The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda and PacketAGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2020, 7:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD A.WORK SESSION B.CALL TO ORDER C.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.Consider a Request for Subdivision Approval to Create Three Lots (Berrospid Addition) with a Variance for the Use of a Private Street on Property Located at 7406 Frontier Trail D.APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Approve Planning Commission Minutes dated October 6, 2020 E.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1.City Council Action Update F.ADJOURNMENT G.OPEN DISCUSSION 1.Engineering Project Updates NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m. as outlined in the official bylaws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If, however, this does not appear to be possible, the Chairperson will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. If a constituent or resident sends an email to staff or the Planning Commission, it must be made part of the public record based on State Statute. If a constituent or resident sends an email to the Mayor and City Council, it is up to each individual City Council member and Mayor if they want it to be made part of the public record or not. There is no State Statute that forces the Mayor or City Council to share that information with the public or be made part of the public record. Under State Statute, staff cannot remove comments or letters provided as part of the public input process. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, October 20, 2020 Subject Consider a Request for Subdivision Approval to Create Three Lots (Berrospid Addition) with a Variance for the Use of a Private Street on Property Located at 7406 Frontier Trail Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: C.1. Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a threelot subdivision with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting subdivision approval with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street for a threelot singlefamily residential development. APPLICANT Luis Berrospid 7406 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 SITE INFORMATION PRESENT ZONING: Residential SingleFamily DIstrict, RSF LAND USE:Residential Low Density (net density 1.2 4 units per acre) ACREAGE: 2.02 acres DENSITY: 1.53 unitsw per net acre APPLICATION REGULATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” SingleFamily Residential District BACKGROUND Auditors Subdivision No. 2 was platted on August 24, 1939.In 1968, a portion of the parcel was separated from the PLANNING COMMISSION STAFFREPORTTuesday, October 20, 2020SubjectConsider a Request for Subdivision Approval to Create Three Lots (Berrospid Addition) with aVariance for the Use of a Private Street on Property Located at 7406 Frontier TrailSectionPUBLIC HEARINGS Item No: C.1.Prepared By Bob Generous, Senior Planner File No: PROPOSED MOTION:The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a threelot subdivision with avariance for the use of a flag lot and private street subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts theFindings of Fact and Recommendation.SUMMARY OF REQUESTThe applicant is requesting subdivision approval with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street for a threelotsinglefamily residential development.APPLICANTLuis Berrospid 7406 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317SITE INFORMATIONPRESENT ZONING: Residential SingleFamily DIstrict, RSFLAND USE:Residential Low Density (net density 1.2 4 units per acre)ACREAGE: 2.02 acres DENSITY: 1.53 unitsw per net acre APPLICATION REGULATIONSChapter 18, SubdivisionsChapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” SingleFamily Residential DistrictBACKGROUND Auditors Subdivision No. 2 was platted on August 24, 1939.In 1968, a portion of the parcel was separated from the original lot (Subdivision 681).The house on the lot was built in 1969. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the subdivision with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Application Preliminary Plat Site Development Plans Revised Sheet 9 Affidavit of Mailing CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: October 20, 2020 CC DATE: November 9, 2020 REVIEW DEADLINE: October 15, 2019 CASE #: 2019-13 BY: RG, EH, TH, DN, JS SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting subdivision approval with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street for a three-lot single-family residential development. LOCATION: 7406 Frontier Trail Lot 19, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 2 APPLICANT: Luis Berrospid 7406 Frontier Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Single-Family Residential District, RSF 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density (net density 1.2 – 4 units per acre) ACREAGE: 2.02 acres DENSITY: 1.53 units per acre LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the city must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance in conjunction with a subdivision is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Subdivision Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting subdivision approval to create a three-lot plat with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street. PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve a three-lot subdivision with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation.” 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 2 SITE CONSTRAINTS Wetland Protection There is no wetland located on the property. Bluff Protection There are no bluffs on the property. Shoreland Management The property is located within a shoreland overlay district for Lotus Lake. Floodplain Overlay This property is not within a federally designated floodplain APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 3 BACKGROUND Auditors Subdivision No. 2 was platted on August 24, 1939. In 1968, a portion of the parcel was separated from the original lot (Subdivision 68-1). The house on the lot was built in 1969. STREETS Access to the property will be via private street which connects to Frontier Trail, a local public street. The property being proposed to be subdivided (7406 Frontier Trail) is currently served by a private driveway that encroaches onto the northern-abutting property (7404 Frontier Trail). The applicant is proposing to remove the driveway and its current encumbrance onto the property to the north, and construct a private street to serve all three lots. Staff finds that the use of a private street is in accordance with city’s Code of Ordinances (Ordinances), Sec. 18-57. The developer will be required to adhere to all private street standards and regulations as addressed in the Ordinances, the city’s Standard Specifications and Details, and install all traffic control that is consistent with the current version of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. As the proposed development will have common sections of the private street that will serve two units or more with a density of less than four units per acre, the private street shall be built to a seven-ton design, paved to be a width of 20 feet, utilize a maximum grade of ten percent, and provide a turnaround area acceptable to the fire marshal based upon guidelines provided by applicable fire codes and Ordinances. While the applicant has provided private street details and cross-sections, calculations based on in-situ soil types or the designated approved subgrade shall be supplied by a registered engineer supporting the 7-ton street design. It is recommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and the declarations address the maintenance responsibilities and associated costs of repairs for the private street. As the private street is not within an Outlot, private access agreements will need to be recorded to grant Lots 1 and 2 the right for ingress/egress. Lastly, review of the required dead-end fire apparatus road turnaround found that the modified hammerhead approach would not allow for a proper turning movement of the Fire Department’s design vehicle (Engine #1). The applicant shall update the turnaround design to allow for proper turning movements, and provide the city updated plans for review and approval. All other Fire Department comments and conditions associated with the private street shall be adhered to. Private streets serving up to four lots may be permitted in residential developments with a density of less than four units per acre if the criteria in variance Section 18-22 are met and upon consideration of the following: (1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to constrict a public street. In making this determination, the city may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 4 (2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to provide a street system consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (3) The use of a private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. The use of the private street meets the criteria specified in City Code since it is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties, would create an excessive amount of hardcover with minimal public benefit and would require even more environmental impacts. EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY The applicant is proposing mostly typical public drainage and utility easements (D&U) along the proposed subdivision’s lot lines. However, due to existing and proposed public utilities, the applicant has provided additional D&U on Lot 3 of the proposed subdivision. A 10’ D&U on the west lot line of Lot 3 was added to accommodate the proper maintenance and repair of an existing 6” cast iron water main, along with a 15’ wide D&U over the proposed 21” reinforced concrete stormwater conveyance system near the northeast corner of Lot 1. Furthermore, additional D&U is being proposed over the private street to accommodate the newly proposed public sanitary sewer main, and public water main. Encroachment agreements for any private infrastructure or improvements within public D&Us will be required prior to recording of final plat. The subdivision abuts Frontier Trail, a residential public street just west of Lotus Lake. As currently platted, the property’s northeast corner extends over Frontier Trail. In order for proper maintenance and access to the public street and utilities, dedication of additional right-of-way over Frontier Trail is required. The preliminary and final plat submitted by the applicant illustrates dedicating this additional right-of-way and was reviewed by staff to be adequate; at its maximum width the applicant has proposed the dedication of an additional 30’ of right-of-way, see Figure 1 below. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY The applicant had provided with the original Development Review Application, submitted August 16, 2019, an existing conditions survey that generally met the requirements of Sec. 18-40. The only required information that was not provided were the locations of all existing utilities such as sanitary sewer mains and laterals, and water mains and laterals (Sec. 18-40 (2)i). The applicant shall submit an updated survey upon submittal of final construction plans illustrating all existing utilities within and surrounding the property. The existing conditions survey and civil plan sheets show an existing retaining wall that appears to be built to benefit the property to the south (7460 Frontier Trail) encroaching into the southeast corner of the proposed subdivision. Additionally, a hard surface improvement (a driveway) is also encroaching from the property to the south into the proposed subdivision in the same location. As these encroachments will be within the newly platted public drainage and utility easement for Lot 1, the applicant shall file for an encroachment agreement concurrently with the recording of final plat. Any and all conditions required by the County Surveyor for recording of the final plat must be met prior to recording. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 6 GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site slopes generally from west to east, with the west side of the site having an elevation of approximately 972 feet and the east side having an elevation of 922 feet. Due to this approximate 50 foot change in elevation, the private street grade has been designed to maintain a maximum 10% grade for approximately 100 feet, then gradually transitions over another 50 feet to achieve a 2% grade, before teeing into Frontier Trail. The proposed grading plan maintains the overall drainage pattern from the existing conditions. The existing house on Lot 3 is located on the western portion of the site, and the newly proposed Lots 1 and 2 are on the eastern portion. As the newly created Lots are down gradient of the site’s drainage, it is imperative that they are graded as to steer stormwater runoff from the proposed houses. Updated grading plans from the applicant shall illustrate the drainage arrows around the homes on Lot 1 and 2 to ensure it is graded to drain stormwater away from the building’s location. Lastly, the geotechnical report by Paul Gionfriddo, P.E. (Lic #23093) with Haugo GeoTechnical Services indicates that the in-situ soils are not suitable for foundation, driveway (private street) or utility support and will need to be removed and replaced with suitable compacted fill. All recommendations from the geotechnical report shall be adhered to, and a geotechnical engineering firm shall be on-site during grading operations as required to ensure the city’s Standard Specifications and Detail Plates are adhered to along with any Minnesota Building Code requirements. Although groundwater was not encountered on the initial boring, a double ring infiltration test was attempted and the test pit began to fill with water from the saturated soils in the vicinity. If groundwater is encountered during grading, the grades shall be adjusted to maintain a 3-foot separation from the bottom floor elevation and adhering to the recommendations of the soil engineer on site. Changes to grades shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 7 RETAINING WALLS The applicant is proposing three retaining walls within the subdivision due to the grade changes discussed above in “Grading and Drainage”. The height of any retaining wall is measured from the top of the wall to the bottom of the footing (not to the top of grade). Two of the three retaining walls will have a height greater than four (4) feet. These walls shall be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer and shall be constructed of a durable material (smooth face concrete, masonry/mortared, railroad ties and timber are prohibited). No such plans or details were submitted with the construction plans, and must be provided prior to issuance of grading permits. Lastly, the retaining wall supporting the required fire apparatus access road turnaround, located on Lot 3, will be required to account for the surcharge of the Fire Department’s design vehicle (Engine #1). The required analysis and plans shall be provided to the city fo r review and approval. EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL The proposed development will not exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, not be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). However, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in accordance with Ordinances shall be submitted for the grading operations of the subdivision as more than 5,000 square feet of land is being disturbed. The applicant has provided an ESCP, and while overall the plan appears feasible, it is deficient as it does not include all the requirements listed under Sec. 19- 145.(a)(2) such as the requirement that drainage boundaries and direction of drainage pre- and post- development be indicated. As such, the applicant shall update the ESCP and resubmitted for review and approval prior to grading operations. Additional comments regarding the ESCP can be found under the Recommendations for “Construction Plans”. SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN The proposed subdivision has access to public sanitary sewer and water that is located within abutting right-of-way and/or public drainage and utility easements. Access to an 8” vitrified clay sanitary sewer main can be had from within a public drainage and utility easement abutting the property to the north (7404 Frontier Trail). Access to a 6” cast iron water main can be had from within the right-of-way of Frontier Trail, abutting the property to the east. The applicant is proposing to extend both of these public utilities into the subdivision. The plans shall be updated to abandon the existing services up to the mains and install all new services to the each lot within the subdivision. These new services will be had from the newly extended utilities. Water and sanitary sewer hook-up charges will only be required for Lots 1 and 2, and not for Lot 3 where the existing home is located. The applicant’s contractor shall coordinate with the Public Works department 48- hours prior to connecting to any public mains. The extension of the public mains throughout the development shall be owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. As the sanitary sewer main is located within a 25’ wide public D&U to the north, access to the main will be available. Nonetheless, continued coordination with the property owner of 7404 Frontier 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 8 Trail shall be conducted by the applicant and their contractor(s). Construction plans shall be updated to show that utility work in the D&U will not encroach onto private property (e.g. temporary perimeter fencing to delineate construction limits) unless temporary construction easements are provided, and a note prescribing that restoration of all disturbed areas will be performed to match or improve the existing site conditions. Prior to commencement of any utility work, a copy of all required permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be provided to the city which shall include but is not limited to the Minnesota Department of Health, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Article VII, Chapter 19 of City Code describes the required stormwater management development standards. Section 19-141 states that “these development standards shall be reflected in plans prepared by developers and/or project proposers in the design and layout of site plans, subdivisions and water management features.” These standards include abstraction of 1.0 inch of runoff from the new impervious surfaces created by the project and water quality treatment resulting in the removal of 90% total suspended solids (TSS) and 60% total phosphorous (TP). The applicant has worked with the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) and the city and has generally met all the requirements. The applicant submitted a preliminary Drainage Narrative (DR) produced by Eric Fagerberg, P.E. (Lic. #53772) with James R. Hill, Inc. The applicant proposes volume control, rate control and water quality treatment of stormwater runoff with the use of an underground infiltration chamber located on the east side of the development (east side yard of Lot 1). Based on the information and analysis provided in the DR regarding treatment of stormwater for TS and TPP, the underground infiltration method proposed is sufficient to meet the requirements of the city and rate controls have been shown to reduce post-construction flows from pre-existing flows. One point of clarification is whether the ditch checks on the plans are for construction stormwater practices or permanent stormwater treatment; if they are temporary BMPs during construction, they should not be included in the P8 modeling. Furthermore, volume control (abstraction) was met as the soil borings and analysis identifying “Type D” soils (slow draining, “tight” soils with an infiltration rate of 0.06 in./hr.), which qualified the project site to be restricted through RPBCWD rules. The classification of a restricted site lowers the required abstraction to 0.55 inches, in which the applicant has shown to provide abstraction to the maximum extent practicable with 0.27 inches of abstraction (approved by RPBCWD engineer), which is acceptable to staff. Ordinances require buildings to maintain at least three feet of freeboard adjacent ponding areas and floodplains. Per the submitted HydroCAD model by the applicant, the underground infiltration system has a 100-year HWL of 925.00 feet, and the adjacent home on Lot 1 has a low floor elevation of 927.00 feet (two feet of freeboard). As such, the applicant shall modify the low floor elevation of the building on Lot 1 to allow for three feet of freeboard. Plans, and if necessary models, shall be resubmitted for review and approval. Along with the updated plans, the applicant shall submit 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 9 rational-method calculations to confirm that the storm sewer is adequately sized for a 10-year rainfall event. Lastly, the applicant shall provide an operation and maintenance plan (O&M) for the private stormwater BMPs. The O&M of private stormwater BMPs is required in perpetuity and must be approved by the Water Resources Coordinator, or their designee, to be recorded against the benefiting properties. It is recommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and the declarations address the maintenance responsibilities and associated costs of repairs and maintenance of the private stormwater facilities. All conditions, comments, and applicable permits required by Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District shall be adhered to. WETLANDS AND BUFFERS A portion of the eastern part of the parcel has the potential to be considered a wetland. The area is a low depression in the landscape. Additionally, an initial review of soil data in the area shows this area to be classified as Hamel loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, which is considered a hydric soil. As such, it is possible that a wetland exists in this area. A wetland delineation should be submitted to verify the presence of wetlands on the property. In addition, submitted plans show areas of cut and fill in this potential wetland area. If this is a wetland and it will be impacted, an approved wetland replacement plan must be submitted and approved through the Wetland Conservation Act approval process before any wetlands can be impacted. If a wetland exists on the property, a wetland buffer and setback will need to be maintained. To determine the required wetland buffer width, a Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) survey will need to be completed and approved (likely in conjunction with the wetland delineation) to determine the wetland classification. STORMWATER UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGES Section 4-30 of City Code sets out the fees associated with surface water management. A water quality and water quantity fee are collected with a subdivision. These fees are based on land use type and are intended to reflect the fact that the more intense the development type, the greater the degradation of surface water. This fee will be applied to the new lots of record being created. It is calculated as shown in the table below: SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEE AREA PER ACRE FEE ACRES FEE GROSS AREA $8,320 0.7690 $6,398.08 Right-of-Way $8,320 -0.0600 $(499.20) NET AREA 0.3503 $5,898.88 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 10 ASSESSMENTS Water and sewer partial hookups are due at the time of final plat. The partial hookup fees will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time; 2020 rates for partial hookup fees are $691.00 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,392.00 per unit for water. The remaining partial hookups fees are due with the building permit. Fees Based on the proposal, the following fees would be collected with the development contract: a) Administration Fee: If the improvement costs are between $500,000 and $1,000,000, 2% of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs exceed $1,000,000, 2.5% of the first $1,000,000 plus 1.5% of the remainder. b) Surface Water Management Fee: $5,898.88 c) A portion of the water hookup charge: $2,392.00/unit d) A portion of the sanitary sewer hookup charge: $691.00/unit e) Park Dedication Fee: $11,600.00 f) GIS Fees: $25 for the plat plus $10 per parcel LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The applicant for the Berrospid Addition property development has submitted tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations. They are as follows: Total upland area (excluding ROW) 1.9 ac. or 85,277 SF Baseline canopy coverage 96% or 82,517 SF Minimum canopy coverage required 55% or 46,902 SF Proposed tree preservation 55% or 47,277 SF The developer appears to meet minimum canopy coverage for the site, but will need to verify calculations before final approval. The tree preservation plan does not match the disturbed area shown in the plan set. The applicant will be required to plant replacement trees if tree removal for the subdivision falls below the minimum allowable area of preservation. Disturbance is shown on the neighboring property to the north. Tree removal must be kept to a minimum and preserved trees must be fenced for protection. A minimum of one tree is required to be planted in the front yard of each new home as required by ordinance. No buffer yards are required as all neighboring properties have the same land use. PARKS & RECREATION The quality and number of recreational facilities in a community directly contributes to its quality of life. For this reason, the City of Chanhassen places a strong emphasis on parks and open space. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 11 Parks The goal of neighborhood parks is to provide informal recreational opportunities close to where people live. Chanhassen operates under the standard that all residents should be within walking distance, or a half mile, of a neighborhood park. The proposed subdivision is located within ½ mile of South Lotus Lake Park, Kerber Pond Park and City Center Park. Trails The city’s goal is to maintain a comprehensive and easily navigable trail and sidewalk system that connects neighborhoods to park and recreation facilities, schools, community destinations and other communities. No additional trails are required of this subdivision. Park and Trail Conditions of Approval Full park fees in lieu of additional parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected as a condition of approval for Berrospid Addition for the two new housing units only. The park fees will be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. Based upon the city’s 2020 single-family park fee of $5,800 per unit, the total park fees for Berrospid Addition would be $11,600. MISCELLANEOUS The private road will follow City of Chanhassen Code for Private Roads – including a turnaround for emergency vehicles. The road is over 150 feet in length. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. If any soil corrections are done on the property, a final grading plan and soil report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits will be issued. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Width (ft.) Depth (ft.) Hard Cover % / sq. ft. Notes Code 15,000 100 # 125 25 / 3,750 #Lots served via private street must have 100 ft. of width at building setback Lot 1 18,289 106 154 25/ 4,572 North property line is designated front lot line. This is a corner lot for setback purposes. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 12 Lot 2 15,208 100 152 25 / 3,802 North property line is designated front lot line. Lot 3 44,520* 193 316 25 /11,130 *7,260 sq. ft. of the neck lot area excluded from total lot area of 51,780 sq. ft.; east lot line is front property line ROW 2,614 0.06 ac. Total 87,891 2.02 acres Setbacks: 30 Feet Front and Rear; 10 Feet Side Sec. 20- 922. - Designation of alternate front lot lines for single-family dwellings For single-family dwellings, the front yard shall be the line nearest the public right-of-way that provides access to the parcel unless: 1) The City Council designates an alternate front lot line as part of the subdivision. In this instance, the front lot lines for Lots 1 and 2 shall be the northerly lot line adjacent to the private street. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the subdivision with a variance for the use of a flag lot and private street subject to the following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: Building 1. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review. 2. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction. 3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. 4. If any soil corrections are done on the property, a final grading plan and soil report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits will be issued. Engineering 1. All driveways shall have direct access only to the proposed private street. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 13 2. Construction plans shall be updated to show the 25’ D&U located on 7404 Frontier Trail, the means of how utility work in the D&U will not encroach onto private property, and a note prescribing restoration methods of the disturbed areas within the D&U. 3. All applicable permits required by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District shall be obtained and adhered to. 4. Calculations supporting the 7-ton private street design shall be submitted by a professional engineer for review and approval prior to grading operations. 5. The private street shall be owned and maintained by the benefiting properties. 6. The applicant shall update the fire apparatus access turnaround design to allow for proper turning movements of the Fire Department design vehicle (Engine #1), and provide the city with updated plans for review and approval. 7. Encroachment agreements for any proposed private infrastructure or improvements shall be provided prior to recording of the final plat. 8. An updated existing conditions survey shall be submitted prior to grading operations that includes all existing utilities within and surrounding the property. 9. An encroachment agreement for all existing structures within public drainage and utility easements, regardless of ownership, shall be filed concurrently with the recording of the final plat. 10. Updated grading plans shall be submitted that illustrate drainage arrows and adequate grading to drain stormwater away from structures, specifically the proposed homes on Lots 1 and 2, prior to grading operations. 11. Recommendations from Haugo GeoTechnical Services shall be adhered to. 12. A geotechnical engineering firm shall be on-site during grading operations as required to ensure conformance to City Standards and Specifications and all Minnesota Building Codes. 13. Grades shall be adjusted to maintain a three (3) foot separation from the bottom floor elevation if groundwater is encountered; any changes to grades shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. 14. The retaining wall supporting the required fire apparatus access road turnaround shall account for the surcharge of the Fire Department’s design vehicle (Engine #1). The required analysis and plans shall be provided to the city for review and approval. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 14 15. An erosion and sediment control plan in accordance with Sec. 19-145 of City Ordinances shall be included with updated plan submittals prior to grading operations. 16. Existing water and sewer service laterals shall be abandoned at the main. All services shall be had from the newly extended water main and sanitary sewer main. 17. All newly installed sanitary sewer and water mains and appurtenances shall be publicly owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. 18. Prior to commencement of any utility work, a copy of all required permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be provided to the city which shall include but is not limited to the Minnesota Department of Health, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 19. The newly installed stormwater facilities and appurtenances shall be owned and maintained by the benefiting properties. 20. Lot 1’s low floor elevation shall be adjusted to allow for three feet of freeboard from the 100-year HWL of the underground infiltration system. 21. The applicant shall submit rational-method calculations to confirm that the storm sewer is adequately sized for a 10-year rainfall event. 22. All applicable permits required by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District shall be obtained and adhered to. 23. The applicant shall enter into a Development Contract with the city and pay all the applicable fees and securities prior to recording of final plat. 24. A wetland delineation and MnRAM should be submitted and approved to determine if wetlands are present on the property. 25. If wetlands exist on the property and impacts to the wetland (cut or fill) are proposed, a wetland replacement plan must be submitted and approved before any wetland impacts can occur. Construction Plans 1. On sheet 1.0, Title Sheet: update contact information for City Engineer to “Charles Howley, P.E., LEED AP”. 2. On sheet 2.0, Grading Plan: as no site plan was provided call-out dimensions of turnaround and the radii for the private street; add call-out to relocate utility pole and light near the top and within the private street; clearly label or depict that no encroachment into the property to 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 15 the north is proposed as it appears the radius of private street that connects to Frontier Trail extends into property to the north; add detail #5202A to detail sheets as it is being called out on this plan sheet; add to legend D&U line; show EOF(s) on plan sheet. 3. On sheet 2.1, Erosion & Sediment Control Plan: update hatching for “stabilized construction entrance” to be consistent with the legend for construction entrance; construction entrance must meet the dimensions of the standard detail plate (50’ long and 20’ wide minimum), update plans accordingly; add disturbance limits to the area impacted by the water tie-in near hydrant; add dewatering notes; add note that final stabilization of areas outside subdivision/property (i.e. disturbance near water main tie-in and sanitary sewer tie-in) need to be restored to existing or better condition; add to legend check dams, indicate whether temporary or permanent. 4. On sheet 3.0, Utility Plan: consider use of HDPE rings on sanitary manhole in street to allow for slope, call-out if they are to be used; the curb stop location for Lot 3 shall be at the D&U line, ensure call-out for cover aligns with detail #5208; trees are located over the newly proposed sanitary sewer which has been assumed to be open trench, however, the trees are indicated to be saved, clarify and update plans accordingly; existing services shall be abandoned at the main and all service laterals will be had from the extension of new utilities, update plans accordingly; all public sanitary sewer mains and water mains require profile views, update accordingly; a wet-tap will not be approved and a tee with sleeves shall be installed, coordination with the Public Works department 48-hours prior to the connection must be had as valves will have to be shut, notes must be added to this effect; On sheet 4.0, Construction Details; update all detail plates to the most recent versions, an update occurred during 2020 and not all detail plates. Environmental Resources 1. The applicant shall verify tree removal and disturbed area calculations to determine actual tree preservation before final approval. 2. Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any grading activities. Fire 1. The private road will need to follow City of Chanhassen Code for Private Roads – including a turnaround for emergency vehicles. Parks 1. Full park fees in lieu of additional parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval for the two new lots. 7406 Frontier Trail October 20, 2020 Page 16 Planning 1. The front lot line for Lots 1 and 2 shall be the northerly property line. 2. An access and maintenance agreement for the private street shall be recorded with the plat. ATTACHMENTS Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Application Preliminary Plat Site Development Plans Revised Sheet 9 Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-13 7406 frontier trail sub and var\_resubmittal 9-18-20\staff report berrospid addition 2020.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of Luis Berrospid – Planning Case No. 2019-13, Berrospid Addition. Request for Subdivision Approval creating three lots and right-of-way fo r public streets with a Variance for the use of a flag lot and private street located at 7406 Frontier Trail. On October 20, 2020, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Luis Berrospid for a single-family residential development. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential District, RSF. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential – Low Density uses. 3. The legal description of the property is shown on the attached Exhibit A. 4. SUBDIVISION FINDINGS a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance and meets all of the requirements of the “RSF” Single-Family Residential District; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's Comprehensive Plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage subject to compliance with conditions of approval; f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements; 2 g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate stormwater drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 5. VARIANCE FINDINGS WITH A SUBDIVISION a. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience by providing reasonable access to three properties while reducing potential impacts to the natural features on the site; b. The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the land including trees; a public street is not necessary to provide access to adjacent properties; c. The condition or conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property because of the previously stated conditions of the property; d. The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of subdivision regulations, the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan since it will reduce potentially significant impacts on the site. 6. The planning report #2019-13 dated October 20, 2020, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed Preliminary Plat approval for two lots and public right-of-way with a Variance for the use of a flag lot and private street for a single-family detached subdivision. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20th day of October, 2020. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Steven Weick, Chairman 3 Exhibit A Lot 19, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 2, Carver County, Minnesota, except that part described as follows: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 19, thence North along the West line of said lot 340 feet, thence Easterly deflecting at an angle of 90°10’ to the right from said last described course, a distance of 272.8 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting to the left at an angle of 27°44’ from said last described course, a distance of 309.6 feet to a point in the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19 a distance of 162.21 feet more or less, to the Southeasterly or most Easterly corner of said lot, thence Westerly and Southwesterly along the Southerly line of Lot 19 to the point of beginning. g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-13 7406 frontier trail sub and var\_resubmittal 9-18-20\findings of fact recommendation.docx a c., 1 1 3 lR,&- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division —7700 Market Boulevard CITY OF CIIANIIASSNMailingAddress—P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1300/Fax: (952)227-1110 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Submittal Date // qIIC." / / Y PC Date i 1 /-7 /19 CC Date: /O/f Ll /19 60-Day Review Date: IC) f ( S I/ q( 1 Section 1: Application Type(check all that apply) Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 600 El Subdivision (SUB) Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers $100 Z Create 3 lots or less .. 300 Create over 3 lots 600 + $15 per lot Conditional Use Permit(CUP) lots) Single-Family Residence 325 Metes & Bounds (2 lots) 300 All Others 425 Consolidate Lots 150 Interim Use Permit(IUP) Lot Line Adjustment 150 In conjunction with Single-Family Residence..$325 Final Plat 700 Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)* 425AllOthers Additional escrow may be required for other applications through the development contract. Rezoning (REZ) Planned Unit Development(PUD) 750 Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way(VAC) $300 Minor Amendment to existing PUD 100 Additional recording fees may apply) All Others 500 tel Variance (VAR)200 Sign Plan Review 150 Wetland Alteration Permit(WAP) Site Plan Review (SPR) Single-Family Residence 150 Administrative 100 All Others 275 Commercial/Industrial Districts* 500 Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area: El Zoning Appeal 100 thousand square feet) Include number of existing employees: Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 500 Include number of new employees: Residential Districts 500 NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Plus $5 per dwelling unit (units) Notification Sign (City to install and remove) 200 I Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre-application meeting) 3 per address ln addresses) 17-07 Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) 50 per document Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Site Plan Agreement Vacation Variance Wetland Alteration Permit Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.)Easements ( easements) Deeds)tJ s= TOTAL FEE: )69S7. i7 Section 2: Required Information Description of Proposal: Preliminary and Final Plat of one parcel into two lots. Property Address or Location: 7406 Frontier Trail, Chanhassen, MN Parcel #: 250800300 Legal Description: attached Total Acreage:2.02 Wetlands Present? Yes 10 No Present Zoning: Single-Family Residential District(REE Requested Zoning: Single-Family Residential District(RSFf Present Land Use Designation: Residential Low Dens Requested Land Use Designation: Residential Low Density Existing Use of Property: residential home site CITY OF CHANHASSEN Check box if separate narrative is attached. RECEIVED AUG 16 2019 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name:Luis Berrospid Contact: Luis Berrospid Address: 7406 Frontier Trail Phone: City/State/Zip: Chanhassen, MN 55317 Cell:763)280-0528 Email: errospidC•; .1 .c•Fax: Signature: troifiA.„4— Date: G Mi PROPERTY OWNE . In igning this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name: same Contact: Address: Phone: City/State/Zip: Cell: Email: Fax: Signature: Date: This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER(if applicable) Name: James R. Hill, Inc.Contact: Rick L. Osberg, PE Address: 2500 County Rd. 42 West, Ste 120 Phone: 952) 890-6044 City/State/Zip: Burnsville, MN 55337 Cell:612)437-7690 Email: rosberg@jrhinc.com Fax: Section 4: Notification Information Who should receive copies of staff reports? Other Contact Information: O Property Owner Via: 0 Email Mailed Paper Copy Name: Applicant Via: [' Email Mailed Paper Copy Address: 0 Engineer Via: 0 Email Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip: Other* Via: Email Mailed Paper Copy Email: INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital copy to the city for processing. SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 19, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 2 WHICH IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF S 31°07'13" E. VICINITY MAP DENOTES FOUND 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT DENOTES SET 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT WITH CAP MARKED R.L.S. NO. 47481 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, ADJOINING RIGHT OF WAY LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: DRAWN BY DATE REVISIONS PL0 11 CAD FILE SS.GZJ PROJECT NO. SHEET 1 OF 1 PROPER BERROSPID ADDITIONST. 0ICHAEL 0INNESOTAPRELIMINARY PLATFORLUIS BERROSPID FRONTIER TRAIL CHANHASSEN 0INNESOTA WEST C.R. S8ITE 1 B8RNSVILLE 0N PHONE .. PKDPSWRQ#MUKLQF.FRPPLANNERS EN*INEERS S8RVEYORSZZZ.MUKLQF.FRPJames R. Hill, Inc.Lot 19, Auditor's Subdivision No. 2, Carver County, Minnesota, except that part described as follows: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 19; thence North along the West line of said lot 340 feet, thence Easterly deflecting at an angle of 90°10' to the right from said last described course, a distance of 272.8 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting to the left at an angle of 27°44' from said last described course, a distance of 309.6 feet to a point in the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19; thence Southeasterly along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 19 distance of 162.21 feet more or less, to the Southeasterly or most Easterly corner of said lot; thence Westerly and Southwesterly along the Southerly line of Lot 19 to the point of beginning. DRI-1 SB-1 DRI-1 SB-1 DRI-1 SB-1 DRI-1 SB-1 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll G TREE REMOVALS REF. #SIZE & TYPE 107 6" MAPLE 108 19" ELM 109 10" ASH 110 11" ELM 111 20" ASH 112 6" MAPLE 113 8" BOX ELDER 114 9" BOX ELDER 115 8" BOX ELDER 116 7" BOX ELDER 117 8" BOX ELDER 124 21" BOX ELDER 125 8" BOX ELDER 126 15" BOX ELDER 127 8" BOX ELDER 128 6" MAPLE 129 16" BOX ELDER 130 14" ASH 131 8" MAPLE 132 9" MAPLE 133 7" MAPLE 134 7" MAPLE 135 8" MAPLE 136 21" BOX ELDER 137 7" BOX ELDER 138 9" BOX ELDER 139 17" BOX ELDER 140 17" BOX ELDER 141 10" BOX ELDER 142 6" MAPLE 143 9" BOX ELDER 144 6" MAPLE 145 13" BOX ELDER 146 15" BOX ELDER 149 6" MAPLE 150 12" BOX ELDER 153 14/13/10" MAPLE 154 10" ELM 155 14/13" ASH 156 9" MAPLE 157 7" MAPLE 158 12" MAPLE 159 12" MAPLE 160 8" MAPLE 161 9" MAPLE 162 7" MAPLE 163 11" MAPLE 164 12" MAPLE 165 7" MAPLE 166 8" MAPLE 167 7" MAPLE 168 7" MAPLE 169 22" ELM 170 10" MAPLE 171 9" MAPLE 172 11" MAPLE 173 12" MAPLE 174 6" MAPLE 175 12" HACKBERRY 176 13" MAPLE 177 15" ASH 178 8" MAPLE 179 16" MAPLE 180 15" ELM 181 11" MAPLE TREE REMOVALS REF. #SIZE & TYPE SAVE/REMOVE 100 19" BOX ELDER SAVE 101 8" MAPLE SAVE 102 10" BOX ELDER SAVE 103 14" BOX ELDER SAVE 104 13" BOX ELDER SAVE 105 12" BOX ELDER REMOVE 106 30" MAPLE SAVE 107 6" MAPLE REMOVE 108 19" ELM REMOVE 109 10" ASH REMOVE 110 11" ELM REMOVE 111 20" ASH REMOVE 112 6" MAPLE REMOVE 113 8" BOX ELDER REMOVE 114 9" BOX ELDER REMOVE 115 8" BOX ELDER REMOVE 116 7" BOX ELDER REMOVE 117 8" BOX ELDER REMOVE 118 7" BOX ELDER SAVE 119 8" MAPLE SAVE 120 9" BOX ELDER SAVE 121 10" ASH SAVE 122 8" ELM SAVE 123 9" BOX ELDER SAVE 124 21" BOX ELDER REMOVE 125 8" BOX ELDER REMOVE 126 15" BOX ELDER REMOVE 127 8" BOX ELDER REMOVE 128 6" MAPLE REMOVE 129 16" BOX ELDER REMOVE 130 14" ASH REMOVE 131 8" MAPLE REMOVE 132 9" MAPLE REMOVE 133 7" MAPLE REMOVE 134 7" MAPLE REMOVE 135 8" MAPLE REMOVE 136 21" BOX ELDER REMOVE 137 7" BOX ELDER REMOVE 138 9" BOX ELDER REMOVE 139 17" BOX ELDER REMOVE 140 17" BOX ELDER REMOVE 141 10" BOX ELDER REMOVE 142 6" MAPLE REMOVE 143 9" BOX ELDER REMOVE 144 6" MAPLE REMOVE 145 13" BOX ELDER REMOVE 146 15" BOX ELDER REMOVE 149 6" MAPLE REMOVE 150 12" BOX ELDER REMOVE 153 14/13/10" MAPLE REMOVE 154 10" ELM REMOVE 155 14/13" ASH REMOVE 156 9" MAPLE REMOVE 157 7" MAPLE REMOVE 158 12" MAPLE REMOVE 159 12" MAPLE REMOVE 160 8" MAPLE REMOVE 161 9" MAPLE REMOVE 162 7" MAPLE REMOVE 163 11" MAPLE REMOVE 164 12" MAPLE REMOVE 165 7" MAPLE REMOVE 166 8" MAPLE REMOVE 167 7" MAPLE REMOVE 168 7" MAPLE REMOVE 169 22" ELM REMOVE 170 10" MAPLE REMOVE 171 9" MAPLE REMOVE 172 11" MAPLE REMOVE 173 12" MAPLE REMOVE 174 6" MAPLE REMOVE 175 12" HACKBERRY REMOVE 176 13" MAPLE REMOVE 177 15" ASH REMOVE 178 8" MAPLE REMOVE 179 16" MAPLE REMOVE 180 15" ELM REMOVE 181 11" MAPLE REMOVE 195 10" MAPLE SAVE 196 7" BASSWOOD SAVE 201 9" MAPLE SAVE 203 7" ELM REMOVE 209 14" MAPLE SAVE 210 10" MAPLE SAVE 213 30" BASSWOOD SAVE 214 6" MAPLE SAVE 215 7" MAPLE SAVE 216 18" MAPLE SAVE 217 10" MAPLE SAVE 218 19" MAPLE REMOVE 219 26" MAPLE REMOVE 220 12" IRONWOOD SAVE 221 23" PINE SAVE 222 8" IRONWOOD SAVE 223 16/11" BASSWOOD REMOVE 224 7" IRONWOOD REMOVE 225 13" BOX ELDER REMOVE 226 14" MAPLE REMOVE 227 27" MAPLE REMOVE 228 22" MAPLE REMOVE 229 29" MAPLE REMOVE 230 6" ELM REMOVE 231 26" MAPLE SAVE CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COUNTYOFCARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on October 8,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy ofthe attached notice ofa Public Hearing to consider a request for subdivision approval to create three lots (Berrospid Addition) with a variance for the use of a private street. Zoned Single-Family Residential (RSF), Planning Case No.20l9-13 (Resubmittal 9-f8-20) to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses ofsuch owners were those appearing as such by the records ofthe County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Ki T. Meuwissen,lerk Subscribed and this!L day o swom to before me 4..r fQl_kjcr-..C_,2020. Notarv Public (Seal) t M Elt . &n 31,2(p. oBclllmcr This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey afld is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilatron of records, infomalion and data located in various cjty. county. state and federal offices and other sources regarding the aaea shown. and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not wenant that the Geographic lnformation System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are eror free. and lhe City does nol represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigalional, tracting or any other pueose requiing exactjng measurement of distance or directon or preclsion in the depi:tjon of geographic featu.es. The preceding disclaimer ls provaded pu6uant to Minnesota Stah,lqs 5466.03, Subd 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that $e Cdy shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims. and agrees to clefend, indemniry, and hold hamless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third partjes which adse o{rt ot lhe use/s access or use oI data provrded Oa!c|!inBr mis map is neither a legally recoft|€d map nor a survey and is nol intended to be llsed as one This map is a compalatjon of recods, information and data located in various ctty, cDunty, state and federal ofices and otfter sources regarding the area shown. and is to be ured for reference purposes only. The City does not warant that the Geographic lnfomalion System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are error free. and the City does not reFesent that the GIS Dala can be used for navilational. ttaclang or any other purpose requinng exacling measurement of distance or directon or precrsion in the depiclion of gEographic eatures. The preceding disdaimer is provijed puGuant to Minnesotia Statutes $4ti6.03. Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknovdedges that the Crty shall nol be liable for any damages. and expressly waives all daims, and agrees lo deieM, andemn y. and hold harml€ss the city from any and all claims bought by User. rts employees or agents, or third partes which aise out ol lhe useis access or use of data provided. (TAX_NAME)t <TAX_ADD_LI r <TAX_ADD_L2r (Next RecordD(TAX_NAME)t (TAX_ADD_L1D <TAX ADD L2r Subject Property ,.- r-t 72 rl)nI I '---.;: u1{irr- @ 2-- a / ,) t I fl Subject Property t- 5 Qo .96tsc ;tsco ci, g g5 l'* .g lEro88€Nc; OEN9 E3 oi ob o=oe OE.f,9 a2 co (l) o =oot-t- a o)-o Eo- oc =o o- (E o aqE 3e3 EEE EcrE q'l EP:(!!2:E&b>> iEE1l,(l,@66, € E;a=-o! o3e5o (EN SbtrDo0)E-.='aG {, E itso d'-;iFoo= po o o)dl .9l.J .i o !! o p o o E E5Fg ,qH Oe LL ,; 53s-F-< eeEg Aa ,o!Yo -o tla.o .- ! A:EE EO :o c ! ad, :>or g o o-' iE56 3 a.;.9 O tr,' O o): trE 6 i A PE 4 E "E *$Fs ts1P*eies€ -ri g ir!-E:6.9 i9 i=c 694i.a.9 oo *eEe E 9H3 rEd 9EE; iEEr.EgE;F't *S-s,99€ E B r h..L; tsP5;99 o a,i o F! hi! Esrg.E6= Ido= o(rFc)tL o e 3.8€F (! a! o- 6t r') s =9 tfi:!d O- ED-.i.ElO ta Y'@ d''= 66u9Ec0r6aL-EE6oGeEii$3t- 69 E g EE E =99bo5HE"i;tf E: sg6setrE Eg:TEE :$BE:H :EEE3E : E EgES F. C\IN NlJ) G n)EoEo- -o o l; E c o) o-ccoEq @-o oc 0,o]o '6'td Or 3 E$ P6E A E g,AE- EiiE=r! 9*rorE E E;EIE IE COIO_Oo rD Nlo --o Eal E 3o d!lo o,*t El!s-ceolo:-E ol- I E g EleSl,oElEr B &El9E E igAF 1B al" H=5ilxa OJac,9 o) E oc 1.c Eio o c(EE ,9o ==B o(, e o,8.Eo6;O(,E>c'-9;E5 aOc-opEO)o-.9(!=o6 -o-Cf EErDo !8!loh; E3oBo= o.=ot- ;fist c(ro)-aE =i =H, iEiigEEgEiEigigi EEEEIEEEEEEgEiEiE EEE iEEEEg EEEEEsEE iEEsiiilEEiilEEiii5. i'; i: oC (, oo o G(.) o -t ooo o I Et!o CI >,Eto o-osto-J 2.;o.=IL? E'E-(,r! .E =; oa ..o9EEO 11, o=rl, E =ooo E') =Ito =aDo,=a h.eoEr-E .9o =of E)o. .= oEoo.98 OE23 ooE o.to C'tr o(, =ao'='6a!oo=-E..)E 9ode OE cEEo.z6 tt ct G GEo o E ugfiti,O 6;p&8.E V EEf* gE -vOcE-lrdtE E fi:E Es:E Hg:lgcsEE EEaIE:sti. ESEI;Ee:;E :ETIE9-:T8E :gHi;sEiE (t o) oN o : E o oo co.tq q;it .t2 0) (! o) o, ol ,:-;co6e9H'Eo- o-o-.E 0) ;! oo)-oE C.5ii9oI -oolDaaao^o-yo Eo-Or, =->e6>. 0)E< ao o, 6 E-ol o.)t E6 .43 o: 5o F-c -Eo& c.r -qoeNC; OEa\I o;i-o9o= ots ;-e(!=oe (l)t.r! E2d) 0) G ooF-t* lt o-o Eo .c.O cfoo oI (ll o aEE 3e3qEE : ps a9 E;Eo(o->'; o ._: E;+f(,o(,6E, C E,; o: o)3c 5o (!N Ibr(r)ooE--b'-raG, a E itaO d'E rvFoa= o o o)dl .9fJ d o I o t {. E sbFg .4, H CEOe t!;<oIoE F-< oeEE i;iE h,Ei9 r do o= ri, ,!!: 6 5 6't E ;:6 0(D 6qis E 9,, E E Eg &AeE Ee! +* E'E i3I 9i or a - -E q) tEE EE ;EE i; Ei Eg Efr Eg"ElEeP IgFEsg*E e+r E: FE*Er (tr-- (l' !a == oo.eE.e6ts6d ts(l) oo-ofS€8.-"i";+ ca ..o9 Oo, tt =11, Efogo o(, E -P 6!AaE> E;E5aocvoo'E O)oE--..qo!] =oJX-ocErgrvgl0., o .!lfoq) €85 b rB :lfE EEEoEa o=F '=Cc HEB .efiE+tE- o{=C CIY.-?;6 "r-q; =H=2Ee 3 - E Es:P , g;*E F sle: " 5e 5g ,' EggEEigiggliliii ;i* gaE;e; EiEE*gc EEiiEiiEiiEiiiEi ;eeEgeE:i;EEEitiig 'I I 3 t B E 6 : E I !, E F .6 !, (go o r!IoJ ,:,,;(!ooeI o- t! q o. >Etoo '5:o- t! eBo-J I ii,o.= i= o.c =E nd,dtd,d,d&ehhi u 6u6udu 6u a(J 6u g(J 6e\J \r \r Ca E. E Z E',\ Z .\ Z .\ Z e ^ Z e .\ Z c .\ Z E r) Z E ^ Zr c- 4- 6 0 0 0 0 ; o ; o ; o 6 > o o ; o o ; o o'! o o ; o ===2PP EP= E = E = EP= E P = E P= EP s E e= E E E-9EE E = E g=H= H = EH = E P=E g= E==E H= Fl O..1 F.a (O !r OOO..{ r{ a\ N an an (n sl sl \l U) ln lrt (O (O \O f\F F- 6o N6ro@ oroooooo oooo oo ooooooooooot\| N(\rm(r1.n <l <lt <l <l t $ <l <t+ <t € rt \t<t <t <t <t st $<t <t <t (J =ark oE cE cE E cE ca oE ca cc6{rr-.>E-t- o 5o5o5o Eo 5o Eo so Eol* h u u u u u u c. e, oc z. oE ra z. .\ z .\ z. e 7 z e 7 z e 7 z e. a z e -,^ zY :'.E c E G s E OA A 66 =11 =6= 6 6 =66 = 6 O =..,t 6 ur ..,l O=a) ; E E E ;;;;E c s c *zi?irile = E e i E c i r c n E c i E6(J'/,Qq qqqq ndd = d e =9 E 9= d9= d I = d9= n = = d9 E<, S 3 E f f E E E 6 b a o a - u - o - o 6 = o 6 = o o = o o; o o = o x N(nor.r r{ -roFr Fr (o Fr ooo -r Fr6lN lr1 anan<ltslr/1 !n lJ)(D(D(oF N F.€<.n !nOO O ON N 0o6(DOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOF ..1 Fl N N N N i'l N .n (n m <l <l <t tt ti tl t t tt * qt t t tt I rt <t <t € <t I ti <t ttFFF ttQlrJlr'lr ==uJzzl-a\ f'\ zQEEOLlt!t!EfissEEsturoi^FFtl LFira ttiaE!o{2.24a E E=?-= = *l-a-frel=!-.4;Eg E z=un,e ssE E.i E= ===iE;itrEFi=BIs35==Eis===E;EIE=r3=fi gs,i oooooo FrOOO OOOO OO OOOO O OOO O O O OOOOO ()O<t l\{ r.r1 I,)F sl <l mN.Y) Fra\rosla or d(trrooN oooF. (n .n ot |.. o6ao <t oo.{ oo Fr ooooooo6t <l .r a\ a\ N Fr (\ rJl .-{ N all a\ a\ st F{ .r (n F.{ a{ <t r-r r-rooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooOOiulOl,)lJ)Ol,)(r.Y)anFiFrO.rO!'lOr'{i'rFlr"lr"lCr.'{.'{!'lF{r'rCrt'ri..lFlao ao <t o t <l 6 It t q <l a @ ft € N @ (\ @ € @ co a N @ @ € @ @ € @ o 0o 6 - o ln N o 6t .\ o N Sf <l <l o 6 ao € ao 6 o o ao ao ao 6 6 ao ao ao 6 0 ao ao ao oo oo1 t't ti tn Ln Lo ra rJl rr') rJl rJl rJ1 rJ1 rJ1 l4 lJl rJl rn rJl rn l4 lJ) rJl rJ1 !n !o lrt r.t] rJ) rr') rr') rJ) rn rn rnA: N N a{ N N N N 6l N N N a\l a\l N N N N a\l a\l N N N N a,l N N N N N N N N N N o€@ @t rt(oarro(o (oo(o o (o a! !n (o F o (o N (o ro a\ oNNt\l GtF r.F.OOrF. NOtF. Ot F. O N F. N (n I\ O O |\. a\ oltFFN NF NNOTFF FFF FFOift1 FFFFCtTNF.FNo)o)c ct o! oolF.oror or or (,1 0rorF\lnororororF.ororqrotr. r. r. s r. r., r. r. n rl r.. FF F F r.. rl r- r-* * * rl* * rl rl rl r.. r.. r.. r.. r...'{ Fl Fl Fl .< ..1 .a c< -l -l Fl Fl Fl .l -{ Fl .l Fl !-l -{ r{ Fl ..1 Fa -{ F{ rl Fl Fl Fa -{ r< r.{!t an rn (n ll) (n d) m ft1 an d) an m m (n lr1 aD an an m (n (n o m m (n lr) d) aD arl (n m m(n (1 t I,) rr! ut rn ra rn u1 ul ra u) u1 rr') ra !n l,) u) rr1 Lrl rJt rjl r/) rj't 14 ra rn ra ra ur s1 l.)<l l.tr !n rrl la !n u) v) ul rn rn rn rJ) u) rn l,.l l,) l,) ln g) u) rJ) rr') rjt rn ur l,) u) rr') rr') rn rn rn = q z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z z. z z z=-ts = > > > > :> = = = := > = = = = == = = = > > = = == == = =?o^. E (o z z z z z z z z 2 2 z z z 2 z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z' : > J r! t! uJ lrJ trJ uJ uJ 14 ul uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ uJ lrl uJ uJ uJ uJ BJ gJ ul tr,t -t -a - Vl Vl t^ tn t, rn ta Vt tt t, tl t\ tl tt Vl Vl Vt tl tn Vt qt Vl tl tl Vt utl V\ tl tl tt t, t, ^'= ^- r, th th th th tt ti tn tn vt v\ tl tl tl tt vl vl v't tt vl tn v\ v\ tl tl tat vl ttt t\ tl tt vt = o sr- - -r r - !- - - - - - - - - - -r - - - - - E - - - -r r -a,z s z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z <E---rr---------E----------E----!--F (,U(J (JU(J (J UUU (J (J (JUUU(J U (J (JUL,(J UUUUU (J (JUU(.)() EEHEgE;=EEEEiiIEEIiEIEiEEIIIEEEiEiE i = !E E *l'=ia*fr u=* = z=* G (o { \.r { { { { { \l { { \J { \t { { { ! { { { { 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 l. 5 5 5 .Fr.rr(,(, l, 5 5 5 5 5 s s E E5 5 Jj F 5 5 t,tr)NN r.}. |. p tr p ooo OQP (n tI (,/r O @ \r Ol Nr Nr P P P rr O O O O O O 5 5 N, O (p (, P P O O lg (o (o 6 6N nJ rr C) O C) O O Ur r, { ( U, P (D { Or (, 5 N' A P !! o !, o c, r) o o - o r,} gt oma;\/ira5nnntln.n.'l'n .ntnn.r1.r1Y-dD=,1r=|'r==m=Pm 8 il il * 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 d 6 d d 6 6 6 6 6 6 r = = i =;;;?;;=;tn>>> ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ==>r=r=EE=r>=< 1 _1 1 _{ _{ _l _t < _{ _t -.t -_{ __{ __t _{ _-{ -_l { i i _l = \, a v \J v \J, < \J, n !,X'ppp;;;;- Att;fi t ; ; A E * tr, m o g o o o = o o m ox - r l:- v v * v v, v v v F v v v v v v v, v dz 7t z v z - v z 6vYPPz -{ -{ -r -.r < -{ -.1 .-{ --r --r --{ -{ -< -r -r -r < -r i ;o r: rtq r,t=-zzzvvvvvvrvvvrvTtvrrva--===P=Qqqq 1- t- t- t- .- t- F F - F r@@tp 000 q, r) r) r) r) o o o o o o o a) r) a) a) o r) c) .) r) r) !, ..) .) 6 r) r) r) .) r.) r) r) r) C)a------i--------------P-r---------r 4 z z z z z z zz z zz z zzz z zz z z z =z z z z z z z z z z z 2(r- -r-- --- - r- - --- - ----- : r - - ----- ---- 2 t-at ah art t t-at t, tn t tt tn r, r, rn r, a, l, r, ah art tn tn I t, t, l l ln@@vrvrV:ttltV1ln ,,t tt art tn 0 tl) ttt t, vl v1 t, r, ah art aJt to ah th q vr \ ; tt \J1 l l tn tn v\ vr llr a/\ ln v1 < z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z z z z z z z:- z z z z z z z z z z z z-- - - tn z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z z = z z z z z z z z z z 2 z !^l o o tn ur ur (^ ur ur (, (, (, (, (, (, r, ur t.rr q u rn o Ei ra u r, (, ur ur trr (^ (rr (, (, (, ; (r ( (, (, ul t, (, ur l.,r qr ur (Jr (n (,l (, (, ur u !n !n l, o q q (, (,t (, (, lr l, l, vt (,/l (, " ur (r) (,^, (lJ (! ur (rJ (! (.r, tr, uJ qJ l, Q q) uJ l, qJ @ (r) u, @ l, l, l, i, (r, l, q, u, uJ lr,) q) qJ P P P TJ P II P P P P P II P P P FT P P ts P P N) P ts P P P P II IJ P P P Pl:Y l:{}}Y} Y}:! }{}Yi }lA"r }}Y}{:}l!!}to ro (o (.cl l0 (o(o(o(o(o(o(ll (o roro(o(o(!,6 (o(o(o(.o (o (o (o (o :lor C'r qr qj -l <{{<{{{ ! !\J{{{6 {{!{ {{{\,1 (o cooo@FUJ eNN.TNl\JNN N, Nl,tr(O(!)6 (O\t{{ {(O{{ Oo,loo{ \r55N)NrNiJ NJ Nr.J!OtOr NJO!!qr OIO{Or N., {.{ r{ { { { { { { { { { { { { { { ! { { \r{ 5 5 55 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 5 55 qr r, (, vr 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 s 5 a 5 5 qJ uJ o o l. p r. |. p p o o o o oo ur (^ (, o co ! or N) N, P P P P o o o o o o 5 5 P ^J (b qJ ll P o o to (o to 0o ooq)N p OOO O O(^ ur{(^u)p (o \.t or (, E ^J ap O O ! r.) O a)O f.) - E, r) lar grr.\ r-i\.r T I P F I a F = m = a m - P rn 6 * a il 66d d 638 688d 666 6 d 6o - - -, >, > -" ii*1iz > > > z z z z z z zzZ ZZZZZZZz z = => v =v = - E =, D =-.1 -l < -l --l --t --{ --l --{ --l --l --l --l -l -{ -l -.1 < -{ -{ -.{ --l \, v n z \J , rJ , < \J 2 n \r ;!!-o;;f, t;t ;;; t;fr ; g o rn O c, O tr O = tr, Q ln o, E- a c v v v v v 7 v v, v v v v v v v v v, v 6 z v z v z - v z (\ vt2Z2 --r --l --r -{ -{ -r -{ -r -r -r .-{ -.r -{ -r --{ --r --r --r io a o9 oi, Z Z Z v , v v v v v P P v v v , v v v 2 v --= = =- ;'-v1 tntn- ? F F @@tD 000 NJ NJ NJ N P NJ NJ N., NJ N NJ AJ AJ AJ I\J N.' N N N) N., N N) I\, NJ N.' NJ N') N N) N N NJ N) N N(, r,rr(, (, l, l, (,r (,l ur (n (,l (, (, (, (, l, l, (,r (,l (,,| ur (n (, (, (,(,q (^(^ (, lr(, q (,'t o o N @ a s D A N ^J o o o o o o o o @ @ o a 6 0o 0o 6 @ Qo @ !o 9o 6 @ @ @ - - (o - 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 @ C. @ @ @ - 6 6 0 (b Nr (p Cb A & O @ @ @ @ @ 6 @ @BB88tttt88B8888888BB885BEBBB55EEB85r- N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 O O O O |l (,'.} F N N.) @ Cl lr (}) ct q, S qr ur P rr 5 Nr O l,(r) -r F F < or 5 t, NJ l. (n 6 < 6 G o o F 5 uJ N., N }. to 5 l. qr Q q1 >l vr { (o (o o6ci66<i6o 6ooO66o 666o o oooo ooo ooooooooo oo O .'looNO@@N@ NN Jf.eEr) Fl!z<9iu< O$r,)O N ('',lo(oooF. r. zz>=2i --zz --U(J torN(Oxxoo@aoooo- o- NFz -za<(JO QaJO_ o<-EoOr!-FF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, October 20, 2020 Subject Approve Planning Commission Minutes dated October 6, 2020 Section APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No: D.1. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No: PROPOSED MOTION: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the minutes from its October 6, 2020 meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated October 6, 2020 Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes dated October 6, 2020 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES OCTOBER 6, 2020 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Eric Noyes, Michael McGonagill, Mark Randall and Douglas Reeder MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Skistad and Mark Von Oven STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator; and Matt Kerr, IT Support Specialist PUBLIC PRESENT: Peter Eskuche Deephaven Todd & Kari Carstensen Chanhassen PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER REQUEST FOR BLUFF, SHORELAND, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE, AND OTHER VARIANCES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME AND DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6915 HIGHOVER LANE. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. The architect Peter Eskuche explained the rationale for the placement of the house and detached garage on the site. Chairman Weick asked about the impacts associated with shifting the house to the buildable area of the lot. Commissioner Noyes asked for clarification on the dimension and primary use of the secondary garage. Commissioner McGonagill asked the applicant to explain his thought process of building on this site when he bought the property. Chairman Weick opened the public hearing and noted that one email was received and was included as a part of the record. No one else spoke and the public hearing was closed. After discussion among commission members the following motion was made. Noyes moved, Randall seconded that the Planning Commission table Planning Case 2020- 20 for 90 days and direct the applicant to work with city staff based on the comments provided. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Noyes noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 15, 2020 as presented. Planning Commission Summary – October 6, 2020 2 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Kate Aanenson provided an update on action taken by the City Council at their September 14, 2020 and September 28, 2020 meetings and discussed items proposed for future Planning Commission agendas. Randall moved, McGonagill seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 6, 2020 Chairman Weick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Weick, Eric Noyes, Michael McGonagill, Mark Randall and Douglas Reeder MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Skistad and Mark Von Oven STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator; and Matt Kerr, IT Support Specialist PUBLIC PRESENT: Peter Eskuche Deephaven Todd & Kari Carstensen Chanhassen Weick: So for the record we do have a quorum for tonight’s meeting. Just briefly I would like to review the guidelines for this evening’s meeting. We are getting good at this but it is a Zoom meeting so please be patient. I would ask all of our commission members not to hold any chats, discussions or text messages on the side. Everything needs to be public and through the Zoom application. All of our discussions need to be public and for the record. As I mentioned we have one hearing on tonight’s agenda and we will present it as follows. Staff will present the item. It will then be opened for commission questions and comments of staff. Then the applicant may make a presentation if they would like and at that time we would also, they would be available for questions from the Planning Commission as well. We’ll also have a public hearing portion of tonight’s item. Anyone present may come forward and speak regarding this item. We will also and have also summarized the emails and we did receive at least one email that will be in the record and we will publish a phone number and you may call in at the appropriate time if you are listening and would like to provide your comment. When everybody has had a chance to be heard we’ll close the public hearing. There’ll be another opportunity for comments from the Planning Commission members and we can have a motion and a vote as appropriate. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER REQUEST FOR BLUFF, SHORELAND, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE, AND OTHER VARIANCES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME AND DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6915 HIGHOVER LANE. Weick: With that I will turn it over to MacKenzie. Thank you MacKenzie. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 2 Walters: Thank you Chair. So this is a variance request for bluff setback variance, bluff impact zone variance, shoreland setback and accessory structure side variance to construct a home, driveway and accessory structures on the property at 6915 Highover Lane. If this is approved or denied by a three-fourths majority vote that decision is final unless appealed. Anyone aggrieved of the decision has four business days to appeal the decision in writing to the City. If it is appealed it would appear on the City Council agenda on October 26th. Were the motion to be carried by less than a three-fourths vote it would automatically go to the City Council so with that out of the way I will get into it. The property is located at 6915 Highover Lane. This property is zoned residential single family district. It is riparian lot. That means it has a 4,000 square foot lot area minimum. Requires 30 foot front and rear setbacks. 10 foot side yard setbacks. The property is encumbered by a bluff which has a 30 foot bluff setback, 20 foot bluff impact zone, 150 foot shoreland setback. The City has a global 1,000 square foot accessory structure size limit. That’s a cumulative limit for all detached accessory structures on a property. The property has a 30 foot utility easement for the benefit of I believe Xcel Energy and their power lines that run across the west lot line and there is a Manage 2 wetland on the east side of the property. Although that wetland is well clear of any proposed construction activities and I mention it just for completeness. Little bit of history on this subdivision. 6915 Highover Lane is part of the Lake Harrison subdivision. This was created in 2005. At that time the City’s current bluff ordinance was in full effect. The setbacks and definition of a bluff have no changed since 1991 when they were first created. When this lot was originally proposed during the subdivision process the developer had requested a 20 foot bluff setback and 20 foot bluff impact zone variance for this lot to allow for a larger home. The Planning Commission and City Council denied that requested variance due to concern about sensitive environmental features, namely the bluff, the trees and wetland complex that would be downstream of that. The Planning Commission had recommended at the time that the lot not be created unless the developer showed it could be built without a variance. The developer provided this exhibit here showing that a house could be placed on the lot without requiring a variance. Because that was shown the City Council approved the lot with the stipulation that the bluff and trees not be disturbed and here I put in red and blue the sewer and water stubs approximate location that were extended into the lot. Some abbreviated background on this site. Starting in November 17th staff was made aware that grading and vegetative removal had occurred on this property within the bluff impact zone and that the property was being used to store equipment associated with a contractor’s yard. Over the next year staff worked with the applicant to address these issues. Remove the items being stored. Restore portions of the bluff. At this time staff explained the site constraints of the property owner and recommended that any future construction occur in the approved building pad. August of 2020 we received a pre-submittal showing the home located within the bluff. Staff sent the approved home site to the applicant and recommended that the house be designed to utilize the approved building pad. On September, 2020 we received a complete application showing the home, driveway, and accessory structure within the bluff that is before you today. On September of 2020 staff was informed that grading and vegetation removal had again occurred and that the property was again being used to store equipment and materials. What the applicant is requesting is that they be allowed to construct a house, driveway and accessory structures within the required bluff setback and bluff impact zone. The accessory structures are Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 3 also located partially within the 150 shoreland setback from Lake Harrison and the cumulative size of the accessory structures is 1,418 square feet. The application has provided justifications for this request in noting that most of the lot is encumbered by bluff setbacks. They feel there is inadequate buildable area to accommodate a modern home. That the property lacks a private yard area due to the walking trail that is along the west lot line and the presence of the 30 foot electrical easement along the west lot line also constrains the building area. Just to explain this graphic, the red line represents the top of the bluff. The yellow line the 20 foot bluff impact zone. And the blue line is the 30 foot bluff setback. As you can see the vast majority of the proposed impervious surface, lot cover and structures are located entirely within the bluff setback. Staff did receive one email. This was attached to the staff report. The individual submitting the email stated concern that the property would be used as a contractor’s yard and that proposed attached buildings likely violate the subdivision’s neighborhood covenants. Staff does not enforce neighborhood covenants but we also don’t like to put ourselves in a position where we are approving stuff that is forbidden by them either. Staff looked at this primarily through the lens of the potential impact to the bluff. Existing vegetation and it’s root structure play a critical role in protecting and reinforcing slopes and soils on bluffs. That’s why the city code strictly regulates and in most cases prohibits the removal of vegetation within 20 feet of the top of the bluff and within the bluff itself. That’s the bluff impact zone as defined by city code. Removing that vegetation and it’s root structure increases erodability of slopes which has the potential to increase sediment load in wetlands and lakes. Right here you can see the area that was cut out of the slope of the bluff to create a driveway. You can see a little bit of under cutting already occurring here where the root structure’s been disturbed as well as soil that looks like it’s been transported. This right here is the area that was approved by the City Council for tree removal to accommodate a building pad. For reference the applicant’s proposed house would be approximately here and the driveway is that this picture is from is approximately here. The other major lens staff looked at is the impact on the wetlands and lakes. Risk of negatively impacting wetlands and lake significantly increases when an adjacent development is proposed on steep, erodible slopes. The setbacks are designed to minimize the disturbance of soil and vegetation near lakes and prevent the creation of lot cover. Engineering and water resources departments believe that the proposal would likely cause significant sediment runoff into the wetland. Increased sediment load has the potential to degrade wetland and water quality. The DNR submitted a letter that is included in your packet where they have recommended denial of this variance request due to the potential to impact the water quality. So staff’s assessment of the variance request is that due to environmental concerns the City has historically acted to preserve steep slopes especially those near lakes and wetlands. One of the policies in our comprehensive plan is actually to protect steep slopes whenever possible as well as to protect wooded areas whenever possible. Variances should always be granted in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. We believe this proposal has significant risk of creating erosive conditions. The DNR has recommended denial due to their concerns about the environmental impact of the proposed variance. Staff believes a usable building area for both houses and a detached accessory structure exists on the lot. This right here is a very rough footprint staff drew and measured out that meets all of the bluff setbacks indicated by the applicant’s surveyor. It provides a 3,600 square foot footprint that would accommodate a 3 car garage as well as quite a bit of living space Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 4 especially is a second story or basement were constructed. Staff feels this does represents a reasonable use of the lot. A detached accessory structure could be built in the northwest corner here. Staff sketched it out at about 800 square feet again without requiring any variances. When looking at the surrounding neighborhoods there are no comparably sized accessory structures present. The design of the detached garage is not what staff typically sees on residential single family lots. Staff would also note that in 2005 significantly less extensive variances were denied for this lot due to environmental concerns. Staff searched all variances issued by the City and cannot find any comparable that have been granted. We’re very concerned with the precedent of allowing new construction to occur directly within the bluff. Staff believes alternative designs are possible that would allow comparable use of the property without the issuance of a variance and for these reasons staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the requested variances. If you have any questions I’d happily answer them at this time. Weick: Thank you MacKenzie and with that I will open to commission members for questions of MacKenzie. You can just go ahead and chime in. Hearing nothing from our commissioners I would invite the applicant to come forward and either onto MacKenzie’s presentation or make your own presentation. I would ask that you speak nice and loud. The microphone up there is covered by plastic so it is hard for the folks on the TV to hear you. And welcome, thank you for coming. Peter Eskuche: Thank you. Thank you MacKenzie for presenting that well. Can everyone hear me okay? I know you can but. Weick: Can you guys hear okay on the phone? McGonagill: Yes. Weick: Okay. Thanks. Peter Eskuche: My name’s Peter Eskuche. My office is in Deephaven. I’m a local architect and I was hired by Todd and Kari Carstensen, the property owners who are here tonight and I believe they may want to just say something super brief. I believe it wouldn’t be a bad time to just say something quick right now. Because there’s nothing about detail. It’s more about what their intent is. Weick: That’d be great. I think that’d be useful presentation. Thank you and welcome. Kari Carstensen: Hi there. Todd Carstensen: Yes my name’s Todd Carstensen. I guess the history of this is, when this came on the market I actually bought it that day which was about 7 years ago because we were so in love with all the trees and how it looks and how private it really is and I didn’t realize about Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 5 this bluff issue when I bought it. But the privacy of it was what we really liked. We’ve lived in this town since we’ve been married. Kari Carstensen: 2004 we bought the house. Todd Carstensen: Yeah quite a few years ago and we’ve raised two kids and we want to keep it as our forever house really so we like the town and we certainly hope we can build something there so thank you. Weick: Okay thanks. Peter Eskuche: So they hired me to do a design for the home. I think the first thing that I did was just I pulled out a book of about 170 different homes that we’ve done in the last on really in only the last like 12 years. I haven’t really documented all of them in 27 years but, and I found only one home that actually fit in that footprint of the allowable area but it’s like a 1,200 square foot house that doesn’t really have, it has about a 3 car garage. I see strange stares so I’ll just prove it. Weick: We may be able to show the overhead. Peter Eskuche: Sure so what I did. Walters: Can you push the document cam please? Weick: Just give us one second. Peter Eskuche: Yeah sure. Perfect. So you can see this has a garage. 3 car garage but I would say a pretty tight 3 car garage. Foyer, stairway, really small. This powder room, family, kitchen and kind of a dinette. So it’s a really a little butter muffin rush so it actually fits but it’s I don’t think it even meets the development minimums. So the first thing they started doing was expanding on how we would build in this area but it became pretty quickly evident that it was going to be descending quite a bit of hill, meaning that they wouldn’t really have much of any yard. The only yard potentially would be the trail system which I’m sure you’ve been on the trails lately. There’s quite a bit of people throwing dog poop including in their yard so they didn’t necessarily think that was a suitable area safe for kids. And so we pretty quickly, you know the whole point that they bought the property was so they could build a tree within the woods and really just have a tree in the house so you can see the contours are very minimal for the extent of house. This whole wing of the house is actually doesn’t have any foundation other than piles so we tried to minimize again the impact on the site and try to preserve as many trees as possible. Keep it a very natural environment. That being said you know we can move the house around it’s just, it’s really not, you can see that this house really just wouldn’t fit in this area so I think the main point of the application is that there’s certainly things that we could do to make erosion better. You could in the front yard put a filtration area that could potentially carry Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 6 all of the roof water and put it in the filtration area. If you look at how the grading is impacting the site it’s almost not impacting the site very, it’s very little impact on the site. If you look at the tree, there’s a tree inventory site as well. There’s really about 4 or 5 trees impacted here and about 2 here. And because it’s minimal foundation we thought that that would do a pretty good job of just staying within the trees. Preserving what they love about the site. You know of course they don’t want any erosion either. That house then feeds out into this kind of open area where they talked about doing a detached garage. McGonagill: Can you speak in the microphone please sir. As you move around we can’t hear you. Peter Eskuche: Sorry about that. And so the house would basically kind of open up to what’s still kind a bit of grade drop too but the area that’s open. This is that open kind of grassy area and they propose to put this garage there. The site plan that we had didn’t show 150 setback. I think that’s an adjustment that could be made in the locating of that. We talked about that today. What we basically are trying to do is minimal impacting as possible while creating a safe environment for their family to enjoy and really finding that this area is just really not large enough. I know you show a 3,600 foot footprint. You know it’s just two rectangles basically but when you try to apply all the rooms and garage doors and access and circulation you know that’s when the problems started to arise so, and we’re trying to be as compliant in every other aspect. Obviously we weren’t aware of the 150 foot setback which we could adjust but I’m here to answer any other questions you might have and thank you for your consideration. Weick: Yeah thank you. While maybe some of the commission members gather their thoughts or if they do have questions I guess I would ask if, and you know I’m going to expose myself as really not knowing anything about building houses right but if that house shifted over exactly like it was onto the area so it just shifted onto the area that was identified as buildable. Peter Eskuche: Yep. Weick: Are we getting into a steep grade there that makes it difficult to do that? Peter Eskuche: It would be slightly less steep actually. Weick: It’d be less steep…if you just shifted that over. Peter Eskuche: Yeah. In all honesty if you move this, this way say. Weick: Yeah. Peter Eskuche: So like this basically rectangle corner would be like here. Weick: Right. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 7 Peter Eskuche: You could do that so I think the main reason we didn’t do that was because these are all really significant maples. Weick: So it’s the tree cover. Peter Eskuche: Yeah and these are kind of wispy, a lot of basswoods. Some, a few maples. Some elm that were kind of light and airy and it was a little easier to put the house in these trees where these are pretty significant maples so we’re just trying to be a little less impactful on trees. However of course you know as we know with elm, ash, oak wilt, you know it doesn’t seem to really matter what kind of tree they are anymore. They seem to all get some sort of disease now but unfortunately, but there’s a little bit of a struggle there with erosion versus trees. Weick: Okay. Peter Eskuche: But we could make a move. I think to some degree it gets very close to, and I don’t know if any of the commissioners have been to the site. Weick: I’ve seen it. I won’t speak for everybody but yeah. Peter Eskuche: But you know you have the high power line tower as you’re getting closer this way. You’re closer to the tower. You’re closer to the open area. You know right now there’s just tons of people on the trail so it’s just a little bit more desirable to be more private there and safe for their family. For their kids. And right under the power tower. Weick: Okay. Peter Eskuche: But good question, thank you. Weick: Okay. That’s all I have. If there are other questions please speak up from the commission. Commissioner Noyes. Noyes: Is there a garage… McGonagill: Commissioner Noyes could you speak up please? We can’t hear you sir. Noyes: Can you hear me now? McGonagill: Yes. Noyes: Okay. The secondary garage that you’re planning, what are the dimensions of that and what is the primary use of that building? Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 8 Peter Eskuche: So the primary use of that building was just to store extra vehicles. They do have a lot of miscellaneous shaped size vehicles so I don’t have my drawings handy. I don’t know if MacKenzie can help me at all. I’ll grab my scale and see if I can just scale it off of this drawing. Walters: It’s 1,188 square foot structure. It has a lower level of vehicle storage and then an upper level of vehicle storage and then the third level I believe has two rooms and a closet would be off the top of my head but it’s more of a kind of open use area than store area I would characterize it as. Peter Eskuche: Yeah I guess the drawings are in the packet. There’s a lower garage, a main garage, and then they just threw some storage above the garage. So there’s like I guess you could call it a second, if this is called a walkout structure that would be like the second floor. If the lowest level be at main level then you call it the third floor. You know it really depends. Walters: Page 12 of your packet has the footprint. Peter Eskuche: Basically is 45 by 26. Noyes: Just a quick follow up question. Is the use of that building 100 percent residential use or will it be used at all for any kind of commercial contracting related type of usage. Todd Carstensen: I had a skid loader that I use. Weick: Can you come up to the microphone I’m sorry. It’s just so the folks on the phone can hear you. Todd Carstensen: I have a skid loader and some attachments that I use just like to plow my driveway and stuff because, especially this one that’s quite a long driveway and I couldn’t wait for maybe a plow guy to come to get out you know so I’ve always had one. I have snowmobiles and four wheelers and boats and plan on getting a camper so. Noyes: Okay thank you. Aanenson: Can I just clarify that too. I think that was one of the concerns that was raised by the staff so I did do this subdivision so I have some history with this and we had a lot of interest in it over the years but one of the concerns we have with a space this size was why we recommend against this is they often turn into contractor’s yards. I’m not saying they’re going to do that but that’s what happens and then there’s a lot of extra traffic on the road that’s unanticipated in a residential street and then it becomes a staff’s problem to try to resolve that so we just want to be transparent and say you cannot run a business in an accessory structure. Even if it’s construction, snowplowing, gardening, landscaping, that sort of thing. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 9 Weick: Okay thank you. McGonagill: Kate I do have a follow up question for you if I may. This is Commissioner McGonagill. When this subdivision was platted before the applicant purchased it would it not show this lot size and building site? Aanenson: Anybody that inquired about it they were given that information. The buildable area and the lot size. McGonagill: So the developer or someone had to do that. Second question, Lake Harrison. I’m real familiar with this area. Around here and around that trail quite a bit. I’ve walked it quite a bit. In fact I was down, went down it this week again. Lake Harrison if I remember right is a really closed lake. In other words there’s not a whole of outlet for it. It’s not like it can, it flows well. I know when the Harrison subdivision was built particularly those houses off of Galpin there was an awful lot of sensitivity to filtration into the, filtration into Lake Harrison, is that correct? Walters: I’ll defer to our Water Resources Coordinator for that question. Unmacht: Thank you. Can you repeat that one more time? McGonagill: I can’t hear you. Unmacht: I’m sorry can you repeat that question commissioner. McGonagill: Okay in the Lake Harrison I believe is a closed lake. What I mean by that it doesn’t have a really good outlet. It’s not like it’s flowing like you would see in some other places. It does have a sensitivity I know to sedimentation as well as just plant growth. I mean I see a lot because I go by it a lot and when the Harrison subdivision was built and the houses were around it I know there was a lot of sensitivity to that. You know the setbacks and putting them back particularly on Harrison Hill which is on the other side of the power lines to that to keep those people out of, you know to keep construction out of the zones and I know there were stakes and everything through there to keep it looking at those. You know keep out the bluff. Is that not correct? Unmacht: Yeah I do believe that’s correct and that’s one of the other kind of concerns that I had myself is that Harrison Lake is considered a natural environmental lake in this city. Not a recreational development lake and what kind of ends up getting defined as can be kind of unclear at times but it’s kind of more or less our code more or less goes by the DNR’s definitions but Harrison Lake is not listed on the MPCA’s website for any impairments meaning sediment, nutrient loads, mercury in fish tissue, etcetera but one of the concerns with a site like this is that excessive erosion into the wetland which is immediately adjacent to the lake would potentially down the road cause an impairment and it could be listed by the MPCA. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 10 McGonagill: Okay thank you. Mr. Chairman I do have a question for the applicant. Can I ask that? Weick: Yes please. McGonagill: Okay Mr. Carstensen, this is Commissioner McGonagill. The question I have for you, I understand looking at your website you’re a contractor. You build houses. You do that. You do roofing. When you bought the lot being that kind of experience you had, I mean I agree it’s a beautiful lot by the way. Beautiful trees. It’s really gorgeous now with all the colors changing. Todd Carstensen: Yes. McGonagill: I would agree with you. So did you just think you could get a house in there or what was your thought process…knowing your background in construction. Todd Carstensen: Yeah I thought I could put a house in there. I mean I’ve been all over the state not to mention the city and I’ve seen a lot of houses that are I guess considered by right by the bluff. I mean I’m kind of surprised about this actually so. McGonagill: Okay so you, and to your, you bought it from the developer but you didn’t really, what I hear you say you didn’t go through and look at the City what you could do or not do. You just assumed what you could do. Todd Carstensen: Correct. McGonagill: Okay. And on the, I guess another question I have, knowing your background as a developer and knowing what it takes for permits I’m a little curious why you cut a road through there knowing that stuff. Todd Carstensen: I didn’t really. I didn’t understand about the bluff thing initially. I haven’t built a house for over 30 years so I’m not, I wouldn’t be considered a builder really. McGonagill: Okay, so because I know that I’ve seen your skid’s still there for a couple years honestly. Todd Carstensen: Yeah. McGonagill: I walk by it a lot. Your roofing material is piled there. The other stuff’s there. The only aspect of that being the logic of using that as a storage facility or not facility, as a storage spot, did they talk to you about that. Again the logic, tell me your logic of doing that. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 11 Todd Carstensen: I’ve just been super swamped. I just haven’t had, I’ve just been trying to make money. McGonagill: Okay. Todd Carstensen: I don’t have another spot for that stuff right now and I usually bring it back… McGonagill: So if you would build this house you don’t have another spot where would you propose to put that stuff? Todd Carstensen: I’m not planning on working much longer actually. McGonagill: Okay. Alright thank you sir. Todd Carstensen: Yep. Weick: Thank you Commissioner McGonagill. Did you want to circle back or you okay? Kari Carstensen: No I think it was talked about. Weick: Okay. Anything else, I didn’t mean to cut you off Commissioner McGonagill if you had more questions. I’m sorry. McGonagill: No I don’t think I do. I thought staff’s report was pretty complete and like you Chairman I went and actually walked that site down both the private drive as well as the power line. MacKenzie one thing you could, there’s one question I have for you. It’s a little bit different situation but could you put up the overhead picture of where the private drive comes through showing the lot size. Okay. Yeah now it shows, it’s the one that shows the private, yeah that private drive coming through. There is a, when you look at the way that lot is laid out, if I go off to the left, off this lot. You had it in the packet where it showed all the lots layout. Let me see if I can find it here for you MacKenzie. It’s on page. Walters: I may not have it in the power point I’m afraid. McGonagill: It’s on page 7. I would direct the commissioners to that page 7 of the packet. In that there is a, if you go down the private drive or go down the power line there is a house there located right down from that house on Lot 11 I guess it’s called which it’s orientation and it’s sensitivity to the bluff I would say is a fairly similar situation. Would you agree with that MacKenzie? Walters: Yeah both Lot 11 and Lot 12 were, if memory serves me right, subject to variance requests by the builder and the exhibit you’re showing, you’re referring to the Lot 11 and 12 Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 12 detail were the proof of concept the developer gave showing that homes could be sited on these lots without negatively impacting the bluff. McGonagill: Right. And on Lot 12 that house, or Lot 11 that house is there. Walters: Yes it is and it was built in accordance with the city code. McGonagill: And what was the, the question I have now that they’re looking at it, to the left of the house on Lot 11 there’s another little stub driveway in there. Do you know what they originally intended to do with that? Walters: I believe that is a turn around Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: That was a turn around? Walters: Yeah. McGonagill: Because I was like okay I was…street going to go through there. So ideally when the developer laid it out he did have similar lots on 11 and 12 that were shown to be buildable. Is that correct? Walters: Correct. McGonagill: Okay. And I do understand that the house on Lot 12 is closer to the front, i.e. closer to the trail and to the power line but that’s just the way it lays in there so I just thought that was interesting. I just wanted to be sure I, that the other commissioners were aware of that. That there is a house right down from it that kind of meets the code. Thank you, Walters: Just so the folks at home can see if you can switch to the document cam of, zoom in. Sorry about that. Unfortunately I think the colors are going to be a little dark on the document cam. McGonagill: That’s pretty close. You can point it out and just kind of, you can see it. It’s fuzzy but you can see it MacKenzie. So that point out what I’m talking about here. The house down the way and then where the proposed house would be if you would with a pencil MacKenzie. Walters: Yeah so this would be the house on Lot 11 that Commissioner McGonagill was talking about. This is the driveway turn around. McGonagill: That’s existing. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 13 Walters: That’s the existing house correct and then this was the Lot 12 is the lot that the variances in question for and this footprint was the developer’s proposed home site and configuration. McGonagill: Thank you MacKenzie. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Weick: Okay. Other questions from the commissioners for the applicant or the architect? Hearing none thank you very much. It’s useful information and it’s nice to hear your perspective on how, what your hopes are anyway for, you know for building a home and living there so that is useful information and thank you for coming and presenting that. With that I will open the public hearing portion of tonight’s item. The phone number is on the screen. If you’re listening 952-227-1630. While we give it a few minutes for that we did receive as MacKenzie mentioned we received one email and they specifically requested that it be part of the record and again we will confirm that that email is part of the record and has been recorded. If anyone is present and wants to come forward to speak about this item may do so at this time. And we do not have anyone here. I can ramble for a few more minutes and I don’t think the phone’s ringing is it? No. Okay with that I will close the public hearing portion of tonight’s item and open this for commissioner discussion. And a motion as appropriate if desired. Beautiful piece of property. Would love to putting myself in the homeowner’s or the landowner’s shoes, it would be wonderful to see a home built there. It’s a nice property. But obviously has a lot of challenges. Yeah go ahead please. McGonagill: This is Commissioner McGonagill Mr. Chairman. Yeah it is a beautiful piece of property and it’s a piece of property that I don’t blame him at all for the family wanting to enjoy and they should be allowed to enjoy it. For sure. And the, because they own it and I do believe you know in property rights to some degree. However that being said we do have a responsibility to protect the environment both of Lake Harrison and the neighbor’s properties around there. I guess I would say a home and garage can be built. I think there’s a couple of different ways to go at it. I think it can be built on the pads that are there. As you’ve suggested Mr. Chairman taking that house down, maybe switching it. Spinning it a little bit. Maybe reducing the footprint maybe is a way to work that in. I don’t like that all the garage cutting in through the bluff and going all the way down because I just think that goes against everything we try to uphold environmentally with our water quality in the city. And similarly with the house itself so I guess…what this is, there’s a way to build a house. Maybe not the dream house that the applicant would want. There is a way to build a house there. There’s a way to build a garage there and there’s a way to build a house and live there and enjoy the property. And at the end of the day that is the objective. The other point is that the developer, etcetera they had the plats. It was there. I don’t know the history of whether the applicant got that from the developer or not but still it’s a known fact that’s there so I’m, I look at it and say the existing site can be built on as is therefore there’s no need for a variance. And I would agree with staff’s position on denying the setback. Denying the request for shoreland variance and the structure variance as well. And the applicant it may not be the dream home but they can still enjoy the lot. Does that, do you follow me Mr. Chairman? Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 14 Weick: I do. Question for you. Do you have if, and I’m not proposing a solution in any way. I’m just asking a question. If we weren’t discussing the accessory structure garage type accessory structure that sort of sticks out into the bluff there more significantly, you know if we were just talking about the home, does that change anything or is it? McGonagill: Not really. I understand they’re putting the road element with pilings but they’re still going to have to work through that bluff quite a bit and that’s just something that as a commission and as City Council and environmentally we never really allow because we’re so rigorous about maintaining the bluffs and the structures. What really makes me nervous too is the water quality of Lake Harrison itself. It is, it’s fragile. I mean they were successfully built all the homes around it but they were extremely careful with them and the setbacks. I can go over and over because I saw them all go in. You follow me Mr. Chairman? Weick: I am yeah. McGonagill: So I would, I would say perhaps closer to your idea of move the house over on the site that was approved. Maybe you could put some variances in there a little bit to make it a little bit more workable but not so onerous but not all the way down the bluff into the flat area. I just think that’s just, that’s just not according to our code. It’s not according to the philosophy we’ve been rigorously trying to maintain. Kari Carstensen: Can I ask a question? Weick: Not really. Sorry. Kari Carstensen: Okay Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: Well that’s you know thank you for your question. Weick: You look like you want to say something. Randall: Yeah I do. Weick: I want to hear it. Randall: The home design is amazing. It’s creative for that location. You came up with some really great ideas. Unfortunately I just think it’s going to be, it has to be closer to that set location and I think you’re already doing a lot of creative work. I think you could probably get it closer to that hopefully. I love the home design. I understand the garage thing. I’ve got a 6 car garage and you can ask my wife they’re already full now and she’s upset about that so you can never replace garage space but that being said I, it’s too much of a variance in my opinion and I think that’s where we’re kind of alluding to before. If the variance was closer to that original Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 15 pad area I think we can work with it. That outside garage down in the bluff area I don’t see how that’s going to go through at all but the home design being able to utilize the bluff and I’m just picturing looking over that in the morning how great that would be and the amount of light you’re going to get coming in from in the morning and that type of thing. Kari Carstensen: Is there any way when…because I really don’t like the idea of building near power lines. I mean that’s never been talked that that was okay…so I just wonder if there’s something you can do to change that. McGonagill: Mr. Chairman we can’t hear her. Weick: I’ll repeat it. I’ll repeat it for you. McGonagill: Thank you very much. Weick: Are you finished? Yeah and I’ll just summarize what was asked. I guess and it was stated earlier but the big issue with the proposed, the City proposed building lot is the presence of the overhead power lines and there’s some concern and I would, I can’t speak to that certainly but that might be something that could be, I just, I’m not even going to guess. Randall: No and I wouldn’t know how to go about that too but I understand her concern. Weick: Yeah. Randall: And we deal with this a lot. People might get a lake lot and it’s limited on setbacks and what they need to get in their lot space and we try to work with them to try to come up with a creative solution on it. I think you’ve guys have already worked a lot on that for just this property alone but it needs to be closer to that existing print. Maybe figure out what to do with the power lines. I don’t know how that’s going to work but that’s my two cents. Weick: Thank you. Kari Carstensen: Then I have a question then…or how do we go further on that? Weick: Yeah Kate thanks. Aanenson: So there’s two options that you can do right now. Weick: Thank you. Aanenson: If you want to give them some direction then that would be to table it. They’d have to agree to a tabling and a certain timeframe. Waive their 60 days but I think it’s good that you Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 16 set clear expectations of what the tabling is to give them direction. We do have power lines that run along the backs of all those lots so the power line’s not going to move. McGonagill: And those power lines go all the way through Longacres. They go through Highover. They go through all those houses. Aanenson: Correct, that’s correct. McGonagill: They’re in close proximity to many houses. Aanenson: Yeah but if the applicant wants to table it the Planning Commission could table it. If it’s agreeable with them and a certain timeframe and then they, and again set clear expectations of kind of what you’re going to be looking at so we don’t go through the same proposal again if that makes sense. McGonagill: No that’s very valuable Kate. Aanenson: Otherwise the other choice would be to take the recommendation, whatever that is. It could be appealed or forwarded onto City Council so but certainly willing to work with them and see if we can, if that’s your desire. Weick: Okay. Kari Carstensen: Can I get clarification on that? Weick: If so can you come up to the microphone, yeah. Kari Carstensen: The clarification for me would just be that that still for us too working with an architect because it’s expensive for us to go through these things. The clarification if we table it will it be that you as a city are coming to us and giving us an option to help us not get you know the same kind of result like giving us parameters and such. Aanenson: It’s my understanding that MacKenzie did try to give you some parameters and you had your first choice. That’s fine but what we’re saying now is that you know if we can try to work together to get closer to what the objectives, whatever the council directs here and that’s what we’re saying is we’ll work with their direction is. Kari Carstensen: Gotch ya. McGonagill: And if I may offer something to the applicant ma’am. I have found city staff to be very workable to try to work with you to, they understand what you’re trying to do. Kari Carstensen: Yeah. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 17 McGonagill: They gave you good advice. They know at least my personal opinion and others that we want to protect the wetlands and protect the bluffs. I don’t speak for the rest of the commission but I know how we feel about that. Then they can tell you from their own experience, Kate and MacKenzie are very well versed on what they think is doable. The problem may be that it may not be what you want to hear but that it will be the truth and they’ve gone through this enough and I would trust them. I would encourage you to trust them to say yeah this is workable or if it’s not jump the gun another way. Does that make sense ma’am? Kari Carstensen: I understand. McGonagill: They’re very good. We trust them so. Noyes: You know the one thing that I would add, you know your request is, the variances are extensive and per Commissioner Randall’s commentary, yeah I kind of agree with what he has said. I always look at these and I think past what we’re talking about today. Whatever we do today sets a precedent right and so one of my biggest concerns is that we’re issuing variances related to bluffs. Related to wetlands. The minute we do that we have a lot more people in here presenting variances that say hey, look at Case Number 2020-20 and they were granted something so we also have to look further beyond kind of what we’re talking about today and that like I said per Commissioner Randall’s thing I think the more we move it towards the original approved site the better opportunity you’re going to have to achieve what you’re wanting to do. Weick: And that said I also in, as much as we can to Kate’s point and also to the request of the applicant if we have opinions and beliefs about what is acceptable and is not acceptable it would be, I mean there is money involved right with talking with architects so I guess I would ask, and this might be not conventional but you know, I know I mentioned earlier moving the house over. If we pretend that that wasn’t going to be a problem with the power lines or whatever it would still stick over the, not only over the setbacks but it would still stick into the bluff right and I guess my question to the commissioners would be, if you sat that would you be okay? Because I think we want to give some direction both to city staff as well as the applicant that you know we do not, you know we’re okay with encroaching on what’s the yellow line on slide. Walters: The yellow line is the bluff setback. Weick: Right. Walters: And the blue line is the, and I’ll go to the slide in question. Weick: Yeah that’s what I was looking at. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 18 Walters: The blue line here is the 30 foot structure setback. The yellow line is the 20 foot bluff impact zone setback where the regulations because much more stringent to protect the top of the bluff. And then the red line is the top line of the bluff itself. Weick: Okay. And so you know for instance the house on Lot 11, I mean hugs that yellow line. I believe. Walters: The house on Lot 11, if I had drawn the same line would hug the blue line. It does not encroach into the 30 foot bluff setback. Weick: Okay. So I guess as I say that you know if we could give some opinion on the level of encroachment and I’m not holding anyone to anything. I’m just asking for opinions here. And also then on the accessory structure as well. You know to me I, Commissioner Randall said it really well. The accessory structure I’m speaking of is the large garage I would call it. You know being out in the flatter area I think poses, to me I don’t have an issue with the use. I don’t think it’s for us to you know make a decision based on what a projected use may or may not be of that but I think we absolutely have the right to talk about the size of the structure and location on the property and I think we should speak to that as well. So any thoughts? I guess I’ll start. Maybe that will help. I would say if there’s going to be a reworking of this I’m not comfortable with that accessory garage being located out where it is. And I would, I’d be comfortable in my opinion going to the yellow line. So over that blue line but to the yellow line. I would have, I’d have to think more about if something extended past that yellow line. That’s just my opinion. Would love some other thoughts. Noyes: I would put myself in the same camp you’re in. I think the accessory structure is a really difficult thing for me to process right now just because of the level of variance required for it. I do think there’s ability to relocate that house and like I said I think the closer you get to the blue and yellow line the more likely I think I would be to say yeah they’re doing whatever they can to make sure they’re protecting the environment. They’re following the regulations and if we’ve got to give a variance for you know a small change I think I’d be up for that. Weick: I appreciate that, thank you. Randall: And I would concur that also. Weick: That was Commissioner Randall speaking. Anyone on the phone or on the Zoom, Commissioner Reeder or Commissioner McGonagill? And as you’re maybe thinking or maybe not I would, I’m not discouraging a motion either if anyone feels strongly to also propose a motion as presented by city staff. We absolutely can entertain that as well. McGonagill: I guess Mr. Chairman I, when I look at it and I’m more of the opinion of keeping to the blue line if at all possible. If they want to encroach a little bit out of that, okay what does that look like but it should be minor. I mean the accessory structure is not even a starter. I’m not Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 19 even going to talk about that because it is what the other commissioners talked about it, it takes so many variances. So my, I’ll reserve the right to vote when I see it and what the DNR says and what our water quality people say. What our engineers say and I, that always is important to me to see what the experts are telling us but I agree with you. It’s got to stay within the, to me the blue line. If it exceeded over a little bit to the yellow line okay but those exceeds and variances should not, should be minor. It shouldn’t take for example okay they said we go out to the yellow line. But their neighbor will push it a little bit beyond the yellow line to the red line. No. That’d be a non-starter for me. I mean I’m really nervous about as Commissioner, one of the commissioners said starting down the slipper slope quite literally here giving a variance to lots and wetlands and stuff like that with bluffs and what it can mean for water quality effect on others. That being said I’d love to see a house in there because it’s a beautiful setting and so I don’t know if I’m making myself clear on that but. Weick: I think so and you know there certainly is enough, to me there’s enough disagreement. You know I, maybe it’s better just to. McGonagill: I’ll be more direct. I think if they’re across the red line it’d be a non-starter to me. Weick: For sure. McGonagill: Going across the yellow line’s almost a non-starter, would be a non-starter to me. Playing around with it in there perhaps because we know how those lines are but I’d want to see those to be minor excursions. I mean that’s just the way I look at them because I’m trying to protect Lake Harrison. Aanenson: So Mr. Chair I think. McGonagill: I think that’s enough said. Aanenson: I think we’ve gathered quite a bit of your feelings. I don’t think you want to pre- judge but I think you’ve given them direction of what you’d like to see if that makes sense so you can either like I say make a motion to table if they’re willing to accept that and I’m not sure we’ve got for the. Walters: The motion I have is a motion for denial. Aanenson: No I’m asking about the 120 days. Walters: Oh apologies. I believe the 60 day ticks in just after the October 26th date so we’d need that waived or we could take our executive 60 day extension. Aanenson: Yeah or we could just have them write something out right now which would be my preference if I can grab a piece of paper. If they wanted to do that that’s one option. And then I Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 20 think what you could say, based on the input that was given tonight as part of the testimony, if you were to table. I’m not trying to, I’m just, if you were to recommend tabling it then that would be kind of the information that you provided tonight because we do have verbatim Minutes then we would use that as the direction to work with the applicant. And you know where it falls on that line you can judge that but I think you’ve given them direction on what you’re thinking. Weick: And then the other option is obviously to vote on, or to have a motion. Aanenson: That’s correct. You can ask for that too. Weick: And then, and depending on how that came out then the applicant could, they could certainly refile? Aanenson: Yeah but. Walters: Yes they could reapply… Weick: What’s the difference between that and a tabling? Aanenson: Because then they have to reapply. Weick: And that costs. There’s fees associated. Aanenson: Correct, correct and so if you feel like there’s room to move on both sides then it probably would be you know, it would be okay to table it. Again if that’s what you’re thinking. McGonagill: Well Kate I think it’s, if the applicant’s willing to do it I think it’s a good idea because I think we have enough of a voted understanding among us that we would probably deny the variances just the way they’re written by staff. At least I think that’s the, I don’t want to speak for the rest of the commissioners but it seems to be strongly to that, particularly on the accessory structure and some of the other stuff. And I think that if they were to table it and work very closely with staff to come up with a solution so they could use that property and come back to us I think it would be, that would be welcomed by the commission. Would you agree Mr. Chairman? Weick: I think so and I just want to, just be clear that to me it didn’t feel like we had, when we talk about where the house could be in relationship to the setbacks I don’t think there was a unanimous opinion about you know how, what type of encroachment if any is acceptable on behalf of the, even the commissioners so I just wanted to be clear on that, that we aren’t… McGonagill: That is a good point Mr. Chairman. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 21 Aanenson: That’s why I was trying to say not to prejudge it too far because I think they’re going go through it and working with us to say you know it may have to go here but for the following reasons so we want to give that opportunity to evaluate that. Weick: Just to be very blunt there were some commissioners who felt okay with some encroachment and there were some commissioners who did not feel okay with encroachment. Aanenson: Correct. Weick: And so I don’t want to give you the impression that you know, if you build it to a certain point it’s, yeah because I don’t feel like, and that’s why I’m struggling with this because there wasn’t agreement amongst us on that. Aanenson: Right. That’s why I’m, I think they alluded to the possibility of tabling it so I’m saying that is an option so that’s why I’m saying it’s up to them if they wanted to take the motion. Whatever you choose tonight and go forward or if they want to take their time and table it, I’m just saying that’s an option you could offer up. Weick: And I mean have you had a moment to think about it? Peter Eskuche: Yeah I think speaking for the applicant we would prefer to certainly be working with the City and if we could be tabled I think you know in good faith we really do want to protect the property so. Weick: Okay. McGonagill: And Mr. Chairman I think you summarize it being… Weick: So we do need a motion then and I don’t know if we want to get, do we need something in writing? Okay. And it will just, oh for sure. McGonagill: So should we go on with the rest of the business and then… Walters: This item needs to be resolved. Weick: Yeah we need to resolve it before we go forward. And so what’s happening right now, I know you can’t see or hear, there you go. We’re just talking about the conditions of the length of days to table the item before it needs to be brought back in front of the commission. So they’re going to sign that and then we’ll have that in writing and then I think we will need a motion. Walters: You will need a, yeah you would move to table Planning Case 2020-20 to be resumed within and then I think Kate will have the timeline for you to use in one second. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 22 Aanenson: It would be 90 days. Walters: Yep so the motion the motion would be moving to table Planning Case 2020-20 to be heard again within 90 days. McGonagill: Does that give the applicant enough time to do what they need to do MacKenzie? Walters: They have consented to the 90 days so. McGonagill: Sounds good. Weick: We do have that in writing Commissioner McGonagill. It’s signed. So I would accept a motion. Noyes: I will propose the motion that we table Case 2020-20 for 90 days. Aanenson: I would also say and direct the applicant to work with the staff based on the comments that was given. Friendly amendment. Noyes: And direct the applicant to work with the staff based on the comments that have been provided. Weick: Thank you Commissioner Noyes. We have a valid motion. Do we have a second? Randall: Second. Weick: We have a second from Commissioner Randall. I will pause. Anyone who would like to make final comment on this item. Again I think a special thank you to MacKenzie and to Kate for helping us through this one. We will take a vote now. We’ll do a roll call vote I’m sorry. I was, I’ve been away for a little bit. So we do a roll call vote. Noyes moved, Randall seconded that the Planning Commission table Planning Case 2020- 20 for 90 days and direct the applicant to work with city staff based on the comments provided. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Weick: So the motion to table this item for 90 days passes unanimously 5 to 0. Thank you. Thank you. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Noyes noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated September 15, 2020 as presented. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 23 Weick: And do we have any City Council updates? Aanenson: Yes we do Chairman. Yes so on Monday, September 14th the Bluff s at Lake Lucy, the final plat was approved. So you see the preliminary plat so just to kind of refresh everybody. The first three phases of The Park were being developed by Lennar. They had the option on the upper portion and that property was bought by Gonyea Homes from the development. More than likely it will be their homes but it could be some others too so those were the 15,000 square foot lots and there is I want to say 32 just off my head. And those, working right now to get the grading going on those lots and…were out staking for the tree preservation area and I know Jill be walking it this week and they’ll have a precon maybe next working to get watershed approval. They’ve been to watershed 3 times and the County land records had their plat permit but they’re ready to go. And then there was, I think we talked about the Highover one was tabled. The other Highover one with the grading so they have…with MacKenzie on that. They do have a permit in. Walters: It is currently being reviewed for the engineers. By the engineering department to determine whether or not it would address the drainage issues or not. Aanenson: And then the Bluff Creek Overlay District boundary line was approved by the City Council. And then on September 28th they did the code amendments that you saw or had the public hearings for. The mylar requirement, the IOP codification and then there was a partial release of Development Contract for Chan East Business Park. I also would note to go through the next, we had two items that were, one was tabled so that was, and one was withdrawn completely so the one on Dakota will not go forward. The one on, it was an amendment to the zoning district to allow for auto repair. Sharmeen worked really hard on that. It’s a very busy intersection. People coming through so we had some concerns. I really kind of recommended tabling. The applicant also agreed to table that too. We just want to work through some issues so everybody puts their best foot forward on that project so you may see that. I’m not sure how quickly they’ll turn it around but we do have some other things in the on deck circle and we do have a 3 lot subdivision that will be on your, on Frontier Trail and that will be on your agenda for the 20th. So if the Crossroads Auto comes back, and I’m not sure this one can turn around that quickly either to put this back on, that we just saw tonight so we do have a couple other things that are kind of floating out there. We just have, there’s no meeting on the 3rd so we really just have two more meetings. Or excuse me, three more meetings left so I know Matt has got a couple code amendments. I’d say significant ones for proposed storm water management in Chapters 18 and 20 that are, those are the ones that go before the Planning Commission. Those are the subdivision and zoning ordinance. We do have a subdivision potentially for Yosemite. That is Mr. Ashfeld who was here before so I think he will be submitting an application for that too. There’s a couple other things that are floating out there but are not always coming together. And then just on a side note we are busy doing roofing permits so we think we’ve roofed, I think MacKenzie’s giving decks and fences to everybody else that didn’t get a roof so we’ve seen a lot of permits this year. So we’ve also had a couple people that came through that did lot splits that Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 6, 2020 24 you may have seen and some of those people have chosen not to go forward. There’s a huge lumber issue right now so prices are kind of jumping up and kind of hard to get supplies and so some people are just kind of going to wait it out maybe so. So that is all I had Chair. If you had anything else for staff? Weick: You know what anyone on the commission? Hearing none I would accept a motion to adjourn. Randall moved, McGonagill seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, October 20, 2020 Subject City Council Action Update Section ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Item No: E.1. Prepared By Jean Steckling, Senior Admin. Support Specialist File No: ATTACHMENTS: City Council Action Update City Council Action Update MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2020 Chanhassen Apartments TIF Discussion – Work Session Discussion; Developer to proceed through PUD Amendment Approve Code Amendment to Permit the Construction of Certain Structures on Outlots – Approved Approve Code Amendment Requiring Zoning Permits for all Structures that Do Not Require Building Permits – Tabled Approve Development Contract for Grading Permit for The Bluffs at Lake Lucy – Approved with condition of no work on Saturdays on the north end of project Minutes for these meetings can be viewed and downloaded from the city’s website at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us, and click on “Agendas and Minutes” from the left-side links. g:\plan\forms\development forms\city council action update.docx