the toe of the slope. Under our ordinance there’s a 40 foot
structure setback. Under Chapter 19 requirements there’s a 20 foot for the drain field and 50 feet
for the tanks themselves. Again the applicant is proposing to place a septic system within the
Bluff Creek primary zone and within the bluff setback. Their existing system is failing. They
need to replace it. Again they have the easement on the bottom. And this gets into what staff is
proposing that we do believe there are alternatives but they say that it would be problematic and
it's not enough workable space to install the system in the front yard. They’ve noted several
homes along Homestead Lane have septic systems at the bottom of the bluff. I checked the city
records. I couldn’t find any on, that back up to Powers Boulevard. There are some on Pioneer
Trail that have some but they have a larger landing area. A flat area at the bottom of the hill so
all the other ones that I found are within 50 or 60 feet of the house so at the top of the bluff.
Staff’s assessment is based on the required separations from the structures and the well that there
is an area within the front yard of the property up on top of the bluff outside of the primary zone
that they could potentially put in a septic system. It meets the 10 foot structure setback on this
side and it’s out of the primary zone and out of the bluff area so staff believes that they could do
it. If their concern is about the compaction of the soil there are additional Type 3 systems that
can be used to provide septic treatment and so we believe absent of them providing additional
information that they can comply with city ordinance. Therefore staff is recommending denial of
the variance request and adoption of the Findings of Fact and direct the applicant to submit plans
in conformance with the city code requirements. I should note that I did provide an email that
we received from Commissioner Tietz. He concurs with staff’s recommendation. With that I’d
be happy to answer any questions.
Weick: I will open kind of questions are over or points of clarification. The issue with putting
the septic system in a proposed location is that because it’s in the bluff zone you’re not supposed
to put any type of structure in that area? It’s not because it’s specific to a septic system right?
Generous: Correct. It would be any structure would need to be out of the primary zone and 40
feet away from the, any the toe of the bluff.
Weick: So if it were a shed or anything.
Generous: Or a house or anything else. A garage.
Weick: I just wanted to be sure that it wasn’t something specific to a septic code or anything like
that.
Generous: No, well they have their own design requirements that this is a variance from but it’s
not, we’re looking from the zoning standpoint about permitting it in an area that’s supposed to
remain permanent open space.
Weick: That was my question. Commissioners can certainly just jump in.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
3
McGonagill: One clarification Bob just so myself and people listening, back up what is the
primary zone so people know. We use that term. It’s defined. It’s application. Why it’s there.
Maybe go to the map and kind of talk through it and say this is what it’s there for just so we kind
of know. Thank you.
Generous: I don’t have a good map on it. The primary zone is any lands that contribute to the
watershed of the Bluff Creek creek. Bluff Creek. And it’s lands that any development or
alteration may have a detrimental impact to the water quality going in that and so the City has
adopted an ordinance to preserve that whole corridor as permanent open space to help improve
as, for habitat. For water quality issues. And as a community amenity. It runs two-thirds of the
length of the city from 41, north of Highway 5 all the way down to the Minnesota River Valley
and so it’s an amenity in our community that we want to preserve and protect.
McGonagill: And that corridor, the primary zone was designated by the City and not so much by
Minnesota water quality or another state agency?
Generous: No it was a study that the City did in the early 90’s and then we adopted an ordinance
to protect it and implement that study and the preservation. We’re trying to create a link system
so eventually we will see a trail system that goes from the headwaters of Bluff Creek all the way
down to the Minnesota River valley.
McGonagill: Okay thanks Bob. I don’t have no more questions.
Undestad: I’ve got a question for you. The proposed septic down at the bottom I noticed that
was a drain field. Or is that a mound, two mound system or is that a drain, just drain fields?
Generous: Those would be I believe they are mound type structures.
Undestad: Are they? And is that what the staff looked at for up by the house? The mound
structure.
Generous: Yes. That would be the Type 3 system that they’d have to do because, well their
contention I believe is that it’s compacted up there and had been altered and so they can’t meet
the minimum requirements for the septic system.
Undestad: Okay.
Skistad: The creek is on the other side of Powers, is that correct?
Generous: Correct.
Skistad: So what do we do about the runoff on Powers?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
4
Generous: That is treated in the stormwater systems before it goes into that. That’s the one
thing we exempt from our ordinance is public facilities because we have to provide
transportation for the community.
Skistad: So how far is the distance, what’s the distance between Powers and the creek?
Generous: Well it’s, there’s wetlands adjacent to the, just across Powers Boulevard. As a matter
when they were building Powers Boulevard they had to surcharge this area because the road
sank. Or the underlayment of the road sank because of the wetlands that were contingent, or
next to that.
Skistad: And so to answer my question though how far is it from Powers?
Generous: To the creek?
Skistad: To the creek, yeah.
Generous: It’s a couple hundred feet maybe.
Skistad: Okay, thank you.
Generous: It runs, I wish I would have brought a bigger map. It runs diagonally across the land,
across the street and it’s about at the corner of Powers and Pioneer where it goes underneath
Pioneer and continues to the south.
Weick: Any follow up?
Skistad: I guess my other question would be if you move, if you have it in a septic near the well
I mean to me that would be a concern as a homeowner. I wouldn’t want my septic right next to
my well.
Generous: And under Minnesota Chapter 7080 is the standard that they have. That’s the
minimum separation between your well and your septic drain fields.
McGonagill: So it’d meet that code?
Generous: Yes. That’s what they tried to show here. The well is located on the east side of the
house and so they did a radius out from that.
McGonagill: Let me ask, the 50 foot radius so it’s beyond that.
Generous: So it would be beyond that. It would be this area that would comply with the
standard.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
5
McGonagill: Okay thank you. If you kept going beyond the other side of the garage Bob, could
that? There. Can that be done? Used?
Generous: Theoretically yes. It’s a longer system.
McGonagill: Right but it could be used.
Generous: I would think so yeah, if it meets. You’d have a 10 foot setback from the structure
but then this area becomes usable.
McGonagill: Okay thanks. So there’s options. Right or left of the driveway. Or even yes it’s a
farther line. You have gravity feed at the south but, okay I understand now thank you.
Skistad: Can I ask one more question? What is that green dotted line that goes into the, yeah
right there.
Generous: Well this is a drainage area. Swale. A ravine that runs down the hill and I believe
this is what, a 25 percent slope edge and this is a 20 or it could be vice versa. That’s a 20 and
that’s 25 percent. But this is one thing that the Carver County pointed out to us. There was
concern about this running down the hill and washing out those drain systems at the bottom.
McGonagill: Yeah.
Skistad: And then the red line, the red dotted line that’s the?
Generous: That’s again it’s a slope designation. It shows where the, I believe it’s a 25 percent.
Skistad: That’s just the, okay that’s just the grade. Okay.
Dale Denn: If I can chime in. I believe the yellow was the 25 which is your bluff and then the
other one’s a 20.
Generous: 20 yeah.
Dale Denn: I think the ordinance here we can’t site a drain field on that much of a grade.
Generous: Or within 20 feet of it or something like that. 50 feet of it.
Skistad: So is there only one, like the first, the first mound or whatever that is, is that the only
one that’s an issue essentially?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
6
Generous: Well both of these are. They don’t meet, well one they’re both, all this is within the
Bluff Creek primary zone and this doesn’t meet the standard for the septic drain fields. So
they’re requesting a variance from the setback from the bottom of that slope, whether it’s 20
percent or 25 percent.
McGonagill: Bob can you go back to the larger. Point out where the existing field is just so I
know.
Generous: I believe it’s right behind the house.
Dale Denn: Yeah the existing is the trenches. There’s like 4 or 5 of them and they’re banged
right in the bluff below the house.
Weick: Let’s just, if we could hold that thought yeah because you’re not at the microphone. It’s
real hard to get you on the record but we will get you on the record. So if you have questions.
That’s okay.
McGonagill: Thank you, that’s all I have.
Weick: Anything else for the City? On this. Okay, thank you Mr. Generous. Then I’d be glad
to invite the applicant to join us and give a presentation.
John Jensen: I’m in. I’m John Jensen.
Weick: Welcome.
John Jensen: So what we could do, what I would like to is actually start by going back to the
diagram that we have with the well.
McGonagill: That one?
John Jensen: Yes. And so when I provided this document I provided the original survey to the
surveyor and what wasn’t realized that there had been an addition after the original survey and so
even though it shows that right under the house, which is where it is essentially, it’s actually 10
feet further in the direction towards the garage. So yeah it’s out that way an additional 10 feet so
that does take up more of that space and also I have some other things I’m going to show you
that relate to this whole area and why it would be a problem and then we can talk about you
know too why it’s good down in the other area. So another thing is you mentioned on the other
side of the garage. Towards the street.
Generous: I switched it to your’s. It might be easier for you to work off of.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
7
John Jensen: Oh no that’s not mine. Can you make it bigger? Okay I’ve got to move things.
Okay there we go. Alright there’s a hill here. Pretty substantial hill. You know so you
definitely would have difficulty putting it in that area because of the hill. So, and also another
thing that I will get to in a minute too is water. I have a lot of water that comes, I don’t know if
it comes off the street or where it comes from but I get a lot of water in this area and it actually
comes along the garage and goes back and goes down into this ravine. So and in fact I think
right now I have a couple puddles sitting there right now. They usually go away in a little while
but all the rain lately it’s kind of made it a little more difficult. And also this is another area that
I just want to make sure we were in consideration. This is where an old driveway was and it’s
just really dug up and would really be a problematic area, plus it is also a very hilly area. And
then also in this area I didn’t designate any trees but there are a lot of substantial trees in that area
so I know my neighbor would not be happy about me taking out any of these trees because in
fact he even said to me because of the old driveway he’s like I’m happy that that old driveway’s
not there because it affords me more privacy so I know he would not be happy taking out trees.
So what I do want to go back to is, I drew a line here and this is not exact but it does give you a
better idea of where approximately that well line would be and then also I have a big blue line.
This is my neighbor’s yard and he has a septic system in the front of his yard and he, his house is
a little bit higher than mine and the septic system actually creates like a valley in his yard so all
the water when it rains hard comes towards my yard. And so what happens here is I really have
a drain area. I mean I cannot do pretty much anything at this point except for just, I don’t know
if you can see this but this is running all the way across my yard. All this area. It’s like a thick
stream running across the yard and that would, if we were to put a mound up there it’s going to
exacerbate the situation, possibly make it even worst and I don’t know what kind of issue that
would create with the mound since they’re saying that you know water going into it would not be
good but this is a lot more than you get at the hill because it absorbs in the hill but this is just,
like I said it’s a lot. So one last thing. I’m not sure how relevant this is but there is an electrical
cable line running from the house that does run under this area also. And I think, and so that’s
pretty much why you know all my indications as to why we shouldn’t put it at the top because
there’s just, there’s no room and anything that’s you know anywhere it’s going to go it’s going to
create problems. They did do some measurements as to how much space it would take up and
they came up with 1,600 feet and I think that was just the sand and rock. Yeah it doesn’t include
the additional 3 structures which is approximately another thousand square feet so we would
have to figure out where those would go too up at the top because they couldn’t go right there so
they would have to be moved somewhere else. As far as the bottom, why is it a good area? It’s
a good area because it is a natural undisturbed soil that will absorb easily. Also another thing
that the City mentioned, they’re like okay well what about big trees. There are no big trees in the
proposed area. All the big trees are outside of that area and then on the side of Powers Street the
only thing that’s pretty much there is buckthorn and we would be getting a lot of rid of a lot of
that invasive buckthorn when we’re doing this because that is you know not something that
helps anything. Also one other thing I’d like to point out that there is a sewer line down below.
I don’t know if you can see this but you can see that there’s a sewer line. Unfortunately that
sewer line is not currently connected to the city otherwise I’d be like okay let’s just connect there
but it’s not connected but it’s there for future use. So and one last item I would like to mention is
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
8
that the City opposes this, or the Planning Commission opposes this but they, the City is also
building a road just on the other side of my neighbor’s property. And that will be very close to
the Bluff Creek zone too so I’m not sure why they’re opposed to mine but they’re okay with a
road so with that I would like to give it to the guy who would like to put the septic system, unless
you guys have questions of me.
Weick: They might.
John Jensen: I can come back.
Weick: Yeah let’s just listen all the way through.
John Jensen: Okay.
Weick: If that’s okay. Okay.
Dale Denn: My name’s Dale Denn with the Homestead Septic. I’m the owner/operator. 1108
Goldenrod Lane, Shakopee.
Weick: Welcome.
Dale Denn: Thanks. So I’ve been, this is my second time out on this property. Actually about 3
years ago with the current owner. Previous owner. I was out here working with them a little bit
also trying to get a system put in so I think some of my point of view in the general, and if I step
over here I can still here. Can this turn?
Weick: Sure.
Dale Denn: So I sent in, I didn’t bring them but I took some aerial photos too a couple, 2-3
years. Maybe 3 years ago when this previous homeowner was there and he was a contractor and
I don’t, do you have a copy John?
John Jensen: No I don’t.
Dale Denn: But if you, so first off this regards soil and siting. One of the reasons why I’m
staying away from this area, if we looked at an aerial photo from 3 years ago it shows a
contractor yard. He had a lot of stuff out here and when I was out there when he was there a lot
of this was, I mean I can’t remember what it was. The aerial photo shows a whole lot of stuff but
I think a lot of this was cut with some Class V. There was stuff here. There was a whole bunch
of stuff here. Pallets.
Weick: Can you pull that into the, I think you’re referencing an area that we can’t quite see.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
9
Dale Denn: Oh okay.
Weick: It just really helps. Yeah yeah yeah. So you’re talking about the City’s proposed area
for the septic?
Dale Denn: Yeah.
Weick: Okay.
Dale Denn: Right. So all around this garage, this is all contractor stuff. And if you look at the
aerial you see it’s kind of white and hazy too which from my understanding of an aerial photo
shows some kind of harder surface. So that’s the first issue there when we come out as designer
looking at a general area to go to. And so these soils would be considered compacted. Cut. Fill
soils. And then the State Code always directs us to try to find the best soils for longevity of the
system which is Type 1 soils. Now and I do beg to differ a little bit on the square footage. So
John has a 5 bedroom home and so this is a mound septic system and the reason there’s two
zones down below is because I couldn’t get it set on a contour so I have to split the mound into
two components so it’s basically two little mini mounds with a common feed inbetween because
mounds are pressurized also. And so one other thing, speaking of that, so if this mound is up
here you have to bear in mind that a 2 inch pump line has to come up to pressurize the mound or
whatever type of system it is because it’s higher than the tanks which come out the back so his
tanks right now are actually right here. That is the approximate area of the existing septic tank
and now his gravity’s down the hill and feeds all the trenches. So if we were looking at coming
up here, well this is where the sewer come out so then we’d have new septic tanks which number
one are impossible to get back there so they would actually, so this is some more design
parameters. They would have to be a poly type plastic tank which if we absolutely have to use
them we do but there’s a lot of issues with the poly tank when you pump them out. If you’ve got
ground water they tend to want to come out of the ground. They collapse. It’s a product and it’s
registered but the uses are not what we usually want to try to use. But then pump tanks would
have to be out here as well and so then a pump line is going to have to come somewhere all the
way up to this, if it was a mound up here someplace. So you have to bear that in mind so that
would be a 2 inch line that’s going to have to come. There’s hardly any room over here but a 2
inch pump line’s going to have to come all the way up to charge up whatever type of septic
system it is. So that’s something to also consider. So now back to the square footage. So he has
a 5 bedroom house. The rock bed for a mound is 10 by 63 feet. That’s just the rock bed area.
So if this was all one mound where it says rock these dimensions would be 10 by 63 and that’s
where your lateral’s go and that’s where we have to run the pump line to to charge that area.
Now the absorption area is another, at a minimum 16 to 20 feet below the rock and that’s just the
absorption area so the absorption area, I did some math here, is almost 2,400 square feet. Just for
the absorption area. Now the mound is going to have the wings, the dikes we call them, which
are about 15 feet on the sides and then we have to finish a mound at a 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 finish so
the down slope dike generally on a slope would carry another 10 feet past the absorption area so
the short of that is, the footprint for this mound is almost 50 by 100. So if I needed an area to
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
10
finish it down to grade, all the side slopes for a 5 bedroom on somewhat of a, say a 5-6 percent
slope, it’s going to be just about 50 by 100. Because we don’t want to build them real steep on
the sides so we have to finish them off at a 3 to 1or 4 to 1. So you’re pushing really easily 4,000-
4,500 square feet. I can tell you that on a 12 percent slope the dike carries over 50 feet just to
catch up on that 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 finish. So down here below the hill is what we would call a toe
slope. It’s a very dramatic bluff to a toe. The slopes down here I believe are only about 8
percent where these are sited right now. So that’s just a nice number. That’s pretty common so
that’s a generous slope. Very workable. Again the reason it’s split into is because, and here’s
another issue up here. The whole length of the rock bed has to be set on the contour at the same
elevation from end to end so it can’t twist against the contours and so we have to, with our laser
we have to ride contours fairly tight. And to be honest with you I think a lot of this area was cut
because it’s pretty level. I don’t even think these contours represent what this past homeowner
did because it’s pretty flat and then just, so and another thing this slope here is concaved. This is
called a swale. It’s very difficult for us to, the code actually has restrictions on, there’s some
math involved that it’s not a good idea to set a mound in a swale like this because the water tends
to want to run together and so it’s not going linear down to absorb like it should so that’s another
design issue. Honestly I think that berm actually was probably, I think it is a berm. I think some
of that might even be man made up there now I’m not sure but that is a pretty dramatic berm.
But keeping in mind if we were to scale that out we’d have to have about a 50 by 100 box that is
outside of the easements yet so that’s a pretty good area to site a 5 bedroom mound. And as far
as the environmental aspect it is a mound septic you know and the research on them is they’re
like the best thing going as far as treating the effluent and recycling it and you know putting it
back into the water system so there’s really no environmental threat whatsoever from the mound
just to make mention of that. And again the State Code would push us as a designer to find the
most suitable soils on the property. Generally even if we, a homeowner wanted to take me and
say I want my system over here and it’s bad soils and we have some virgin soils down here, the
County’s not going to let me appease the homeowner and say we can just bang in a Type 3 over
here. A Type 3 system is your non-standard system for compacted soils. Cut and fill. What
those are, those are very high risk systems and there is a place for them when there’s absolutely
no other options to install a standard septic so we always lean on the side of standard because the
first soils, if we were to do something in fill soil most of the time we’d have to add the pre-
treatment component to clean it up and that’s an aerobic type of system that’s on the front end of
a system so it’s a lot more bells and whistles. It takes management and bacteria checks and
monitoring and that goes on for the life of the system so these ain’t something that we as a
designer just try to go and sell because it’s, there’s a lot of associated costs with them and they’re
pretty high risk. What you have to keep in mind is in that footprint of the mound in the
absorption area, if it’s a 5 bedroom house that’s 750 gallons per day per potential use. If we do
the math on that over a year’s time just to give you some idea, that’s a column of water almost I
think roughly about 18 feet deep that has to go through every square foot of that area so we’re
putting a lot of, and that’s dirty water so that’s putting a lot of water through that footprint.
That’s why we like to have our best soils for structure and for the perc test and everything going
through. And also treatment. Whenever you remove the topsoil you’re taking the biological
component out of the treatment and then it’s just trying to pressure it through without any
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
11
biological treatment and that’s usually why we’re going to add the pre-treatment is to kill off
some of the bacteria ahead of time. So that’s another drawback. We can say yes there’s soils
there but soils to us is the organic component and then your nice viable sub-soils. Not just cut
and fill soils. So going down below from an install point of view, from a designer’s point of
view there are good soils. The water tables are down over 3 feet. I could actually do a different
design but for sake of room and stuff like that the mound is the best option down there so, but
what that is, that is a split mound that will just be built as one unit and then there’s a pump line
that’s going to go over and still has to pressurize those so our take, everything with gravity down
piece of cake. And then we’d have our tanks and it is true that the swale does come down but if
you were to walk out here and look it really delta’s out down there so it’s not the ravine like it is
up here. It’s just kind of a flat area with a little bit of a, you can kind of see where the water’s
going but that’s next to the mound but it’s, it’s really not a threat in my opinion. I’ve been at this
quite a while because it’s, the water there is kind of feathering out and losing it’s force and there
probably is some pretty easy ways to modify that a little bit with some rip rap and some fabric to
even improve that area and catch some of the sediment that is coming down the hill. But as far
as erosion and impacting the mound I just really don’t see that happening from my experience
and that could be modified and pushed over a little bit because it’s just simply discharging out
into the ditch there so that could be moved. There’s no trees that would come out. It’s just a
little bit of forcing it to go mostly straight west. It kind of turns and it goes a little bit northwest
when it wraps around, when it wraps around the tank. It’s kind of going just about like that. So
that could be almost just pushed straight down. I think I covered most of my, oh. I guess one
more point. So constructability, it’s true that it does butt right up to the bluff and it’s pretty
dramatic where it goes up so keep in mind after we actually would put this mound in I, in my
opinion it’s actually going to stabilize the bluff because if you try to visualize this being the
bluff, it’s pretty sharp and then the mound is right here. The mound’s going to be up and on the
top side of the mound, which ordinarily would go down, that can literally be filled in with some
additional sand and so from the crest of the mound, which we usually would go down and then
there would be a swale, on the up slope side we don’t get any credit for absorption so we can
literally fill that in so from the peak of the mound it would just go right uphill on an angle and
then just blend right into the bluff. As a matter of fact there’s a lot of times on new construction,
when it’s on some steeper slopes I will park the mound at the minimum 20 feet to a house and
they always ask me why is, you know why do you want to put that thing right next to my house
for and then I explain to them the same situation. They’re going to be coming down a slope. We
put the mound in which would have the valley but we fill it and it just plateaus right off the lawn
and then goes down on the 4 to 1 and you can’t even tell it’s there. And that would be the same
situation down here. Not that it’s, not that we’re concerned about aesthetics but that’s just going
to blend up against the hill and all that mound sand and the soil and everything is really just
going to, instead of having it a real sharp demarcation it’s just going to be more gradual as it
goes over the mound. Yeah that’s just kind of my general overview from a design standpoint.
And again if I had the aerial photos here though you would see that this was a pretty busy
contractor yard so to be honest with you I didn’t even do soils here but when I was out there 3
years ago it’s like no this just, I mean it was, it was a construction yard.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
12
John Jensen: …do you have your picture of the lot?
Dale Denn: Going back to the 2000.
John Jensen: The one that you were using. I think that one’s a little bit older one.
Dale Denn: 16.
Generous: I believe Mr. Chairman there is an attempt…and it should be in your’s too. It’s one
of the attachments.
Dale Denn: It would be nice to take a peak at that if somebody has it and I apologize for not
bringing it. I assumed it was in a packet.
Weick: Thanks Bob.
Dale Denn: So yeah it’s still a little small but you can see the lighter area, all this stuff. Stuff
was over here.
Weick: So we’re looking at the garage there?
Dale Denn: Yeah around the garage.
Weick: Okay.
Dale Denn: Yep.
McGonagill: Put that picture up so we can see the bottom of the slope.
Dale Denn: Up this way?
McGonagill: Yes that’s correct. Keep going. Thank you. Shows where your mounds are going.
Dale Denn: That’s not the oldest one though because that road, because the one I have the
driveway still goes, the driveway goes through here and I can tell you the one I have is a lot
busier than this one. I think he started down sizing here at this point. But I truly I have another
one that, where the road goes straight and it’s a lot busier than this one here.
McGonagill: Can I ask a quick question?
Weick: Do you have any other, anything else to your statement? If not we can certainly open it
up for questions if that’s okay.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
13
Dale Denn: I don’t think I do. I think I covered most of my.
Weick: Okay Commissioner McGonagill, please.
McGonagill: Thank you. At the bottom of where you’re proposing to put the two mounds, and
if you, okay slide it to the right where I can see. The other way. I’m sorry to my right. This
way. There you go. Sorry. When I look at the gradient there at the, so right below the yellow
area where the sand and rock is you’re right at like 170 contour. Just for example. The height of
the mound off that contour, how much higher than that contour would the mound be? If you did
what you were talking about.
Dale Denn: Yeah. In the center of the rock bed would be the highest point of the mound from
grade starting with 12 inches of sand in that slope. It would be up about 3 ½ feet.
McGonagill: And the same for the other one? Same for the other one?
Dale Denn: Yeah. Yeah the slopes are pretty much the same.
McGonagill: Thank you.
Dale Denn: Sure.
McGonagill: It just gave me an idea of mass.
Weick: Lots to process here and I know we are not, well some of us aren’t septic experts.
Undestad: I’ve got a question.
John Jensen: I have one more comment if you don’t mind. Real quick.
Weick: Yeah.
John Jensen: So I had a whole bunch of notes before and I didn’t look at them while I was
talking up here and I did want to bring up a couple things and one, both of them actually are
related the area up above where the City was talking about putting the septic system. So this
ravine is pretty steep and it’s been wearing away and at some point I’m going to need to
reinforce it. I’m going to need to do something and if there’s a mound system in there it’s going
to be incredibly difficult to get stuff in there and reinforce it or take care of it because it, you
know it just, I won’t be able to get by the mound system because you can’t drive on it once it’s
there. So that’s one option. And the other thing I did want to bring up something that Laura
brought up, and I thought about too is that while 50 feet is the minimum for the septic system it
would still be practically right on top of the well. I mean that would be close if you put it right
up there. And I don’t think any of my neighbors have their’s that close.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
14
Weick: Okay thank you.
John Jensen: Yep.
Undestad: Question for you so you did perc tests down on the lower side. Did you do any perc
tests anywhere else?
Dale Denn: Yeah. Initially I was on the bluff trying to site something where the old drain fields
were which is an almost impossible for a mound build. It’s almost impossible to get materials in
on that top part of the bluff because he has no room along the side of the house. It’s just wide
enough for a Bobcat. That’s another, but I was on the bluff and Erick was actually out. We did
soils but it’s a tough area to work.
Undestad: I was just going to ask, would you be able to locate the existing drain field now?
Dale Denn: I can pretty much. So they’re coming down, they’re probably, they’re on the,
they’re relatively on these contours so right now they are on these right and they go all the way
over. There’s about 4 runs. They’re trenches so they’ll follow the contour pretty close so
they’re, I’d say they’re just on the shoulder so I’d say they’re right, right in this area. So they go
into the yellow. They’re pretty long. They actually start about 10 feet from this very sharp
ravine right now. The trenches and obviously there hasn’t been any impact either. Erosion but
these trenches are failing. It technically it shouldn’t be trenches because there is a seasonal water
table there and right now there’s, they’re having some issues as far as performance and they
don’t meet the soil separation there for trenches. So if I was to work there, and I’ve been
through a couple different proposals. But it’s dramatic. It would be trying to do an above
ground system there. Another option is an at grade system. It’s we start on top of the soil but we
don’t have to have the sand but it’s just very difficult getting materials in to that, apart from
coming up the hill. And I mean I was trying to pull the rabbit out of the hat and if that was our
last spot to go we could come up with something but it was getting to be unfeasible with the soils
and the workability. And plus it’s, I think it’s right in the bluff. It’s still a bluff, some of it.
Undestad: But if you looked at, if you were able to put one between, where the old drain field is
and then up towards the house, then you’d kind of be building a better back yard for them too
wouldn’t you with your?
Dale Denn: Yeah the only thing though that’s the slopes there, well see there’s some limits on
the mounds. I think we’re limited to 18 percent slope to build them on per code. Trenches we
can go up to 25 but, for a mound I believe the limit’s 18. And at grade I was, I was exploring an
at grade. Laying out an at grade and at grade I can go up to 25 percent but the slopes there, they
always look better on this map but they’re kind of, see on the back side of the house the slopes
here start working against me so if I was to try to lay out an at grade, an at grade, a single at
grade for this house would have to be 180 feet long. They’re only 10 feet wide but they’re long
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
15
so I would still be splitting it in half but it would be, the problem was the old trenches were in
and if we had other soils then we, we’re not, we’re supposed to stay off the trenches because
that’s disturbed soil again. Plus the trenches would probably have to be dug out because if
you’ve got 3, 2-3 feet of rock in the trenches and one foot of cover materials say for example, we
don’t get any credit for the rock so we technically don’t meet the soil separation so that, all the
trenches would have to be dug out and probably just filled in with some mound sand before we
could even contemplate doing a new system. And then right away that’s going to push us into a
Type 3 type of system. But I did because I had the luxury of the slope being like right there,
almost 25, 23, 24. What I was trying to lay out in that grade but I just couldn’t dodge the
trenches just because of how they were configured. So that really kind of fell apart as far as the
design. I was ascertaining anything I could think of to see what we could come up with. Like I
say this, I’ve been out there 3-4 years ago already. I’ve been out there quite a bit on this site. So
I guess the short answer is it’s still a very difficult area and the old trenches are in there and it
would push into a Type 3 and it’s very hard getting materials in, and the big trees are in that area.
Undestad: So just to correct me, when you’re looking at the mount up on top you said for a 5
bedroom house with the slopes and everything if you went up top it would cover a 50 by 100
area?
Dale Denn: Pretty close. The rock bed itself is 63 feet.
Undestad: Okay so by 100 would be the same.
Dale Denn: Oh definitely it’d be yeah. Oh yeah it’d be the same all over. Yeah because down
below a hill there those rock beds are 26 feet so it’s cut in half.
Undestad: Okay.
Dale Denn: I’m sorry it’s 160.
Undestad: 160 or 180 feet.
Dale Denn: 30 something yeah. So they still equal their.
McGonagill: …could go behind the house. Okay.
Dale Denn: And I’m still getting cheated down there just a little bit by virtue of that 75 foot
setback but the soils are pretty nice soils. They’re a nice loam soil. So you can see they’re kind
of diagonal. The sand bed and the sand bed is essentially are absorption area. And to keep it
within that 75 feet it’s crunching me a little bit but I’m a little wider on the other side. I’m a
little narrower on the one side but from a design standpoint they are a nice, light loamy soil so
they perc out really good so I probably don’t even have to have technically quite that big but as
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
16
designers if we, we always make the sand extra because that extra absorption area for the long
haul is pretty cheap insurance.
Skistad: When you say it’s failing is it failing, thank you. When it’s failing, when you say it’s
failing is it leaking at this point?
Dale Denn: I’m not so sure about leaking but it had a compliance inspection so it fails from the
36 inch soil separation rule that’s in the State Code so it’s too close to a seasonal water table. So
right now the trenches, so they’re more of an environmental threat than anything because they’re
too close to that seasonal water table.
Skistad: Okay.
Weick: How we doing down there? Questions?
Randall: I don’t have any.
Reeder: Is there no way to fix the existing system to make it work so it does meet this
requirement?
Dale Denn: Yeah not conveniently because it’s, it’s less than 3 feet of separation. On occasion
if that was the only existing system, and this would be up to the local unit of government, there’s
times where we would take the trenches. Design the Type 3. Put in an aerobic treatment unit
that has three classes of design, A, B, C. The short of that is Class C, we need a minimum of 2
feet of separation so we can design and install at less than 3 feet for Type 3 generally with no
other options so the short answer is yes there is designs that would probably be able to come
back and utilize a trench. I’ve done a few. If it’s 18 inches of separation or less then we’re into
a Class B type of pre-treatment which is trying to kill more bacteria. More bells and whistles.
Higher risk and we can go down, just to be honest, we can go within 12 inches of the water table.
Super high risk. As a designer I can say I can, I have the technology to design at 12 inches and
at the end of 12 inches there wont’ be any E.coli bacteria but then of course I have to put in,
implement the monitoring and the maintenance to prove that that design is going to perform to
those standards so I’ve never done A. I’ve done a few C’s because I’m working with 2 feet but
that still is basically pre-treatment bacteria. Lab tests. Monitoring. Maintenance. The units
need to be cleaned and serviced every year so I don’t ever sell them. There is a place for them
where they’re absolutely needed but I probably sold maybe 6 in my lifetime because they, when
they start failing the bottom layering those aerobic unit just turns into a big, just sludge because
this bio-mat layer will start forming. See what’s going on with the drain field is the effluent
comes in. There’s food in there. There’s bacteria that, and that’s the other thing about the
biological component of the soil being gone. The bacteria, so you’ve got to keep in mind the
septic system is not a mechanical treatment. It’s really a biological treatment so the bio-mat
layer essentially is just a bunch of good bacteria that are acting on all the nutrients. Utilizing
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
17
them. Taking some of the nitrates and things out so with the bio-mat layer gone up here the risk
of it working environmentally is a lot less. Just to reiterate that.
Reeder: So the answer is yes but you wouldn’t recommend that solution? Is that?
Dale Denn: Yeah. It’s a high risk for us designers. We already, our bonds are up to $25,000 so
we always got to stand behind our work and to be honest with you, John probably would not be
able to hire me to do a system up here. It’s a high risk type of situation. To get 18 feet of water
to go through the soil every year so number one, the water has to get into the soil and disappear.
So there’s two major breakdowns in a mound. Does it take the water? Maybe there’s a water
table under it or something. And I’ve got one or two of them in my 30 years and they’re a pain
in the butt because they, they bleed out the toe of your mound a little bit and they’re just a pain to
fix. That’s the one breakdown is it doesn’t take all the water that you give it, and there’s things
we can do there. We can put timers in and regulate the flow but the other side is the
environmental treatment. Is it killing off the bacteria? Is it reducing some of the nitrates and
that’s where that natural soil that has some organic matter and it does the best job and it’s really
a biological treatment system.
Reeder: So clearly the best system you think is the one you have proposed?
Dale Denn: Yeah based on those soils. As far as treating the effluent and constructability is not
a, is in my eyes a piece of cake. That to me as a designer is the best for treatment because it has
the best soils. And for longevity of the water going in. Keeping in mind again about 18 feet has
to go through.
Reeder: So is staff not agreeing with that? I mean are you saying that there is a workable, that
possibly they could bring in a workable solution that you guys would approve?
Generous: That’s what, we think they can. We didn’t have enough information to make that
determination though so. If you look we also made an alternate motion within the packet.
Reeder: I see it but I’ve learned more about sewers than I ever wanted to know.
Generous: With this I’m learning a lot myself.
Skistad: I have one more question.
Weick: Sure, please.
Skistad: So if we look at where you’re putting it up eventually, I mean it looks to me like if it
goes down there maybe the next upgrade would be to go right into the city sewer system that’s
plotted down there.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
18
Dale Denn: Ah yeah. I mean definitely whether or not that’s a point of debate or not but
obviously the pipe is down there and he can hook up that pipe right here and just simply continue
right in.
Skistad: So that would be, so for me for longevity that also makes sense where you could once
the city has septic that you’re already set up to feed into it.
Dale Denn: That’s the part of my whole plan too. The pipe’s already in. The tanks can just be
abandoned and then sure.
Reeder: Is that ever something we’re going to look at?
Generous: It is shown in the City’s Comprehensive Sewer Plan to provide that. We need a lift
station just to the north of this area by, well there’s some office land available. I don’t know
what is it, maybe a quarter mile to the north so as part of the Powers Boulevard project we did
put sewer line in so we didn’t have to tear up the road again. So it’s a gravity system there. And
then that lift station will serve all of southern Chanhassen actually.
McGonagill: And that’s pushing it all away.
Generous: Yeah and.
Reeder: So that’s a lift station that we probably will build.
Generous: Yes. We will build it. It’s development driven though so timing is the question.
Dale Denn: And you know if that’s the case and these mounds are built, again I’m trying to get
you to just visualize the finish look of the mound you know. It’s top soil. It just comes from the
slope. It just kind of up and then just go up again. I mean really looking at them in this situation
like I do it on the houses, you can’t even tell it’s a mound. And all that soil and everything is
really going to be kind of pushing up against the bluff. I mean it’s true that we have to finish up
into the bluff a little bit. I think I talked with Erick about that just to get the grade so that we you
know shed a little water over the mound. But aesthetically you look from the road it’s just going
to look like a little natural feature. And John is correct about the trees. We take that in mind too
as designers of course. That’s the issue with down on the bluff down here. I was doing
everything I could to dodge all of this, these big trees and that was getting difficult. That was
another challenge I had as a designer. Down here surprisingly for some reason they’re just,
they’re all just small. I don’t think there’s anything over 6 inches diameter DBH down there do,
and a lot of brush and buckthorn but no major, no major trees. And we don’t, and when we
come to a mound, just so you know if there was a big tree there or something we don’t dig out
the stumps so we just essentially, we but them within 6 inches of grade and we just leave them
intact because if we dig them out we’re disturbing the soil so it ain’t like a major construction
project down there. It’s just we cut all the trees off and at that site we’re being protective of the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
19
soils and stuff but that’s all pretty small stuff and it doesn’t take mechanical or big equipment to
come in there because we always have a concern once we identify a site and you have to do
some clean up, is they can’t be in there with rubber tired Bobcats and ripping and turning so that,
a lot of that stuff was small so that’s pretty much going to have to come out by hand. So that’s
another advantage of that area.
Undestad: But all the material you’re bringing in will just come off of Powers Boulevard then?
Dale Denn: Yeah. Yeah. We’ll have a little bit of a temporary road through the ditch there at
the, some of the highest points but yeah we definitely got to bring some truckloads of materials
in. And the tree line, there’ll still be a tree line there as far as visually from the road because
where the sand is, well is this still on? Do this mound, this is the center of the rock is the high
point. 3 ½-4 feet and it tapers all the way down so it’s going to finish off right at the easement
and there’s some trees along here yet that don’t have to come out so I’ve got an idea over here,
there’s two oaks. Actually it’s the spot where I would want to alter the swale a little bit between
two large oaks is where I would come in with the trucks because I have to build most of the stuff
from the top side of the mount so that I’m not driving over the absorption area with 500 passes
on the skid loader. So I mean to be honest I have to have a little bit of a lane just to Bobcat
width. Just getting into the bluff here a little bit so I can drive level and then place my materials
from the up slope side but that’s already rolled through my mind. But again that little bit of
cutting I do when the mound is finished the top soil’s going to come back over that so that’s our
restoration plan and I think we had two grasses and whatever. That’s no problem either. But my
thoughts would be to change the swale just a little bit. It takes about 1, 1 ½ to 2 feet of cutting at
the most to just make that swale go straight. Straight east into the ditch and that would be my
temporary road anyway and I’d, I probably would flatten that out because I have, to give you
some idea for this system it’s pushing about 30 truckloads of product that have to come in here.
And that’s the problem with trying to construct it in the back. This, he’s got a propane tank over
here. There’s, I can barely get a skid loader in over here. And there’s no room to come around
here because this is, this is a walkout area and I think you have a deck over here too. It’s
impossible to get in. So access wise, apart from up here of course you know, this is very doable.
Weick: Go ahead yeah.
Skistad: Well I can understand, thank you. I can understand the City’s point of view before you
came in just to speak about it but I think overall I think you’ve done your due diligence and that
you want to, you want to protect that ground water table which is high on the other end which is
why you want it down below where the grade is less and I think it also leads into eventually to
what the City’s sewer system is going to be anyway so to me this, I think this is a very due
diligence and I appreciate all of the effort that you’ve put into it to make sure that we’re
protecting really our creek and our bluff by doing this.
Weick: Thank you commissioner.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
20
Dale Denn: And just for the record I happen to be a soil scientist too, whether that makes any
difference. That’s what my degree is in so I am kind of a tree hugger so. And I used to be in the
tree business also and yes I adore trees. Big ones.
Weick: Any other questions for the applicant or the applicant’s contractor? Seeing none thank
you. It’s very informational. At this time I would open the public hearing portion of this item.
Anyone wishing to come forward and share an opinion please do so. Welcome.
Tim Bloudek: Hi thanks. My name’s Tim Bloudek. I’m at 1107 Homestead Lane, right next
door to the south of the property.
Weick: Okay.
Tim Bloudek: I’ve lived in that property for 33 years and when they were talking about the
construction site, it pretty much looked like that. Where they were describing the area to the east
of the current, additional garage space the aerials may have shown, when they put Powers
through behind us they took out a number of our trees as part of the project. We knew that was
coming way back in the 80’s. My former neighbor was able to somehow work with the crew and
they deposited lots of large trees and they drove on it a lot. There was heavy equipment up there
so the comments about the construction site, it looked like that for more than 20 years so I
believe when they were talking about the compaction issue up in the front area there was concern
even without doing the soil testing so. That was just one of the observations as I listened to this.
The other thing I learned today was this, the zoning along the backs of our properties. I’m sorry
I forget.
Weick: Primary bluff.
Tim Bloudek: Primary yeah. Anyway I live there but I was unaware that that went through. It’s
a good idea and yet I think some things need to be adjusted when a good plan is brought forward.
It was interesting, I appeared before this, the council I think it was back in 1985 when I built my
home. I had to get a variance because of the setbacks. It was a 10 foot side and 100 foot side
and I remember a comment from Ursula Dimler who was on the council at the time, she said my
house wouldn’t fit on your property. We have to be practical about this and with that being said
they said, she said I move we approve and it was just, it was something that was just practical so
even though we have this primary area, and it’s definitely worth protecting I think we need to be
somewhat practical in our decisions. I don’t think the variance is dramatic. It makes sense. The
plan that was, that I listened to. This is the first time I heard it by the way. The plan I heard
sounded good. I’m not an expert. I do digital stuff. I don’t do soil stuff but it sounded good so I
would just lend my support to my neighbor and thank you for listening to me.
Weick: Thank you. Anyone else would like to come forward? Seeing no one else come
forward I will close the public hearing portion and open this item up for commissioner
discussion.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
21
Undestad: Well I’ll pipe in.
Weick: Yeah please, thank you.
Undestad: I did look at all the aerial history of that and it was seriously covered with just about
anything at any time up there so I’m sure that would be a soils issue for the perc test. Not to say
that a Type 3 system won’t go up there but a regular you know would not work up there. The
location at the bottom you know I kind of, I get that too. I mean it does make the most sense
down there and I think our bluff, that’s the hard part is trying to figure out the bluff protection
side on there and I’m trying to look at what is, what is that going to do to the bottom of the bluff
down to that toe of the heel and I don’t really see, you know I’ve seen a lot of mound systems
and they just blend in and it is sod. You look at the grass when you’re all done and, so you know
I guess, and there may be room right behind the house to do the same type of thing but you know
I just, I don’t know if we have to go through a lot, jump through more hoops to see if will this
work. Will that work and it looks like they’ve done a lot of research on the whole thing as it is
but, that’s all. But I know what it looks totally different than it does in this picture for the last 15
years anyway.
McGonagill: I do think the homeowner and the neighbors coming in and all the work that’s done
on that, you’ve done a lot of optionality. I will say that the, you’ve come in with the best logical
solution for your, for the homeowner which is what I would have done as well. My issue is, is
the fact that it is in the primary zone. My other issue is the fact is yeah you are cutting in the toe
of the hill and I never want to touch a toe of a hill when I used to do geotechnical work you
know because that’s what gets, it’s being stabilized naturally and when you start destabilizing it
with the vegetation and the rest of it yes you can put a mound in and try to bank it back but I
worry about that particularly with the amount of geotechnical drop that occurs right on top of
those mounds. I’m going to sit here and look at this going the amount of water that would come
through it. So it, you’re messing with the toe. It is in the primary zone and our job on the
commission, yes we’re here to be practical but we also are charged stewardship at a very high
level of a lot of quality of life issues in the city and, which is something I take pretty seriously.
I’m not a tree hugger. I build big construction projects but at the same time trees are very
important. I’ve got a lot of them in my yard as well so, you know I think, I’m not a sewer expert
either but I look at the room in front of the house. Yes it’s compacted. I keep asking myself the
question about mounds. Mound systems up there. I understand the problem of pumping up
there. I get that but while it is a difficult problem of the property that the homeowner owns, from
a City standpoint I come back and say there’s a primary zone here that we’re charged to protect
and I look at that as my first duty and I don’t compromise that frankly. I also look at the swale
coming down off of the ravine. It will move. You know it is going to move as we know. They
all do. We spent a lot of time coming through it so I wish I could, I’m not a sewer expert. I wish
I could in my own mind come up with a solution here. I don’t see one but I don’t like where it’s
at at the bottom of the hill. That’s just basically where I land. I think that I would, I would, I’m
challenging the homeowner and the firm to say okay you’ve got, what’s the solution that’s higher
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
22
up on the hill. I don’t think anything around the bluff or in front of the house because I don’t
want to mess with the primary zone.
Weick: Thank you. Other thoughts.
Randall: I’ll go after you.
Reeder: I think he’s, they’ve convinced me that they’ve looked at a lot of options to try to solve
the problem and it’s knowing nothing about sewer systems it convinced me that the system
they’ve designed may be the best environmental system to take care of the treatment from this
house. It’s unfortunate that it’s in the area that we’re trying to protect but he’s also convinced
me that the other area has larger trees and would not be beneficial to the neighborhood or that
property either so I’m pretty much convinced that we should go with the staff’s second motion
that gives them certain criteria that we need to have them to prove that he’s going to do it
correctly but I would go with that.
Weick: You next.
Randall: I feel the same way. However I think, not that I have no idea when the sewer
connection’s going to happen but that might be a removal of this system when it gets hooked up
and eventually we know in the future that will happen so I was convinced by it too. I just think
that, especially when you brought up the point about the primary, the bluff primary area, it’s
only, it’s for structures. It’s not septic only and that was kind of my thought on it too once you
said that. That’s why I’m going to vote in favor of the second option with those conditions in
place.
Skistad: I feel like I said my piece.
Weick: Okay. I will say this is, for me this is very difficult because I, you know similar to you
Commissioner Reeder I don’t, I don’t have any knowledge of these systems and so I struggle to
make a decision maybe because it doesn’t, you know whether it’s on a hill or are hills good or
bad or we could put a Type 3 but not, you know and is that like cost prohibitive and that’s what I
come back to. So I’ll take myself out of the technical discussions and I’ll say in my mind this is
not, this is not a structure that’s a nice to have. Right? We’re not talking about a deck or a shed
or something that someone wants to impose on a bluff area as a, what I would consider a nice to
have. To me this is a must have. The current system is, needs to be replaced. To your point you
know I’m convinced of that and are we burdening the homeowner with something that’s really
cost prohibitive? That’s what I’m trying to weigh in my mind. I’m with you the primary bluff
you know being a sacred area and I struggle with that but then I also, I’m really struggling with
the burden that we would potentially be putting on the homeowner from a cost perspective. And
I’m just, I don’t know what the costs are but I’m imaging that the things he was describing
would be significantly, I think at some point he even said I’m not even sure he could hire me.
Right? Because I’m assuming that means because of the cost that it would take to monitor the
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
23
material and to put in a Type 3 above, whatever it is. Like all that kind of stuff. I am, that’s
what I’m leaning on and so I would be willing to you know, I’d be willing to vote I think in favor
of a variance to assist the homeowner in this way. That’s where my head’s at.
Skistad: I think the risk of failure is too with that water table being so high on the upper part.
Weick: Right.
Skistad: You know if that sludge goes in there that’s really a big problem.
Weick: Sludge is bad right?
Skistad: That’s your number two okay.
Weick: Okay I gotch ya.
McGonagill: Can you see, can you put up the second…?
Generous: I don’t have that. It’s on the back of the staff report.
McGonagill: Those are good comments commissioners and.
Weick: It would be this and I don’t know if you want me to read it or not.
McGonagill: No I’m just wondering I, Commissioner Randall’s suggestion I think is a good one.
Weick: There’s several conditions obviously.
McGonagill: I’m talking about the removal of it after it.
Weick: Oh oh oh oh oh.
Generous: Connection to city service.
Reeder: When we put a pipe like that in would we normally require a connection within a
certain amount of time or not?
Generous: Commissioner Reeder it’s, the ordinance says if your structure is within 150 feet you
have to connect so.
Weick: The structure is the house?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
24
Generous: The house so they wouldn’t by ordinance be required to do that. They may want to
from a practical standpoint connect to it.
Weick: So it doesn’t sound like we could add a condition but we could, it’s certainly in the
record that we would prefer if we were to approve the variance that at the time that the city sewer
became available we would certainly encourage the homeowner to connect, connect into that city
sewer line.
Randall: Can I ask a question?
Weick: Sure.
Randall: I know we’ve been educated a lot about septic systems but we never learned what the
life of a septic system is. I mean is that something that this thing will in 25 years it will need to
be replaced by that time? If sewer’s available will they have to connect?
Weick: Could you re, yeah engage?
Randall: Because that might solve the problem right there. I mean if it’s got a 25 year life by
that time we’ll have to connect.
Dale Denn: Yeah I’m glad I get to come back up here. The main reason why as a designer I
wouldn’t design in those soils, they’re really high risk because it’s a lot of water that has to get in
and I have one or two that have been leaking and they’re just a big headache and then we’re out
on some farm soils and so they have a whole nother set of problems. So the longevity, it’s quite
a range. I’ve been at it over 30 years. I have mounds going for over 30 years because again
they’re operating on a biological principle. The thing that kills a mound is the deep pumping is
important every 3 years to take out what’s called the total suspended soils so that’s the
component of the sewage that doesn’t break down. Excuse me. That doesn’t break down and
those are small particles so long story short they will continue to migrate into the soil and those
are the physical little things that don’t break down so they start plugging up the soil pores so the
most of the time when a system is starting to come up it can’t go down because all the pores and
that all goes back to the soil structure and that’s why up here in this area there’s no soil structure.
Structure’s like a pallet of bricks, a whole bunch of bricks sitting on a pallet that between the
bricks are your pores you know so when that’s gone it’s really hard to get the water to go
through that’s clean water. Now keep in mind the little bacteria which builds this dark little
black bio-mat layer where the soil, where the effluent first hits the soil, that’s called bio-mat.
Within that one inch or two inch, excuse me again. Properly developer bio-mat layer, most of
the treatment is within 3 or 4 inches in that little layer and so if that layer’s not there the
treatment disappears. But if it’s already a bad soil and it’s perking at say 50-60 minutes per inch
which is slow, and then the bio-mat layer gets in there, that actually slows the water down but it
slows it down for the purpose so that there’s time to treat it and to act upon it. So that water
starts going slow with the bio-mat layer. That’s why we’ve got to have the soil structure intact
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
25
because if that’s gone being a soil scientist, it’s just a high risk design. So my question is then if
we did do something up here and it fails you know an environmental health threat. You have a
public health threat because now you have E.coli bacteria on the surface coming out of the toe of
the mound because it doesn’t want to go down and I had meant to just instill that into the whole
thinking process. It’s a high risk system and if it fails he’s got big issues.
McGonagill: Go to the bottom and it fails. What, how will you protect the mound from being
washed out from the bluff? Because you’re going to cut into the bluff.
Dale Denn: Yeah that’s a good question but I don’t see on the, on that bluff itself that’s basic
sheet flow, being a soil scientist, those soils are stabilized by the vegetation but they’re also, it’s
a loamy soil. There’s a lot of water soaking into the bluff. You can go out there after a snow
melt or heavy rain and you don’t really see channeling reversion.
McGonagill: I understand you’re saying that it won’t do it but how will you protect the bluff?
That’s my question. Or not the bluff, the mounds from starting to leak or wash out or.
Dale Denn: Oh oh, well we can go right into straw blankets. We can seed it and put down the
doubled sided straw blankets which pops that grass right up within a week it’s getting green.
Towards the end of the year.
McGonagill: But I saw the drawing. You have block walls and stuff, I don’t know are you
building rock behind it to hold that toe? There was some rock on the, or maybe that was natural
rock.
Dale Denn: Oh in the drawing?
McGonagill: Yes.
Dale Denn: Well that rock is, that’s internal. That’s embedded within the mound.
McGonagill: But this, no right here. This, back over to the other way. I’ll have to look at the
contour map. I seen it on one of the maps.
Undestad: And just a note that systems are inspected by the City every 3 years or required for?
Generous: We require that they be inspected and pumped out.
Dale Denn: Yeah that the tanks be pumped, yeah. But not inspected.
Generous: Not the mounds per se.
Dale Denn: Just pumped.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
26
McGonagill: So you just basically lay it in there. You’re not going to put, there’s no sort of
reinforcement to it per se?
Dale Denn: If I could just take a minute I could do a little cross section which really helps, not to
insult anybody’s intelligence.
McGonagill: No…get an exam on sewage systems we might as well get the whole 9 yards.
Weick: While he’s doing that I would say in response to your question also there’s no guarantee
that these homeowners will be here you know whenever. You know they can certainly sell the
house and new owners.
Randall: Yeah well that’s another concern too. If like right now based on their system that they
have now I don’t know if they could sell their home because it has to be up to county code in
order to sell so.
Weick: Oh, oh yeah yeah yeah I get it.
Randall: So now they’re kind of locked in. They have to do something you know.
Weick: I’m with you.
Randall: So yeah.
McGonagill: So from the City standpoint you talk about, I’m looking at the motion.
Weick: For approval.
McGonagill: Yeah. When you talk about, you said you’ve asked for, you would want an erosion
control plan. You want them to protect the ravine. I’m looking at point 1. To protect the ravine
and then you talk about point 4, erosion control plan. What particularly are you looking to see
from them in order to say yeah this is good to go?
Generous: Chairman, Commissioner McGonagill, it would be like a standard erosion control
plan. Where are they going to put this blanket or rows. How are they going to revegetate any
slopes to show all that as part of their submittal to us. Additionally we were looking at how that
ravine system will be redirected which is something you’ve already been talking about as part of
your construction. You would just have to show it on a plan what you’re proposing for that.
Dale Denn: And so we definitely can address all those points.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
27
McGonagill: Is there anything that they could do as part of that erosion control plan at the toe of
that ravine? Because I think about this going okay if that’s the area of concern is there
something new on the toe itself to help stabilize even further? Like down at the bottom of the
ravine and you know what I’m thinking about because you do that sometimes. You can build a
toe out.
Weick: Well isn’t he going to build into it?
Skistad: He’s going to.
McGonagill: He’s going to cut, he’s going to cut onto the slope. I’m thinking back in here.
Weick: Oh that way.
McGonagill: That way.
Undestad: No he won’t be back in.
McGonagill: Well he’s coming through here is what he’s saying he’s going to come this way
and that’s where he’s going to redirect so is that okay what, he’s going to shed the water that
way.
Generous: And that could be part of his design that they submit what they’re going to do to help,
either slow it down or redirect.
McGonagill: Or stabilize it yeah. Okay.
Generous: And then yeah, our engineering staff and our surface water management people
would look at it. And of course he’s been working with our building official on the whole design
issue so.
McGonagill: Okay. You got a drawing for me?
Dale Denn: Yeah.
McGonagill: Can you turn it the other way? Thank you.
Dale Denn: Okay. So, so here’s the bluff and this demarcation here is pretty dramatic so the
rock bed’s a few feet back. This is the absorption area. So if you look down you have rock and
then you have the sand. So this is the sand so a typical mound to finish off and have this, have
this valley right. But when you have such a steep slope this can all be good top soil and this can
be just, just blended right in like this and then down and away it goes. And that’s almost going
to happen automatically there because that bluff comes down so steep and by the time I take my
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
28
crown of the mound and come back the 10 feet I need it’s just right there. I mean there’s hardly
any back slope because it’s just boom right there.
McGonagill: As long as that fill is maintained you’ve protected the crown. On your drawing.
Dale Denn: Yeah.
McGonagill: Don’t move your drawing. Go the other way. You moved it out of, there you go.
As long as you protect what you filled in then.
Dale Denn: Yeah this cutting is just, it’s just a little bit.
McGonagill: I understand that but when you fill it up to level it as long as you keep that in there
you’ve protected the crown.
Dale Denn: Yeah, we would take straw blankets and then we would this, we could put straw
blankets over all this and staple them down with a prairie vegetation. We have a lot of choices
you know vegetation. It could be a prairie mix. Something that’s going to have to grow in the
shade there. So again it’s probably good that I still do that because that’s what it’s going to look
like and then if you’re down in on the street and you’re looking up, this is all going to green up
and natural weeds and stuff will grow. Brush and trees will not grow on it because it’s droughty
so that rock bed is, it’s inside the mound and this is all, this is all 6 inches of black soil minimum
has to be placed over the mound and blended in with the original landscape. So it’s topsoil. So
it’s going to green up. It’s going to grow grass. Weeds. Some people plant flowers. I mean it
could be hostas. It can be, I’ve seen all kinds of creative stuff done to both protect the mound
and green it up. So lots of ideas there. And then the swale, again that is a flat area. It delta’s
out. We can move it a little bit and we could put some rip rap down with some fabric and break
the force of the water. Some nice lime stone that looks pretty good. Kind of make it where the
delta is. We could easily draft something up like that. We’ve already talked about doing that.
McGonagill: Okay.
Weick: Thank you again.
Reeder: Mr. Chairman one more question.
Weick: Sure.
Reeder: How difficult would it be to hook this whole system up into the sanitary sewer pipe
once we put it in?
Dale Denn: Oh to hook up?
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
29
Reeder: Yeah.
Dale Denn: Oh they got, wherever the curb stop is, it’s real simple just taking the pipe. This
will be a 4 inch schedule 40.
Reeder: But I mean so it would flow from the house by gravity down to that thing with no
problem without reconstructing everything?
Dale Denn: No, just taking.
Reeder: So is there something we could do to make that connection easier in the future in your
design now?
McGonagill: You can stub, have a stub at the end couldn’t you?
Dale Denn: Yeah, number one the tank up here is going to be gone I think. We have a choice.
We could leave extra septic or it can be taken out. But down here then most likely these tanks
would come out of the picture and then the digging would just have to start from right here. This
is a pump tank so this has to be lower than my system so I can’t configure that too much
different to make it any more practical but it’s pretty practical right now because it’s a straight
shot right out to wherever the curb stop is.
Reeder: So you just remove those tanks and put a pipe through and you’re down?
Dale Denn: Yep. Yeah.
Reeder: Okay.
Dale Denn: And there’s going to be clean out’s on this pipe every 100 feet already also and so
you’ll be able to see where that pipe is and it will have the clean out’s.
Weick: Good.
McGonagill: I think you all have made some pretty good convincing arguments that why you
can do that. Why you should do it. It’s good resulting dialogue.
Weick: It is. I’m glad we talked it through.
McGonagill: Okay need a motion?
Weick: We do. I cannot do it. That’s the only rule that I know of.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
30
Undestad: Alright I will make a motion. The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments
approves a variance for the bluff setback and encroachment into the Bluff Creek primary zone
for the construction of a septic system subject to the conditions 1 through 6.
Weick: Thank you. We have a valid motion. Do we have a second?
Skistad: I will second it. We have a motion and a second. Any comments before we vote?
Generous: Mr. Chairman?
Weick: Yes.
Generous: Does that also include adoption of the Findings of Fact for approval?
Weick: Yes.
Undestad: Yes.
McGonagill: Yes it does. I would suggest it does Mr. Chair.
Weick: Yes it does. So we will note that as well. Again I will, the thanks both to the applicant,
your contractor as well as the Planning Commission and the City. Tonight’s discussion was, it
was good. I mean there’s a lot of us admittedly that you know don’t have a lot of experience in
this area so we’re really trying to do our best to you know weigh the, you know all of the
mitigating factors that go into this and so I appreciate your expertise to my left as well as your’s.
It was very helpful. So with that any other comment? None.
Undestad moved, Skistad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approves the bluff setback variance and encroachment into the Bluff Creek
primary zone for the construction of a septic system as shown in the plans shown on the
Certificate of Survey by SISU Land Surveying dated 8/19/19, subject to the following
conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision:
1. The applicant is required to submit detailed construction drawings and/or plat drawings
for the project, as applicable. An engineer-designed plan is required to divert the existing
drainage ravine that would be impacted by the proposed SSTS.
2. The applicant shall apply for a septic permit for the septic system.
3. The applicant shall provide further justification of the impracticability of such a location
for a SSTS (e.g. a geotechnical report or perk test if the concern is fill/disturbed soil).
4. An erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – September 17, 2019
31
5. The applicant shall submit a tree survey showing the system located as to minimize tree
removal should be required. All trees 6” and larger in and around the construction area
shall be shown. Replacement planting will be required in areas cleared outside of the
septic fields. Plans and quantities shall be approved by the city.
6. Tree protection fencing shall be installed to protect trees and vegetation outside of the
construction area.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Weick: The motion passes 6 to 0.
Generous: Do you have a second?
Weick: We did. Commissioner Skistad. Yes.
Generous: Thank you.
Weick: So with that, I did not print an agenda in front of me but I believe the next item would be
the Minutes.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner McGonagill noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 3, 2019 as presented.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE.
Weick: Any presentations from the City?
Generous: Council items. The Tequila Butcher was approved with the variance so to go
forward. And they amended the development contract for Glendale Homes. The one on
Glendale and Minnewashta Parkway. They have a new developer name. that was the only
change that they had with that.
Weick: Okay.
Generous: We do have one item at our next Planning Commission meeting. It’s a variance. Not
quite as involved as that and so at this meeting we were supposed to have a second hearing for a
subdivision but the applicant withdrew that application. He's revising his plat and he hopes to
come back yet this year so.
Weick: Okay.
McGonagill: Question?