The URL can be used to link to this page

06-6-90 Agenda and PacketFile AGENDA CHANIIASSEN PIANNING COI{IIISSIC WEDNESDAY, Jt NE 5, 1990, 7:30 P.!iI. CTIANIIASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE 1 CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS OLD BUSTNESS NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF UINUTES CITY COI'NCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAIS OPEN DISCUSSION 8:30 P.tt. 3.Conprehensive Plan Discussion discussed.- North Side of Hvy.5 wilL be Prelininary Plat to subdivide 159 single fanily lots on 63.7acres of property zoned PUD-R and located on the west side of Powers Boulevard (Co. Rd. 17), just south of the existing Lake Susan Hil1s 2nd and 3rd Additions. 2 Site Plan Review for a 17,500 square foot addition toexisting building on property zoned Iop and located atPark Drj.ve, Industrial Infornation Controls. the 7470 ALTOT'RNI,IENT CITY OF CH[NH[EEEN 690 COULTER DR|VE. p.O. BOX 147 0 691111115SEN, MTNNESOTA 5s317 (612) 937-19m. FAX (612) 937-5739 UET{ORANDT'I{ TO: FROIII: DATE: SURf: 2. Planning Conmission Paul Krauss, Planning Director Changes to the Draft Iand Use PIan Incorporated Since theLast Ueeting Based upon input provided at the last vork session, a nunber ofdetail changes have been incorporated into the current draft. These are summarized below but no significance should be placed inthe order in which they are listed. ltay 31, 1990 The proposed collector Etreet located north of the Tirnbernood neighborhood, was realigmed to suing north adjacent to Hwy. 5.This has been one of the changes that was suggested by UaryHarrington that staff believed nade sone sense for tworeasons. ft avoided iupacting the potential school site bysplitting it down the riddle and it uould further segregateresidential developnent frorn locations adjacent to Huy. 5.with the road in thiE location, the nediun density and officeland uses that have been shown adJacent to Hwy. 5 north of Tinberrood have been elininated and replaced rrith low densityresidential developnent. Without having the road aligned sothat it chops up this area, we saw no further need to segregate uses into different intensities and believe that ifresidentl,al developDent ras to occur, low density uses could be justified. The collector road runnlng between Huy. {1 and Galpin Boulevard has been realigned. The uestenr portion of thestreet is designed so that Lt nerges ylth 82nd Street which isbeing extended by Chaska this sunmer. It is realigned toprovide continuity to the north rather than to the east to avoid running industrial office traffic through a residentialneighlrorhood. The office area which had been shown previouslyat the intersection of llvy. 5 and calpin lras been removed andreplaced uith a nediuu density housing site. The area southof the collector street in this area, ras and continues to be Iow density housing. L oL 3 Update on Draft Uay 31, 1990 Page 2 4. 5. The industrial office area located aouth of the railroad tracks between Audubon and L)rDan Boulevard has been nodifiedvith an increase in the area illustrated as yetland. Ehisrevision more accurately reflects the size of the uetland which is larger than originally illustrated. The electrical substation located near the intersection of Llman Boulevard and Audubon Road is nos illustrated. Buffer yards are illustrated along Audubon Road and around Sun Ridge Court and by the Rednond property. Bhis nechanisn is being used to illustrate a nethod whereby the city can requirelarger than standard landscape aetbacks to assist innitigating inpacts betueen lndustrial office and residential developnent. It is anticipated that the construction of thesebuffer yards would be a condition of approval of any rezoning and developnent approvals that may be granted in the future.I{hile the width of these buffer yards has not formally been established, staff anticipates reguiring a 50 foot buffer yard along Audubon Road and a 100 foot wide buffer yard adj acent to Sun Ridge Court. We would anticipate drafting this in such a manner that the required setbacks for new developnent would be measured at the point at which the buffer yard ends, thus the required setback that rrould result rrould be 150 feet fron the Sun Ridge neighborhood. The frontage road located on the north side of Hrry. 5 has been realigrned through the 1990 Study Area to avoid inpacting wetlands and ponds that exist near Highuays 5 and 41. CITY OF CH[!IH[SSEN UET,IORANDI,u TO: EROtil: DATE: SUBJ: Planning Connission Paul Xrauss, Planning Director Uay 24, L99O Large Iot Zoning Issue Paper 0L At the Uay 15th Planning Conmission vork session, staff was askedto research the potential of urlng the Comprehensive ptan toacconmodate sone sort of large lot residential developnent. Apetition drafted by Eric Rivkin (copy attached) appeared toindicate the desire of a large grroup of homeowners to opt for thist)rpe of developnent rather than be subj ect to nornal RsF Districtstandards. Staff rras directed to research the pros and cons ofthis approach. The petition and Ur. Rivkin.s remarks indicate adual focus, the first being a desire by 6ome to preserve the statusquo, the second a desire by others to be able to subdivide intoIarge }ots without being required to connect to city serrer andwater. BACKGROUND SUUMARY OF FINDTNGS fnfornation provLded in this report draus several conclusions. These are surrmarized beloy. 1 Iarge lot developnent is not inherently good or bad. It is alife style that nany peole can afford and enjoy. However,allowing a relatively snall lot unsewered developnent withindeveloping areas is costLy in tene of actual service costsand potentially fron an environmental standpoint. It alsogreatly dininishes the potential of the City to plan comprehensively and effectlvely for grorth. Developing conuunities sinilar to Chanhassen were surveyed togain an understanding of their policies. None of then aIIo!,the subdivision of property inside the ITIUSA line vithoutsanitary sewer service. The only exception is 1O acre zoningconsistent uith Hetropolitan Council poticies. 2 690 COULTER DR|VE. P.O. BOX 147 o 691111115SEN, MTNNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 3 The Xetropolitan Council uas contacted for input. In anattached letter, they indicate that their 1 per 10 acrestandard for unsewered developnent is applicable inside oroutside the UUSA. At thiE time, the Cityrs ordinances only address the situation outside tbe UUSA. We can assume thatnodifying our ordinances to come into compliance is likely to be a requirenent of plan approval . tletropolitan Council staffalso indicated that IIUSA line expansions must be orderly and contiguous and should not include land intended to develop atrural densities. There appears to be a group of people who vish to uaintain thestatus quo of large lot developDent. Staff believes that thenost effecitve uay to accouplish this would be to alter the UUSA line request to onit that neighborhood. A planalternative has accordingly been developed for review. Theaffected property orrners should, however, understand thatexclusion fron the }IUSA request uill linit theD to 10 acre zoning into the foreseeable future. PRoS AND CONS OF IARGE I,oT DEVEIOPI,IENT Large lot development represents a life style that many peopledesire and staff uould not suggest that there is anythinginherently wrong with it. But it is also a difficult concept todefine and the pros and cons of different tlpes of large lot usesvary greatly. For exanple, each of the following could be considered large lot zoning: - nHobby Farrsn or hones on lots with nore than 10 acres - Hones situated on lots parceled out fron faras with lotsizes varying fron 3-10 acres - 2.5 acre minimum lot divisions platted under pre-1982 City Ordinances, and - Lots provided uith City sewer and platted under RSF District atandards but uith lots in excess of the 15,oOO square footnininun required. For example, ! or t acre lots. Since !lr. Rivkinrs petition appeara to focus prlnarily on thepotential of 2l acre lots uithout public serrer, -this report willfocus on this use. 4 open space Preservation Pro - 2l acre lots are generally perceived to preserve open Epaceby nature of the fact that Dost of the lot is not octupie-a lya hone, drlveway or outbuildings. Con - 2* acre Bubdivision requires large anounts of land for arelatively - 6maII nuDber of honeE. The land ls privately owned and is not availabLe for public use. ttisioricall!, Large Lot Zoning uay 24, L99O Page 3 uncontrolled large lot zoning on the urban fringe has beenassociated with pronoting urban spraul . One of thelletropolitan Councilrs prinary obJ ectives has been toconstrain urban sprawl. Environnental Protection Pro - Con - The large tracts of land associated with large lot zoningtend to provide added flexibility to avoid inpactingnetlands, stands of trees and sinilar features. Visua11y,large Iot zoning may appear to preserve sone of the pre- developnent view and feel of an agricultural neighborhood. There is reason to believe that large lot zoning, by creatingrelatively Enall. areas of hard surface coverage, nininizeiinpact from non-point source sater pollution and continues toa1low infiltration to replenish groundwater supplies. Lowerdensity of developnent also reduces traffic lCvels on arearoads and resulting inpacts. Iarge lot developnent is just that, developnent. It resultsin the need for roads, electric and often gas service and ofcourse large quantities of land. lletlands are protected fromdevelopnent in Chanhassen regardless of the zoningdesignatlon and the City is working to inprove treepreservation prolrrams. If large lot property ounersinproperly fertilize their lawns or have inproperlynaintained or fai).ing on-site sewer systeDs point ind nonlpoint pollution as great or greater than nornal RSFdeveloprnent is possible. Although loser traffic levelsresult fron large lot development, if the land area involvedis extensive, trip distances are increased since developnentis pushed farther out into ex-urban to acco'nnrodate theequivalent nu[ber of homes. Provision of Serrrices Pro - There is a perception that low density developuent requires fewer public services then noroal RSF neighborhoods. Con - Ihe reality of low density developnent is that Lt oftenrequires einilar servLces but the cost of providing ttren maybe higher. Low density deveLopment requires significant street developuent to service a few hones since the lots are large. The streets nust be built and maintained by loca1 governmentbut since there are fewer homes the cost per hone to provideservice is higher. Large Iot Zoning uay 24, 1990 Page 4 House val.ues and resulting tax revenues would need to be nuchhigher then noruaL RSF developnent to off-set the cost. While we are not aware of a current study of this issue, weuould apeculate that thie is not necessarily the case in Chanhassen. Related costs are found in the provision of school bus service and energency services. Public water uay often be provided to these lots even ifsanitary sewer is not presently required. Lake Lucy Highlands is an example of a large lot development that haspublic uater serrrice. Provision of sanitary seser service is a naJor concern. on-site systens are environmentally appropriate as long as theyare properly designed, installed and naintained. Neuer systems in chanhassen are generally of very good design and a secondary drainfield site has been designated on approvedplans. Horrever, the systens require proper maintenance and inspections by the city. This cannot be assumed to be acorrect assuroption in every case. Staff is also aware that Eotne of the reserve drainfield sites have had their soilsdisturbed by construction or other activity uhich raises doubts about their utility. Sinally, not all on-site sewer systems are built to current atandards and history has demonstrated that all on-site systems rrill eventually fail. When on-site systens fail, environmental danage and heatththreats uiIl occur. Installing city sanitary serrer in largelot subdivisions roany years after initial development is an expansive and often divisive process. ProvisLon of serviceis very costly due to the need to cover long distances anddisturb existing developDent. It is divisive because systemswilL fail at different tines and there will generally not bea consensus in support of utility construction and bearingthe resulting cost. T.rhd tlea .rrd nre-r'l a,i <i an af Ilf i 'l i +r, Qax;i e.a Con - Pro - Iarge lot developnent is often viewed as a nechanisn forestablishing a greenbelt or boundary around urbanized areas.This vieu is also intertuined rith the open rpace argumentdiEcussed previously. Large lot development Is often a temporary phenomena inurbanizing areaa. Eistory has shourt that these lots willultinateJ.y be eubdivided if it is possible to do so. Wewould never guestion the lntegrity of a home orfller who tellsthe City that they would not develop their property. But wehave all seen that rising property values, divorce, aging,corporate. moves, need to generate retireuent incorne, etc.have all induced deveLopment to occur. To an extent this can Inrge Iot Zoning ltay 24, 1990 Page 5 IARGE I.oT UTILITY POLICIES OF O.rI{ER COT,T},TUNITIES Selrer and Water Policies Orono Area uithout serer and waterstreet frontage. be niniuized by establishing specific large lot zoning butthere uill alrays be a potential for rezoning. Ilouever, the critical factor rrith large lot zoning is whenresulting developnent leap-frogs aiound the Lonrnunityresulting in greatly increased cost and difficulty oiproviding streets, utillties, parkE, and other services.- The Itetro_ politan Council has establlshed the Ii{UsA }ine conceptspecifically to linit leap-frog development and the regionllconcept uorks egually reII at a local level. In Eany uaysthe City should be even Dore concerned due to the aireltco6ts that uil.l be a result. Staff h.9. surveyed several other coumunities to gain anunderstanding of their policies with regard to developnenl withinthe UUSA area. We had to pick connunities that were on theurbanizing Ttrin Cities fringe and therefore, sinilar to Chanhassen.The results follow: Sener service is required for all subdivisions within the I{USA boundary. The City has } and 1 acre zoning. Varianceshave been rarely granted and only for situations where accessto service is not feasible. . Clty allows 2 acre lots vithout serrer outside the UUSA.Staff lndicated that lots have proven to be too 6na11 tosupport homes being built today with on-site sewer. Cityrsdevelopnent policles have also resulted in great difficultyin providing City services as areas develop. There ls .rno logictr to their systens and costs or serviCe are high. Eden Prairie . Sewer and uater is required unless it is zoned rural. Thereis rural land in the ilUsA boundary - it is linited to 1unit/lo acres. . Zoning Code - Singte Fauily Residence uith aanitary seuer. ninimun 20 acre lot 5OOl l,laple Grove Large Lot Zoning l{ay 24, 1990 Page 6 Area vithin sewerbenefit.and water nust hook up if there is a The City Council has consistently required hook up. 10 acre uininum if not hooked up to seuer. Minnetrista ff in ltUSA, subdivision has to be at or very near density of Comprehensive Plan. Exanple - Cannot have 5 acre lots in area vith 3 units,/acre density. If within irnroediately serviceable area must hook up even if neu systems. If failing systen - must connect. If operable they can keep. are larger must show overlay of futureIf 1ot sizes subdivis ion. A11ow estate pl,at - nininum 3 acres only outside ITIUSA -per anent on site systems - never sewer and uater. Urban Service Area - new subdivisions reguire public serrer and uater. IITETROPOLITAN COI'NCI L POLICTES The Uetropolitan Council will be in the position of approving ourplan and is able to require conp).iance vith its policies. Staffspoke to Anne Hurlburt sho is the t{anager of Conprehensive andLocal Assistance for the Hetropolitan Council, to gain anunderstanding of their policies and vhat requirements they willplace upon the City as a condition of approval for the Conprehens ive PIan. A letter froD !ls. Hurlburt sumnarlzed. Ls attached but the follouing can be The counciLrs position on large lot developnent withoutEanitary sewer is the same inside or outside €he uUsA 1ine,i.9: average densities of 4 homes per 40 acres. Citiordj.nances adopted this standard for the Rural Service Arel 1 Lakevil l.e woodburv Large Iot Zoning It{ay 24, 1990 Page 7 2. SUI'{I{ARY ALTERNATIVE IAND USE PROPOSAL but there is a nloop holer! Lf you wiII, inside the lfUSA. fthas always been assumed that subdivision sithin the UUSAsould hook into the aeser and this has been the case in thepast. It is Eafe to assuDe that the l,Ietropolitan councilui]1 require that city ordinances be changed to elininate theloop hole ln a manner siuil.ar to the cormunities Eurveyedpreviously. Staff has dlscussed the Datter uith the CityNanager. rt is his belief that clty Code orlginally reguiredaeuer hook-up for subdivision vithin the uUsA but that sonehow this requireDent uas lost during re-codification. t{eare researchlng this issue further but believe it rould beuseful to consider drafting reviaed ordinance language tocorrespond to l,letropolitan council requirenents in advance ofsubnitting the PIan for their review. The UUSA expansion should not include areas that the City isproposing be developed without sewer. The only exception instaffls view would be Tiuberuood and l,ake Lucy Highlandswhich vere developed with on-site sewer under pieviousordinances and prior to the adoption of the plan Anendnent. Any .expansions of the UUSA tine must be rrorderly andcontiguousrr. The city cannot gerrlmander the MusA line to accoromodate individual honeovner desires since this wouldpronote leap frog devel,opnent. 3 Large lot developoent is not inherently good or bad. It representsa lifestyle that some peopJ.e uant and can afford and probably represents uhat is for aLl intents and purposes the pernanLnt landuse. Houever, the use of unseuered large lot developnent as a land use strategy rrithin the UUSA area is, in our opinion, inappropriatefor reasons outlines in the report, inconsistent with developuentstrategies enployed by other conmunities, and will not beacceptable to the l,letropolitan Council. Staff continues to note that the land use plan does not Dandate orrequire that developnent occur. It does allow for the possibilityof development but this is contingent upon the decisions of theindividual property orrners and will be subject to City approvalafter public hearings. Horrever, Ur. Rivkin has gotten a large block of property ovners tosign a petition that appears to indicate that they do not want tohave their area develop in any significant vay in the near future.Since we have concLuded that the large lot without sewer plattingproposal he is a proponent of, is not likely to gain approval, we Iarge Lot Zoning Uay 24, 1990 Page I believe the best neans of accornmodating their desires is to excludethe area from the I.IUSA expansion request. ThiE is the only roechanisu rre are aware of that uould achieve what appears to betheir goals. Accordingly, an alternative land use plan has been developed that would reallocate UUSA coverage to the eouth closer to HiIy. 5, intothe area that had been considered a i Future Study Arear. Staff believes that this would provide sufflcient ser"rriced land area to Dake up for the loss of the area that sould be removed fronconsideration. Utility senrice could be provided along uith appropriate street access. The proposed alternate plan has advantages and disadvantages. 1. It assumes that the entire Study Area nould be set aside forlow density residential uses. This irould preclude thepossibility of one day accoDmodating Uil]s Fleet Farn at Hwy. 5 and 41. Staff is not a proponent of providing additionalconnercial sites at this tine and would be concerned aboutthe inpacts of connercial developnent here in the future. Houever, the issue should be discussed. 2.The Study Area could be served with sewer at sone cost. Onthe other hand the IIUSA expansion that had been originatly proposed is bisected by the Lake Ann Interceptor. The Cityand its taxpayers have paid for this iroprovenent and thealternate plan would not effectively utilize it. Inaddition, the original plan approach was consistent withearlier City plans that illustrated a 1990 and later year 2O0O l,tUSA line through the area in question. The final factor to be considered is that irherever the IIUSAline is located, it rrill not please everyone. TheUetropolitan Council has uade it clear that the UUSA lineDust be orderly and contiguous, it cannot be drasn to satisfythe needs of individual property owners. It aLso cannot bEexpected to be changed easily at sone point in the future if soneone changes their nind. 3 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mean tu* c.nt,e,2io tusr F{th staet, sr. tu!/t, MN. ssw 612 291-6359 May 23, 190 Paul Krauss, Director 6f P[xnning City of Chanbassen 690 Coulter Drive Q!anh65ss1, Minnesota 55317 Dear Paul: You have asked me to outline some of the implications should the city of chanhassen permit dorelopment using on-site sewage disposal systeDs within its Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). After reviewing the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (lvtDF), the wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan and the sewer Facility Agreement for the Lake Ann interceptor, I have a number of comments for you- I have also discussed this with Marcel Jouseau, manager of the Council's Natural Resources Division. Council policy, as set out in the MDIF, indicates that an expansion of the (MUSA) represents a commitmeDt by the local govemment and the region to extend the services needed for urban development. An expansion of the MUSA without the local govemment's commitment to provide services would not be consistent with the MDIF. As part of any request to expand the MUSd the city will be required to also update itk sewer policy plan (as required by the wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan) to demoNtrate how and when sewer service would be provided. A plan to allow areas inside the MUSA to develop with on-site systems would be inconsistent with both the MDIF and the policy plan Orderly, mntiguous expansions of the MUSA that minirnize the need for additional local and regional investments is a goal of the MDIF. A proposed MUSA expansion that would 'lespfrog, past or around dorelopable land may raise some concens. ln addition, if an area was propoaed to be included in the MUSA even though the intent was to develop it at 'rural" densities, we would have to consider the area to be developable at urban densities for the purpose of evaluating the City's land supply. A regional commitment to provide sewer servicc is made when land is permitted to be added to the MUSA I would also direct your attentioo to Policy l-2 (page 14) of the Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan Policy, which indicates that on-site sewage disposal qDtems are appropriate at densities of 4 uoits per 40 acres or less. This policy does not distinguish betu/een areas iDside or outside the MUSA Even within the MUSA the 4140 policy applies. The plan further states Nl page ?5 that on-site disposal facilities are not suited for urban development. itAY 2 5 1993 CIII OF CHANI-IASSE'{ Paul Krauss May 23, 190 Page 2 The hke Ann agreement states that 'In accordance with the Council's Metropolitan doaelopment Frame*ork and applicable policy plans, the City agrees to u6e its b€st efforts to prevent the prcmature urbanization of areas outside the par Zm Metropolitao Urban Service Area' Statr belierrcs that permitting development with on-site serrers in the MUSA uould violate the spirit and inten! if not the letter, of the agreement. While my comnents to yDu on this topic are only a staff opinion at thh timq I hope they are valuable to ),ou as you *ork with grur Planning C,ommission ad City Council on lour pending plan aneDdments. Please feel free to call me if )rou hane questions or need further information My rclephone number is (612)2914501. Sincerely, Anne W. Hurlburt, Maaager Comprehensir€ planning atrd Locd Assistaoce Division m,hAp cc:Marcy J. Waritz, Metropolitan Council District 14 Marcel Jouseau, Metropolitan Council Staff Paul Baltzersen, Metropolitan Council Staff lIay 9, 1990 To Faul Krlurs, Clranlu$en Pbnnlng Dltrclorr Ptennlng Comnlrlon nrnton ce Oty Counclt metrlbcrg Sublect Covcr Lter lor FetlUon br no sewer servica and Resirl. -large Lot zoning6r the 1990 Comp. Plan Iho Urde6ign€d Afiachod b tho potltlon at€ turo maps. Ttr ytlor mapped araa was the orllnal Etartng poit ,or tlo petltioned arsa. As the potition was cirq.rlded, rDro end lrcro pooph uanleo o ptn l. ne pet omo a,Ba grai, o ttrefaa rcfrocrino tho gl8morod epport lo dal6 r€lehro b the pdriorr b tacded oIr 0ro goon rrg. -tt rnd.r meroro 8p6nl, I b carttin lrD'o getlbrr'a @lju Da dod. Fotm.dabn ol tHogetlbn br t{o sower sowea ard trIls tot Fo6tsonlLl &dgnailbfl ues t lehrEhgf typ€ ot@llplodsa lrom tho Etart. orr tho. oJle turd, many oerBcs€d tr oeerc r rcep oJ] hrd &dgndeo tre viiy Ib now, ulh rD oxlonsion ot the MUSA Ino. Tha lroorr ac{on b ,evbo tho afli .ontcs sea io ron ahatloBd expoclstiorB thd tDsl doveloprnenl routs al hn 6!so uru d b8t tho ,ter 2OOO, mrlpc Her. On lhe ohor hand, soflE orptossod 8 (hs&a, rftl tet thoy hsd lhe ,lolf, b drvoOpi portOn a Uif Us toErnlDdato ! ,ow rDr€ lDrnes with larlc us h rfi. TldE &sro mkas I ]m'€ te'asabte rih reptlc sydernstr8lwlh mrnicbd sorube. rHs was apparodly accopeu€ b thoso wtD usnted the ddus cro. r* orait or &e Corprehenslve Plan gEvs tho fryossbn thd rr6tsonthil hrlo h @|Jts exEil wl0rln a MiSe UunOaryriturt seqter aerube. ort orrron ltread arpng the Polilionols erdacod hlnEdldoty ard pasdonatsfy - ard lhai b ft|8t so ai havolbahnoe'h mlrd. Yss, *€ r.alizo that our lsrd srd homes ,rsvo hlgh ironomb vabas md may bc r hrdgo aelainsl an uncorteln economic luturc. Brit bocauso d our Leh poGonal varos, uo abo boliev6 n mgomue dotYarbhD ot tho lafir, air and wat6r. wo o,gect plamlp and zoilng to bo abh b p.Bsoile eoobgacal, .rilt6fc, md. rocial vabos nol or*y ,or ourlelves .nd tho onvtonmrn br bday, hn rbo for orr clItsren, nctlttor ar|d efuironment br brrDrrow. A wsll{ared lor or rrsiloi€d nat ral errcurdlno and wdanhod, prctocltd by elttg and buldlrp lewe, hrs ls own ocorDmic vabs bo on the tabe of out lDmss and br polonid ttevotop-]lBrf. *e hwe priO- tr cartng nr th orr own backyards. A groorto[ oonc.d, r ,ou ufl. Thb b lhe teg&, rre wafl to lesrc o'o,' orroon, -ru ttre ,airJlhr nlslakos o0lor cofirunlties mal(o .s r rrejl o( golclos, nrs, inO oontairnErt u,ltlt| . Uttlly diru tttd attoouraoes lhoso Eistal(es. Sende oreod, or'rd,lm on lnvest rent' bnl lho or*y rseson b n bnd ard tive h 9Llll.r:-".n, and thb nanDw-Bighted vhw shoutdnt manrod nser h tho potide;, and espociary 0lo erbns c, l,|6 City. We &nl uant to cor lruatly f8tt to rllhElo tho damaoe trom tuman progess inrU<*rO h mbplaaod or lnserr9tiv€ly (hveloped rostdentkil ad tndr6t,tat plD,octs. sotid ptans, bns a;ld prures, rrarortg urge chsos ol ublb educafio[ ]tusl be th6 1l3r rDnn b prwert lho darnago h UE frd Ce. Wg contirue to appreclate nollca d upcomh lIEeeEs Irr, up@ilnO F.ooc hoarhgE r.garrlrE tho Corp.ehonsivo Phn and relatod lorc n Ufe pOttrn-to U ttr6 undeclined Rospectftrlly submn€d, . { + 'April24, 1990 To Paul Krauss, Chanhassen Ptannlng Dlllctor, cc: CIty Councll trDnrbeB SublecU Fetlton br no sewer seMce and Rq;id. -large Lot zoring br 1990 Comp. plan Wo, tlo udersloned, pdfbn lho _Cfy d Cnil E6on b r.drslgnde tE hrd h(H.d on t,r &dEd map tun 'Resirendal{-ow Den$tl b 'ib Sowor Seilbe' end Bsslhntbt - LrrlE l-d . Dnhg f25 E€ ,rft) t tho MUSA oretopoean t,flily Sowice At€a) boutdarbs 8m oxterded. Wo psttbn that the Coltp.€rresivo Phn br ugco|t8E - FJbllc lEarfEE oontain lhb cfiane€. Poubne|s rl! i,3 h uEEo aroas rart ulb dl.rEB tor tE tobmg rsssonB an be[eve t B hthe trlblic htor6: t. Emtorm.nlal . (Rel6r b 1990 Strdy on L Lucy rd ylbuc 5p'1 , yp6f guEc b uaf.r qr.ny) We rantlho eroa ptrsatv3d u,th as mOr open rpaoe ss porsDle hr ruo rliti rf be crdangeed by Hghor derr3ty darobptorf. fho rrdcr€lgnod tCo p.Uo h clhg b. .rd .rffE lfta lutral enviorme- lrl3 way I b as brE Ur lrro h6lB .rrl br g.ttoretoo3 b @rt lr,!L amunts of udewloD€d hrd erg noodod b a€$r rs a tahaeE hrfior br rlttlclll3 ard aodiments- anterhg tho hl(es lrom tho eflourdE lrtrs. Hhhor drGfy d3irBloprmnl crtd€s mrD frpewhrs 3.nfacas, ar$ wil r€sil h tlDlr rSts ntiod b.alrE d tra hl(as. hasiarlrg lho d€cfi d ftilor $aIty. Wnh higher donsty devobpnErt' rnalor Class A udands arruldhg L*a Lucy codd mceho an oxrrenply hleh, yet prediclable anrunl d lD[}eoh! 3ouroo pou.llbn. E ratr I,!h oxb0ng populalbn densl Etom waler rurEl, b alr€arry harmhe the ajrourdng w8lands, ut&h an b€gllnhg b fil u,ih urd.slrable rulrier -lad8n s€dirrEnts Irom lh3 ltorm 3ero]8. SL66tardal Ed.rcton ol rDn-pold sourcs po&Jlbn b a _ gpal lh3 M€hpolilan Courrl b r€qrldng ol e[ wdorshsd dsucts ln lt6 ll€to aroa, ard wo rEqrs$ fh6 City ,woStigdo ways tO Ouaranio3 maxhum on tonmental Fd6cfio1l Lake Lucy, l€d rlDstly by g]uJndraler seepaop b na]tah a rDnrlal lsl(e l6rsl and possit y Ltka Ann, - may have l€ss aquiler availabl€ flom darly ?olmvd d mllor6 d gallons d water trnr?€d od ot tro groundrater rlom Clty wslb and laken oul ol $o u,alarshed h a Berygr slrieflr AqJlor .t ailabfi[y rnay havo a negative lnpact on lake levsb or wdor qjalty h lhb w'aorsh€d. 2. Pracllcal - Mosl ol th€ lots beture3n l-ake Lucy Foad and lhe rDrth !fior! rr€ olhor lr?osrblc, bo dfllicu!, ot uridasirablg b develop hto l/+ecro lots bocauso d deop torah, 8rd lnany designdod p.oteclod wdland aEss. I wouts rDl b€ oconomicaly leasaHo to connact lhosa FDportios b ! publb syslem bocarso lhoy sould r3main largF- bts h th3 tilure. & Erlstlng Systemr - Mosi ol th€ oxtstine hornos h t t's s'ra llsta nou, mro\r.d, fuElixrhO lailb systems. Wo believe lhese syslens Pose no darlge.lo lhe onviro rnt bocarjse d tho sfingont codes applled h lhot rocotil - conslrudion and becauso d tho rutdoni ahoriliol capady d orr hoavy lol b alow tho phoeghonrs b bc ured up. ThorE srould be rD value h connecflng lheso p.oporlio3 b a FJbIb systom. lhce lhart lbaady b I trcr&ofig syrtem h plac€. Ws do ml want b be forced &to srbdhrbhn dro b unrcess3ry apecbl es3rssmeds l. Sstety - Hlgher dgnslty sould causa hcreasod eub fanic, posing a darleor lo bot snd Wo trdtb on Leko tuc) Boa.l (ard any extsnsiorE). sirEs Utis ]oad b &sbnailed as a EaI b Fh Chentl8sson partc- 5. Control ol our ftnutt . ln ctroshg ttis are! br qn lDnrs, rr t(n6u ttrd rc w'! hryhg (n01, brlc ndrrat treas, lndudittg designalod weuand Fopetty. Ws ero @mrnued to pr€soMng and gIotodftO lhb nerral envlonrnernb keep Ule erea a desirablo ple to 5ro. We ask tha Cty lo tna! tDtice ol upcoriry prDlc hoaritls tteE &rg tro CorrgrBhonuhra Plin lrd reta[€d l3llls h tL pouion b al tho un&r8igrod. Respec{trrlly submlted, Tho UrdersigrEd P.S. b.ll9.ttsrf,r:frr.a wrib l,ry d.fti,n l crEra. b b Ciu.PlDrale Dia.e.. Prf l&rr.s.Ib dcia a Cttl l{d. O Cqtr Dlra. PO Bor fazChrr*ra$i. 53ll7.Irrr* you la yor erpgat Toeodror. r cft ti*. r dlrtEl tlome Addres Phone tot sEe I ^a9 eirrttfrrr,b|f u t L u)L 0eft9 ct //16 .tactZt (tu.rL ** e,v 112 -aoa o 2,'#, 4 5 lsl Z,s *r.u R/ t C.L. e. Ji)2q .f,l 4tJ , I loo 4?2,&a,a c. {-90>.s 5 a,e L o t{co< -o A1-lti o [o3 ,f,1A&,. - //.t o? Fdton br m sewer eervi€ and Beddental -l-aEe Lot (Bl.l) zottrE br 1990 Compohenslve Plan brH deshnel€d on dached maP. ,r " ' t/ EtUon b no sswsr servica and Resld€ndat -lrrge Lot (R[l) zodng ,or 1990 Comprehensirn Plan lo. bnd dedgttded on dtached map. l.lome Address Phone Lot dze b'|w c ,y -? + ,E t( d k,z-t a 2 o f'-qf qTW.tlb l>tE k e 2rcfu*z ol I L tarr, sot I F I- -Tt F LAKE ATT 7 t LAXE LUCY lr Eq ArrcrtqrD rErfliat et!p. 0o a.r.eerr) .sr r t.. i t- ?l r. i, ttre tltt LAKE 'IICI 1" rDYA I a g s.:: .i .\: iri Ia ct ra I r-llr -ltl fI I 731A I t 1 #s E .+:."-_ga-- !;-,i --,1;r.. -:--.;.. *1iSil} I;i : ! lr oo . :.' . .'. 'i"':. ' :s :..} I I t I 700 CITY OF EH[NH[ESEN I|{E!,IORANDIN,T TO: FROl,l: DATE: su&f: BACKGROT'ND 690 COULTER ORIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 9s7-5739 Planning Conmission Paul Krauss, Planning Olrector QL l,lay 29, 1990 Iand Use Plan Discussion paper on Impact ofOffice/Industrial Uses South of the Railroad iracks onAdjoining Residential Uses At a relatively early stage in the developnent of the Land UseP1an, the Planning Conrnission proposed the locations ofOffice/Industrial (OI) uses south oi the railroad tracks betweenAudubon Road and calpin Boulevard. There sere several reasons forthis. The first stenmed froD a desire to protect the Tiubemoodneighborhood by surrounding It with residential developnent. OIuses previously considered for this area uere displaced- and therewas a desire to naintain a reasonable supply ot lana in thiscategory. The Conmissioners also expreased a desire to structurea plan that would serve to direct traffic south to new Hwy. 212rather then continue the historic reliance on Hwy. 5. Based upon the Planning Cornrnissionrs direction, staff investigated !h. proposal and concluded that the land rras adaptable forindustrial uae aince it contains reaeonable qrades and no treecover. There is a large centralJ.y located uetland that would beprotected. The area was already inpacted by industrlal uses inadjacent Chaska and by NSP substation in Chanhassen. There are 4 horoes in the Sun Ridge plat that woutd be iDpacted, although theyare oriented south on a hlllgide and already have the -chaski industrial sites in plain view. fhe planning ConmissLon directedstaff to designate the area for industrial/of f ice uses. ISSUE This area has received relatlvety tittle attention since the tinethe.area was designated I/O. The concerns raised by Tinberuoodresidents have not yet been heard concerning this arel. However,staff is somewhat uncomfortable with the situation and since we IDpact of Office/fndustrial Usesllay 29, 1990 Page 2 have recently had inguiries fron several area residents, ue expectthe issue to be raised in upconJ.ng neetings. Therefore, ue thoughtit would be useful to examlne the issue and discuss possiblealternatives to deal yith it. AL?ERNATTVE TTT - USING THE COI{PREHENSIVE PIAI{ TO REOUTRE I,ARGE IANDSCAPED SETBACKS Staff has discussed the possibility of using the plan to illustratea 100 foot wide buffer yard around Sun Ridge and a 50 foot wideIinear one along Auqgbgn. Thls concept could also be enployedelsewhere. As a condition of rezoning and site plan approval, theoffice industrial developer yould be required to -ireate the The problero is the relatlve lack of either physical or visualseparation between the office,/industrial uses, homes on Sun Ridge Court and to an extent, hones located along Audubon Road. Ttrere is no separation that will be provided beyond setbacks and landscapingthat is norrally required by the zoning ordinance. The onlyexception is the O/I couponent located along calpin that isphysically separated by a large setland. By comparison, the Titubersood area has a visual separation in the forn of a tree line,buffering by a single fanily neighborhood and creek corridor andextrenely large setbacks on the order of 1O0O feet or more. Anaerial nap has been prepared by staff to facilitate an examinationof the issue. This will be presented at the work session. ALTERNATIVE 1 - TOTAL ELII.{INATION OF OFFICE INDUSTRIAL SOUTH OF TIIE RAILROAD TR,ACKS Clearly, this alternative would do the most to elininate theproblen. The cost would cone in the great reduction in the Cityrsability to get a share of future O/I growth since the onlyreuaining area would be tocated at Hwy. 5 and 41. We also questionthe utility of the Iand along Gatpin for quality resldential use due to industrial developnent Ln Chaska. Lastly, we doubt that ifthe area is to be developed for residential use that the City couldjustify bringing it all into the I{USA at this tine. Sone icreage soneuhere vould likely need to be trirnned frorn the UUSA requestsince it is unlikely that the expansion could be justified based onpotential grouth rates. ALTERNATTVE II - PARTIAL ELTUT}IATION OF OFFICE INDUSTRIAL USES A portion of the office industrial use could be e}ininated andreplaced with single fanily use to provide a buffer along AudubonRoad and around Sun Ridge Court. One posslbility ls ttre areainnediately north of Sun Ridge up to and including the existingfarD hone. There are a nunber of variations that could beconsidered. IDpact of Office/Industrial Uses Uay 29, 1990 Page 3 landscaped strip. we have taken the liberty of illustrating thison thE current draft of the plan. Nornal setbacks would be anadditional requirenent. ALTERNATIVE IV - ACOUISTTION OF HOI,IES ON SUN RIDGE COI'RT It is possible that the hoDes on Sun Ridge Court could be acquiredand the land cleared for O/I development. This uould directlyelininate the interface problen in this area but rrould not resolvEissues along the east slde of Audubon Road. It sould alsorepresent a significant financial outlay. It uould be difficultfor a developer to justify the cost and it is unlikely that theCity would be in a position to participate financialty in ttreproj ect . SU}{I,IARY Staff is seeking the Planning Conraission r s direction on hou toproceed. We believe the concern is a legitinate one and it nouldbe preferable to be able to get out af,ead of it prior to itsbeconing a najor issue relative to the plan adoption. CITY OF EH[NHISTEN PC DATE: CC DATE: CASE I: June 5, 1990 June 25, 1990 87-1 site STAFF REPORT Fz o =0-L B lrjF U, site Plan Review for the Expansion of a 17,500 square Foot Addition of an Office,/Warehouse Building Lot- 2, Block 1, chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7870 Pdrk Drive PROPOSAL: IOCATION: APPLICANT:R. iI. Ryan Construction, Inc. 6511 Cedar Avenue So.uinneapolis, lo{ 55423 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: ALTACE}IT ZONING AND I,AND USE: IoP, Industrial office Park 2.93 acres N - IOP, component Engineerings - Drainage pond/outlot E - IOP, Vacant W - IOP, Dunn and Roos WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CHARA TER. : Available to the site. The aite abuts Riley Purgatory Creek and isheavily wooded sith mature trees. It enerall s1 s dorfn to the southrrest. 2OOO I,AND USE PI,AN:Industrial D:l*&. Bo) ? ; A ,v -- . --- - t\ \ \h \ \ \ i, E7 x @ TGg If, I L.I res r Oi a 1\tro t. f, -l F \trII ./) cA o a t 6i ttft--.-.,{ilt. I ) f,f, I BLPOwERS r -lN & I I l I ! nA I ', ,$\I.rt l_ I I I I : i 6s I I I I I It I I I I ( I I I PROPOSAL On April 6, L987, the City Council approved the Site plan for a15,888 square foot office and uarehouse facility for IndustrialInfornation Controls,.Inc. (Attachnent fl). The type of operationthat is taking place in the building Ls asseubling- ot nach-ines andconputerized controls. The eite has an area of 2.9 acres andcontains a low area adjacent to Riley Creek. The proposed additionwiII have an area of L7,S2o square feet and sifl UL utilized aso!!1cg spa99r rarehouse, product assenbly and storage. The newaddition will be situated to the yest of the existing building.Additional parking rrill be provided on the westerly porlion of theproperty. Access will be obtained from park oiive through anexisting curb cut. An additional loading dock will be added to thewest of the existing loading dock as Ehorrn on the site plan datedltay 3, 1990. The dock is conpletely concealed by the existingbuilding to the east. The Watershed Oistrict requires 1oo footsetback from the creek centerline for all hard surfaces. A1Iproposed hard surface coverage maintains that distance.Architectura.l]y, the building will be a nirror inage of theexisting building except that the new addition wiII ie 2 feethlgher than the existi.ng.building. The applicant rsil1 preserve anyexisting vegetation outside the buildable lrea and the parking Iot. -Additional -landscaping will be added to the site on ihe existingdrainage and utility easenent. There currently exists a drainag6probLen fron the property. to the north of the slte due to inpropergrading. The Senior Engineering Technician is reconmenain! tfratthe applicant work wj.th staff and the owner of the adjacentproperty to resolve this issue. IIC Site Plan June 5, 1990 Page 2 The aDount of chenicals on site are nininal and are stored in thebuilding in one or two gaIlon containers. A hazardous waste permitis not required as the chemicals used are not toxic in n-ature.Circult boards which require hazardous chenicals are sent out fornanufacturing. According to their nanageDent, IIc does not andrill not nanufacture their orn base circult boards. Horrever, theydo assenble these boards by lnstalling parts into then. Attachnenl*2 shows the t)rpe of chenicals use and stored in the building. Theapplicant indicated that should the need arise, a disposal Jite isavailable for theD. Staff is recornnending thatappropriate conditions.the requeat be approved subj ect to General Site Plan./Archltecture The site is located to the west of park Drive. The aite plan isfairly atraightforuard. Access is gained from park Oriv6. Theproposed addition is a continuation of the existing building. PARKING CII{PLIANCE TABLE Area ParkLno 5,200 s.f. 3 stalls per 1000 s. f. 1 stall per employee TotaI 16 I'lanufacture 14, 060 s. f.39 IIc Site PIan June 6, 1990 Page 3 use office Parking uill be located to the far uest of the site. The truck Ioading area will be located adj acent to the existing dock. Thetruck loading area is conpletely Ecreened fron off site views bythe existing building. Building architecture is functional andwill conplinent the existing building. fhe uain material used forthe exterior facade is rock faced concrete brick uith a single score concrete brick that rriIl be used to accent the building. Thesingle score concrete brick will be extended fron the existingbuilding. Tero units are proposed for roof top eguipnent. Eachunit riII be approxinately 3 feet high. Ehe units si1l be set at such a far distance that they w111 not be seen from Park Drive. The applicant requested painting the units with a color natchingthe roof color rather than using fencing for screening. Staff feels that this is an acceptable proposal as the roof top eguipnentwill not be seen fron Park Drive in the first place. No additional signage wiLl be added to the site. The applicant has not shown where the trash enclosures will belocated. Such should be shown on the site plan. Parkincr/Interior Circulation With the addition of the new building, sone functions will beshifted froB the existing bullding to the new addition. Totaloffice space betueen the tro buildings will be 5,200 sguare feet, rrarehouse - 41060 square feet and manufacturing of 14,050 squarefeet. Parking requirenents for the office portion of the buildingis 3 parking stalls per 1,000 square feet which amounts to 16parking sta1ls. The nanufacturing faci).ity is proposed to accommodate a maxirnun of 39 erDployees, thus 39 parking stalls willbe required as tbe ordinance ca11s for one parking stall perenployee. The warehouse and shipping area has a total area of14,060 square feet which translate to 15 parking statls, as theordinance requires one parking stall per IrOOO square feet. Thetotal reguired number of parking stalls iE 70. The appJ.icant isproposing 76 parking stalls which exceeds the niniDum reguirenents. Handicapped parking stalls have not been shown on the site p1an. The applicant Dust show the designated handicapped parking. rrc s June te Plan , 1990 i 5 4Page warehouse 14,060 r. f.1 stall per 1000 a. f.15 Stalls required - 70 Stalls provided - 75 Based upon this analysis, staff concludes that parking requirenents have been satisfied. There are sone rninor changes to the Eet up ofthe parking lot. Taro turnaround areas to the northuest of theproposed parking 1ot nust be provided. Each aisle should be 10feet deep. Access to the far uesterly parking stalls is inadequateand does not meet ordinance requirements. The aisle is lG feetwide and the ordinance requires it be 22 feet. To remedy thesituation, two of the parking spaces must be turned lnto an iilanaas shown in Attachnent *3. Access to the loading docks is adequatevith proper turning. radius for trucks. However, following a fie:.dilspection of the site, staff has observed drainage probleis in thevlcinity of the present loading dock area as evidLnced by pavenentdeterioration. This problen should be corrected in conjunctionuith the expansion project. Landscapinq The_ Iandscaping plan ls generally well conceived although it isdeficient in sone areas. The Iandscaping plan lhows aconcentration of trees along the westerly side of the site nithpreservation of Eorne existing vegetation. The landscaping planfails to show the landscaping for the northerly portion ot-ttresite. The applicant nust sork with staff to provide adequatelandscaping to the north of the building. The applicant alsofailed to shou seeded areas, therefore, a four fooL Ltrip of sodDust be placed ionediately adjacent to the parking 1ot whele sheetdrainage rrill occur. The reroainLng areaa should be seeded anderosion control blanket installed to prevent future erosion untilvegetation is re-established. Under the revised Site plan Ordinance, financial guarantees for landscaping and other siteinprovements are required. Liqhtino Lighting locations are illustrated on the ptan. The fixture t)rpeis 250 rrhps lights. OnIy shielded fixtures are allowed and tLeapplicant nust demonstrate that there is no nore than .5t candlesof light at the property line. S icrnaqe The applicant is not proposing any additional signage for the site. fIC Site PIan June 5, 1990 Page 5 Grading and Drainaqe The site generally drains to the southrrest. The uater floweventually drains into Riley Creek. Existing vegetation acts as anatural screen to remove sedinent from the runoff prior to reachingthe creek. The plans propose concrete curb and gutter around theparking lot and building site. The parking lot is proposed todrain southerly into Riley Purgatory creek by an opening in the curb which will channelize the uater fron the parking 1ot anddirect it to a specific point whl.ch sill create a potential erosionproblen. The sr. Engineering Technician is recommendlng that the southwest corner of the parking lot be lorered to Datch the southeast corner and the continuous concrete curb along the parking sta1l be replaced with a barrier t)rpe curb that will allow drainageto flow underneath and around. He is also reconmending that thecurb along the southerly portion of the proposed driveway be renoved to allow the natural sheet drainage. Horrever, sone t)rlre ofgruardrail/post should be installed to delineate the driveway edge. The proposed grading plans fail to shou the proposed slopes orgrades outside the parking lot area. Staff is requesting theapplicant to subnit a revised grading plan indicating the existing and proposed contours on the site. The rnaj ority of the site is proposed to be graded. Plans shown erosi.on control around the construction site. I:r1>e III erosioncontrol shall be used on the site due to the nature of the area. Public utitities city uater and sewer are available on Park Drive. The applicantintends to route sewer and water lines internally. The northerly reguested turn island nj.ll encroach upon a drainage easement. TheEngineering Departnent is requesting that the encroachment beperDitted on the condition that the applicant enter into a nhold harnless agreeDent'r vith the City to acknosledge that the City wiIInot be held responsible for any danage or restoration costs to theparking lot or landscaping while perfoming naintenance. COUPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRI T Ordinance ProDertv Height Setback 4 storles s-10 w-10 1 rtory N-10 S-70E-170 U-2OO/aO Parking Stalls N-10 E-30 70 76 IIC S June te PIan , 1gg0 1 6 5gePa Parking setbacks Lot Coverage Iot Area STAFF RECOUI'IENDATTON Staff recoDmends the rnot i on : 70*ss8 1 acre 2.93 acres Planning Cornnission adopt the following Reviewto the N-10 E-30 s-10 If-10 N-10 E-50 s-2 5 w-7 o/ t5 nThe Plannlng Conmission recomnends approval of Site plan *87-1 as Bhown on the plan dated Uay 3, 1990, subj ectfollowing conditions: 1. Provision of a trash storage enclosure for all outside trashstorage. 2 3 4 Roof top screening shall be subnltted to staff for approval . Designated handicapped parking shall be shown on the plans. Provide two turnaround areas at the northwest corner of theproposed parklng lot. Delete tro parklng spaces and provideaisles as shorn In Attachment f3). Dock area drainage problen Dust be corrected. The parking lot grade shal1 be nodified and even sheetdrainage must be provide and concrete curb must be replacedwith a barrier type that vill allow the drainage to rununderneath. Concrete curb along the south edge of thedriveuay shall be deleted and replaced with soDe t)'pe ofgruardrail or post to delineate the drivevay edge. Lorrer the grade of the southweEt corner of the parking lot tonatch the southeast corner. ftT,e III erosion control must be used on the perineters of the construction site. Provide Iandscaping on the north portion of the site and sodarea rith 4 foot strip of sod to be placed il nediately adjacent to the parking lot uhere sheet drainage vill occur.A1so, all disturbed areas should be seeded and erosion controlblanket installed until vegetation is re-established.Financial guarantees for landscaping shall be subnitted to thecity. 5 5 7. 8. IIC Site Plan June 6, 1990 Page 7 9. 10. 11. The applicant must denonstrate that there is no uore than .5foot candles of light fron fixtures at the property tine. Ttre applicant shall work with City staff and the adjoiningproperty osner to tbe north to resolve the current drainageproblen. ftre applicant shall conply rlth all conditions of the ltatershed District. Watershed District approval is required. Staff report dated April 6, 1987. Type of cheoicals used by IIC.Iocation of parking sta11s to be renoved and turning islandsto be added. llemo fron Sr. Engineering Technlcian dated Irlay 30, 1990. AppI ication. Uemo from Building Official dated Uay 15, 1990. Reduced site plan. L2. Floor plans of existing building nust be provided to deternine code conpliance. r ATTACHI,IENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 /a., N% JITY OF EHf,NHfi55TN STAFF REPORT i 3. DATE: Uarch 11, I98Z C.C. DATE: April 6, 1987 CASE NO: 87-1 Site Plan Prepared by: Olsen: v ?.r, . . :a1 ;: _.,-._r., Fz- (J =(LL ko l!ha Site Plan Review for a 151808 Square F.oot O f f ice,/Warehouse Building PROPOSAL: #-a - t'/ LOCATION: APPLICANT: Chanhassen Lakes Business Park M i nnea o1is, MN 55420 Lot 4th 2, Block 1,Addition R. J. Ryan Construction 530 International Plaza 7900 International Drive PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE 3 DENSITY: IOP 2.9 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:N- s- E- tit- IOP ; IOP, IOP; IOP; Component Design J & R RadiaEor/Day-co Concrete vacan t va can t WA?ER AND SEWER: PEYSICAL CEARAC. :The site abutis low land w north. iley-Purgatory Creek anda sloped area to the I99O LAND USE PLAN:Industrial SRith Available to the site l"(l- LAKE ATIIV RD ,1, 5 R12 toP e J =l Luz7a, OT;3!tr3 ah" E C $ LAKE SL RD F cA : .D o aai RSF o 7 T R12 € et RSF Rg,, s J @ 'od- /- c\ R4 PUD-R; R12 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Ryan Site March 11, Page 2 Plan Review t987 Site Des i qn The applicant is proposing a L5,808 square foot office warehousebuilding for Industrial Information Controls, Inc. (ICC). ICCassembles machj.nes and computerized controls. The site is 2.9acres and contains a Iow area adjacent to Riley-purgaLory Creekand a sloped area adjacent to Component Engineering to the north. The proposal shows a proposed and future development. Thecurrent proposal maintains an impervious surface of 34t(building, parking and sidewalks). The future building andparking area will increase this to 581. The Zoning Ordinancerequires a maximum of 70$ impervious surface. The ZoningOrdinance permits the building and parking area t.o be Locat.ed 10feet from the north property line and the Watershed Distri.ctreguires a 100 foot setback from the creek centerline. Section 5-L6-2 of the Zoning Ordinance al1ows office and. ware- house as a permitted use in the IOp District (Attachment *l). Section 5-16-5 of the Zoning Oralinance requires a front yard set-back of 30 feet and a rear and side yard setback of I0 feet and a maximum lot coverage of 70t in the IOp District (Attachment 11). Section 7-1-10 of the Zoning Ordinance requires one parking spaceper 1000 square feet of floor area up to 10,000 square feet anaone additional space for each 2r000 square feet thereafter forsarehouse estabLishments ( Attachment 12). Section 7-l-10 of the Zoning Ordinance requires three parkingspaces per 1000 square feet of office floor area (Attachment 12). Section 8-2-1 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a strip of land atleast I0 feet between right-of-way and vehicular use lrea with onetree every 40 feet plus a 2 foot hedge or berm (Attachment il3). Section 8-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance requires one tree every 40feet for interior lot lines abutting industrial land (Attachment *3). Section 8-3-1 of the Zoning Ordinance requires interiorlandscaping for vehicular areas containing more than 6,000 sguarefeet (AttachmenL *3 ) - REFERRAL AGENCIES City Engineer See Attachment *4 ANALYS I S Ryan Site March 11, Page 3 PIan Review 1987 Therefore, the building is located as far from the creek aspossible. Due to the limited area, the existing hill and mature vegetation wilI be removed for the proposecl building. The Zoning Ordinance requires that, to the extent possible, thesite design shalI preserve woodland areas and that shade trees over six inch caliper shall be preserved unless there is no oEher way to develop the site. The site conditions require the rernovalof the existing hill- and vegetation. The ordinance allovrs thecity to require the replacement of removeC trees. At a minimum,the site plan must provide for landscaping required by the Zoningordinance. Staff is recommending the applicant submit a plan showing existing vegetati.on which will be removed prior to finalplat approval. Parkinq and Landsca DLnq A total of 35 parking spaces are required and the siLe plan is providing 37 parking spaces. The site plan is proviiling the required I0 foot landscape strip around the south and east side of the building. A I0 foot Iandscape strip must also be maintained betrreen the parking area and right-of-way. A two foot berm with a tree every 4 feet is required on this strip. The applicant has proviileil for this requirement. The Zoning Ordinance reguires one tree every 40 feet along Ehe interior lot lines. The applicant has provided a strip of trees along the south lot line. Such a strip of trees must also be provided on the north property line. The Zoning Ordinance requires interior landscaping for parking areas over 6,000 square feet. The parking area is approximatelyI7,000 square feet. The Zoning Orclinance requires 5 square feet. of lantlscaped areas for every I00 feet of parking area for atotal of 850 square feeE required (the applicant calculated 887 square feet required). The applicant is providing 920 squarefeet of interior landscaping. Grading and Dra i nage There rsill be extensive grading on the site. Erosion controlsilt fences and hay bales nilI be required arounal the contructionarea to minimize sediment from leaving the site. The erosion,/sedimentation protection will be reguired to be maintained during and after construction until the landscaping and vegetative coverhas been restored. It appears that drainage from the entire site is proposed t.o bebrought to a catch basin and directed through a l2-inch storm sewer where it will then be conveyed to Riley-Purgatory Creek.Staff and the Watershed District are concerneil with the piping of Ryan Site March 11, Page 4 P 1an I987 the runoff of the site through the r2-inch storm serder. staff isrecommending that a portion of tne runoff from the site bedirected to Park Drive where cat.ch basins are available. Thiswould minimize Ehe erosion impact to Riley-purgatory Creek andprovide for sediment removal . rf the drainage-is aireci"a i.o^the site to the creek through a storm ".*", iip., itr.-ippii."ntmust receive a permit from the DNR. Component Engineering is located directly to the north. A por_tion of.the drainage-from component rngiieering is aiiectea'toPark Drive and the rest is diiected to the sou[,h over the site inquestion. There is a drainage ditch from Component engineering9n.!!: proposeil site, located approximateJ.y wirere ttre iuiuiebuilding is ?roposed. A drainali easement for this aii.t -t." n"rbeen provided for and Opus is w6rking with the appficani to-remedy this discrepancy. Utilities A l0-inch municipal sani taryDrive and municipal water iialso located in park Drive. sewer service isavailable from a available from park l0-inch watermain The Watershed District reguries a 200 foot greenspace along Rileycreek. The 200 foot greenspace is measured as ro'o reei on-eitrrerside of the creek centerlin6. The proposal has some i.pJ.uiou"surface within the 100 foot setback-an& must receive a irariancefrom the Watershed Di strict. The lvatershed District reviewed the variance apprication on I{arch4, L987,_ and gave preliminary approval if the iipficani canobtain deed restrictions trom tnl properties to'ttr"-""rtt,-lomaintain the 200 feet. of greenspac-e. The properties to the southare owned by the city and Day-co concrete (atlachment *5). Thereare outlots throughout the business center along the cieek.These outrots are owned by chanhassen and are uied for aiain.g"and stormwater holding ponds. The outrots sill nevei ue-imfro"eaand deed restrictions can be granted for the outlot o*n.a-6'| tn.city. To maintain a 200 foot-green space a portion of oay_toConcreters property must also have a deed reitriction and'theapplicant must rrork with the owner to obtain this. Recommenda t i on Miscellaneous Planning staff recommenils that.following motion: "The Planning Commission recomrnendsas shown on site plan dated Februaryconditions: the Planning Commi.ssion adopt Ehe approval of site plan *87-l18, 1987, with the following Ryan Site March 11, Page 5 2 3 4 q P Ian 1987 1 The applicant submit a plan showing existing vegetation whichwill be removetl. The applicant shall provide one tree per 40 feet along thenorth property 1ine. The applicant sha1l provide an acceptable grading plan to accommodate drainage from the Component Engineering site tothe north. The applicant sha1l provide reviseil site grades to force the easlerly half of the site drainage to flow to Park Drive thuseliminating the 12-inch storm pipe and maximize Ehe sediment removal/erosion control for tshe site. The iresterly half ofthe site shall be graded to allow nsheet' flow into the creek s etback . The applicant shalI provicle anplan for the site.acceptable erosion control fhe applicant shaIl install erosion control measures prior toinitiating construction; to be maintained throughout construction until the Landscaping,/vegetat ive cover has been restored. The applicant shall provide all necessary drainage and uti-Iity easements . The applicant nust receive pelmits from the DNR and the watershed Di.strict. 6. 7 8 I 2 3 4 5 6 7I 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval withstaff's conditions. ATTACITMENIS . Section 5-L6-2 and 5-15-5 of the Zoning Orilinance.. Section 7-L-I0 of the Zoning Ordinance.. Section 8-2-L, 8-2-2 and 8-3-I of the Zoning Ordinance.. l,femo f rom City Engineer dated tlarch 6. L987.. Location of City owneil outlot and Day-Co Concrete.. Application. . Reducetl copies of elevation and site plan.. Planning Conmission minutes dated Uarch 25. 1987.. Site Plan dated February 18, 1987. CHEMICALS USED AT MILLTRONICS May 7, 1990 Paints :DMR-475 orange DAR-2185 vhit.e DMR- 487 yell-o!, DAR-25032 Havanna br own DAR-24574 beige DSX-100 bonding clear DP-40 epoxy primer Spray painE, !2 oz. cans Hardeners:DX-77 fisheye eliminator DXR-81 accelerator DU-4 caEalyst DXR-80 caCalyst DP-401 epoxy primer catalyst. DTR-600 enamel- reducer DTR-601 enamel reducer Thinners: DTL- 1-0 lacguer lhinner DX-330 acrylic cleaner DX- 47 4 spray gun cleaner Miscellaneous : DX-54 road guard DX-520 calva prep net,al conditioner DX- 579 metal prep AnEi-rust. film, 11 oz. cans gtqt qE G G 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 18 L% pE 3rt pE %pE 214 pE 1G 5G 5G 5G 5G 5G 2 1 3 6 qt qt qE n, TURNING ISLANDS TO BE ADDED Sqqqq It 0 ,t C ,<6 PA KING TA LS TO BE RE 4l tll 6?7.6'l 5t{ r_ \I :aaJ 24:zz I .;.'i i.: ( ( I CITY OF CH[NH[EST[I 690 COULTER DRTVE . p.O. BOX 147 0 69111115SEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937_s739 }TEMORANDUU TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, FRO}I: David C. Eempel , DATE: I.lay 30, 1990 SUBJ : Planner I Sr. Engineering Technician Site Plan ReviewIndustrial Information ControlsEile No. 90-6 Land Use Review Dra i naqe The site borders Riley/purgatory Creek which is uniler DNR andlilatershed Jurisdiction. qpica1ly, a site as this would berequireil to have concrete curb and gutter around the perimeterwith storm sewers to convey runnoff into a seiliment basin.Horeve!, due to the terrain, lot size and sensitive nature ofcreek, the Watershed favors a 'sheet f1ow" from the parcel tomaintain the natural drainage pattern. The existing- building andparking 1ot was constructed rith this same concept to naintainthe natural drainage pattern. The vegetation acts as a naturalscreen to remove sediment from the run off prior to reaching thecreek . tu The plans propose sotDe concrete curb and gutter around theparking 1ot and the building site. The parking lot is proposedto drain soutberly iato Riley/Purgatory Creek by an opening inthe curb. The opening in the curb witl channelize the water fromthe parking lot antl direct it to a speclfic point rhicb willcreate a potential erosion problen. A solution would be to 1owe!the SW corner of the parking lot to Eatch the SE corner analreplace the continuous concrete curb aloog the parking stal1s with abarrier-type curb that will aIIw drainage to flow underneath andarounal. It is also recommended that the curb along the aoutherlyportion of the proposed driveway be removed to allow the naturalsheet drainage, however, some type of guardrail,/post should beinstalled to deliniate the driveway edge. The plans provide spot elevations for proposed parking Iotelevations. Hot ever, they do not indicate the proposed slopes orgrades outside the parking lot area. I{ithout this, it isdifficult to determine the extent of the grading on the 1ot. Sharmin A1-Jaff I'Iay 30, 1990 Page 2 The plans propose erosion control around the perimeter of the new construction. Horrever, the specified type of erosion control is not describetl , therefore, the new grading plan should include the type of erosion control to be installecl. Due to the nature of the area, it is recoranendetl that l)rpe -3 erosion control be in sta 11ed . According to the landscape plan, it is unclear whether any areas will be receiving sod, therefore, it should be recomended that a four-foot strip of sod be placed inmediately adjacent to the parking 1oL where sheet drainage will occur. ?he remaining disturbed ireas should be seedetl and erosion control blanket instatled to prevent future erosion until the vegetation is re-establ ished. Recommendecl Condi tions I The applicant shall re-submit a grading plan indicating the existing contours and the proposed contours over the site. The parking lot grade shaIl be modified to provide an even sheet drainage off the site anil the conclete curb rePlaced with a barrier-type curb that nill allow the drainage to run underneath . 3. The concrete curb along the south edge of the driveway should be deleted and replaced with some type of guaralrail or post to deliniate the drivewaY edge. 4. The applicant shall provide TlPe-3 erosion control around the site. The details should be incorporated onto the new grading plan. 5. The applicant sha1l work with City staff and the atljoining ploperty owner to the north to resolve the current drainage problem. 6. Ttre applicant shall obtain and comply with conditions of the Watershed District permit . lms Gary c. viarren, City Engineer 2. Ti. ,, DEVBIOETET' TPPI.ICIIIGclll ol c.Erlf,lltssEt 590 @ulter DalveChrDh...eD, ltlf 55317(512) 937-1900 tPPLIcN{t: R. J. Ryan Construction Inc.O$NERs IIC/l,li lltronics ADDRESS 65ll Cedar Ave. S.TDDRESS 77870 Park Drive' llinneapol is, HN 55423 Chanhassen , llinnesota 55317 TELEPEONE (DaytlDe)liP code 866-4632 IELEpE9NE 474-8100 z P Code PROJECT NAr{E IIC/l.li lltronics PRESENT TAND USE PLAN DESTGNAIION REQT'ESIED I.AND OSE PLAN DESIGNATION pRESENT ZONING Industrial Office Park PlanDed ODlt DeyGloE nent _ Sketcb Plan_ Prellnlnary_ Final plan Subdlvision _ Pl.ttlng _ lletas and Boundls Street,/Easeneat Vac.tion Ietlands pernlt Plan REQIESTED zoNrNG Industrial office Park USES pRoposgp Light manufacturi n g/warehous i ng/offi ce SIZE OF pRopERty 2.93 acres T CAIION Lot 2 Block 1 Chanhassen Lakes Business Park ) REQT,ESI: Zoning District Chaage Zoning lppeal Zoning Variance Zoniug lext lnendlnent Lnd Use plan tmendnent Conditional Use perDit X Site plan Review BEASONS FOR TEIS RESUEST Addltion to ex'isting facility - ISGA! DESCRIPIION (Attrch lcgal lf E.e!ss:::y r FILING CER?TFICA?ION: Signed Bl' Signed By OLrr12 City of Chanhas tand DevelopEen Page 2 ctpplication -) Dat e Date ,-7 -fa rhe undersilned- representative of tbe apglicaat bcreby certifiesthat he is faailiar rith tbe ;lrocedural-iequirenents i,t-iiiappli.cable City 9s!i6ansg5. APp rcan Fee Ot{n Date Application Received Application Fee Paiil City Receipt No. . This -Application will be coosidercd.by thBoald of Adjustnents and Appeals at tLeirnee ti ng . c PlanniaE Connissioa./ !.ILING INSTR,UCTTONS : ?his agprication must be conpreted in furr and be typewritten bicl'earl'y priated and must be lcconpanied by a1r iato'riiiion-"na Ei??: r:gyired by appticable City-OrdinanEe provislons.--B"for.rrrrng .nrs appltcation, you should confer rith tbe city plannerto deternine the specific-ordiuaace aad proceduril-riq;lr;"ot"applicable to you! application. The. undersigned lrereby certifies that the applicant has beenauthorized to Eake rhi.s application for the- iroperty teriindes cri bed CITY ()F CH[!IH[SSE[I 690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MTNNESOTA ss317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937_5739 M EI{ORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE : SUBJ: ,) FIoor plans of de t ermi ne cod e existing bui Iding mustcompliance.be prov i ded to Jc Ann OIsen, Senior planner Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official May 15, 1990 Planning Case 8?-1, Site plan Review 2t Two hand i cap parking be provided adjacent hand i cap spaces. spaces are required. Ato, but not encroaching curb into cut nust the 3) Type III erosion control requried. (+r- \ \ \ I I t \ l i+\ ir 'l h 1Ertti [. I I t I I I\ f I ,I I I l. ffEiiiii I, I t t I t \ I , ffi TII I illk! ;H3F! n =E E h ltt;Iii it \, l I I I l t lir li: Itii I I I !ri r; I I r_i ! I I t I I ti I I lI I I J I t I i tt I t. I I I I II t E H FI Ir .:-==,+.iCP^7 II / II I I I I I I I I t t I I \ I I I I I I , . I \ t \ I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I .1,: t I z:. d0r-o. I i i aIt, dtti , t : t r n 5 P 2-{x a HFm fl!fiiIfflti !I I T u I L E n E II T!E ffi ,aA t-3 l;l I { ? $ m I ,: !i f-. - I III' -F T I ri M'irdustrial infrrmatixl cqffds : It ! !. I , : a,: LAE B.E$€sS PAFK it , Cg|sudd\ h.- r !:' .i z.I--{r H 4I .: ,tq il I N ',' ii{ liil rIII i I T r !r -III ffi ltf 7a i I il[ II E :::=eCc*rdLh, { g I tiiil v q _n eZ. E m t;E l!i rEl t. ll I fi n ililIfiililil ilrffiflfli ruffiffi ilffiflflI ilflnflil lI l |I ffi iill tfifl ffiilfl iffiil I tilti ill fit flt ll H rlII I I il{ il T IE [fl Lti fl il u ilt flt HI il tll il ,ill lI I I I fl il 1[ lfii itrilil ilil titIl lll E {il flI ltril titl llillr fiil tilil llilI ilil[ ilililil1 fltilil 11ililil ilfiililt tfliltil tsl B t il t E t/to dr9 m EEUEE'FIIIIUE IlEIEllflillE EIiIEIIEIIIIEH lEi!!l|!iltEtl EiiEE]EililiE IEEEI]]il[E ffiiilt!illlH !lllEtffiill liliiitiilill iEilfliltEII t--=-t LTM l_:fr- =Dr=" fJ.=t F F HI a 5 5it Fr lr'! d IF ! I ,I ! I II lr F:+ s! tlttz e, ltt ffi IIi I ;T tl I li t I I li; iEiilir inbrmathn cmtds r I illl I L :t Coocrdo, fgPARI(L^KEs EI.EII€sS I . ,! a : I L I tL5 Due to the size of this report, not all attachments have been copied in your report. If you uish to recei.ve the attachments notcopied, please call Vicki. As alrrays, the City Council will receive the entire report when theiten is scheduted for your revielr. CITY OF EHINHISSEN P.C. DATE: June 5, 1990 C.C. DATE: June 25, 1990 CASE NO: 87-3 PUD Pre red b : O1sen,/v I STAFF REPORT Fz C)J(L 0- s E ldF @ Preliurinary Plat for 159 Single Family Lots Lake Susan Ei1ls ltlest PUD 4th Addition PROPOSAI: LOCATION:West Side of Powers Boulevard, one-quarter mile south of Hwy. Argu r 813 F arm eveloPment edar Avenueton, MN 55024 approxima!e 1y 5 SD3c ing PRESENT ZONIT{IG: ACREAGE: DENSITY ! ADJACENT ZONING AND LATD USE: IIAIER AND SEIYER! PEYSICAL CEARAC.: PUD-R, Planned Unit Deve lopment-Re s iden t i 85.6 (gross) 53.73 (net) 3.0 units/acre (net) PUD-R; single fanily PUD-R; vacant Lake Susan PUD-R, single fanily and vacant - Available to site trhe site contains rolling hills sith thenajority of it ti lled. Residential Low Density APPTICANT: 1990 LAND USE PLAN: N- s- E- w- 8-12 ,$l1 € BG RD t I \ -l .LarE-. ri : a i a j { ) , l I _l lt Ii 5 I A2,l 9 I l RO AD .lop: 'I J n Pt,D-R I RSF v Lake June Page Susan lli1l s5, I990 2 Section 20-518 of the City Code requires the applicant to receive development stage approval of the PUD following general concepLapproval. The development stage is essentiatly the preliminaryplat of the site (Attachment *1). REFERRAL AGENCIES City Engineer Park and Recreation Commission Attachment *2 Attachnent t3 BACKGROUND The City Council reviewed the PUD concept plan on lTune 29, 1987,and approved the concept plan as a PUD with certain conditions(Attachment #4). The developer subsequently revised the conceptplan to aaldress the Councilr s conditions. The planning Commission and City Council held a joint meeting on JuIy 27,1987, to review the overall PUD philosophy and specifically, theLake Susan HiIls West PUD proposal. The City CounciL recommendedcertain changes (increase Outlot H to a five acre park) and againapproved the concept plan as a PUD. The City Council felt that it was beneficial to have the 299 acresite developetl as a PUD rather than as a subdivision. As a pUD the site will be reviewed as one coordinated development enablingthe city to require adeguate park facilities and to require logi:ca1 staging of roail improvements and utilities. Since the pUDwill be developed in separate preliminary plats, the city anddeveloper negotiated a concept plan agreement to ensure that allof the conditions wiLl be provideil for each phase. On October 5, L987. the City Council approved lhe land use plan amendment, wetland alteration permit, rezoning and prel,iminaryplat for 76 single family lots for Lake Susan HiIIs $res! lstAddition (Attachment *5). At that time, the City Council approved to rezone the property fron RSF, R-4, R-8, and R-12, to PUD-R and to amend the land use plan to correspond to t.he dif-ferent areas of density approved as part of the PUD Concept PIan. The City Council also approvedl a wetland alteration permit' forthe construction of a holding pond within a Class B wetland andpreliminary plat for the First eddition of Lake Susan Eills Westcontaining 76 single family lots on the east and west side of Powers Boulevard. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Iake susan Hills June 6, 1990 Page 3 On Augiust 28, 1989, the City Council approved the final plat for Lake Susan Hi11s west 2nd and 3rd Addition. The Lake susan llills West 2nd Addition contained 21 single fanily lots and the 3rd Addition contained 55 single fanily lots (AttachDent *5). PreL ininarv PIat The appticant is proposing to plat the remainlng land under the Lake susan Hills west PUD located on the vest side of Powers Boulevard (AttachDent #7). The prelininary plat contains 159single fanily lots. The average lot size is L4,723 tguare feet with the largest lot being 25,350 aquare feet and the smallest lot being 12,ooo. Eighty of the lots (50*) contain 15,000 square feet or Dore and 79 (5ot) of the lots contain less than 15,ooo square feet. The PUD ordinance requires that at teast 50* of the single fanilyIots contain 15,000 square feet or Dore and that the average lot size shall not be belou 13,500 square feet. The PUD ordinance also requires a minirnum of 80 feet at the building getback fine (30feet) and that no lot shall be snaLler than 12,OOO square feet. The proposed preliuinary plat has proposed changes over the approved PUD concept Plan. Due to the topography and the soil ofthe site, the applicant is realigning some of the streets and adding 4 additional lots to this section over what was originally approved. The applicant is also proposing to add sone additional open space and remove sone of the previously approved parkland. The original PUD concept plan for the whole Lake Susan Hi1ls West developnent perroitted a total of 411 slngle fanily lots. with thefirst 3 phases, the applicant has developed a total of 152 singlefanily lots with 249 single fanily lots renaining which can beplatted as part of future phases. Therefore, as long as theapplicant meets all of the other requirenents of the PUD ordinance,it is possible for additional tots to be added in this phase aslong as the developer understands that no nore than a total of 411single fanily lots will be pernitted throughout the rhole PUD. streets The 159 single fanily lots rrilt be senriced by extension of Lake Susan Hills Drive and tuo other streets (unnaned) coning south froE Heron Drive. The proposed streets and cul-de-6acs provide therequired right-of-uay. The lots are proposed to be developed inthree phases as shorm on the prelirninary plat sheet. The firstphase is located in the northwest corner of the addition and isserviced by an extension south of Heron Drive. phase 1 is alsoproviding future access for undeveloped property to the westbetueen Lots 5 and 6, Block 8. All streets that are proposed forfuture connection will have to be provided with a turnaround vhich Lake Susan Hills June 5, 1990 Page 4 neets city standards sith a barricade and slgnage stating that itis a ternporary cul-de-sac and uill be a future road coinection.This is to ensure that all future home buyers are adequatetynotified of the ultinite street system. The ienaining two -ptrases will provide an additional connec€ion to porers Bourevlrd frln tne PUD and internal connecti.on betueen phases 1 and 2. Ihe street grades in this. developnent range from 0.5t up to 8.otgrade uhich exceeds the cityrs oidinance. The excessive- grade isdue-to the steep slope adj acent to County Road 12. Howevei, stafffeels that the .grade could be reduced to neet City Codes (7.0*)uithout severe inpact on the proposed plan. Gradino/Dra inaoe The naj ority of the site is proposed to be graded. The nostcrltical slopes are in the reaf lots of the proiosed deveropnent.special slope stabilization measures and eroiio-n control nei"ure.will be required to stabirize the sLopes, i.e. wood riueiuranrets. Th. applicant has expressed a desire to grade the entiredevelopnent at this tirne to save on nobilization costs and providethe county with approxinately 11o,ooo cubic yards of naterial forthe future expansi.on of co. Rd. 17 between Lyntn Boulevard and r,akeDrive l{est. It is Carver County Highway -Oepartnent r s intent toopen bids for the rough grading oi co.- Rd. 12 near the end of ,fune.The County will be entering into a Borrou Agreenent with theapplicant for the naterial. The entire developnent generarly slopes downrrard to the southwest.The west and southwest portions of the site are 1orrer in elevationwhile higher Lands are present to the northeast and east. Thedrainage plan continues this drainage pattern with a series ofstorD serrers draining into one sedinent basin located towards theniddle of the developnent. The exact configuration of the sediroentbasin is somewhat unknonn at this tiroe due to future park uses,i.e. -ba11 fields, soccer fields, trails and so on, therlfore, theapplicant uiIl. be rrorking with staff to provide a sedirnent basinthat sould least impact the proposed future park uses. The proposed drainage for the easterJ.y portion of the project isdLrected through a series of atorm sewer pipes and disch-argLs intothe ditch along Co. Rd. 17. The ditch follorrs Co. Rd. 17 iouth toa culvert underneath the road into a uetland which drains into LakeSusan. The applicant may be required to provide a sediment basinin the area to meet the flow and water quality requirenents of theCity and watershed. As. in the past, the exact stbrn sewer designcan be ,rf ine tunedtl during the plan and specification review stalealong uith any Watershed concerns. Iake susan HiIIs June 5, 1990 Page 5 The proposed storro seirer pipes ahould be sized to accor0nodate a 10year storn event. The proposed sedinent basin appears to be sized to Deet the cityrs codes as far as Etorage and runoff requirenents. Erosion control The plans propose a filter blanket enconpassing a naJority of thesite. rn addition to the proposed filter blanket along theper.ineters, Tlrpe II erosion control fence should be j.nstalled around any and all proposed drainage/sedinent basins in thedevelopDent. The entire site should be reseeded and mulched innedlately after grading is conpleted. Landscapinq The ordinance requires 1 tree per 1ot to be provided by thedeveloper. As part of the PUD approval, the appllcant proposed increases in landscaping at entrances and along the boulevards (AttachDent *8). A1so, the PUD contract required S150,/1ot for landscaping by the developer (Attachnent #9). The PUD was also approved with the condition to preserve existing vegetation as bestpossible. The applicant nust provide a landscaping plan uhich provides for the 1 tree per lot and the additional landscaping as approved with the PUD Concept Plan. In addition, there are sone large areas of nature vegetation located on the site. staff uouldIike these areas highlighted on the plat and for the applicant to shor hou areas not inpacted by streets or building pads will bepreserved. Tree renoval plans vill be required as part of thebuilding pernit as was done with the first phase. Lots 11 and 13, Block 4 contain a deep ravine within each 1ot. These ravines are heavily vegetated and serive as habitat forseveral forros of wildlife. As proposed, there f,rill be a largeportion of the ravine filled and nuch of the vegetation renoved(see grading plan). Staff is reconmending that the applicant puIIback the cul-de-sac rrhich would allow the building pads to befurther renoved fron ttte ravines and reguire less filling of theareas and renovaL of vegetation. Also, staff is reconnending thatthe applicant provide a registered engineerrs report on ioi1s,footi-ngs and structural design and a registered engineer gradingand drainagg plan -for the City Engineer and Building Oepirtuentapproval prior to i.ssuance of a bullding perrnit on Iota liand 13,Bl.ock 4. Park and Recreation The Park and Recreation Connission reviewed the proposed plat on 't,ay 22, L99O. The planning Comnission reviewed whether or not to \ accept the alditional open space between Blocks 5 and 6 as parkland'and to credit the applicant with a reduction in park fe6s. The The PUD contains a large percentage of lots with snall squarefootage. In the past, the City has received several variancerequests for decks on lots of thLs size. l,Iost of the tine the horoeovner already as a patio door installed and then finds a deckcannot be installed vithout a variance. To help prevent thissituation, staff is reconnending that each building pLrmit with apatio door shou a deck to verify that it can Deet setbacks. ff thesetbacks cannot be maintained, the patio door shouLd be removed orrelocated. STAFF RECOIT'II,TENDATION Staff recommends thenotion:Planning Coomisslon adopt the following L,ake Susan Hills June 6, 1990 Page 5 additional open space contains poor soils and a large percentage ofthe area sill be used for stortr water ponding (Attachrent #10).Since the additional open space is not iuitabll ior park use, tirePark and RecreatLon ConmissLon agreed to accept it as parkland butno additional credit toward park dedication fees shall be granted. The applicant is also changing aone of the park boundaries on thesouth side of the plat to remove parkland and add it into singlefanily lots (Attachnent f11). The park and Recreation Conmissionagreed to allow the park boundary to be shifted along the lots westof the park access but all lots east of the park access nust renainas originally approved rith the concept plan. Ehis results in soneof. the lots going belor l:5rOOO square feet with the overall platgoing below 50t tots with 15,OOo square feet or nore. Theapplicant will have to amend the plat to naintain the pUD requirenents. The parkland is designated on the prelininary plat as rparklandr. This property Eust be designated as an outLot ind plattLd as partof lh9.first phase. A condition of pUD Concept plan approval wasto-dedicate parkland to the City as the area around it- developedand for the developer to grade the site (Attachroent #12). Sidewalks wiII be required along the internal Etreets as shown onAttachnent #13. All of the access points to the parkland betrreenlots nust be either paved and/or elgned that they are public accesspoints. The ponding area that is proposed between Bfocks 5 and 6 should berelocated to the north with overfLow drainage piped to the south.Where the pond is currently propoaed will cut off access to thepark fron the north. If the pond is moved to the north, it willprovide free and dry aceess to both sections of parkland. Lot Size Iake susan Hills June 6, 1990 Page 7 nThe Planning Conmlssion recomDends approval of Lake susan Hills West PUD 4th Addition for 159 single fanily lots as shosn on the plans dated truay 10, 199orr, with the following conditions: 1. A11 streets that are proposed for future connection shall be provided with a turnaround which meets city standards with a barricade and aigmage stating that it is a tenporary cuI-de- sac and viII be a future road connection. The applicant shall provide one tree per lot and additional landscaping along the entrances and boulevards as part of the PUD approval and the developer shall provide $150 per lot for landscaping. The applicant shall provide a plan illustrating large areas of mature vegetation located on the site. Areas of nature vegetation not iupacted by streets or building pads sha11 be preserved uith tree removal plans reguired as part of the building permits. 2 3 4 5. 6. 7 I 9. The appl icant shalI pu1l 11-13, Block 4 to reDove areas. back the cul-de-sac servicing Iotsthe building pads fron the ravine The applicant shal1 provide a registered engineerrs report onsoiIs, footings and structural design and a registered engineerts grading and drainage plan for the City Engineer andBuilding Departnent approval prior to issuance of a buildingpernit on I6ts 11 and 13, Block 4. An aDended prelininary plat naintaining with at least 50t of the lots uith 15,ooo square feet or nore shall be provided. Designate the parkland as an outlot which uill be platted aspart of the first phase. All of the access points to the parkland betrreen single fanj.lylots shal} eitber be paved and or signed that they are public access points. The ponding area, as proposed betueen Block 5 and 5 t ithin theparkland, shall be relocated to the north with overflowdrainage piped to the south. Park grading: The developer, at itrs sole cost, shall gradethe aprk areas in accordinace with a tinetable and plans to befurnished by the city. The City silI develop park plans vhenthe final park boundaries have been deteruined. 10. Park Access: The approved PUD plan provided access off of 9. Iake susan Hills June 6, 1990 Page 8 11. a 12. 13. 14. 15. 15. t7. 18. both looped streets. Such continues to be required and shouldbe shorn as parkland dedication, not sinp).y easenents. Trails/Sidewalks: The developertrentprovide trails/sidenalks as follows:shall be required to Five foot ride concrete sideualks shall be constructedalong thru streets as ahowrt on the attached plan.Sideralka shall be coDpleted at the tiue slreetinproveroents are constructed. A 20 foot wide trail easenent alongPowers Boulevard shall be dedicatedpurposes. b thefor west side offuture trail c. The above trails/sidewalks satiafy the Cityrs traildedication requirenents and therefore, no traif fee sha11be charged. The applicant will be required to pay 5ot of park dedicatlonfees. There will be no trail fee required. AII building pemits will patio doors as part of the buildingplans, sha1l provide a survey shorring that a deck can b6installed without a variance to the setback. The applicant shall enter into a deveJ.opuent contract rrith theCity and provide the necessary financial securities toguarantee conpletion of the inproveroents. The .applicant shall obtain and conply uith all permitsrequired by the DNR, Watershed District and Office of theCarver County Engineer. The applicantts engineer shall provide the City Engineer withcalcuLations _verifying the stora Eewer, waternain and sanitarysewer pipe sizing. At intersections rhere the street grades exceed 3t, a landingzone vith a street grade of 3t or less for a ninimun distanceof 200 feet shall be used. After grading, all disturbed areaE 6ha11 ir"-ediately be seeded and mulched to prevent erosion. All slopes greater than 3 toI wil.l need to be stabilized uith rood fiber blankets oreguivalent. qrpe II erosion control shalI be added along the proposed siltfence adjacent to sediment basin and ravine areis.- 19. Iake Susan Hi1ls June 6, 1990 Page 9 20. 2t. 22. All street and utility inprovements shall conforn to theCityrs standards for urban construction. Construction plans and speclfications 6hall be 6ubr0itted to the city Engineer for review and approval. The applicant shall reduce street grades to conply with city Ordinance throughout the developuent (naxinun 7t). Prior to assigning street naDes, the applicant shall consultsith Public safety for recoDrDendations. r ATTACHUENTS city code. Memo from Dave llempel dated ltlay 31, 1990. Park and Recreation report dated llay 22, L99o.city council nlnutes dated June 29, 1987.city council uintues dated october 5, 1987.City Council ninutes dated Augtust 28, 1989. Plan showing phases of PUD rrest of Powers Bouelvard. PUD approved landscape plan. section froro PUD contract. Plan shosing proposed pond. PIan showing nei, park boundaries.section froD PUD contract. Siderralk focation.L€tter from Danlel Dauffenbach dated uay 29, L99o. Application. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. L2. 13. 14. 15. CITY OF EH[NH[ESEN I{EUORNiIDUIU !O: iIo Ann Olsen, Sr. planner FROM: David C. Eenpel , Sr. Engineering Techni"i^n @( DATE: May 3I , 1990 SUBJ: PUD Plan Amendment for Lake Susan Eills90-14 Land Use Reviert 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 y west of exi stingof lanile is n throughout the site. Int1y exclusively clay Ioamea anil are suitable forareas, the soils varye plesent along withd water is slightly higher1 types. These1 corrections and The site consists of 63.7 acres of land lying imnediatelPo\rers Boulevard (County Road 17) and just south of theLake Susan Hil1s west 2nd and 3ril Additions. The tractis characterized by generally rolling terrain. The sitmostly open and covered with grasses, weeds and crop residue. Sdne areas were til1ed last falI anal have no vegetation. Woodeilvegetation is present mostly in one sma1l wooded area in the eastportion of the tract and other random locations. The applicant has had soil borings takeupland areas, soils encountered are rnogwhich are typical for the Chanhassen arthe anticipated contruction. In Iorrersomewhat. Silty clays and silt loam arorganic soi1s. In this area, the groun due to the low lying conditions and soiIinitations are couectable through soifoundation designs. Grad i ng The najority of the site is proposed to be graated. The most cri-tical slopes are in the rear lots of the propoaed developnent.Special slope st,abilization tneasures and erosion control measureswill be requireil to stabilize the alopes, i.e. wood fiberblankets. tz The applicant has expressed a desire to grade the entire development at this time to save on nobilization costs andprovide the County with approximately 110r000 cubic yards ofmaterial for the future expansion of County Road 17 between LlrnanBoulevard and Lake Drive West. It is Carver County EighwayDepartmentrs intent to open bids for the rough grading of County Road 17 near the end of June. The County will be entering into a Borrow Agreement with the applicant for the material . (See Attachment No. I) Staff is proceeding with inplenenting a development policy requiring as-built grading information in sensitive areas inCfuaing but not linited to the following: sedinent basins, retlands, bluff lines and natural water courses. The applicant shall be advised of this forth coming policy in preparation of final p1at. Jo Ann Olsen May 31 , 1990 Page 2 Erosion Control The entire development generally sloPes downirard to the southwest. The west and southwest Portions of the site are lower in elevation while higher lands are present to the northeast and east. The ilrainage plan continues this drainage pattern with a series of storm sewers draining into one sediment basin located towards the middle of the development. The exact configuration of the sediment basin is somewhat unknown at this time due to future park uses, i.e. ball fields, soccer fields, trails and so on, theiefore, the applicant will be working with staff to proviile a sediment basin that would .' least impact the proposed future park uses. The proposed drainage for the easterly portion of the project is directeil through a series of storm sewer pipes and discharges into the ditch along County Road 17. The ditch follorrs County Road 17 south to a culvert underneath the roail into a wetlantl which drains into Lake susan. The applicant may be required to provide a sediment basin in the area to meet the flow and raterquality requirements of the City and watershed. As in the Past,the exact storm seeer design can be 'fine tuned' during the plan and specification review stage along with any watershed concerns. Drainaqe The proposed storm sewer pipes should be sized to acconnodate a I0-year storm event. The proposed sediment basin appears to be sized to meet the City's codes as far as storage and runoff requilements. Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewe! plan for this develoPment Proposes connecting to sanitary sewer Lines that rrere extendeal with the previous Lake susan Hills iilest 3rd Addition and Phase I Addition. The plans The plans propose a filter blanket enconpassing a najority of the site. fn laaition to the proposed filter blanket along the perimeters, T!pe-2 erosion control fence should be installed iround any'and-al1 proposetl dra inage/sediment basins in the development. The entire site should be reseeded and mulched immetliitely after grading is completed. Hunicipal water service to the devetopur.ent is available through aseries of connections from the previous Lake Susan Eil1s lilestdevelopments. In addition, the seconil phase is proposed to belooped back into the City's existing I8-inch trunk water mainalong the west boulevard of County Road 17. The pipe sizes inthis development range fron six to eight inch in dtiameter. Theinitial PUD ptan indicated a 10-inch trunk main extending fromPof,ers Boulevard through the second phase into Lake Susan HillsWest first phase. The applicant nay be required to increase thediameter of the erater main in some areas of this developBent toprovide adequate flows. This will be determined during the planand specification review stage when the applicantrs engineer hasprovided the City Engineer ryith calculations verifying waterpressure and flow rates. inilicate the entire development wiLl be serviced through a gra-vity 8-inch diamet,er PVC sewer m,in. The initial pUD planindicated a trunk sewer line extending from the east side of County Road 17. Streets The street right-of-ways in this development are consistent withthe previous PUD agreement. The right-of-ways range from 50 feeton the interior streets to 60 feet wide on the main thoroughfarestreets. The street grades in this development range from 0.5*up to 8.0t grade which exceeds the Cityrs ordinance. Theexcessive grade is due to the steep slope adjacent to County Road17. Eowever, staff feels that the grade coulil be reduced to meetCity codes (7.0t) without severe impact on the proposed plan. fhe plans fail to address trail and sidewalk construction. ThetraiL and sidewalk construction can be addressed during plans and specif ications review. Recomnended Conditions The applicant shall enter into a Development Contract withthe City and provide the necessary financial eecurities toguarantee completion of the improvements. The applicant shall obtain antl comply with all permitsrequired by the DNR, Watelshed and office of the Carver County Engineer. 1 2 Jo Ann Olsen l.lay 31 , 1990 Page 3 Water Irrain Jo Ann Olsen rrtay 31 , 19 9 0 Page 4 3 lms The applicant's engineer sha1l provide the City Engineer with calculltions verifying the storm sewer, water main antl sanitary sewer piPe si zing. At intersections where the street grades landing zone with a stleet grade of 3t or distance of 200 feet sha1l be used. a a minimum c: Gary G. warren, CitY Engineer exceed 3*, Iess for 5. After grading, all disturbed areas shall imediately be seedeal and mulched to prevent erosion. A11 slopes greater than 3 to I will need to stabilizeil with woocl fiber blankets or eguivalent. 6. lYpe-2 erosion control shal1 be atlded along with the proposed silt fence aaljacent to seCliment basin antl ravine areas. 7. All street and utility improvenents shall conform to the Cityrs standarals for urban construction. Construction plans anct- specifications sha1l be submitted to the City Engineer for review and aPProval . 8. The applicant sha1l reduce street grades to comply with City ordinance throughout the development (rnaximum 7t) - izttt O I / CARV€R COUNTY COURTHOUSE 600 EAST 4TH STR EET CHASKA, MINNESOTA 553r 8 &.lt &t,8t?4t PUSL IC WORXS OEPARTM ENT (612).r{8-3435 April 26, 1990 Brian W. Olson Argus Developnent, Inc. 18133 Cedar Avenue South Farnington, l{N 55024 Re: CSAH 17 ( Chanhassen ) Dear llr. Olson: Sin Iy, Rog r M. cus son, PEcounty Engineer RHG/Cjr This letter is sent to inforn you that the Carver County Board ofconmissioners on April 24th did adjust the 19.90 highway iepartnentconstruction program to include the rough graaing -ot -CSIH Lzbetl,een Lyman Bourevard and Lake Drive west to acomrnodate a futurefour-Iane roadway. This action rras taken in response to the letterdated April 9, 1990, from ur. Uolinaro of pioneer Engineeringoutlining your companyrs conmitrnent to provide IlO,ooo cu6ic yaraiof rnaterial for this project. The Carver County Highway_ Department, s present intent is to openbids for this grading projec€ near the end of June. To neet tiisobjective we wiIl inraediately begin to prepare the necessarydocuments. one of these docunents wirl be c bolrow agreenent witiryour colDpany for the 110,000 cubic yards of soil you are providing.BiII t{ecknan of our office witl - be contactin! you aibout thisagreenent in the near future. Also, BilI wi1l be iesponsible forthe preparation of the other construction docunents fof this countyproject.. Therefore, please contact either Bi1l. or nyself regardin!any questions you may have. Thank you for your cooperation in advancing this cooperative effortto inprove CSAH 17 in the area of your developnent. your continuedwillingness to keep us inforned about the status of yourdevelopnent project would be tauch appreciated. ae. 6 ry COUNTY Of CAPVEP Alntu Prr 0[I 0r^ot[!!!!$tH APR 3 0 1990 tt0llltiRlllt 0EPI. 6/ttG. Gary warren, Chanhassen city fngi nee hrr*.lnavr// ' fro9 Alli'/notiP Actkn/Eewl Or',ctrunity Emdo*r PRC DAIE: 5-22-90 CC DATE: SIETSEITIA:k + ( S'IAFF REPORT Fz () J(L (L E UJ tsU' Planned Unit DevelopDent ADendDent for Irake Susan Hills $est for 159 single Fanily Lots on 63 .7 Acres On the nest side of Powers Boulevard (CR 17) Just qouth of existing Iake susan Hills west 2nd and 3rd Additions PROPOSAL: ISCATION: APPLICA}flP:Argus DevelopDentAttn: Brian olsoh 18133 Cedar Ave. South Farmington, UN 55024 PRESENT ZONING: PUD-R, Planned Urban DevelopDent, Residential AATACENT ZONING AND I,AND USE:N - PUD-R S - A-2, Agricultural Estate E - PUD-RI{ - A-2 EXISTING PARKS:lhe PUD Agreenent calla for parks within thi6 develoPDent i a 9+ acre sl-te on the north end, a 4acre sj-te along CR 17, a 6+ acre linear parcelalong the vest aide of Lake Susan, and an 18 acresite located uithin this addition. w" CITY OF EHINHISSEN ?puth,Wz. ACREAGE: 63.7 AcreE' Pp- Rutnl,,Lake uay Page usan Hi11s West PUD Anendnent , 1990 BACXGROI'ND This proposal is part of a 3OOt acre PUD development which ties onboth sides of CR 17 aouth of Iake Drive. As part of the approvaLprocess, a PUD agreement uas executed (attached) which outlines thepark and trail requirements and the dedication credit for such.Specifically, the developer is required to dedicate 4 parcels ofparkland and to rough grade on them, for rhich he will receive 50tcredit toward park dedication fees. Park atrA Re roatLoE coDnLssLor uDdla te (5-22-991 : The Park and s 22 2 I The developer is requestlng that the pUD be anended to reconfigurethe layout of the lots and to provide addltional park property.fnitially it was proposed that the addltional property Ue deaicatearsithout further conpensation, houever, last ieeli stJff received aletter fron Argus Development requesting the remaining 5Og bewalved. The 3.8 acres of proposed additional parkLand contains soil.sunsuitable to support houses. The plan shorra pedestrian access tothe new. parkland fron the north and the uest, and to the originalpark site at a north central point (see attached nap). Thedeveloper is also proposing to Dove the boundary linL' of theoriginal park tand so as to add area to the lots along the northedge. As this is the narrorrest section of the park, tuch shouldnot be approved. The plan includes a sBa1l holding pond on the south end of theproposed new parkland which in reality, according to ourEngineering Department's calculations, wiII have to besignificantly larger. Such would block the pedestrian access tothe original portion of the park. Staff uould suggest that thepond be moved to the northern portion of the site and that a bernbe built to acconmodate a trail that uould high and dry. This is not a park deficient area. The bulk of the proposed newparkl.and will contain a large holding pond. It would be difficultto justify the expenditure of park funds for property with 1initedpark developnent potential and in an area that is not tackingparkland. Additionally, if such a credit was given, there would beno funds available for park developnent. RECO}IITTENDATION It is the reconmendation of this office to approve the site planwith the sane conditions outlined in the Pt D agreenent. If anyadditional property iE availabLe, euch should be accepted, however,no additional credit toward park dedlcation fees Bhould be grantedas this is not a park deficient area. Recreation Conmission discussed thls iten at their last neeting.Although the Conmission felt that the additional park properiywould be desirable, they could not justify spending funds- on suchas this is not a park deficient area. They felt that they couldaccept the property if dedicated, however, uere not willing to Iake Susan Hllls l9est PUD Anendnent lqay 22, L99O Page 3 alIow an additional credit toward the park dedication fee. The developer asked that allowances be Dade to allow a portion oforlginal parkland, along the pipeline easement, to be included inlot area. As this area is very narrow, the CoDmission requestedthat west of the park entrance not be infringed upon, however, such would be pernissible along the 6lope. It uas also noted that the ponding areas should not block pedestrian access to the park. The Park and Recreation Connisslon recoumended to approve the amendments to the PUD ulth the eame conditlons outlined in the PUDagreenent. They speclfically noted that no additional credittosard park dedication fees ahould be allorred if additionalparkland is dedicated, due to the need for funds to developexisting parkland. The PUD Agreement conditlons include the folLowing for this segrnentof the PUD: 1. Palt1rDd Dodicatr.oD! fhe developer ehall dedicate the 18.1 acre OutLot F for park purposes at the tine the final plat is signed by the city. ff additional parkland is dedicated, such should be shown as an outlot and also conveyed at the tine thefinal plat is signed. 2.PalX cradlDg! The developer, at itts sole cost, sha1l grade the park areas in accordance with a tine tabl.e and plans to be furnished by the City. The City uill develop park plans whenthe final park boundaries have been deternined. 3. 4 ParI lccelrc The approved PUD plan provided access off ofboth looped streets. Such continues to be required and should be shown as parkland dedication, not sinply easenents. Park Crodlt: The developer shall be given a credit of 5Ot ofthe park dedication fee per dwelling unit in the plat for the conveyance of the above described land to the City. Trails,/Sideualts: The developer shall be required to providetrails/sideiralks as follows: 5 ft. wide concrete sidewalks shall be constructed alongthru streets as showrr on the attached plan. sideualksshall be coDpleted at the tine street inprovements areconstructed. 5. a b.A 20 ft. ylde trail easement along Powers Boulevard shall be dedicated purposes. thefor west side offuture trail The above trails/sideualks satisfy the Cityrs traitdedication requirenents and therefore no trail fee shallbe charged. c. I I I tl S-,b z P a-Is o Gr T ,t I t E It I T F E , -1 3 +r I -J --t I! -.1 (r- y'.,. I 6 cc. RD. t7C'I--l ,h'. ru -- rl ilirtlr i-rlr I I I I o PLNTIIID UIITT DRgI LPrlm loettxsm AcREEl,lEtiIT, datcd lt@elber 15, 1987, Detyeen the gtTt OF CEAI{IIASSEN, a tll,nnecota uurlcl.pal oorporatton (the ,Cltyr), .tra ,tXE AUSAII EIIJS, a lllnneaotr gcneral partaarablp, rnd tlllBs l. CUnRy ltrd BlnaARf CURRY, busbanal ana rlfe (th. ,Dcn lolrGrr) t. Lqu.tC lor ?l.!!.A Ellt D.v.loDr.!t ltrpsc?rl. Ihe Devcloper baa arkod tbc clty to rlpronc r pl.nD.d unlt D.v.loIDGnt to be knonn ae ,I4XE SUSAI! ErlJS IESI pODt (tbe ,Drvclopuentr) on the land legally deecrlbed on the .ttrched D.lriblt ,Ar. 2. DlrD.a Eatt Dovolopl.lt Colo.Dt llrp!fir!. llbc Clty bcreby grants general Concept Plan .pprwal of thc pl,rn attach.d aa Erhlblt ,B'. Approval 1,3 .ubj ect to ttre follorlng: d.velolrDent andl final rtage approval, a negati.ve declaratlon of the EAW, coDpltance ulth th. BAW revleu findinge and coupllance rlth the te:il8 andl condltlone of thl: lErocDcnt. ExcGpt as lodllledt borrl,n, each plat .ball rr.o bG lubj.ct, to the rtandardB of thc cl.ty'r tonlng and aubdlvtrlon ordlnanoea r8 lay be alandcd frou tbe to tbc. !. Dolrltt rDd Ur.. ,lDr lollolng drneltlor arc approrbate and rubJcct to changes ' l. Btnglo trltly Ao.td.ntid. ,ltbt totrl Drabcr of rlngle taatly lotr ln thc develop.nt rhlll Dot .xc..d att. trc.Dt .. rodlf!.ed berela, rlngre tallly totr rhall b. d.vGtqr.d ln eccbrdancc vltb tbc \urcr, rtandardr, and regulrolcntr of th. gSl tonl,ng Dlrtrtct. IB. lrutttglr taalty (Etth D.n fty ncrl.dontlal). tlto : derrelolrDent rharl provtdc a rlnlnl ol 21.5 .cr.3 of htgb denrlty l-lultlprc fantry rcaldcntlal unltr. tDr total nrEbGr ot duclllnlEagtEsf -1 iloy t 9 t387i11116187 . @orcnrnnrsserv - t .- a ( ( hlgb tlenslty tultiple faully resl.dentlal propertlT rhall not Gxceed 325, or a dansity greater tban lz.ir unlte per acre. lxc.pt as rodiliedl hereLn, tbe developnent of the Dtgh ilcnctty rultlple faully roeldential rbau be Ln accordance ultb tbe u3aa, ltaldarde, and regulrolentB of the R-12 Zonlng Dlstrlct. C. Iultlplo taltty (lttred tlGA&D D.nstty B.sld.ntlsl). IDe developnent rball provldlo a rlntnra ol 23.6 aqr.. of rkoil rrdtru denslty reeldcntl,al unltr. lthe total nurbcr of dnclling turlta of llxedt red.lnn denslty residentl.al property rhall not rxcrcd 22,', or a density Ereater ttran 9.3 unlta per acre. Exccpt ar lodlfled herel.n, thc developnent of the llred lediru d.ntlty rsal.dentlal rhall be Ln accordance ulth the usee, atandat{3, and regulrcucntc of the R-8 zonLng District. a. ?rrt!. thc D.velopcr.hall deill,cato to thc Clty Outlot A (18.1 rcrcE), outlot c (9.t rcr.3), ortlot E (3.9 !cr..), rrrd ortlot E. I credlt of 5.7 acrol tor Dark d.diortton rtrl Do gtvon for outlot E. unrree otb.nl3e rcguirod by tno clty, cotw.y.nc.. of th. Dert lrnat thau bG ladr utren thc tl,nar plat, rtrroln a perl lr locatedl, tr rlgnrei Dy the clty. lIbe laDd .b!11 De prettrd !t outlotr uc tranrterred to thc ctty by uarranty deed. !t!bo Dcrrcl.oprr, rt lt .ola co.t, .Dru graa. tbo lrnd foi tDe Clty tn accordancr ultb r thctablr uA Dlrn to D. turalebad Dy tho clty. trto Dcvclog'.r rball Dr glvro e c.alt of sot ot thr parr too prr drolttng unlt tn th. tht tor tb. corv.ylnc. ot the .bov. dcrcrtb.d latld to thr Cttt?. tlb. Drlrno. ot tbo DarL d.dlcrtlon t .3 Bharl bo patd tn carL ln an uourt rtrc !t tb. tb. r.qutr.at Dy ctty ordlnancc end pollclc ln rlfoct rrtrn ll,nal plat ar. approvod. -2- ( 5. tlartl .!6 tl6.rrll DG.loF.trt. lb. Developer .ball dedlcate traile and rldesalke tbrouEhout tbe Devolopnent to the Clty as lndlcated on the coEprebenrlve lrrall ptan. thlg dedlcation ratlaflee the city,a trall dedtlcatl,on f.e requlrurntr. frallr lbaU be coqrlcted at tbe tlle 3traet tlprovcnenta are conrtnreteil ln thc lbaea t i.ra the tral.ls and rlderalka or portlone tboroof erc tocatod. llbe D.v.loper rha1l constnrct the follolnE trallr anrd ridcralb: (1). Elght (8) loot rldc bttlulnour trall rlong the ueEtride of lrke 3uran. (2r. Elght (8) foot vldc bitrnl.nour off-street trall along - the .a8t rl,de of Audobon Road; and an elght (S) foot-rlde bltunlnoua off-street trall along tbe rast rideot Pou.r3 Boul.vard. (3). llve (5) toot rldc concret€ off-.treet trall-rldevalkalonE one tlde of all lnternal rtreetB rxccpt cul-de-racr rhcn thc .tr.ctB ar. constructed. (4). flrenty (20) foot rlde bltullnou. off-Etr.et trail.ageDent on thc uott tldc of pdera Boul.vard. ltlriEtrall . regaeDt 3-ball only bc conrtnrct€d i! ordered bythe Clty Councll. tf order.A, tbo Devcloper yi1l cgnvcy the .a.cDcnt to tbc Clty vlthout cort, but tbe -clty ulll pay tor the conEtlructton. Conrtnrctlonttulng ulll De et tlr. 6l.rcrotl,on of tbc Clty Councll. . 5. laAltlolrt ColAltlo!. ot T,Dso"rl. A. ,tbe Dcvolopcr rball pronldc butfGr arca., accGptable to _ tbe Clty, bctreen lultlplo fe-lly ud rlnglo tallty ercaa to.r.urG adcqurtc tranaltl.on Dcte..n ur.t, tncluillng uro of b.nr, lendrcaplng and 3etblclcr troD lot llncr. t. ![h. D.v.lot cr rhall not alrrrE. or rlrDw. ltry ta..r arcept ar Lndlcated on th. grraattDE ard trat a.roerl plani to De lptro.lrGal Dy the Ctty and cubalttoll ulth .ach Dlat. ,!r..! .baU Dc prot.ct d froD destnrctl,on Dy rnov tcnccl, fl.EglnE, rtrtltrg, or otbsr ahllar rcanc durlng gradlng and conatnrctlon. -3- ( T C. f€tlandE IoB. ta-10 and 23_01 as rhorn ln &.blblt ,G, rhall, be preEer:'v.d 1n tbeir natural atate. D. ,Ihe followinE tball De the raxl.uuu p.rcentage of .llorable Lnpenrlouc .urfaces ortrot A 32t, ortlot E 3ot, outlot c 31t, andl Outlot D 27t. E. lbc Developer rhall provtdt S5oo.oo of lana3caDlng per rultlple fauily unlt rnd $15O.OO por rlnElo tanlty unlt. 7. ttt.ot ct pl.ii.6 Ultt D.".tot[.!t lD!,scvd. lor flve (5) yrare frou tbe datr ot thlc lgr..Dcnt, no $.ndrentr to tb. cltyrr eoEDrehensive Pl.an, or offlcial controla rball apply to or affect ttre uae, developnent, donelty, lot rl,zo, lot layout, or dodllcatlone of the deveropuent unreea requlred by .tat. or f.deral llu or agreed to !.n vrltlng by the clty and tbe D.v.lotcr. |lhcrcaftcr, notvJ.thrtandlng anything in thle tEtceDent to the coDtrat?, to the tull cxtcnt perDlttcd by itate law, the city lay rcguire coapl l,ance ulth any rDendDentE to the city'a conprehensJ.ve Plan, offlclar controlr, plattlnE or dedllcatJ,ng rcguirenents enactod after the data of thla Agroeuont. 3. Dhr..al D.v.lopr.!t. llhc DGv.loper rhall dovelop ttre d.vclopDent ln olcvcn (11) phaaer ln accordtanco rtth th. EAr. ro .arth lovlnE or other dcvGloptrent rhall, br donc ln eny pharc prl,or to appro,nal ot ttnal plat3 anA d.velopDcnt contract for the Dha.. by tbc Clty. t. Colpllraor dtL t r. .!6 r.gul.tlonr. . !h. DcvrloFr rCpr.renta to tbc clty thrt tb. Drolror.d dcvclolnont cqrll.r; ulth al1 .ppucrbte clty, ColDty, tetropolltrtr, gtat , rDd !.d.nl lrrr .nd r.Eulrtlons, lncludlnE Dnrt not ltrlt d to: Erlbdlvlrlon Or{inancu, lonlng OrdLnancel, and Bnvr.rono.ntrt nagulatlonr. !!ht Drvcloper .!fr.r3 to conply vith rucb lays and rogrulatlonr.r ( f0. ?.8lrtlcDr ts ll,l,sdoo Dlrar. ttlnor varlancGa troD tbe approrred plans tay bc appronedl by the Cltyrr plannlng Dlrector. Substantlar departurea frou tbe approvcd planr rball rcqulre an lDand- rent to the Planned Enl,t Den.lolrD.nt, ln accordance rltb the chlnhraaen Sonlng Ordlnance. 18. &tc.!r.. tle D.v.lop.r DrrrQr grr.ntr tbe clty, Lte. aEcnte. .Eployeea, and otflcars a tl.crnro to .ntGr tb. plet to ltEpoct tb. ?ork to be done by tbc D.v.lolrGr .nd to p.rforr all rcrr !.Eulrca berrurdcr il Developer fallr to perfota la rccordance her.utth. 12. utltttt, ?oDa, .Ec DniDrg. trr..!tt. tthe Deveroper .harl dedicate to tbe clty rt tbe tlDe of tl.nar plat approvalr utirity, draj'nage, and ponding ca6eDent3 rocat.d ultbln tb. plat, lncrudlng acceE8, as regulrod to aerve the plat. 13. I, rpolrlDltlty to8 @.tt. A. ,ttbC D€veloper rball Dolil tbc Cl.ty, ltr offi.core, agenta, and oupl0yeea har:dcra tro clahr by thc D.v.lop.r lDat thlrd partlcs, lncludlnE, but not ltdtoat to, lot pur€bar.r3, other prop.rty ryDAr3, COntraetora, aubcontractoB, ll|ld ratcrlahan, for dauaEee .u.tal.ned, eocts Lncurred, or tnJurlrt rreultlng fro! a;prorral of the Agroeuent, tha devclopDcnt, fr'r prrt., pranr and rpoctttcatlonl, and :lrou thc rGBultlDE conetnrc;tlon rnn drvcloplcnt. !h. D.v.lopcr.brlr lnileonlfy thc clty, ttr oftlc*r, lg.nt , rnit qrloyo, tor atl corta, dalaECa, or .xp.nr.!, racruitrng o.aroneDrr rnglnmrlng .od attorm.yr. tocr, ntlch tir ctty lay pry or rag.r ln conrcguonoo of r.cb clehr. B. ,:t!b. D.vcloper rhall rrlrbur.e tb. Clty for cort tncu*ed I'n thc .nforcG,ant of thrr AEr' Goent, lncludrng rca.onabla onElneering and attorneyr. Cr,',.. ID. D.rr.lolrGr .half I'ry ln tull atl( I -5- blue subnltted to lt by tbe city tor ruch reilburcaents rltbtn rlxty (60) days after recelpt. rf tie bllla are not pald on tJ.ne, the clty Day balt au develoDDent sork untl.l the blllr are paLdt ln turr. Btlls ngt pald utthtn elxty (60) daya rhall bc arbJcct to an olgbt (at) pcrcer*, por annrn LntcreEt chatge. ta. Il.c.lh!.otrr. t. Breacb of any ratcrlal terr of tblr Agrcetcnt by tbe Doveloper rhall be grroundr for donlar of Dtrudlng DGrrltB, platr, Lnd ccttlficatc3 of occupancy. B. tf any jrortt on, loctlon, arbaectl,on, acnteDcc, clari-se, paragraph or phrase of thlr planDed unlt De.trelopDent lErreenent l. for lny reaaon heldl lnvalld 8s a rceult of a cbatlonge brought by the Developer, lte agents or aaeigne, the clty ray, at ltr optron, decrare the entl.re AEr.GDent null and vord and approval of tbc ?inal Dcvcropuent Plan sha1l thereby be r.voked. c. ,Ihe actl,on or lnaetlon ot lny party .hsll not constl- tute a ralvcr or aDendEent to the provirl.onc of thlr agrreeurnt. To be blndling, areDdnente or ra!.vcrs sbaU D. in rrltlng, rlgrnod by the partlee and qpproveat by ualtten r.rolutton of thr crty corurcll. rny party'i fallurc to proDptly takc logar actt on to rnforco thlr lgrrcuent efter a:rpiratlon of tllc ln rlrlch th. rort.lr to br corpl.t d rhalr not bo a vatver or relear. D. ,Ittt AErrocnent rball nrn vlth th. lrna lld Dy D. recorded ln tbo caF.r County R.cot{.rr. otll,c.. E. lftLa Agreeuent rbalt Do ltberally conrthr.d to protect the publl.c,e lntercat. I r -5- ( A. Drc to tbe prrlhlnary uture of rany of tb. rrhibtte and pranB and tbe thlng of the weralr Daver opDent, addenduDa to tbie agreeDent lay be roguired to'rddreE8 conccrnB not rpcciflcllly ,et forth c. ftl.r lgracucnt rbal1 bc btnAtnE trlron the parttoa, thelr bel.rs, aucceaBor3 or arai.gna, u the caro iay be. B. me Dcvelopsr r.pre3.nt3 to thc Cl,ty that tbc arlat is not of 'Detroporltan rlEnlflcancc'lnd that a .trt. rrvlroDrcntal Llpact 3tatcDent ls not roguired. Eoe\r.r, l.! tbr clty or another Eovarrrrental rntity or agency dctcrrines that a federal or .t!t. tryract rtatcnent or any othCr revieu, pcr:uit, or rpproval lr rogulrcd, thc Dcvolopcr rball prepare or obtain lt at lt8 0rrr Grlrenae. t'be DGverolnr rhall rotnburee the Clty for all GxpcnaeE, lncludllng rtaff ttre and rcaaonablo lttorney'8 fces, that the ctty ray lncur Ln aealrtlng la prcparation. 15. trotlo.!. ReEulr.d notl,ccs to the D€v.Ioper rball be ln rrlting and ehalr be olther hand delivor.d to tbc Drvorolnr, ttret r ouployces or agent3, or lallcd to the D.v.lopr by crrtlflcit or rcElstercd lall at tbc folroslng addr.ss! ?600 parrlara ay.nu., Bdi.na, rinneaota 55{35. ltotlcaa to th. ctty rhatl be ln rrttlng rnd .hall be either hand derlv.r.d to tb. clty crorts or raircdr to tbc clty by ccrtl.flod or regi.rtcrod rall ln carc ot tb. ctty cl.rt rt th. lolloulng rddr3.3: P.o. Box la7, 690 Coutt r Drlvr, chrnba.!.n, llLnncrota 35317. berein { ( I}r rrmlEss THEREoF, tbe partlcs hlve hsrcunto ret thelr bands the day and year firet above utlttcn. CITY BY: BY:y llanage- EN F a , SAAAE OF }TINIESOIA coU}ITT OF C}RVER 81ATE OF UINNESOIA elo of su.an Blll., abebalf. IAXE AI'SIN EILGS BY: A.Y BARBARA CT'RRY lnE Lnatnuent raa aclrnovl, 1987, Dy 85.) ( ) )( ) h.lrhe forogolng lnrtnuent uar .ctnflr.alE cr b.tor. re trtr td 111--?x J1144ry-l le_87, by-lDo!. L. suilron, rtryor, antr byEi-AanuorEn, city ltanage!, of tbe ctty of cbanba[on, e tllnneiota nrilctpalcorporatlon, on Dehalf of . tbc corrrontlon anit grrruant to authorltygrranted by lte Clty Cotrncil. as. oou}f,ry day o Eener zrrtt /* tttsa c t- fffi#;Tr,#s^rt a-tt arr!! t{an a q:rEr{a @ 8AH BABA FISHER}.oi AAY ru8LrC v rl}atlota HENN EPI N co UNTYC.r il.gacn9,Ee,,r tt. -8- I baforo ![be foregolng day of Y e. DRN':IED BY:Grannlr, Grannie, lar:rellt Xnutron, P.A. 103 lloneEt Bant Butldtng 151 North Concord Exchange South 8t. Paul , UN 55075(612) a55-1651 i'.-1.i.; '6.7,'3', '. llitht.;iua-rrrrtSo?l : *[ !\;(i Prrr , .;t irt f, C6ria. Ett'ri.'.rJr, ?o. tgto a YvYvvwr'ywYwvlvJvrwww!.a/ww!..aa )( ) ( Lnstnuent ra3 aclcnoulodged before re thlB I. 1987, by irAl{BS l. C0RRY .Dat EIRBARA CORRY,- I -9- arAra oF ulNtrEsotA Ooutlty OF t{t"Wrp. a I .Exp1,p't *n a a LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR LOCTTION PURPOSE OilLY t of thc Southyest Quartcr I4 aad the north ole-hatf oft Quartcr of the Xorthycst ell5. Iaage 23, Carvcr Countyot D. CIIAI{IIASSE}I LAIES BUsIxplat thcrcof, rald Carvcr Crly rt3ht-of-u!, tlaG of lcv T t1 of thln CT th of l that par Section Ie Sou thea s Tounshl p 1y of 0ut1e rccord edthe ueste ad th.the llouartcr , Xl. na ESS Pr oED t, ,Coun! Southcast QuertcrrthYeat Quartcr andof Sectloa 23, allcaotr lrllg routh- RI . rccordiog toead lyta3 ucatcrlv, load Xo. 17. ETCEPT that pirt of thc ortbvcrt euarter of ratd xorlbrlrtQuarter-lylng uestcrlv of the i"irJriii icscrtbcd ltoe eorr tteoorthcrly aad soutbcrly ertcaslon: Colocnclag at thc_routbcart coracr of rtld lorthvcet (tutrtcrof thc l{ortbuesr Quarrcrs thcrci-Soutt gi aGiiii"-oi lioot."49 rccoadc ucst, bcarlos-.--oiio,-iioog-iri-ii"i[ ii.I-Lt. gaid l{orthycsr euartcr of ttc loittvcsi qririci. .-ifit"o""of 790.00 fcct to the Dotot of bctiaatag-or ih-.fioi-ii'u.described: thence ,,ortf, I dogrce 5i-trairca zz riciiai-cesr,a distaace of 660.0O fcct; tf,cnce t{olth f8-argrels-ii- ' Dinures 33 accoads-E8arr r dtsrrDce of 3io.oo'iIli;-it.o..Igl.l_s? dcgrces 00 rlautcs oo riionas u;;;;-.-;i;i"ill'ot -638.s7 feet; rhcac: IgIr! r aesrc--iz rriuiia-zi-;;;;;;"uest. a dr'stancc of 150-59 rccE io i gotat on thc aortb rrleof said l{orthuesr Qperter of the noitir"isi Qu."tir-iiii"rt156.07 feet sest.riy of the aortlrest corar! of caidNorrhuesr Quarrcr oi thc ror ttrre-t -(u!rrGr es-ieirii.a erong .sald aorth line and thcre tcrtiastl;g. ALSO E Quartcl{ev Co f o11ov ICEPT thet part of the Glst oac-half of raid Xorthyrrtr lylog uesterly of the ucltcrl, rrgti_oi_"iy-iiie-ii-rataunty Road No. l7 and couthcrfy iad Eastirty i,f ileing described l!.oe: 9:r::i":iq^!r thc^Dorrhyclr corrcr of rhc Sosrhcarr Quarr:ror Ene roltaucst eulrtlr of rald Scctloa 23; thcacc ioutt idcgree.50 linutrs lZ recoads east,-ieaiitrE,isi-rii"-.i-.iia-southcart Qu.rtcr 3E !i!"ii*o3l3ltQuarlcr, a dlsruc. of 6?5.O0 i"ii;-it.o.. A.rt.-i-filtro".of 305.00 fGrr; thcncc xorth 40 da;r;;;-oo iiiuici oo------lcconds Elat, . dlrraocc of 270.00-fcci; thacr iorii Zdcarccs o0 rtautGr O0 rccoodr fiii,-i-Jirrracc ot 2OO.OOfcct; theacc t{orth t9 dcarccr oo rinutir-oo-ri.iial-iill, .dlrtencc of 323.O0 fect; thcrcc foiit-ei Ccfi.ci-OO ;i;;;.;00 rcconds Easr, e dl.r.ncG ol f3O.OO iict: tncacc forth 2Odcarces O0 !iDut.! 00 sccoade Eart, i iirt.o". of 110.00fcct; thcacr f,orGh 89 dcarcrr oo rirutii oo ii"ooci-iiii. .dlstgacc ot 395.74 fcct io tbd rcrterii-rftti_oi_riy frii .rll.u County loed llo. t7 ead tb:rc tcrrii.tf"3. I tl,t'a a LEGAL DESCRIPTIoN foR LocATrp[ puRposE o}{Ly 'll1 that_part of the Gast one-half of the Southcagt eurrGrr ofSectlon 15, Tornshlp ll6, Xaage 23, Carver .County, ttjoo.ioi.lying casterly of thc cGnrerliac oi old Couaty f;;d l{o. ir-;!travel.led. ( ( i t o II I I I fl ill iii iilr!t$A I -) r--= F I IL- I If"--I I Ir \. B nt a-(lt * r I ! I i I I il ti !!l tll ii! I Lt I iiiiir Iaiii!t IiL_ I1 q I,I E il E il T : +i..ii l!qj z ( a ( /^L - cHAts{AssEN pt_AM{It{G C(}l}iISSIOi{.REGI'LAR I{EETING ]tAY 16, 1990 Tom Kordonohry l'1arti n Jones UNEDITED_ Chairman Conrad called the neeting to order at 7:40 p.m.- IGIIBERS PRESENT: Steve Emmings, Annette Elleon,Jim tlildermuth and Joan Ahrens Ladd.Conrad, Brian EatzIi, IGIAERS ABSENT: Tim Erhart STAFF PRESENT: PauI Krauss, planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, SeniorPlanner: and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner One. PI.BLIC }EARTNG: C(}{SIDER APPLICATIO{ OF Tl$t{AS KORDOI{OI.|Y FOR A IETLAIID ALTEffiTf()l{ PERt{rT TO CREATE A POND IN A CLASS B I'ETLAND OT{ PROPERTY ZOI{ED RR, RI'RAL RESIDENTIAL eDD LOCATED SqrTH OF TANADil)NA DRI\rE, r,EST OF DOGITOOD'ROAD. PubIic P resent: Addr ess AppL icant Dogwood Road Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Conrad: Just a quick question before He open it up to thethe uater quality going to improve based on the dredsing?that's causing the quality to improve that urill flow into L public. tlhy isl.lhat is it ake Hi nnewashta? AI-Jaff: It is in the report. The bottom of the pond wiIIand-. - not be level Conrad: Act as a sedimentation basin? Krauss: l.leIl you're getting both sedimentation plus for uetland vegetationhelps to filter as well. l.le're working. - -especially since apart from the house Mr. Kordonory wiII be developing. Conrad: Okay. l.le'II open it up for pubLic commcnts. If the applicant iBhere. If he has anything to say. Tom Kordonohry: Good evening tlr - Chairman, members of the PlanningCommission- lly name is Tom Kordonowy and raquosting thls ponding areareally for our enjoyment but beyond that ure think that it,e an cnhancementto the area. Creation of thc op€n Hat€r should probably have nesting forfriendly critters and we think would be kind of a nice addition to the areaso that's my only comment. Read the staff report and in concurrence xithit. l.le've tried to work closely yith staff in designing the pond to conform to the requirements of the ordinance as well as I say, improve thearea. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Conrad: l.le may have some later- Thanks Tom. Any othcr public comments? Na me PIanning Commission l4ay 16, t99O - Page Meet i ng 2 Conrad: Thank you. Anything else?to close the public hearing? Any other comments? Is there a motion Batzli moved, l.li ldermuth secondedin favor and the motion carried.to cLose the public hearing- AII voted The public hearing was closed. Conrad: Steve, comments? Emmings: No. It looks like this was designed veryconsiderati.ons that f can see taken into account andrecommendations, carefu]Ly withI support the aIl thestaff's Ellson: r think it ]ooks great. I'm glad to see someone being proacLivein the right direction for a change but r do have a question in regards toonce this is in place. Then it wourd be guarded and let's say he sold theland or whatever, as a pond now. The wetrand contains the pond and thenthe pond can no Ionger be altered and everything like that? Hould that betrue? You know what I'm saying? Once you dis it as a pond and turned itinto one and then maybe if it passes hands or ulhatever and someone doesn'tu,ant a pond there anymore, because he altered the uretland and it waspermitted, now nobody else could take away the pond because Lhat would nowbe altering it again. Krauss: tlell it is classified as a wetland and I've sot to believe thiswould take on Class A wetland characteristics uhich would make it eventougher to alter. tle also require plans...at Hennepin County. In factwe're gelting our ordinance to...so future property or{ners urould be onnotice that this is a condition of approval. Ellson: Yeah, I assume that they'd have to come in for a wetlandalteration permit but I'm saying would we aIlow them to go back? Onceyou've got it improved you'd hope that you noul have to stay at the level ofimprovement and you can never have to go back and things like that. Iguess we don't ever have a Lotal guarantee it doesn't sound like but I Iikethe fact that it's being improved and I'd just like.to say okay, nou, thatit's improved, no holds bar . [,Je can't go back anymore on it no matter !,rhotakes it over after that. Martin Jones: Can f make one comment? You said it's been improved. yes, it will be. If iL would go back to the original, that ain't aII bad so Idon't think you're going to have a loss either way, If Hr. Kordonowydecides to sell, it would go back to the original , it would not be bad.It's better this r.,ay but it won't be bad the other way. ElIson; Those are just the only things I thought about. Batzli: It looks Iike the applicant hasIooks like a good plan.worked well wilh staff and it Martin Jones: r'm Martin Jones. Mr. Kordonowy will become a neighbor ofmine. Everything that he has done so far has been excellent. r can't sayno to anything he has done so far. At this point I'Il say 9o ahead withthis. It looks great. Planning Commission Nay L6, l99O - Page Meeti ng 3 tJildermuth: I like the plan. I just have one question. How does the r^,ater currently flow under Tanadoona Drive? Is there a culvert? Martin Jones: I can answer that. There's a 12 inch culvert underneath the road that's just at the curve where Tanadoona turns into Dogwood. There's a 12 inch culvert going there and that's been in place for the Last I'd say- 6 oY 7 years since the new culvert. t^Jildermuth:Do we TheKrauss 3 No. Wi Idermuth: Because with metal aprons at the installation of of the pond. Okay. the, where is it? A pipe- That's all I've have. I like itI think think the pond would alter that in any r^ray PauI? pond's not going to reLease urater any faster than it..- of uherethe exit Ahrens: I think it's a good plan too but there a number of conditions that- are very specific and I just had a question. Does the City find it difficult to monitor aII the conditions that are set uP with the approval of this permit? f mean they can't dredge during certain times and they have to ]ocate the dredging material in a certain P]ace and hot^l do you know- that's going on? Conrad: I have no comments. It looks like a good application. when ue improve a wetland and the residents geL uhat they want. that's just a good win-win situation. Is there a motion? EIIson: I'lI move the Planning Commission recommend approval of tJetland Alteration Permit *9O-3 as shown on plans dated April 16, 1990 with the following two conditions and one condition also added. And the third condition should read that the applicant is to obtain a grading permit prior to start. tlildermuth: Second. Ellson moved, llildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of tletland Alteration Permit *9O-3 as shown on plans dated April 15, 1990 with the following conditions: 1. The proposed pondi ng standards for ponds. area conforms to the Fish and t^,iIdIife guideline Krauss: Frankly it's difficult because unlike a home or a building, you don't have a building permit that triPs the Process. t^lhat we do is we depend on the applicant to notify us that work's been started and we go out and monitor that from time to time. tle...staff to do that. t^le do make the- attempt to follou up as best hle can. In the future I'd like, and by the way the grading ordinance passed at the City Council t'tonday night and I think that we can use that to require, in fact you may want to add acondition that they obtain a grading permit prior to starting the work from- the engineer's department so we have a definitive permit so we know when they are grading- 2 The app.Licant provide Type III erosion control along the westerly edgeof the fill area between the proposed fiII area and the Class B wetlandand the fill area be revegetated with natural vegetation urithin six months of completion of the pond. 3 The appl^icant shall obtain a grading permit prior to beginning work onthe wetland. All voted in favor and the motion carried- PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIHINARY PLAT OF 3.2 ACRES INTO 2 SINGLE FAHILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 365 PLEASANT VIEI.I ROAD, ROBERT SATHRE. Sharmin AI-Jaff presented thepublic hearing to order. staff report. Chairman Conrad calLed the Conrad: Maybe we'll open it up wi.th the applicant. Bob, any comments onthe staff report? Bob Sathre: No! realIy. There's nothing differentthat was not considered with the vacating of Baldur other than the exchange Ave nue . but mea n Conrad: That cleans it up pretty easily. Any other comments? Batzli moved, Ellson seconded to close the public hearing- AII voted infavor and the motion carried- The public hearing nas closed- Ahrens: I guess it makes sense Lo have the property Iocated west of thedriveway. Become part of Lot 3, that's right. Is that the proposal? Rather Lhan have it divide Lot 1. I guess it makes more sense for theproposed drive on Lo! 1also, I had a question why that wasrr't connecledonto the other private drive. Since there uas some concern thaL theproposed drive on Lot 1 not be located too close to Horseshoe Curveit's almost right on top of the oLher private drive. Is thaL how, Ithat's the way it looks to me. Krauss: They're still separated by, I don't remember the exact distancebut we can scale that off, but there's a grade change there. I think ifyou're going Hith the first report ue said that we would prefer to have asingle curb cut and we would have recommended it if we thought it wasrealistic to do but because of the grade change ue didn't think it r^,as so we just added a condition that the driver.lay to the new home has to be asfar east as possible. Ahrens: As far east from what? From the other existing driveway? AI-Jaff: The engineering department said that if there is a distance of 1OO feet, that aIlows enough visibility and there is a distance of 1OOfeet. Planning Commission Meeti ng Hay 16, 1990 - Page 4 Ahrens: Between the two driveways? Planning Commission May 16, 1990 - Pase Heet i ng 5 Krauss: The main concern Has sight distance as you come around the curve, that this driveway not be introduced right over here. The desire b,as toget it up that way but as I read the report, I see we used to have a condition in for that and I don't read it in this version. It would be warranted to consider it with the condition that states that the Iocation for the driveuray shall be no further utest than is illustrated on the survey. Krauss: If I urrderstand it, we had this Baldur Avenue in here that wasquite confusing because part of it r.tas actual right-of-uay and part of it was an easement. This part of it then was right-of-way. This area down to- here would be vacated. l.,hat r.re didn't vacate is the easement that we have on this side of it. tlhat we're proposing to do is the City would vacate this. The vacated land urhich Has a part of this parcel uill be traded to this parcel . Ahrens: The vacated portion of BaLdur Avenue? Krauss: Right, would become part of this Iot. Ahrens: But it originally was part of Lot 1? Krauss: Risht. Because of that funny tail that what they're doing is they're swapping a Iittle here. uras on that lot. And thenbit of property right in Ahrens: Oh , easements onthe existing Lot 3? so that's the reason this, page 4, you state that thedriveway. I assume that's okay. In the staff report under Citv is requesting an easement over- the existing driveway located on Ahrens: Number one, under your conditions. The driveway access to Lot 3, Block l shall be placed in the chain of title of the Lot 1, Block 1? Krauss: Risht. That condition . . .proposal . would not be needed if the Ba]dur, the neck Ahrens: But if they don't alter it though, it should be placed in the title of both lots. Ijust have to do it for both lots, Lhat's all. and not the other. That's all I have. shouLd be that the easement mean just technical . You You just can't do it for one AL-Jaff: Not the tNo driveways but their main concern was Horseshoe curve. Ahrens: I agree. I don't quite understand the land exchange- l{aybe you could point to that on the map. Krauss: Lo! 3, correct. As you recall, lhere was some confusion about that. t^le believed ue had an easement over it and one easement uas drafted up but as near as we can teII was never filed and we wanted to correct that omission . t^te've been using it to make this, . . PIannj.ng Commission May 15, 1990 - Pase Heeti ns 6 Right. Okay. So that's basically the reasoning? Becausevegetation there, it looks Iike to come directly out to thegoing to involve removing as much vegetation one way as the Nil.dermuth: One more time Paul , why can,t the street access to pleasant View for Lot 1 connect with the City easement? It looks like there's adrop of about 16 feet according to the topo map and about 6O to 70 feet.That doesn't seem out of Iine. Krauss: tlell we bient out to the site with our engineer technician and Idon't knour if it actually looks {.,orse than it is...but the grade is fairlysubstantial and you'd r.lind up with a driveuay that was probably in excessof 1OZ which is not impossible but with ueather conditions, it could bedifficult. Wi Idermuth:with all thestreet it's other. Krauss: Rieht . t"liLdermuth: And by connecting uith the easement roaduay, it eliminated onecurb cut which would be pretty desireable. Krauss: Except that you probably would not run the driveway straight tothe east. You'd want to roll down the hill and...concrete apron there, bythat time you've caused about as much damage to get to that point. t,lildermuth: I don't know, it stiII looks Iike you about 3O or 40 feet of the road and still cut downMinimize the grade r.rhich t^rould be less than the 16directly from the current turn around shown on the easement road. could come off to within on some of the grade. feet if you went map over to lhe City Krauss: HelI I don't Nant to give you the impression that we would be opposed to that. I mean that Has our initial goal with it. If you,re comfortable with wording a conditj.on that encourages us to do that butIeaves it, defers it to the engineering department to 9o out and takeanother look aL it, I'd be more than happy to have them do that. Wildermuth: I guess that's what I urould favor. Thank point to the map up there and tell.me you . which one is Lot 1,Batzl.i: can you Lot 2 and Lot 3? A]-Jaff: Lot 1. Lot 2. Lot 3 Batzli: where it easte r I y Ave nue ? LoL 3 is the one with the existing house? says the driveway access to Lot 2 shall beedge. Did we just decide Lot 2 is the one Okay. In condition 1 located to the farthat borders on Ba ldur A1-Jaff: Krauss: On Lot 2 and Lot 3. Lot 2 is the one that borders on Baldur. Planning Commission May 16, 1990 - Page Batzli: Ar2 is moved t,i ldermuth: Krauss: Oh Batzli: So Krauss: Yeah, the surveyer uhen he put the numbers on the and find game. The numbers are on there. They're in the the one with the existing home down by the Iake. Lot 2 is Ba]dur. Lot 1 is the new lot that wiII be made available development. t^le need to change the condiLions to reflect 1 should be access !o Lot 3. That's right. Batzli: Driveway access to Lot 3? Krauss: Risht. Batzli: Shall be Located to the far easterly edge of Lot. Meet i n9 7 e we reguiring in condition 1 that their driveway access to Lot some how? [^1e aren 't ta] ki ng about Lot 2 at al l . I see what you're saying. that should be Lot 3 in condition 1? map had cor ner . Lhe one through that . a search -Lot 3 is over by Condition Krauss: No . That 's the driveway access to Lot 2 on the property. new condition that we're suggesting. That's No I'm sorry, Lot 1 needs to be located as far Emmings: Another way to word that one would be constructing the driveway on Lot 1, they shouldlocation from the City Engineer. That's what I these. just that maybeget approval for thought and just Prlorit's avoid to aI I Batz]i: Yeah, okay. Is there, I seem to remember it now talking about what the appropriate separation forcollector. fs there some sort of an ordinance in the minimum distance beLween dr iveways? seems like years agoprivate drives onto aCity about the Krauss: No,for residenLial use.not forBatzIi: Not residential? Krauss: tlhat we've done is and there are separation distances fromintersections on collectors of 15O feet and the engineer's come up uith spacing requirements on Park Drive for industrial use but for residences, no ue don't have one- Batzli: Okay. I think it misht make more sense for the easements requiredthat Ne reflect in the conditions urho the easement is for the benefit of.In condition 2 for example, sanitary ser.rer easement wouLd run to thebenefit of the city. And $hat was the, do you still want an additionalcondition regarding the ]ocation of that drive if you change condition 1? t^le talked earlier about there was a previous condition about locating thedrivetray, Does that go away then once you change? Planning Commission May 15, 1990 - Page Meet i ngI Kr auss : Batzli: No. Condition 1i.s r efl ected? Krauss: No, you still have to construct thatwant that to be as far east as possibLe.neu, driveway for Lot 1. You Batzli: But if you changed it to ulhat Steve proposed, thataccess to Lot l must be approved by the city, isn,t that allwith the one condition? Okay. I don't have anything else. the dr iveway taken care of Ellson: I thought changes and got me whatever to do a Iorder and all the we've made to some I air th o understood it until people starting making aIl thelittle confused. I saw this as ure had tabled it orlle more housecleaning to make sure everything was inings uere in place and I guess with the changes Lhatf the wording here, I feel comfortable that urhat Newanted to have changed before u,as changed. The only thing I'muncomfortable with is they Han! !o do some change here that we're notreaLly seeing and they wanted to make that one a neck lot and sometimes I'ma little squeemish about approving something and then it goes on and it maybe isn't what I expected in my head. So the request that we don,t seehere is basically to take that drive and everything lhat,s west of that and make it part of the lot on top there? Al-Jaff: Lot 3 EIIson: Lot 3. Good- Krauss: If they think there's any problem there are any variances...we can certainly with i! and Ibring it bac k can't foresee to you. Ellson: Yeah, in general I don't have a problem with it and I just startedto get more confused as it came dobrn the row so I'll go back to the way Istarted. Yes, it looks like we cleaned up everything bre h,anted to have cleaned up. Go ahead Steve. Emmings: t,lhere wil.I the line be? There will be the new lot. line on Lot 1.Oh, you're going Lo move it back too? And then just follow the edge of thedrive? Okay. In general I wouLdn't be in favor of approving something. [,Je're approving a plat here and iL's not the r.lay the plat's going to look and I'm a little uncomfortable with that as a general principle. If that's Lhe way it comes in, I'd be comfortable trith that and I don't think ureshould hold it up for that reason but if it's anything other than you'vejust drawn on there, then I'd want to see it again. Otherwise, it looksreasonable to me. Emmings: I'd Iike to ask Jim,wants. I didn't follow that.I didn't understand the condition that Jim Conrad: I have no additional comments. Looks fine to me as long as it'sas represented on the overhead. Any other comments? Planning Comm ission Hay 16, 1990 - Pase t^J i ldermuth: WeL I that the City access for the Emmi ngs: You mean the Meet i ng 9 would be that the driveway for Lot 1be tied intolift station . other dr iveway? existing driveuay. I'd like the engineer to taketlildermuth: anoLher look Yeah. The at that. conrad: You may uJant to make a motion. tlildermuth: AIrisht. I move that the Planning Commission aPProve Subdivision *A9-2o as shown on the plat dated April 15, 1990 subject to the following conditions l thru 4 with Lhe addition of a fifth condition. Requesting thaC the City Engineer review the Possibility of tying the driveoay for the housepad in Lot 1to the city's easement drive. Are there any other fr iendly amendments? conrad: tle]I let's ge! the, is there a second? Ahrens: Second . Batzli.: I'm sorry, did you add condition 6,7 and 8? You added 5 right. Isn't there a 6,7 and I somewhere? Am I looking at the wrong thing? conrad: You're Iooking at January 3rd stuff. Batzli: okay, what happened to. Oh, they didthat He were talking about was condition 1 and do urith that . move that over. The I don't know what we one need to Condition Condition 1 changed fr om 1 tal ked about Pr ev L ous2. But submission to we are talkins this about Lot the Lot Batz]i: Correct. No I agree but if they do what they're talking aboutthere then the access and easement isn't required and that's my concern isthat what we're approving isn't what they're going to do according lo your motion . l.Ji lder muth : Batzl i: Not Wi ldermuth: Batzli: No, comi ng down t^le]] there's stilI an easement required. if they do that. But it would be for Lot 3. because the driveway would be Iocated entirely on the flagLot 1. t^l i Idermuth: Righ! accessing the Iif t but the City will still need some legal means ofstation along that drive right? Krauss: That's in condition 2 tJi ldermuth: submission. J- PIanning Commiss ion May 16, 7990 - Pase Meet i n9 10 Emmings: There are a phole bunch of things that have changed in l and 2and maybe just as a suggestion, weII. tlildermuth: WelL there really is no need for l then if the change is made. Batzli: l,lell l could be changed to reflect that they,re going to attemp!to, well you've already indicated that they're Eoing to try to get it offof the turn around. Tie that into the existing gravel drive. If theycan't do that, there h,as a proposal that they locate it as far east or ureston that map, whichever way it is, east as possible and that urould besubmitted to the City for approval . Ahrens: They wiII still need an easemenL. There will be a need for an easement if they tie into the Lot 3 lot. Emmings: See, lhere's a lot of things up in the air. And if you go through the ones that need easements to i.t, in number 2(a), the existingsanitary sewer easement says it's over LoLs l and 2 but it's over Lots 3and 2. And (b), driveway access and utility easement over LoL 1, Block 1,that's the same thing again. You don't need that one at all. And (c), theutility easement over the sanitary sewer along Lotus Lake, that seems tome, who's that running in favor of? The City? For what utility? Kr auss : l^Je have a sewer I i ne . Emmings: uell I know but that's, what's (a) then? BatzLi: l^JelI that Has access into the lift station or whatever.I think the intent of that. Krauss; No, I see what you're saying. Emmings: No, (a) is the sewer itself. Ahrens: It says easements required, (a) reflect existing sanitary easement. Batzli: Perhaps (c) is intended then to T hat u,as se wer Emmings: It says the sewer along across 3 and 2 and what used to be access the other Lake. That's the dr iveway? one that goesLotus tlildermuth: How big a problem isit to be cleaned thoroughly? Baldur Avenue. this going to be if we table it and allour Emmings: The problem is they don't know what they're going to do with thedriveways and it's hard to figure out r.,hat to put in for language in orderto let it 9o onto the City Council. Again, they put us in a position ofnot knouing what they're doing and it's hard to figure it out for them. So maybe they should bring it back. I don't know, I hate to hang it up. It seems li ke. Ahrens: You won't need a driveway access. Planning Commission May 16, 799a - Page Heet i ng 11 Conrad: It should be out of our hands. Emmings: Once it's cleaned up I knou, we're going Lo approve it so around with iL but I don't know how to do it because we don't knou they're going to do. tle don't know how the driveways are going to connected if they are, tthy fool -u hat be Stuart Horn: one of the issues that came up as kind of a surprise is that the couple who has purchased what we are calling Lot I nou,r, Lhey're working on a mortgage and the problem with mortgages is that there's a question about having easements for other private parties. There are liabilityproblems. There's maintenance problems. The mortgage companies are a little nervous about the idea of sharing a driveway. It's legal but the couple said they would give up the property that would be kind of northeast of the driveway in order to resolve that problem and that's why the alignment. I think your thought about having the City Engineer look at that would be very good. I'm working on designing the house for that site and the driveway I think r.rould be kind of dangerous if it were connected up at the point where Lhe other driveuay comes in. If you're looking overyour left shoulder lrying !o watch for traffic behind you coming down PleasanL Vier.r, I think the visibility there I think is not real good at the existing driveway. It's actually much better for parties on the pubtic road and on the driveway. If there u,ere a fire, the public safety officer.. - because on paper it looks real easy to connect them up or move them further east or kind of northeasterly there but if you get ouL and actually wal. k the ]and, you're talking I think a dangerous sLippery driveway and not much visibility to seeing who's coming and going either for the people on the public road or the people on the private drive. Ithink it wouldn't $,ork that well if that's... t^liLdermuth: That's why we want the City Engineer to take a look at it. Emmings: I guess as a suggestion, maybe what we should do is approve this as if the lot lines are changed the way they said they were and as if it'sgoing to have it's own driveway out to Lhe street. Given that approval andif they u,ant to change that later or if it needs to be changed later, then we'll have to worry about whether it has to come back or not. tle'll Iet the staff decide if they have to come back. If ue approve it with it's own driveway, that doesn't satisfy Jim's concern but if we approve it with it's own driveway. If it turns out that the City Engineer determines it can't have it's oun drivexay, they could come back. That uay there's only a 5O-5O chance they'd have to come back. I don't know if that's better ornot. Otherwise, they ought to uork aII this out and bring it back. conrad: Yeah, it's real sloppy right noh,. Paul, what do you think? Krauss: You knou, there's a fair amount of confusion with this, It'd benice if aII of this got straighten out. On the other hand, I think the problems are relatively simple once we know how it wiII end up. Conrad: tle can't make a motion though. Krauss: I understand your difficulty. Planning Commission May 16, 1990 - Page Meeti n9 1a what are your concerns? You want to here under some time constraints? Conrad: Bob,get it out of push this through and Stuart Horn: tle have Soon - construction we'd Iike to start on the house. Conrad: Stuart Hor n:It's getting to be a problem because of the time... you'd rather have us move on it right nor^r?Conrad: So Bob Sathre: If you could and whatever stipulations you rantas having the public safety and the engineering people place Conrad: Jim, do you want to uithdraw your motion? tJi ldermuth: I 'l I wiLhdraw the motion . Conrad: Is there another motion? to make as farthe dr iveway . Emmings: Yeah, I'm going to move Lhat the Planning Commission recommend approva). of Subdivision S89-2O as shown on the plat dated Apri] 15, t99Osubject to the following conditions. Number 1, a new plat will besubmitted showing the changes in the configuration of Lot l that wererepresented Lo us at the meeting would be the new lot lines of that lot. The second, what was condition 1 will be striken completel.y. Condition easements required. (a) wiII say that it will reflect the existingsanitary sewer easements over Lots 2 and 3 instead of l and 2. It wiII 2, 2 an,l 3. Block 1 and Baldur Avenue. And r^rhat's down there as ( b ) wiII beslriken and what's down there as (c). No, strike what's doun there as (c).We'II put in a new (b) Lhat says that u,e've got to get the easementrecorded that gives lhe City the right over the driveway that services Lo!3, Block 1. The easement that runs in favor of lhe City to get access tothe lift station. Then 3 will stay as is. 4 will sLay as is. 5 will saythat the driveway location for Lot l must be approved by the City Engineerprior to any construction of that driveway. I think that's it. BaLzIi: Second. Conrad: Discussion? Are you taken care of Jim? tliIdermuth: I think so. Emmings moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommendapproval of Subdivision *89-20 as shown on the plat dated April 16, 1990subject to the following conditions: 1. A new plat wiII be submitted showing the changes in the configurationof Lot l that were represented at the meeting with the new lot lines, say 2 . Easements required: Planning Commission May 16, 7990 - Page Meet i ng 13 Reflect the existing sanitary sebrer easements over Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 and Baldur Avenue. a b The applicant shall record an easement that City over the dr iver.ray Lhat services Lot 3 ,the lift station. runs ln Block 1 favor of thefor access to 3 4 Park and trail dedication fees will be required in lieu of land dedication. A tree preservation plan must be submi.tted prior to issuance of a building permit. The pl.an should illustrate how the driveway and home placement and construction will minimize tree loss. The pl.an must be approved by staff. Preservation areas shaII be adequately marked by a snow fence prior to construction to avoid damage. Clear cutting of trees 4' in caliper or larger is prohibited. The driveway location for Lot l must be approved by the City Engineerprior to any construction of that drivewa),. AII voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARTNG: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDHENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-92 REGARDING CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY BY ADDING PROVISIONS FOR LANDSCAPE REOUIREI.IENTS. 5 Resident: f 've got one question. Can requirements are for a boulevard tree?thaL stuff? you explain exactly what How close to the street the and aII Krauss: tle require that it be, uill deciduous but deciduous or coniferoustree. 2l/2 inches in diameter for deciduous, 5 foot in height forconiferous. It has to be in the front yard area. It can't be in Lheright-of-way boulevard so any part of that proper!y is acceptable and ifthere's existing natural trees there, tha! requirement is waived. Resident: It doesn't have to be within so many feet of Lhe street? Conrad: Any other comments? Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing- AIl voted infavor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. PauI Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conradcalled the public hearing to order. Krauss: No . Resident: It's not a boulevard tree. . . Ahrens: I have one comment. I think we should make the developerguarantee the tree for a year. ReaIIy. I mean so what if they put a tree Planning Commission May 16, 1990 - Page tleet i ng t4 and it's dead and it doesn't last? Ahrens: That's urith. assuming that the developer puts in a healthy tree to begin Krauss:Risht. I thi nkAhrens:a lot of times Lhat's not true. Just a suggesLion. conrad: I assume the on uhat's in front ofyou've seen here? Do other time? Ahrens: Do any otheror that they have Lheperiod of time? public hearing's closed. Joan, your comments? us tonight, do you uant to make any changes to you want to look into this guarantee further at Ba sed what some cities have anything like this where lhey guarantee developer guarantee that the trees Iive for a certain Krauss: WeIl we in fact do that urith our new landscaping bond or letter of credit. The trees in landscaping have to survive for a fuII growing seasonpast the date of installation. Frankly again you come uP against a tough one to administer, tle can go out there and insPecL the thing to make sure it's installed when we give them back their money or when we sign off on the building permit. Then going back out there a year later to make sure it r.ras done properly is a second triP and then you're dealing with the homeowner and not the develoPer. Escrow accounts get rather unweildy. The ansr.,er is we can but it's diff icult Conrad: That's a tough one. tJildermuLh: Let's see how this works for a while. conrad: Jim, anything on Lhis? Brian anything here? Batzli: tJel] I had a question. I didn't look in the code book. Does thisjust apply then to people uho enter into develoPment contracts? Krauss: Exactly Commissioner Batzli. tJhat ure do and developmen! contracts are worded, I mean for every development contract Lhey've been different uP until about 3-4 years ago. The deveLopment contract which is recorded Emnrings: A good example is right out here on Kerber BIvd.. There's a row of pine trees up there along there and Lhey're all dead. Krauss: You know we've tried to enforce it in different ways. Having the developer do it up front causes a lot of problems. Because the loL's not developed yet, likely the tree wiII get killed when Lhey build the house and there's nobody there to maintain it. Requiring installation urhen the home is built and the developer may be long gone at that time and the lot sold several times. Usually means that there's a property owner who takes some pride in the property that they just bought and wiII try to keep that tree alive. It's not a perfect system but at least we're getting those improvements or trying to. Planning Commission May 15, 1990 - Page Meet i ng against the property wiI). have a condition and it's being r.Jritten into all.of them today that states that the property owner, future property ownersare obligated to install the tree and seed and sod. That condition, the development contract is fi1.ed against the property so anybody that does atitle search in the future is going Lo be made aware of it. Then urhat wedo is r.rhen we enforce it aL the time the building permit's pulled whichmight be 5 years or 5 months after the plat is filed. Batzli: I think it's a great idea. Ellson: I like iL too. Better late than never. Emmi ngs: It Iooks have any di ffer entfrontage IoLs? fine to me. The quesLion raised in my mind slandards for double frontage lots than we is do do we for single Krauss: I don't think we do. Conrad: i have no comments. Resident: tJhen I lived in Richfield, the City instatLed and maintained theboulevard trees. Trimmed and replaced them when they died. It was a realboulevard tree right next to the street. Krauss: Yeah, Hinneapolis did that too but the tree in that case isbetueen the sidewalk and the street. Conrad: A little bit different. Anything else? Is there a motion? Batz]i: I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendmenl to the Zoning Ordinance Section ZO-92 pe:.Laining to landscapingrequirements prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for singlefamily dwellings as set forth in the sLaff report dated Hay 9th. t,li I der muth : Second. Batzri moved, tlirdermuth seconded that the planning commission recommendapproval. of the amendment to the zoning ordinance, section 20-92 pertainingto landscaping requirements prior to issuance of certificate of occupancyfor single family dwellings- AII voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL oF HrNurES: Emmings moved, ElIson seconded to approve the Minutes-of the Planning Commi.ssion meeting dated Hay 2, 1990 amended as follows:Steve Emmings sLated that lhe word "ban, should be changed to "band" whenreferring to the sign bands. Brian Batzli changed condition 13 of themotion on page 28 to read, 'application and receipt" rather than'aPPlication or receipt'. AII voted in favor of the Minutes as amended andthe motion carr ied - Krauss: The meeting on Honday night was the first City Council meetingsince you last me! so there uasn'L any time to urrite anything into thereport. The schedule got jumbled up. It's a good excuse. The mostsignificant thing that happened Honday nisht I believe is the fact that thegrading and mining ordinance was approved, t,e're going to be pubhlishingthat next ueek and we wiII start to operate under it as soon as possible, l.Je also prior to the City Council meeting held a joint meeting with theBoard of Adjustments to discuss the variance ordinance and I think thedialogue was a good one between the City Council and the Board andbasically that ordinance wiII 90 foru,ard to the City Council now ulith acouple of minor changes and I don't reci?l] exactly wha! they are but I'IIgive you that information next time. That strikes me as the most salientpoints of what happened on Honday. Ahrens: Any word from Moon VaIley? Krauss: Moon Valley Nas absent from the meeting soresigned to it at this point or what their feeling Iis.don't know if they Batzli: Haybe they don't want to lend an air of legitimacy to the ordi nance . ONGOING ITEI'IS: Batzli: Did we add Bluff preservation to this or should that just be lumped in uith rezoning BF district? I guess it's a potential zoning district ordinance. kind of new Conrad: fL's a good question Brian. Have we updated? I! says revised9th. Have we put any new work items in here Paul? .8ased on last week's meeting, I thought we had several that we were going to tackle but I can remember what they are. Hay 't Krauss: tJel] ule did change a couple things. tJhat exactly r,re changed. Number 2 under zoning code amendments u,ith the BF district, we added that lJe were going to prepare a new zoning district for your review. I don'thave a time frame for that but we'II do it as soon as time permits. Emmings: Did you hear Brian's question. Heprotection ordi nance. Krauss: Oh, as a separate iLem? asked about the bluff Planning Commission Meetingfiay !6, 7990 - Page 15 CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Krauss: That could be. As soon as the ordinance is published however,we're going to send them a registered letter saying the clock is ticking.You have 6 months !o get a permit. Conrad: Any comments about the status of our work agenda? Openissues? Anybody care? Planning Commission Hay !6, 7990 - Page Meeti ng 77 Batzli: Yeah. Krauss: Sure. That's f ine. Conrad: there. Krauss: t^lell to Lhe extent that the junkyard's not in Lhe It's sort of a separate subject that should be researched.down. I'd Iike to uork with Roger on that. tJe talked about another issue and that uras the junkyard downIs that a separate subject? BF distr ict tJe can put now .that Conrad: okay. Another one that we talked about and I don't know ifour issue right now but hre talked about storm brater management and Iyou've got a contrat to do some things. Do I assume that Lre have no it's know role? Krauss: tJeII Chairman Conrad, at this point in time there's no uorkactually proceeding on storm water management or welland ordinances or water quality. tJhat t.le've been doing is working oith the City Council onexploring the possibility of a slorm water utility district which would be used if it's approved, to generate funds to do those plans at such time asthose, right now we're just doing the financing mechanism. At such time as those plans are actually underway, I'm sure we'II be working with you intensively on them. conrad: Anybody feel a need to put that on the work program or should wejust let it ride until it's financing? Anythins else that we can remember from ]ast week or two weeks ago? Okay. ADMINSTRATIVE APPROVALS : Conrad: Are there any adminstrative approvals? Krauss: Actually Lhere's one that we declined to approve adminstratively and will be bringing to the City CounciL Kind of an interesting point todigress on a little bit. The Press is looking to comply uith some PCAregulations and to do that they need some sort of an afterburner deal , aroof mounted sysLem that's quite Iarge. The burner unit itself is about 40-feet Long and 14 or 15 feet high and there's a mass of duct work that would have to go up on the roof and there's also a 50 foot high chimney thatthey're looking at. And this is the initial proposaL . l.,le're very concerned -with what it might look like. t,e r4ant to work urith them to make sure theair is as clean as possible but in the interest of expediting their need to respond to the PCA, He're probably going to try to bring that before theCity Council at their next meeting. They're under a deadline from the PCA -for June 5th I think to bring the thing into compliance. Emmings: tJhat are they putting into theout? Oo you know? air that this system will take Krauss: I don't know. It has something to do with the presses. These are_exhaust sysLems for the presses. They're nou vented out and what this is 9oin9 to do is burn up whatever they're venting out. Exactly what it is Idon't know. I gave the report to'Jay Johnson. He's Lhe person I know LhaL Planning Commission May 15, t99O - Page Heet i ng 18 can read that and he thousht they were on line and doing somethingenvironmentally sound. Krauss: Yeah . Eric Rivkin: Okay. He toLd me that those guys were, they're and they don't have any time, ...they jusL said the opacityunacceptable. They really don't know what's in the smoke butprinting business for a r^rhile and it's pretty bad stuff. Krauss: No, i!'s actually a furnace type unit as I understandi.rith the engineers and ure talked about an internal location andafraid of locating it inlernally for fire hazards so I'm goins them again on Friday to geL some more definition on their plans somelhing that we b,ant to expedite. Krauss; t^Jel I as you can see approve it. u nder s taffed wasI was in the it. I metthey were to meet withbut it's Resident: You don't burn off heavy metals. You have to scrub them outwith urethane. . . Ellson: Ue'II find out soon enough uJon 't hre . this is why we didn't want to adminstratively COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION - REVTSIONS TO LAND USE HAP, UPDATE ON SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANS AND TEXT ISSUES. Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Eric Rivkin: I can shed some light on this. I asked the pollution ControlAgency urhat was going on and they told me that the press b,as cited for toomuch opacity in their smoke. It's not a visua.I problem. I asked them,,well does opacity really mean it just looks bad and he said tro, it means itconlains contaminants that are not acceptable. So Hhat are they going todo about it? tlell he said they're supposed to put in some scrubbers inJune. t^lhat these pipes are smoking out here is solids, heavy metals thatare cancer causing, into the air and they're going Lo, they come off theheaL, the press that dries and this yrater vapor that you see the white smoke contains all these contaminants. If they put the scrubbers in, theopacity !ri. ll go away along with the contaminants so the pCA measures it interms of how it looks but it's really... I have some, I don't know whatthe Press is really doing about their schedule for this but it didn't soundIike the PCA was really spending the time to kind of keep on it to makesure that they are staying on the problems. I think they said the localar.,Lhorities urere supposed to be doing LhaL. Krauss; No, that's not true and the PCA's given them a June 6th deadLineto comply. Eri.c Rivkin: They gave lhem a deadline? Eric Rivkin: By products are supposed to be carbon dioxide and a few less contami nents . Planning Commiss ion l4ay 76, t99O - Pase Heet i ng 79 Conrad: Let's go back. You covered a lot of stuff and I think where you might be very familiar uith it, He're probably not. PauI, start back, Iet's go through these one at a time. I just want tlo see if we've got comments from the commission and maybe even Lhe public here might not be a bad idea to hear what they're having to say about some of these. Go through your Iist. Start us off. Krauss: t^lith the land use? Conrad: Yeah. Land use, or ]et's start at Transportation. I think that's where you started wasn't it? Emmi ngs: Natural features . Krauss: t"leII natural features is Conrad: Okay, that's good. You comments on what the text was? in the text that you don't need to talk to t,lildermuth: I Iiked the revisions to it. To the text. Conrad: I thought it was outstanding. I just Lhink it's really neaL. were going to say something negaLive weren't you and I kind of beat you the punch. received. us about it. Any You to Emmings: No, I've got some little things that I want to, I can talk to Paul about separately because they're basically stylistic but overalL l thought it was good. The one thing that I think is sort of subsLantativeis i.f a little bit trivial. I noticed in the natural features section ue say we've got 9lakes and then the land use section on page 7 it says we'vegot T lakes. I think within our ot.ln report we ought to be consistent andI'm curious as to how many lakes we have. Krauss: t^le wi 1I def i nitely , we 'l I count them aII. It really tell.s you what we're forConrad: and how Ellson: was . Conrad: It 's r.lorthy of worked on that, I think I ist . Iength. I'm real pleased uith that. l.lhoeverdid a nice job. Next item on your laundry That's realLy a good section. we're going to do it. Here I thought you guys were going to complain about how long it that they Krauss:the road Conrad: So how do you want us tothis, do you tranl reaction PauI? Iooking at it. Okay, getting into the land use. First one ue talked about adding netuork and the new roads that uere added. react to the r oad t^le haven't rea I Iy this ti.me? Is lot of time networ k spent a Planning Commission May 16, 1990 - Pase Heet i ng 20 Krauss: I guess Hr. Chairman we've been, some of these roads have been onprevious plans. I asked Mark to include them on the Comp PIan itself sothat you could see how it fit together uith the land use. t^te'l.l bediscussing the individual road segments and traffic Ioadings, etc. indetail when the transportation elements discussed but if you have anygeneral comments, I'd be happy to hear. Conrad: Okay. Are there any general comments. Ellson: I like the road that he put in. I remember thinkins at the sametime when the Shardlow's gave a presentation that that !,,as a good idea forroads so I think that's a good one to add. Conrad; It Iooks 1i ke i.t . Resident: The service road itself at TH 5 from TH 5 compared to the north road? why is that located so far away Resident: How's lhe ]and between Timberwood and that road zoned? Krauss: It's guided single family. It's the samethe communi.ty. It didn't print dark enough but it zlP IS code as elsewhere inthe same . . . Emmings: I think that there's an error on Lhe land use map, They finally have changed, if you look at Ches Har and there's that long strip therethat's indicated, it looks like it's part of the long strip going dourn towards the lake. It looks like it's part of the Campfire camp. Thatisn't. That's private ounership and it has a little boot that sticks outto the north that connects it to the lake. Conrad: Yeah, there's a flag that gives it access. Emmings: This is privately ourned and it pr ivately owned aIso. comes out like this. That's Krauss: We '11 correct it . Ellson: I've got a question example , there's IitLIe treethat mea n? too. If you look at Lake St. Joe symbols aII around Lake St. Joe. just t.lha t as an does Krauss: The north of highway 5 is a service road. It's always been shown a-= that. ThaL makes development rather difficult. Basically you have a dead strip and then you have the road. I guess it does provide a bufferstriD as well. On the south side, we look at the connecting points forthat road and they're somewhat displaced from TH 5. [.,e come off of the HcGIy nrr's site where l',lcGlynn's had a road platted and bringing that across and if we'd like in fact to connect it ultimately to this road going up to TH 41 , it displaces the center Iine south. If you can't have iL right upagainst TH 5, the next best thing is to split the difference so you have enough room on either side. Planning Comm iss ion May 16, 1990 - Page Heet i ng 2t need to clarify thal as well. Theoretically the treepark. Now I'm aware that a lot of that is wetland. Krauss: Maybe we symbol would mea n Emmings: A ]ot of i!'s in private ownership. Krauss: t^iell yes and we've talked to a couple developers about iLrecently. I'lI have to confirm that with the park board. Emmi ngs: But comes from? urho decides to put trees around it? I'm not sure u/here that Krauss: tJell the trees, where the treecurrenLly a park, it implies there's an symbols occur uhere there's no!intent to create a park there. Emmi ngs: 0kay, that's fine. Krauss: You know if you look on Lake Ann Park, there's a 30 acreground that I think is or,rned by the church right now that's being a park expansiorr . Same thing down at Bandimere and we're showingacquisition by Rice Marsh Lake. chunk of shown as new par k Emmings: You should ]ook at this as what the City would look ]ike in theyear 2OOO. Krauss: Emm i ngs : El Ison: Conrad: Emm i ngs : Conrad: Batzli: Conrad: Emmi ngs: EIIson: Conr ad : Kr auss : Conrad r Yes . or after. or would like to look like. t,lhat u,ere we just talkins about? The trees. The trees yeah , but. The corridors before that. Corr idors . You menlioned Lake Ann Park. Lake St. Joe. Did we fi nish? Do you r,Jant to go Lo the next one? Let's go to the next one. t,ell the next one t^las the it at a couple ]ocations creation of an office designaLion and around Timberwood. Krauss: employi n9 Planning Commission May 16, 7990 - Pase Meeti ng 22 Conrad: Tha! was Ursula's suggestion? Krauss: Ursu]a suggested it and frankly it's something that hasn't been done on previous Chanhassen plans but I've done it elsewhere. I mean it'snot an uncommon practice. tjildermuth: tle did have an office institutional . Ellson: See I thoughL r.re had something also. tlildermuth: tle had something that 1aas called the OI designation. Krauss: That's stilL a zoning designation. St. Hubert's is zoned that. Emmings: It's just office though but we sLiII have OI . t^iildermuth: Yeah...and if you Iocate a school somewhere around there,Lhat's what it will be. It will be the OI, office i.nstitutional. Emmings: There's no office institutional. Krauss: There's a zoning district that's office institutional . Emmings: It's not on the key. Krauss: tJell because this is a guide plan. It's not a zoning map. That'ssomething that needs to be made clear. The guide plan will not change theunderlying zoning. t^,here you have large tracts that are zoned ruralresidential right now and if the guide plan shows it as Iow density, it'snot going to change until the property owner makes a rezoning petition tothe City and the CiLy accepts that development plan. Resident: Does office mean buildings like industrial thinss Iike The Presscould be built there? Krausss No, it means that office uses nould be there and I think if wehaven't defined it yet, what ue would defer is that over 8OZ of thebuilding has to be office. Ahrens: OveY 8OZ? Krauss: AO. EI Ison: Or u,,hatever ue designated it . Conrad: Are we all comfortable with the new distr ict? it? It just Does anybody caY e? seems Iike it's lessElIson: t^lelI what's the reasoning behindthreatening than industrial or uhatever? Krauss; tlell iL is in a way. Zoning used to be a pyramidal thins. It wasbased on a heirarchy of uses r.rith the single family home at the top and more and more intensive uses at the bottom with the idea that you segregate Planning Commission l4ay 76, t99O - Page Heeti ng 23 tlildermuth: Paul, hour is the old office institutional?office designation going to differ from the Krauss: t^lell Jo Ann, uJas the office instilutional ever on the guide plan map itself? It's a zoning district so they're different in that respect. There was never a designation on our Comp PIan that said strj.ctly office. conrad: There uras a question or comment out there, Oid I see a hand? Hary Harrington: Yeah. The comment a couple questions back when it came down to the road. On the map it shows the service road Iike TH 7 has..- and J understand what Paul says...tJhy can't they come off the north end ofthe McGIynn's road instead of the south end of it and have it back up tothe road and then come out like they do on the other side where it's closer -up? They're not cutting off the area down there and leaving lhese tractsor whatever it is up closer to the road. I realize that you're trying topromote certain locations and they couldn't string down once they made itpast Galpin, we'd get a different loop across the front end...ha1fway through and they connect back down Lo wherever the impact street is. t^lhy do we have to go cutting through the middle of it? Krauss: tJeII theoretically any of those alignments is possible. Basicallyyou want to connect the end points. Nou, what you uJant to do, ideally theconnection from McGIynn's would be further south so you have continuitywith Park Road. [^,le can't do that perfectly because of the way development has occurred but ideally you don't want to introduce aII that traffic up to TH 5. You'd like to persuade some of it to go south so you don't uant that -intersection all that close to TH 5. As to where the road goes internallyin there, frankly anything's possible. You don't t,ant it too curvalinear.It is a collector street we're anticipating. The more curvalinear it is,the less it will be used. Krauss: Yes. Mary Harrington: tJeII, I realize that you don't !,ant it to be super curvyor anyLhins but it still. could function by going up a little higher off theother and I realize you're trying to come off the park but that r.rould also add congestion to the area which there is planned residential south of theroad and on eilher side of the road but parts of it you wouldn't want to make it a collector street that close t'o the residential although busyness on this type of street is less offensive than industrial or an office or a schoo.L use would be to existing residential. Then I don'! see the, Irealize the point about the park but I don't see why we can't suring up and have some sort of, swing back up to TH 5 and do like we're doing on lhe everyone from the other one. That's not the way the real world funclionsbut office use is generally regarded as less intensive than industrial use. You don't have heavy trucks. You don't have shift work. The buildings are-generally more attractive or hopefully Lhey are. Traffi.c is often worsebut that's an impact that you can deal with. l,lary Harringtonr The one on Lhe north is a collector street too? Planning Comm ission l4ay 76, l99O - Page Heet i ng 24 north end and why dc,w n there . are we necessarily run all the traffic through the area Resident: The offices wouldvisibi I ity on TH 5. probably like to face TH 5 too and get [.li]dermuth: Be served f rom the back. Krauss: And they would be doing that,. They would be oriented to TH 5 Resident: And then the address r,rould be to the back of it. Krauss: t^lell one thing that didn't shou here, if you look there,s twocorridcrs with trees in them shown in LhaL area. Both of those are creeks.Bluff Creek. The tJestern one is also a location that MnDot has said you can access TH 5 so there would be a link from that internal road up to TH sat thaL point and thaL office site, if the office goes there, *ould accessoff that link. Ahrens: As far as collector streets being located in residential neighborhoods, they're locaLed in residential neighborhoods throughoutentire plan. They run through Kerber BIvd., they run on Pleasant Vier.rand dor.r:r Lake Lucy Road. I mean there's houses right on all those col I ector st r eets the Roa d Emniings: The parcel that's identified as aasterick, whaL's the size of the parcel, of ove:- to the trees and down to Timberwood. school search area with thethe whole thing from Galpin Krauss: It's approximately 4O acres. That would be the school site. Con:-ad: The school would need the entire space? Krauss: And the road Hould have to skirt around that somehou. Emmings: Then the road uould have to be on either Lhe north end or thesouth end. Krauss: Depending on hohr the school plan develops, .yeah. Ernmings: So there are a lot of things that can impact the location of thisroad. Krauss: I have to add too that the road on the north side that's set up asa frontage road was developed for a different purpose. It came out of the downtou;n development and the downtown main street extended to the west anda Cesire to serve Lake Ann Park to provide safer intersection to Lake AnnPark and not run the street somewhere through the middle of the park butminimize the impact. So it follor^red an alignment that paralled TH 5. Conrad: If the school goes in there, and that's probably reallyhypothetical, do we really need a collector then? Planning Commission May 15, 1990 - Page Meet i ng 25 Krauss: Possibly not. It would sliII be desireable from a traffic standpoint to have iL but you'd have to weigh the pros and cons. If a school goes in there, you still have a loop if you wiII from HcGlynn'sgoing north to where that connecLion is on TH 5 and then the continuity is there for that point and that may be suffici.ent. Ahrensr I would think that it would be even more necessary if the school was there then. To have a street located. conrad: Access to the school. Ahrens: Yeah, access to the school.. E}Lson: Versus everyone turning left off of TH 5. AII the buses and everything. Ahrens: Right. Krauss: i'd have to add too that the traffic leveLs that we're showing from Eastern Carver county traffic modeL on TH 5 are extremely high. You're looking at, the model's projecting 40,OOO to 50,OOO trips a day. On t l-,a r'- type of road, that's an awful lot of traf f ic. If you can keep people off of that, local trips off of that it would be safer for everybody. Ahrens; Especially the people driving kids to school . conrad: Yeah. It's a valid point. Resident: ...the other mentioned three. tuo possible Iocations for the school, I think you Krauss: The school looked at a site north of TH 5 near Lake Ann Park wlrich I think is Gorra's property. They also Iooked at a piece of property - on the soutl-r part of the Eckankar site. The Eckankar site raises someproblems for the City and for the school district. If the Park's going to be expanded as we !^rant it to be, there's not enough room to put a school in-there and you've got to also question Lhe point of putting a school adjacent to the main street of Chanhassen which is someday going to be developed comrnercially. Also, in terms of proximity to the students, it was too far east. The Gorra site is a possibility. The grades didn't appeal to them as much- You only have access off that frontage road or off TH 5 on that parcel which makes it a little more problematic to use and Iguess from a staff point of vieu, it didn't encourage their residentialcorridor to jump south of TH 5 as we felt a school. might. Resident: Oid Lhey you look at the b,est of Galpin BIvd.? Krauss: No they didn't because that's not being proposed to be sewered.It's outside the sLudy area. Resident: You mean of ...on south of TH 5 and west of Galpin Road is no! part Planning Comm ission Hay 16, 7990 - Page Heet i ng 26 Krauss: no. Oh south of TH 5 is. The school disLrict did not look in there, Resident: Any reason for that? Krauss: tJe suggested some sites with them. l.,e went out and looked at themwith them and those were the ones we came up with. Resident: tlhat' would be differenL about going uesL or east? Krauss: l^lell west of Galpin you run into some environmental constrainLs. tJhere that road is shown coming through, the single family area to thesouth is quite full of wetlands and extensive tree cover. A school needsto clear fairly extensive areas if they're not already cleared. Thepreferred site right now is the cullivated field. There's nothing to losethere. It can be graded quite easily. The area to the north between thatroad and TH 5 real]y wasn't large enough to accommodate the school unlessyou really pushed it further to the Nest and if you push it lhat far to thewesL, is that still a Chanhassen school at that point. Conrad: Any more questions in relation to Lhe schools? Anything? M6ry Har-ring'-on: ft's my understanding Paul , you said the site adjacentuas seLect-ed by you after you folks had gone out and seen several differentsites uith the school district and they had not formally picked a site. They had preferences for a few of them and from my understanding from thegentleman you did not shor,r them anything in the section that u,e have ahorizonlal line on the IefL hand side of this map south of TH 5 and just east of TH 41 where you see a little bump out section down there, there'spresently a house down there. That area is very flat. It also has acreagethat is tilled and what not. That u,as not shoun to them? Is thaL correct PauI? Krauss: l.Jell Hary, wha! we showed to them, we had discussed 3 sites on a map arrC then we brousht them out here and urent out with their architect. l^le drove up and dor^rn the corridor and they were Iooking at the entirecorridor. t^ie looked specifically at 3 sites that had been chosen. Krauss I Yes. Mary Harr i ngton:for them? I mean you didn't pick out that one to take a look at Krauss: No! in detail, no. Hary Harrington: You had picked on a map for them? Hary Harrington: No. Okay, maybe that's a site that you might be closerto the middle and some sort of service road and being on a service roadmight not be that bad of an idea. I know in Edina one of the high schoolsis sitting on a service road off of the freeway and it didn't stop the carsor the buses from getting to the high school or junior high on the eastside. I forget. I did send my kids there. But I drove past it aII the Planning Commission May 15, 1990 - Page Meet i ng 27 time...on the service road they were able to get to it. I'm in question about taking that entire 40 acre site just north of Timberwood and plunking in a buil.ding which in effect is very similar to an office building aestheLj.cally and with ballfields and parks, etc. because the junior high children are not going to spend their life indoors. You know you have gym time and what we have effectively done then is ue have cut off Lhe residential uses between the Timberwood area and just north of it and then by putting the office zoning in on the other side, you've also cut off the residentiaL uses and potential because as you said, south of that curvy road on the wesL side of Galpin there is a lot of Iotrland and trees and boggy...which obviously will not get developed into houses unless we run out of land in the future and they b,ant...so uhat you've done is you've effectively cut off sociologically the site of Timberwood and on theparticular use map you have surrounded it with offices, a school whichfuntions and looks aesthelically Iike an office, another office and then you've dragged the commercial out and you have psychologically and emotionally totally closed off that community of Timberwood and the residents who li.ve on the other side of Galpin and the people who don'L live in Tirnberwood but they are on GaLpin just belor^r it. I don't find that to be... Conrad: So your point is, you really don't want a school there? Is that really r{hat you're saying? That's a long way of lelling us. There are aIot of siles for schools but I'm just trying to... Mary Harrington: I would like a school. Conradt Not there? llary Harrington: Not necessarily pushed in my back yard, Conrad; Yo.r said some other things that ule just have to respond toreally haven't, we've been trying to cluster residential around and statement ulas ure've totally cut you off and I don't understand what saying. tJe your you're Hary Harrington: t^,lith this particular concept r.rith the off ices . making a comment that I wasConrad: No, I heard what she said. Somebody's wrong but I heard exactly r,lhat she said. Mary Harrington: Okay. If I could refer to the other one that we have here we've got residential , the last map...residential uses b,ere all in the-area where it's zoned office and Lhen it t^tas aII, just kind of that sectionaIl the way down and then there was residential, abeit it was hish density and medium density and then regular density just to the north of it and then it sr^,ung around with this tiny little strip and so there wasresidential. Now this residential has been eliminated okay and it's been shut off by changing this thing to putting the offices that had residentialinitially. Does that make sense? ltaybe I uasn't explaining it right. I'm-just saying that if we're going to put a school in, maybe we should... where there isn't a lot of neighbors around it so the neighbors who volunLeer to move around the school as opposed to putting a school in and Planning Commission May 15, 7990 - Page Meet i n9 2A you push it on the existing group of neighbors who maybein having it aII part of the school and not residential not i nterested there. are uses Conrad: Any other comments on schools? Resident: At a prior meeting, I think iL uras...no one wanted to put any medium density residential there because nobody wanted kids anywhere near TH 5. That was a big issue t^ras hey, we don't u,ant kids near TH 5 and nowyou're goi.ng to put a school on TH 5? It just doesn't make sense. Then Paul said that we put a school in and residential tends to develop aroundi! but as Mary points out, he's putting office on the left, office on theright, commercial across the streeL. t^le could devalue 3 sides by nowresidential , you can't put residential there. There's not going to be anyattraction. There's not going to be developed any residenLial around theschool if now we've changed the land just west of Galpin to office and the lancl right within office... It's going to be basically cut off compleLelyother than Timberwood and there's that low wetland to develop off of there and Lhat's aII. Conracl : Jusl to quickly respond. The school district picked that sitecul. They said that was flne so we're noL experts in locating schools. Ithink your comments on close to traffic, that's interesting. I think they obviously feel that that's not a problem but still it is. It's of interest!o me that they'd want to locate a school on a busy street. Emmings: Minnetonka High School's on TH 7 Conrad: l'linnetonka's there too. En,m i ngs : Hopkins High School, conrad: Access is really a key function f guess for school districts. Eri.c Rivkin: I have a question, maybe PauI could answer this. Is there apositive impact or the design that Eden Prairie did with their Eden Prairie High School and the park at Round Lake Park, the community center kind ofall rolled inlo one bis pile of land there. I mean to me it's borderingresidential but I know a lot of the residents that live there are, they're developed so nicely they don't mind seeing that because they've got thepark, it's kind of a buffer to the school. They've.got Duck Lake and aII tha! stuff behind there and the residents in the Duck Lake uere there before the hish school went in. There urere some objections and stuff but after it uent in the design of the high school and ever)zLhing, put al.l the ballfields and all that kind of noisy stuff toward the park trhere iL sras a good design. I'd like to know in clusting that kind of thing, uouldn'! that be more of a, to find a uay to kind of t"rork that into the plan if the school district, I don't think they're realIy in the business of planning co:,munities. I think they're in the business of schooling your children so perhaps nexE to the Arboretum instead of an industrial area there, perhaps Lhat r^rould make a better site. You've goL ponds Lhat needs to be developedinto somelhing like park. The Arboretum I know, I've talked to thesepeople, the head of the Arboretum, they do not like a Fleet Farm or whatever as lhe proper Land use for that next to the Arboretum. They fear Planning Commi.ssion l4ay 16, 1990 - Page Meet i ng '-h: worse wilL happen to that both environmentally and aesthetically to thecomiiiuni'.y. It's one of the most inapporpriate zonings I've ever seen onthis but I think that might be a good site. Haybe come in from the souLhrather than from TH 5like you did at Round Lake. That mighL be a bettersite and it's kind of a nice buffer for the Arboretum. It wouldn't be hishdensity residential , it would be offices and so forlh so that's just asuggestion. Maybe think about that. Conrad r Next item. Krauss: l^lel1 the next one was a minor one. It was the Bluff Creek trailcorridor. Conrad: okay, any comments on the Bluff Creek? Anything? Then where'dyou go? Krauss: The MUSA Highlands. donut hole and treatment of Timberwood and Lake Lucy Conrad: go talk to me about the 2 7/2 acye on that is kind of new. I trent through the The Lake Lucy Highlands issue, teII me whatthat PauI. Krauss: Well Lake Lucy HighLands was platted 1987 ordinance that created Timberwood. It'sa1l with on-site sewer and as with Timberwood,uould be further subdivided or need utilities nrinimal so ure thought there was good reason todealt with in a similar manner. deal . f guess your perspective- 2 L/2 acYe deal many years ago.you're thinking in terms of under the same ordinance, pre a 2 L/2 acre plus subdivision-lhe Iikelihood that thatin the future is pretty thi.nk that they should be conrad: Now your perspective on that, you know we have aof us tonight. Now what's here on this petiLion, is that bundled i nto this? petition in front uhat you've Krauss: No, it's not. Conrad: ft's not, This is expanded. Krauss: The petition has a much larger area. Conrad: So your commenls are really for what is existing? Krauss: Yes. Conrad: Okay, weII this is a two prong deal . Anybody have a concern withthose 2 7/2 acYe folks? t,!ildermuth: Is the Het Council real.ly goin9 to let us do something ]ikethat? Fr agrne nt it.? Krauss: tJeII if you draw a donut hoLe around it and draw their attentionto it, the answer is probably no. If you accomplish the same thing by Planni n9 Commissionfiey 16, t99O - Page Heet i n9 30 gu j.ding it Somewhat differently and putting we can pull that off.IN plan text, I'm pretty sure tJildermuth: What happens if in the middle of one of these areas, let's sayfor one reason or another ure have 2 or 3 systems that fail. Of course on a2 7/? acre lot there should be enough area available for deve).opment ofanother drainfield location but if something like that should occur, what r,lould your plan be? To put in holding tanks? Krauss: tle've had a similar case up on Lake Lucy Road a few months ago where there weye 2 homes with failing seu,,er systems and I believe that beLween them they have about 10 acres but due to the location of lhe homesand in their view the proximity of utilities, they didn't feel it was expeCiaLe or fiscally smart to put in another drainfield or even possible on one of the homes to put another drainfield. So the utilities are in theprccess of being expanded down Lake Lucy Road to pick up those tuo homes. The Metro Council. did approve that extension. Ui lCernruth: But let.'s say that you had a situation like that that .,roulddevelop in the interior of one of these areas. tlho's going to stand thecost of running collector Iines? Krauss: tJell frankly it gets very difficult. tlhat you would have is ascenario where one homeouner needs utilities and nobody else around him orher does and il would be very expensive to bring it in because the City Cour,ciI xould have a difficult time assessins it oversomebody that uasn'tgoing to use it and wasn't going to benefit. Uildermuth: Can the I'let Council force the issue? Krauss: No . Eric Rivkin: I can answer Jim's concerns. Since the subdivision of Lake Lucy llighlands and Timberwood, as a condition of the building permits everysingle one of those 2 \/2 acye sites had to have an alternate site for the septic system. t^Je had to rope them off in case the first one failed, you had a second one and I have some other concerns about that address that. Tha'. relate to the comprehensive plan draft. I tried to tie it togetherwith the overall plan and specific concerns that you have about septic systems and their...and all Lhat. Is this like just an open discussion her e? Conradr That's the way I've been handl.ing it although it wasn't really int-ended as, we're using it to get input really. The key for me, Lo tellyou lhe truth, the key for me right noll is the staff has dome some things over the last month and some of these are new to us. Really the point isfor Planning Commission to say hey, we haven't looked at that before and we r,rar-t to give them some additional direction. It really has not been to get comnnunily input but being that you're all here, I'm kind of, it's kind of nice to know where you stand on some of these things and in lerms of septic systerrs what you're bringing up, I think we've gone through, we are pretty familiar urith what you're talking about. tle've had some experts in Lalking to us about it. Planning Commission l4ay 76, 7990 - Page Heet i ng 31 Eric Ri.vkin: I have a whole list of things !haL, on the map and text that and I want to address the petition too and I'd like to know urhen urould be a-good point in time to interject that so I can just talk it all out.There's a loL of things that you haven't heard before and probably don't knoi^l about that I Nant to bring out to your attention. Conrad: ReLating to what in particular? Eric Rivkin: t^lell the text of the. . . Eric Rivki.n: And the map and the petition. Conrad: WeIl f'm interested in the petition. I don't know that I'm realinterested tonight in the text. t^lhich text are you talking about? Eric Rivkin: llell the Comprehensive PIan draft text. I understoodfrom the agenda that you were going to welcome comments on the textplan. That uas my understanding. l^lhen does tha! come? thaL and the- Emmings: Can't he take those to the staff? Can't he take his comments tothe staff and let them consider them and then to the extent that the staffdoesn't address them, he can bring them back at a public hearing can't he? Eric Rivkin: I wanted the public to hear these so they could comment. Emmings: Yeah but that has to be done... Conrad: My perspective would be, rather than just those that are heretonight, I think other people should be invited. The forum is a public hearing for that. That is the forum. This is not a public hearing rightnow. This is really just discussion here with staff and planning Commission. Eric Rivkin: There arefor the hear i n9 . some things here that ulould help you fine tune it Conrad: And that's why I'm opening it up a little bit. Let us see lhere ure go oir some of these things and maybe I can direct or open up somethings, I'm real interested in lhe 2 t/2 acre and that's where ue're atright nour. Jim, did you have any additional comments on the Z L/2 ac(eholes? Emmings: Can't he bring those to the staff? Conrad: UeIl those are in public hearing formats and unless, again ueappreciate getting as much input as t4e can but sometimes it gets out ofcontrol and I'm not sure how to handle what you've got in your material.Tonight t^ras really not a night to go through the text. Tonight was thenight for us as a Planning Commission to hear the additional staff, thethings that I'm covering righ! nour in terms of getting us familiar withwhat staff is recommendi ng . Pl.anning Commi ss ion May 16, 1990 - Pase Heeti ng a) t,,i ldermuth: No . Conrad: The question that remains is that r.re've us that really Hants to expand that, Do u,e as astaff to look into that expansion possibility? got a petition in front of Planning Commission want Emmings: I wonder if ue t^rant toplat the property. I wonder why do that without we 'd want to do there being any plan tothat. Conrad: Well it's creating athat. UsuaI ly when, PauI? zone and you know I don't mind looking into Krauss: I just wanted to clarify something. It's not creating a zone.Ulai it's doing is creating a potential for future development. The i,n.Jer).yin9 area, I think most of our petition is zoned rural residential. which is ]arge lot unsewered zoning right now. The Comp Plan coming inwill not change that. ThaL won't change unless the property ou,ner requeststhat it be changed. cc;'rrad: Yeah, but still they will sink up. If h,e say that this is ]argeIo*- o:, the comp plan, that's what He want. Cor'rad: So yeah, you're right. It may not be petitioned to be zoned that uray but geez r He're saying we're committing that ure want large lots there.f heer luhat you're saying yet on the other hand I have to sink the twotogeiher. This is comprehensive plan but it's almost the same as zoning because whoever owns that land can quality for whatever we said ue wantedhere. 9!) f go back, 2 L/2 acyes. Basically to assess, to take anothergocd look aL ? 1/2 acre lot sizes as potentially for our zoning, I think i1;'s been pelitioned. I think there are enough people, at leasL in my mind '-h;*. wculci like it. I think there are some people who wouldn't but PauL we need you Lo do an analysis of expanding the 2 l/2 acre from the Lake Lucy Highlands to broadened area. l.Jildermuth: Wou]d maintaining these 2 !/2 acye lot size areas preclude anyone within the area from subdividing? Krauss: I had a ]ong talk with the City Attorney about that today. The ordinance uas changed in 1987 to preclude 2 L/2 acye lots uith on siLeser{er. That applies in the rural service area so right now the only wayyou could subdivide property there is a gross density of l per 10 acres. Lake Lucy Highlands and Timberwood could not happen today. If the HUSAIine is expanded, it gets fuzzier. Apparenlly you have more latitude oddly enough with the HUSA line expanding and flexibility frankly to use on site sei.Jer. tJe agreed with the Hetro Council in 1987 to deal with the areaoutside of the MUSA Line in that way- There was nothing explicitedly agreed to r,rith r.ihat happened inside Lhe HUSA line. Eric Rivkin: It was my understanding when I received the draft plan fromyou and drafted the petition uras that if the MUSA Iine uere extended, could2 i/2 acye lots wiLh no service exist within a MUSA boundary and it was my Krauss: That's true. PIanni n9 Commiss ion May 15, 7990 - Page Meet i ng 33 understanding that it could so I drafted the petition around that, tlildermuth: t^Jhat PauI is telling us that it can but the question of the owners of the 2 !/2 acye lots wants to subdivide, how small increment of land can ure tolerate a septic sysLem? is, one an Krauss: tle'd have to do some research on that, It's an issue that's not been dealt urith by the City- Areas that have developed inside the MUSA Line have developed with sewer. I'm not auare of any exceptions to that . Eric Rivkin: It would be too big of an environmental threat if you had more density wiLh septic systems beyond Lhe 2 L/2 acye. In fact, I don't kno,.; that it would be acceptable to even our City Council that having this rnuch land trith 2 L/2 acye r.rith septic uould not be an environmental threat eithe:. I want to make clear the thrust of the petition. Since we ci:cula'-eC it, there's been a Iot of changes going on and I guess thefallcut frcm this is a set of expectations I guess that I L,ant to make cle:i' so that you undeistand where we're going to 90. tle hrant to 9o ahead f crL;ard. t^]e'd Iike to have some kind of incentives or guarantees buil!into the pclicies that for Lhose who uant to keep large lots are not penaLized by the facto by keeping the land in the natural state and not subdividing, tle don't Hant to be forced to seII and move on because offorced assessrnents or un*anted utilities. [.Je Hant guarantees tha! if a septic syst€m fails in a large lot zoned area u,ith no foreseeable hook upor feasible hook up to ser.,er, that that o.^,ner would have the right torepsir it or use that alterantive site thaL the City allowed them to haverather than forced to leave and subdivide in order to pay to bring in a seu:er line and likewise force all their neighbors to do Lhe same because riow they're going to get hit with all these assessments. l.Je want to rid ourselves of so called pending special assessments on utilities ue don't uee nD!4 or wiLl never use in the foreseeable future. There in effect, He've got $45O.OO an acre assessed on us now for the Lake Ann Interceptor.That's as good as Ievied because when we buy or sell the property as manypeople have, they puL Lhe money in the pending specials in escrow and the $48O,OOO.OO that was spent by Chanhassen basically was taken out ofcirculation IocaIIy by Lhe people uho own Lhese lots- I could have had !E4,650.0O more to finish my house which would have increased the value. Given the City more laxes. The Horan's could have used their $2,8OO.OOtaken away by their bank to do more p]anting. The CordeII's could have used their money to take their treeless lot and make more, increase theirvalue too. t^le don't want to be taxed on the basis of potential forsubdivision- Zoning is very important nou, as Ladd said or implied and thepetitioners want to stay rural residential or J.arge Lot residential and thetax benefits that 9o with it. t^li ldermuth: I think this issue is going to keep Roger rea.Lly busy. K)-auss: If I coul.d interject for a moment. The special assessmenL that Eric Rivkin: Now as far as the feasibility, ue just t.tant to keep discussions soins on this. We want to sit down uith them in discussions and- be able to. . . Planning Commission l4ay !6, t99O - Page Meet i ng 34 Eric's referring to was one that was approved by the Cily Council over 3y.ars ago relative to the inslallation of the Lake Ann Interceptor. TheCity basically fronted the money for the construction or our share of thecost with the assessments to be levied againsL undeveloped properties and Ithink Eric's risht, it's $460.OO an acre and those have been listed aspending specials. It's a Lrunk charge basically. But the Planning Cornrirission's not really in a position to anticipate uhat the City Council did 3 years ago in terms of over ruling that assessment. ThaL's somethingthat lhe city Council would need to deal with and it reall.y doesn't have, si.nce it took place 3 years ago I don't believe it has a direct bearing onthe Comprepehsive Plan itself. Eric Rivkin: The map that you have before you nou, does reflect one thing '.hat we wanted in the petition and that's large Iot zoning but not in the area3 '-hat r,rere petitioned. I can go over here to show you the petitioners '-l-,at i.:a.nt ',he Large lot zone. It exLends all the way to TH 41 . If I had more time with this petition I could have gotten a lot more signatures, S,c;ne of them along TH 41 here but uhen you talk about foreseeable future and who l.rants to subdivide and who doesn'i, Lhese are the people. As far as going all the way to where seu,er stops on Lake Lucy Road, these people siened the petition and do not eant to develop into quarter acre lots. If they wan*. to cievelop, they expressed a concern of the environment and thequantity of land that's in these houses. The...are too steep there, They've got a lot of wetlands. They can'L subdivide either. They're in the same kind of lot type that ure in Lake Lucy Highlands are. They may have )arger land areas but they are undevelopable. There's 2 exceptions here ancl as f ai- as developability is concerned but they in spirit, as long asthey're Iiving there, want to stay large lot. This is an area...and Hennesee's and Jerome Carlson who owns this and this also want to see largelot residentiaL. t^le plan to submit the petition to the Hetropolitan Council since it has been already submitted and ure don't... conrad: You're submitting the petition to the Metropolitan Council? Erir Rivkins t,ell we're going to copy them. Just give them a copy of thepeti.tion to le! them know our feelings but we don't see that that's maybe any guarantee Lhat uer'e going to get what r.le uant but ue do see one thing that is pointed in the right direction here and that's large lot residenLial . I'm just saying as we circulated the petition, these are thepetitioners who want that designation. The ones theit I couldn't get, well there are some fence sitlers there but basically that's the kind of lots tl',at these people h,,ant and if MUSA is extended, we feel also, I don't knowif we'lI get this but we're willing to concede if that's the case that we do;r't want it until the year 2oOO which is kind of wha! the deal r.ras. Things will quiet down for a uhile and it uould give the City andyourselves some time !o be able to assess the environmental. impact ofpa:'t.icular developments in cerLain areas so that maybe to plan a little bitbe:ter so that things aren't done in a rush and knee jerk fashion and thenyou find out later that you've just polluted your watershed to the hilt. conrad: I reall.y do want to study this. I think it's valid in terms of then, petitioning. I think in my mind the potential of a large lot zone is Planning Commission !.i6y 16, 7990 - Page Meet i ng 35 Krauss: f would be happy uhat you HanL me to bring it but I guess I need someI mean clearly you can do direction as to that . to do back. Conrad: Yeah. Pros and cons. There's some financial aspects I think. Thething that worries me about rdhat Has just said are there are some cases where you could have sewer failure and you're asking for no, a guarantee that the one thing lre're not going to do is say somebody has seurer failure -that we're just 9oin9 to al]ow contamination and what have you and that'sbasically b,hat you've kind of said. tJe're not going to, don't force us to hook up. I think the City has an obligation to maintain all the quality of-Iife that you moved into that area for and so I see a Iot of legal things.f see a lot of probl.ems potentially getting what you want because to insuretl,ai r,ie're mainLaining the natural aspects, there are some things that u,ejust have to look at. tJe've lried to do 2 !/2 acyes before in this cityan'j f was involved in that and at the end the neighbors didn't, when they sah, Nhat it entailed and the fact that they couldn't subdivide anymore, alot of thern pulled out. That's the other thing that's going to have tohappen. ff we decide to do this, and again I'm just speaking for myselfright now. Only for myself but there are certainly financial implicationsof tha!. The future potential . It would be in my mind, it would be large -lot zoning and nobody could subdivide period until you changed the zoning and therefore that has some impact on neighbors on your pelition. It may seem nice to keep the green but when you say you cannot subdivide, thereare financial impl.ications and personally I'm aIl for what you're talking abotrt but there's a whole Iot of stuff in Lhe way of getting you there and h,e can kind of work with you on that and see hrhat we can do. I feel that u:a;' ar,d again I'm speaking just for myself right now l.1ar r' Harrington: The Cily of Orono has large lot areas and i! uorks ourveiT nice as far as it's a very prime area and high value. Very soughLafter. From an appraisal standpoint, people look for somelhing like that.That's kind of r.lhat Lhey want. It's something that Chanhassen is knownfor. You don't come here because they...buildings. They come here becauseit's small town and it has a rural nature and it's more small lots, look hot^r fas! the lots gobbled up in Lake Lucy and hou fast they sobbled up inwhere is the place I live in, Timberurood. They really uent fast from an economic sta ndpoi nt Conrad: And I hear whaL you're saying and. . . really a market for them.Mary Harrington: There's Conrad: There real Iy is. laary Harrington: You couLd be another Orono. Conrad: But you realIy end up with like urith the problems you're experiencing right nor.r. As b,e expand you end up with some problems because communities aren't, it's more difficult to deal uith some of these largelots and buffer and alI those things. They're unique situaLions but still valid in Chanhassen but I need Paul , you to come back to us and lookat it. Planning Comm ission l.4ay 16., 199O - Page t'leet i ng 36 anybiay, other people here, you knoNin pursuing this? Should ure directlot? Mary Harrington: Right but I mean a say in on Iike south of Carver Eeach I spoke for myself. staff to take a good Are we i nterested Iook at a large i^,ildermuth: I think the idea is great. I'd like to know the pros and consof the large lot zoning. Cor,rad: Ne just need you to come back whenever PauI and jus! say here's uha! ihe implications are. I think the citizens should know too Lhe dok;rstream type of stuff, As you get. inlo large lots. Eric Rivkin: t^lhat can happen. t^lhat can't. The 18O foot rule or whatever it is. ff you're, if this did go in like on Lake Lucy Road there, we don't have any objections to people extending the line hooking up to there but th; people on the south who don'L have subdivideable lots, are they going to be fcl-ced Lo hook up just because their house happens to be closer to Lake Luc>' Road and they've got a functioning septic system? It's kind of unfair so where development ends and uilderness begins, you've got to draL,t-hr I i ne sornei.lhere and that's where i! is . coirad: 9ee the implications of some of the things Lhat you're going to see '.hough is if I don't see somebody wanting this, more than likely we may rr.l- include it in the large lot area. I think there's a financial taki.ng to people who don'L wan! the large lots and they're going to be in here lobbying against urhat you want. Eric Rivkin: WelI the petition is not an all or nothing proposition. It was simply, actually right now it's simply came out to be a caLalys'- for discussion anci get people moving and that's Hhat's happening, Conrad: You've got out there. us going, We're responding to that. There was a hand Ed Hasek: I was just inlerested, I'm fairly familiar with orono and some of the problems that they had wiLh servicing their. . .because of their large 1o! developments. It'd be interesting to know what kind of taxes comPared to taxes that are generated by large lot comPared to small lot and what that can and can't do for the City as a whole because the City j.s more thanjusL a large lot subdivision. It is a single family out there that's aquarter acre and lt's their kids and it's their streets and it's their utilities and so forth and so on so from an ob,ner standpoint utithin the Cily I'd like to know how ]arge lot developments carry their own portion of ulha+-'s going on from that respect. Ma)'y Harrington: tlell from an appraisal standpoint, I'm an appraiserit usually tends to be worth 2,3 oy 4 times the value and sometimes especia.Lly in Li.ke in orono. and mor e Ed Hasek: Tha!'s usuaLly the case but that's not the case in Chanhassen. That's riot the case in Chanhassen. Iot of your Chanhassen Road and east of, whaL houses let 'sis it cR 117 Planning Commission Ma)' 15, t99O - Page Meet i ng 37 there, that have a }ot of nice little splits and split entries and splitfoye:'s and there are a lot of these houses that are up and worth 2 L/z Lo 3 more times the value of those nice houses and they're picking up the tab. Conradr tlell r.re'll take a look at that. I think that's one of the thingsthat xe should know. I guess personally if somebody moved out here and wants to live on a large lot, boy I teII you, that's why you moved out here . Eric Rivkin: And the people in Pheasant Hills, a Lot of them, we've beenin some meetings abouL that Carrico AddiEion there and uJe brought this up and they said they would sign a petition just because they think the largelots next to them are amenities to seII for the values of their homes. And-lhe people in Greenwood Shores expected the same thing so lhe surroundingcomnunities Iike to see the green belt. They definitely do. aon]-ec': ft's going to be trouble with the people that you want in thisalea when Lhey find out that they can'L subdivide. They're going to beraal irritat-ecJ E:-ic Rivkin: Hell why isn't that, like I say, this is not an aIl ornoth-ing proposition. This is a catalyst and if all uJe can get out of thisie large lot zoning with some guarantees for the future, that may be fine. -3kay? A).right. f 've goL a couple other basic questions. Eric Rivkinr About environmental impact on the plan and whether or not,:'.i tike to knoi.,r ulhether or not you plan to fill ouL an environmental assessment worksheet for this in the planning stages before it gets accepted. Conrad: On the entire plan? Eric Rivkin: WeII according to the Environmental Ouality Review Board,this comprehensive plan qualifies as a project requiring'an EAU. The wayit sits before it goes to Counci] or h,hen it goes to the Hetropolitan -council or whatever but before it gets accepted and voted in and concreLe,it is a process that requires one so. Conrad: f'm not familiar uith that. Krauss: If I could respond to that. Hr. Rivkin is wrong on that issue.There's probably been about 4OO comprehensive plans approved in Lhe TwinCities si.nce 1977. Not a one of them has an EAU or an EIS. Now thatdoesn't mean that some of the issues that could be raised are unvalid butLhe plan itself is a study of what Lhose issues are. you're getting thaL, -that's what the comprehensive plan is. Conrad: That's a surprising staLement on your part. If you have someini'ormaLion that uJe should be aware of, why don't you talk to staff aboutit and i think they're the ones that have to meet the State requirementsand we're reaIIy responding to t,letropolitan Council's requirements so as Flanning Commiss ionllay 16, t99O - Page tleeL i ng 3a you know ure're reaIly sensitive to environmental issues here. You're not t6.Lking to some foLks that aren't sensitive to lhat so we're trying to plan around lhose issues so I'm no! sure where you 're going with that but ifyou've got some stuff, I'd sure hand it to the staff and they can Iook atit an,j apprise us of whaL it means. Anything else? Eric Rivkin: Yeah, I h,an! to commend, I read the comprehensive plan Craft over and I r^ran! to commend the Planning department for addressing such environmentally sensitive comments in there and most of it sounds really good and I just hope down the road that the actions malch lhe words. I would suggest some specific goals and policies relating to environmentalprotection that I have in here and I u,anted to hopefully go over lhem torright. Conrad: HeII could you, seriously what trorks really good for us is to get us colirients in advance so u,e can look at them and see uJhat they are onpaper. Even to the point of getting your comments to staff so staff could Cist:'iblite them to us. Then ule can react having thought about it as in anygroup r-iot ihinking about something that not rea.Lly, you could talk to us bu*- really it's hard Lo react on the spot so I'd really if you could put the time, and I appreciate you going Lhrough that. I think that's just r,utsta:-.di ng that you t"rould but the best forum for doing that and Iglarantee they're not going to be dropped. h,e wiIl read them but if you cc":lJ gel staff a copy of urhat you've got, staff can get that out in a kit, ir: a packet ano' r"te can review it and it's a lot better format for reviewing -,,-^-^L ! ^^^5u!J9=5Lr.(,rr5. iaiaus=: fn fairness to Eric, he reviewed the earlier draf! of the Natural Features secLion. You did not have the updated one. Some of the stuff '-hat's in there came out of our discussions and some other things that were going on- In fact, why don't I jusL give you a fair copy of that so you can see the update. Li-t.- !l:v;:r,: InanK you. Conrad: But I really, I'm trying to make this meeting move but I don't urani to discounL Lhe enersy you put in- Not at aII. I totally aPPrecia'.e the time. tle're not the urisest people in the world as some PeoPle can submit to or believe but we really like that kind of input. That's just terrific. Eric Rivkin: I'1I try to get a !.rritten meeting and I guess I would expect thaL of TH 5 would be. summary and before lhe June since, you said that people 6rh north Krauss: t^le had arbitrarily I guess had to sPlit it up somehow so what.. . issues above TH 5 on the 6th and below TH 5 at the 20th. If ure need more meetings, we'11 schedule those at the July meetings but for noh, tha! seemed to be lhe best way to ki.ck off the process. E:ic Rivkin: Is someone from this commission going to be at the Eagan Town HalI tomorrow uhere they're discussing this cutLing edge ordinance about the sewer utility fund lhat's going to be created for utility bills to fund PIanni ng Commiss ion Mai 15, 1990 - Page HeeL i ng 39 a protection for the runoff? aware of the Eagan program and have been given copiesKrauss: Ne're f u.Llyto the City Council. Conrad: Say that again. Steve was volunteering to go that's uhy I didn't hear. Krauss: [.le've been fo]lowing. There's a number of communities thaL have done storm water utility districls, Eagan being one of Lhem. t"lhat Eagan'sdoing that's different is that they have a sLrong water quality emphasis intheir p1an, We're aware of what they're doing, Our engineer is talking totheir engineer. tJe're getting materials forwarded from them and we'regivin,j them Lo the CiLy Council for consideration of the storm wat-erutiLity prc,gram that Ne want to embark on. Conrad; Okay. Nhat else on our agenda did you cover? Krauss: I think we're down to the Bluff Creek trail corridor. Ccnrad: Okay, thaL one hre had no comments on. Kiausn: Anci the park delet.ions up around Lake Lucy and TH 41 which I think-are statenierrts of fact Lhe way things are, ^--\--1. rL -+ ..-- i+?L t^/o> 1L. Conrad: Ljhat else? Anything else on what paul presented? Anything? Anybcdy else who has been with us? M6ry Hairington: ...if you did move the HUSA line r"rouLd Ne also have !oconsider puLting a i,,,ell and a water tower and that kind of stuff? Have yougi:ys though! about where you're going to put the wells in to do thosethi ngs? Krauss: Yes we have. That element is going !o come to... Mary Harrington: .,.Are they going to show up on the plan or anything? Krauss: They wilI. Mary Harrington: But they don't... Krauss: NelI we're kind of damned if we do and damned if we don't. If weccme to the PLanning Commission urith a completed plan, we,re blamed fordoing things behind people's backs. If we come to them with a plan lhat'sstill in Lhe formative stages, ure're accused of not having our acttogether. f guess we're trying !o r.ralk a tightrope inbetween the two Conrad: Anybody else {,lho iiants to make a comment? AI? PIanning Commission l.4ay 15, 7990 - Page Meet i n9 40 Al Klingelhulz: I just got in on the tail end of what Eric was saying andf 'nr a Iittle bit concerned because up in that area there is still somequite large land owners and I think one of the reasons that that land waspurchased was for fuLure development and I don't think it was purchased for2 i/2 acre loLs- Furthermore our present ordinance uouldn't even aIlow 27/2 ac(e lots because it's still 1 in 10. It allows 2 7/2 acte loLs butyou can get l unit per 10 acres. So if you have 1OO acres, you can get 10Iots on 1OC acres - The people would still have to put in their wells andseptic tanks and possibly the sewer will. be coming around that area. Ibelieve it's been assessed for when the sewer is available for that areafor $43O.OO an acre just for the seuer availability. Even if sewer don't conre in and these Iarge Iot subdivisions, I know they selI well. f 've solda lo+- of them myself. Peop]e ]ike to live in them but ure do have to make room for people other than Lhe Iarge lot subdivisions. We've got a lot of young people growing up in Chanhassen. 1.,e've got a lot of industry comingirr Charrhassen and we've got to find a place for these young people to buiLda ho,-rse a:-r.j they aren't 9oin9 to be able to afford it on a 2 !/2 acye lot , Co:raC: Yeah we know that. I think tonight uhat you heard me say AI uas to taLe a look at this. The pros and cons. That's what bre've got to do and I d..,i't think this is going to influence whether h,e have enough Iand forfutu:e generations but we just have to take a look at it. I think there's: peiition in front of us and I think staff can give us a fair analysis of tl-,e right- way to fly on that. Anything else. Something that AI said, the 2 !/2 If this was within the MUSA line uiou I d you? acre lot andyou wouldn 't the 1 in 10 have the 1 in iOdensi'-y p:' oh i em Coi-ri-ad: No, it wouldn't be there but I think there's going to be other Elison: I liked it. I like the idea of the Lake Ann. f guess you brought up some points about the topography and things like that but that to me sounds more like the Round Lake Park connection than the Arboretum one if you want to be next to a park and combine even ballfields if necessary u,hatever buL I don't have a problem with it being against a highway. Notjust because other schools have done that but they're not built so that someone's running after a fly baII out onto TH 5 and I guess I'd rather see i+- there because you do see residents around schools. I mean every city y.:.. 90 to there's residents around schools. That seems like a Iogical transition to me so I didn't have a problem with where that was located at Balzli.: I think you're going to have a heck of a time with this collector sr-reet if you put the school there. If ue do need that collector, I thinkyou':'e going to compress it one hray or another north or south to the extent KTauss: There are other issues. That kind of develoPment r.ras not ar,ticipated in Lhe zoning ordinance and you probably have to change the ;oning or.dinance to correspond. Not to belabor the point but I was wondering if the Planning Commission had any feedback on the school site itself. I'd Iike some further direction on that. Planning Commission l4ay \6, 1990 - Page Meet i ng 41 that it may not be used as much if you're worried about making it toocurvy. I don't know that I agree that a school Iooks industrial. The comment made on that so I don't know if I find that comment valid but Ithink the question about the street is certainly troublesome and if theschool board people and the school officials don't mind putting it on TH 5I guess they know better than I do on that. Ahrens: I don't have any problem uith the site itself. It's great to havea park around every school Iike Eden Prairie High School but I don't thinkthat anybody in the district's going to Nant to pay for that kind of ]andaround every school that goes up in Lhe city. Krauss: tlell uriththe 40 acre park, and again this is a staff to staffdisci.rssion but we've talked about mutual development of recreationalfacllities and the school district clearly wants to encourage that. Theques'-io;r xas raised whether or not the community center should be there?l^iell there may not be a community center at all and there are differentsites +.ha+- are being looked at for that buL clearly a cooperative efforti^.rith the school district wherever it is, recreational facil.ities is sornething LhEt uJe're aII talking about. Ah)-ens: Krauss: FieL,is Hcw bit an area is this that you're planning that the schoolwould like Lo put the school on? They're looking for 40 and play fields.acres most of which uould be open space. Ahrens: Like ballfields and stuff so it uould be green around there? I'dIike to see how it r^rould look like to have the school there and thecollector street to the south of it. See how that uould work- Res i dent :t it pre+-ly rolling land there for ballfields? Krauss: The land there is somewhat rollins but there,s nothing on it.It's also got valleys in terms of nobs. It r.rould take flattening to put aschool there or anything else for that matter but the grades don't getdifficult until vou get down Lo the creek uhich they perceive to be theborder of the school si.te. N!ldermuth: I think the school would work either on the north or southside of TH 5. The idea of putting a school on the north side of TH S onthe west side of Lake Ann and perhaps combining it with the park and thecommunity center, I think is pretty attractive but as you pointed out, thetopography isn't all that great so there would be something to overcomethere. It'd probably be some additional land expense incurred in going onto the north side of TH 5. f guess we reall.y missed the boat on theEckankar site but that's history. Enrmings: As far as that site for a school , it's clear to me that it isn'tgoirrg to be residential up to the highuray and it shouldn't be. Then youask yourself, what else can you do in there and one of the plans we Lookedat H6s to put office or induslrial in there and f think in a lot of uays wewere looking for something that uould be a little less intensive than PIanni ng Commissionllay 76, l99O - Page Meet i ng 42 office and industrial and it seems to me a school kind of fiLs that bil].I'm frankly srlrprised Lo hear the objections from lhe Timberwood people andI'.hink, or at least from the 1or 2 that talked tonight and it seems to methat is a less intense use. It's not used all during the day or it's not usec{ so much on weekends. ft involves a lot of open space urhich kind ofgives them something in lerms of a nice buffer. It doesn't change thecharacter too much between them and TH 5- I think it looks very reasonablefor that area. I don't know what, I guess as I sit and listen to the comftents that were made by people from Timberuood I b,onder if they, f hope wherr it comes time for the public hearing, I sure don't urant to hear ittonight because I don't knou if the 1or 2 h,ho talked here arerepresentative of the uhole group but I sure would like to know uhat theywould iike to see in there as opposed to so I hope they'Il come to thepublic hearing prepared to talk about what they want to see in there. iiar y Harrington: Go doun ResiCent: You don'L have En,ir,ings: BuL they don't urant to Iive next Lo a collector street but they want cther people !o live on the highway and that makes no sense to me atall for- th€ same reasons Lhat they don't urant to have a collector streetnext +Lo their- neighborhood, why would they think someone would want to liverre\t to a highway. That I don't understand. 494 to and they're aII over. 90 very far to get to the highway... i'la r,w Harrington: They're less offensive. A highqay's less offensive,.. Enmings: I think when you buy a house and you don't buy aII the land ai-:und you, I don't know whaL you think is going !o happen to that surrounding land or wha! makes you think that you can control what happensto that- Iand. This is a process that allows everybody input but h,e've got ir coir,e up with a plan. If we look at that piece of property, I really don't see any reasonable objecLion to a school on Lhat site. I see pec,pl robjecting to anylhing that's in that site except residential and that isnot reasonable Lo me. Mark FosLer: Hy name is Hark Foster and I am a residen! of Timberwood.: guess f agree with some of the Timberurood residents that have spokenhere. t^.!hat the school does right there is effectively cut off any furtherresiden'.ial development around Timberuood. I think that's kind of thepoint bie were making. I think r.re alL agree wiLh that. conrad: But I think that's real interestins, I'lI:t seems like to me school is community. School isls kicjs, conrmunity and you tend to like to clusLer,a neishborhood so I don'! understand that. take you up on that. no! industrial. Sc hoo I have a school close to t4ark Foster; with that collector street the uray you have it, you're notgoing to get the residenlial development on lhe south side. Conrad: f'm sure they want residential. It's pretty clear. E;r;,'"i ngs: Cr- on col Ielor streets. Pianning Comm ission Y,ay 76, 7990 - Page Meet i ng 43 Cor.,i-ac:: [,.1e're !rying to buf fer never going to be, I'm not surebut still I've go! to press you School is neighborhood. School and you're telLing me that it's itlar- k Foster r I 'm not opposed to aothe: point is why wasn't a school south of TH 5? you as much as Ne can f believe but you're that you're going to achieve this ultinrate on the school issue, School is community.is pride. School is all Lhose good thingsnot so f'm not sure. schoo I l oo ked per se but I HanLed at to the west side make the Galpin and to of conrad: t,ell I think we can take a Look at i!. Iark troster: It seems like you pinned it right ao'l S aJ a:t tha i',3 r.1 You knour . . . there. rad: 7 dc,esn' think the school board or the people came out and took a look at and Lhere are others and I think we can identify severai sitesotential. And just because h,,e put an asterick someplace righti mean anything. They can select a siLe. A school can go inLo a;,'7 :esid:ntiaI nej.ghborhood, It is a legal perrnitted use in anyr=:.lde:tial neighborhood. tle're just trying to get in front of thel:l.arrrii ng process a little bit and say what are the potentials so there areprcbably 20 sites that could be looked at and they've looked at some rishl i'1ark Foster; Does the City pick the sites for the school district toc!'ioc:.: from? Kial]ss: Ultimately it's the school district's choice. The.process is cneuhereb'y we've tried to cooperate with them and hopefully identify somesites that work in the mutual interest. The school district is noL, Lheyhaven'i said tha! Lhis is r,lhere they're going to go. Even if ure bought ii:rd gave i! to them, they can't commj.t to doing thaL until they actuallyfund t-he school . They did say however if we gave Lhem a site, that it r,;c::Ld be a factor they would consider. But no, it's a long process. Thesci-rool bo;rd does not have the school funded. They know they have a needfor one. It's no! programmed and there's a long way to 90. Conrad: fn locating a school , again going back t.o what I just said, Icion't like to put schools in the fringe. Again, it kind of defeats again my personal opinion of uhat a school should be and a school should besutrporting local people. If some kids can actually even walk to school ,that's even neater Lhan something else but any other comments? I'm talkiand reaIIy - Sharon Burry: f'm also a Timberurood IoL ouner, Hy name is Sharon Burryand f currently live in l.linnetonka near a school and f love it. Theballparks are there. The kids are playing. Now f was against having any cor.,iire'i'ciaI going there. I like Lhe idea of residential but f even likedthe idea beLter of having a school because you have all summer long thatycu.'re en-ioying those ballparks urhere there's no kids there. you're overlooking a beautiful green so you don't have to Iook a! a commercjalparliing lot with a commercial office buildins or somehow since that mighLnct lre up to our standards of what ue would like to see go there, like the ng In€cium density housing that they were speaking of. I just ulanted to let ;'cu k.roi,r that there are other Timberwood owners uho do promote and like thejdea and feeL that it is a very good plan and so I just wanted to Ie! you krrow that that's how ae feel . Thanks. Ed Hasek: The proposal, nobody's had time to react to. . . have seen it tonight for- thehaven't either - ThaL's righL. tJeConrad: [.lefirst time. Resident: O kay , that's area - a high school then so we're talking an open green Sheron Burr;',: I think it would be very pleasant to ]ook at given some of the other alternatives. Co.,r-;,j: It sure seems to us who've looked at issues ]ike this, it sure s€€rrr:r d real good soluLion to some things versus some alterantives thatycir,'re going to have to cjeal with sooner or later. Annette, did you have anythi ng else? Okay . Residen!: So this secondary on the map is urrong? It's a middle school ,i'ot a secondary school? Kra-..rss: f t's a middle school . Eric c,ivkin: Do you want to take beirrg designated as a collector? Krauss: it is a collector. E:it Rivkin: It is one noH? Conrad: Yeah - breather andIs lhat what think about Lake Lucy Road lhat black line means? Eric Rivkinr How can you have a policy that says that, I don't know if it's an official policy yet but it's an official trail designated by tl^,e Park Eoard for I think, there's no sidewalk and yet it's going to connect Lake Minnewashta Regional, possibly 3 other, 2 known parks and one other ooseibJ.e park. Are you going to have kids on bikes and things traversing back and forth.., It's kind of an unsafe situation. It's kind of a co nc er n - Conrad: I'd love to kids, all the people have a trail on TH 1O1 , on TH 1O1 trying to geL Seriously, you to Chanhassen - see all the I! 's terrible Planning Cornmission Meeting Yay 76, l99O - Page 44 Residen!: I'd just like to clarify one thing- We're talking about amiddle school right? tje're talking 13, 14, 15 year old kids. No licenses. t^,e're la1king a parking lot for teachers. We're not talking a hig,h schooliL's basically a middle school? K:-auss: Yes, it's a middle school and I specifically asked if lhere would l-^-,e liglrted ballfields and they said no. trianni ng CornmissionYa/ 76, 1990 - Pase Meet i ng 45 so z'eah, maybe there's a way aroundfrcr' one place Lo another. I guess an, is that a trail corridor there? t^le do need pathNays to ge! Park and Rec has designatedthat what we. ir. the Is people that as Krauss: f would believe so. Conrad: The fact of the matter is on those issues, it's easier to pu! atrail on a road like that than a Iot of other neighborhood roads. That'sflat out, thaL's the way it is and the real question becomes does the conmunity lant ways to move people around a city on foot or on bicyclesother than out on a highway and so far the trail system is not a realpopula:- thing but I think it has a purpose. As we grow, as this communitygro*s and we're going !o be big. tte're small right now but a feui moreyeers, there's going Lo be a lot of foLks out here and the problems aregoi:-rg to get wcrse . 9ric Rivkin: ...residential zoning, it probably is not going to be aprc,bie,n but if that area goes high density, if you can imagine that road5eins the ciensity of Kerber Blvd. without sidewalks, that's very dangerous. Conrad: Absolutely , Al ralingelhrtz; I happened !o mention at the.,.meeting last night, Iu::lerstand thal Eden Prairi.e is getting a bicycle trails alI along Lhe the'ou:- 1ane l-,ighway 5 and I was wondering if Chanhassen is going to getbic:'cle trails. They've already got it in their highway plan. Corir a cf : Uha t sort of , what j' r-aUSS: Clse'i: I f :-om Eden Resident: we doing on Par k and Rec are is that issue? t^Jel1 it's Park doing on trails, espec ia I Iy and Rec a ncl it's along TH 5? '.^11 f ulasn't aware but Jo Ann is saying that lhe trail is Olsen: I ve had contact with...and theyPrairie r^rhere they have enough Al1 the way out to TH 41? believe so - are planning to put in a trailright-of-way. . . now itof the s gor ng distance Krauss: t^,ell the improvements don't go to TH 41 . Rightbe 4lane ouL to the Hest side of downtourn. ,..Lhe restsomething the CiLy is talking to. Conrad:fs there Errm i ngs ; Okay, Lhank you aII for coming tonight. Is there anything else?a motion to go home? There 's this tree ordinance- That's just for our, is that for discussion? I didn't even know how that got in there. Conrad: Krauss i Planning Commission l4ay L6, 1990 - Page Heet i ng 46 r,hrens: OIser; I thoughl that I'-'s one of the !ree information was very interesting, model ordinances. l^,ildermuth moved, Ahrens seconded to adjourn the meeting. AII voteci infavor an,C the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p-rn." Sub,m itled by PauI Krauss Planning D i r ecLor Prepareci by Nann Opheim CITY OF EH[}IH[SEEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . PO. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 I,IEI,IORANDT'U TO: Planning Connission FROII: Paul Krauss, Planning Director DATE: Uay 30, 1990 SUBJ3 City Council Update Gtr At the City Council meeting on t{ay L4, LggO, the City Council tookthe following actions: 1. T!e. Zoning Ordinance amendment pertaining to exeavating,nining, fi11in9 and grading vas given itL final reaaing.Ouring an earlier review, the City Council had lowered themaxiuum volume allowed for an administrative approval frorn1,000 to 5O0 yards. At this neeting it was raised back to1,000. yards after staff gained additional insight intohandling problens that have recently developed witn tneremoval and cleaning of soils contaninated by leaking gastanks. The ordinance has since been published and the tltoonVa1ley operator and other perEit holders are being advisedthat they are required to gain a pernit and cone intoconpliance within a six nonth period. 2. The City Council considered a reguest for extension ofplatting approvaL for .2* .aclie lots by GiI Iaurent, BruceJeurissen and Sever peteraon. -.,., Tiese individuals had beengranted prelininary approval, for 2\ acre zoning in the ruralarea prior to the adoption of ordinances prohiJciting snalt lotrural subdivision githout sewer adopted in :t9BZ. Their tineextensions were originaLly grart&t" {n light of the TH 2f2Corridor plans and inplications on this property. They wereoriginally granted extensions to a point in time associatedwith the adoption of the official map for the highway. TheDap uas officially adopted in Novenber. They requestedfurther extensions until the final EfS is done, they do notbelierre they can effectivety plan on the highway beLoning areality. The City Council granted an extension of plattingapproval to a date 50 days beyond the official adoption of thefinal EIS. Planning Coouission Uay 30, 1990 Page 2 At the ,une 4, 1990 neeting, the City Council is scheduled to discuss the following itens of interest to the Planning Conmission: 1. The Zoning ordinance amendment to arend sections 20-30 and 20- 903 of City Code pertaining to recording of pernits and zoningIots, final reading. 2. Northwest Nursery conditional Use Pernit for an expansion ofthe uholesale nursery and retland alteration pernit. 3. Site plan review and signage review for the ChanhassenProfessional Building. Extension of final plat approval for Burdick Second Addition.This plat was originally approved in 1987, but has never beenfiled by the appl icant. The applicant was contending that theCityrs requirenent for dedication of easements uasinappropriate and has since taken no action on the proposal. The applicant now desires to file the final plat, but cannotdo so unless the City Council deternines that it is stitlvalid given the length of tiue that has ensued. The applicant now naintains that he is willing to provide the requiredeasenents and wil.l file the plat t ithin Go days. Final plat approval, Zinmerman Fann: The final plat isconsistent with earlier approvals I however, the applicant iscontending that he is not required to improve th- tenporarycu1-de-sac and turnaround area to City standards. Replat and Site Plan Revieu for PI,[t Corporation, Expansion ofExisting Facility. 5 6 7. 8. Site PIan Amendment for The press relative topollution control equipnent nounted on the roof.screening Zoning Ordinance amendment to amend Article II, Sections 23-5Gand 23-70 pertaining to procedures for the iesuance ofvariances, first reading. The pJ.anning Cornmission reviewedand reconnended approval of this ordinance eeveral Donths ago,but no action has been taken by the City Coirncil. Action waivithheld to allow the Board of AdjustDents and City Council tohold. a Joint neetlng to discuss the ordinance. - The jointneeting sas held with the ordinance generally rece-ivingfavorable coDment. REVTSED HAY 9, 1990 STATUS 3 4 5 ONGOING ISSI'ES copprehensive Plan Issues 1. coDprehensive PIan Update 2. Amendments to uUsA Boundary 3. zuture Use for Areas outside the uusA Boundary Zonincr Code Amendments 1. Blending ordinance 2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2 Sign ordinance (Iow priority) Tree ordinance - Uapping ofsignificant vegetative areas Other Itens 1. computerize land use fi1es,pernits, conditions andexpiration dates on aparcel by parcel basis Reappraisal on wetland issues, ordinance and napping in conjunctionwith storn uater nanagenent Adoption 9/90 Adoption 9/90 1995 Study Areas scheduled Discussion Scheduled Di scus s i onl Sta f fdirected to draft a potential new zoning district ordinance Inactive Inactive Schedule future agenda Uarch, 1990 - CC directed staffto expedite 2 Definition of structures shoreland ordinance Flood zone ordinance crading/l,lineral Extraction Ongoing - gtPrs conpleted staff processing a positionpaper to review rretlandordinance and enforcenent Budgeted noney for update 2year tiDefraDe Revier uarch, 1990 January, 1991 August, 1990 Rezoning 2tr Acre I-ots to RRDistrict 3. 4. I 6. 7 8 9 REVISED tlAy 9, 1990 R-16 District Approved by CC on 3/L2/9O ZOA Bank uith drive-thru in Approved by CC on 3/L2/9O BH Dlstrict Review legislation and ordinance pertainlng togroup hones 10. Variance ordinance and procedures June, 1990 Approved by PC, joint neeting CCIBA.A scheduled for 5/L4/9o Approved by CC on 3/26/90 Final approvat by CC 4/9o 11. Ordinance revision dealinguith lots accessed byprivate driverays 12. ordinance revisi.on dealingwith requirenent to post signs of notice for developnent CITY OF EH[I{H[SSE!I 690 COULTER DR|VE. p.O. BOX 147 e g611r11i1gSEN, MTNNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-19m. FAX (612) 937-5739 CERTIFIED l{r. ToD ZuiersG&fTruckingConpany 111U Deuce RoadElko, ltN 55020 D€ar I{r. Zuiers : Please feel free to contact ne lf you need assistance. 1y, on -ftrursday, -U,ay 24, 1990, the City of Chanhassen officiallypublished revisions to Chapters 7 and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code pertaining to excavating, DinLng, filling and gradLng. As youare auare the ordinance provides a G month period during whichexisting operations, such as lfodr va]Iey, uust apply for andreceive a permit. A copy of tbe final ordinance is i-ttlctred. P1ease be asare that a ninilun 2-3 Donth tine period uilI bereguired to conplete tbe neview process to ob€ain a pernit.llherefore, I am recoDDending that you inltiate vork on yoursubritted package innediately and yant to erq)reas the staifrswillingness to sork with you during tbe proiess. I am alsoenclosing a copy of our Interin Use krmit application forro foryour use. s Paul Xrauss, AfCPDirector of Plannlng PX:v Enclosures Clty Council Planning Conniesion Gary l{arren Dave Hempel cc: Hay 24, 1990 CITY OF EH[}IH[SEEN ltay 24, 1990 l,lr. [ichael Ds]rer, Attorneyliackall, Crouse and lloore 1600 TCF Tower 121 south 8th streetI{inneapolis, lil{ 55402 Dear Ur. Drryer : On Thursday, llay 24, 1990, tbe City of Chanhassen officiallypublished revisions to chapters ? and 20 of the Chanhassen city Code pertaining to excavating, rnining, filling and grading. As youare auare the ordinance provides a 6 Donth period during whi,chexisting operations, 6uch as lioon Va11ey, Dust apply for andreceive a permit. A copy of the final ordinance Ls attached. Please be aware that a ninilum 2-3 Donth tine period will berequired to comptete the review process to obtain a peroit.Therefore, f am recoEnending that you initiate work on yoursubnitted package iunediatety and rrant to express the staffrswillingness to uork rith you during the process. I aE alsoenclosing a copy of our Interin Use Pernit application forn foryour use. Pl.ease feel free to contact ne if you need assistance. Sincerel Paul uss, AICPDirector of Planning PN:v Enclosures City Council Planning Connission Gary Warren Dave Henpel 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 CERTIFIED CITY OF EH[I{H[ESE!I 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX I47 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 llay 15, 1990 llr. Jin PeterBon George lfelson and Associates 1660 So. llr.y. 1OO, Suite {28llinneapolis, l{N 55415 Dear xr. Peterson: Should you bave any questione or any additioDal infornation on thestatus of the plat, please feel free to contact :ne. si v Pa Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning Joel Cooper, Pioneer Engineering Planning ConnissionCity Councll Gary warren, city EngineerJin Chaffee, Public Safety Director As you are aware, the issue pertaining to the replat of Lots 4 and5, Iake Riley Woods Second Addition, remains as yet unresolved. Consideration of this iten was pulled at the request of pioneer Engineering fron the April 9, 1990, City Council agenda. Theyindicated to staff that their attorneys sere talking to an attorneyrepresenting Xr. Fraser, the purchaser of Iot 4, in an attenpt touork out a reasonable EettleDent. I an concemed that Eatters do not seen to be progressing regardingthe ultinate resolution of this situation. The street has not yei been accepted for public dedication and any required repJ.at orstreet (i.e. construction) could affest reDaining undeveloped lotsin Iake Riley woods 2nd lddition. Therefore, I believe it isincunbent upon the City to insure that this situation is resolvedand not be made uore aerious by starting the construction ofadditional new homes. Therefore, as gf this date, no furtherbuililing peraits vilI be issued for lots in the Iake Rilry Woods Second Addition until thiE natter is resolved to the Citytssatisfaction. cc: t