CC Minutes 8-22-05
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
5.Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13):
a.Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption
paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland;
b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and
c.Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area.
6.A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be
maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas
shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City’s wetland ordinance. The
applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before
construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots)
shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer.
7.The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation
(including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland
are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of
final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation
(including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation
letter of credit.
8.Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all
existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water
ponds.
9.Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the
wetland.
10.The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g.,
Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit),
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and
comply with their conditions of approval.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you everyone. Appreciate your help in the process. Let’s move on now
to our next item.
MINNEWASHTA CREEK HILL, 6560 MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY, ROBERT RICK
(FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TIM & MARY COLLERAN), PLANNING CASE 05-25;
SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD-R.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This request is located on Minnewashta Parkway just south of
Highway 7. It’s a request to divide one lot into 3 single family homes. The Planning
nd
Commission held a public hearing on this item on August 22 and recommended 6 to 1
regarding the proposed development. The one no vote regarded consideration of the historic
value of the home. Staff did include some pictures regarding that and did some research on that
25
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
and it’s unclear whether or not it has historic significance. It’s not on any listing so we provided
that information for you. The plat itself includes 3 lots. There is, was a recommendation always
supposed to do a public street and in your staff report on the last page, I’ll have you zoom in on
that. We did show how this project could be subdivided with a public street. A cul-de-sac off of
Minnewashta Parkway. A couple of concerns with that. Certainly the most significant was it
pushed the homes further back and eliminated 27 additional trees. There was an opportunity to
consider an eyebrow besides the cul-de-sac. Problematic with both of those regarding grading
and the like and the retaining wall. So in reviewing that, using the existing driveway and the
attempt to save additional trees. In working with the neighborhood, pushing those houses
forward more, staff recommended the use of the private drive. I did include for you the revised
consideration of the area calculations. Staff took a more conservative approach in the calculation
of the lot area. The revised lot area’s included now based on further legal opinion is that the
private drive, the common portion was taken out of the lot configuration so that is included in
your lot, revised lot calculation I gave you. All lots. It doesn’t change the plat in itself. All lots
do meet the required standards. With the PUD ordinance because it’s in the shoreland district
and the PUD adjacent to the collector street, it requires a 50 foot setback so the homes are set
back significantly. Again this is just a rough idea of what the layout would be. Of course we
show the proposed building pads. We have included in your packet some potential home designs
on the site that would work. We do want to, as the homes come in, look at additional turn
around, specifically on the middle lot. We don’t anticipate a school bus going up there. It’s
anticipated that the children would come to the street on Minnewashta Parkway. I believe that
was addressing most of the concerns of, that were addressed. With that, staff is recommending
approval of the subdivision with the variances and with the conditions in the staff report and I’d
be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff?
Councilman Lundquist: Kate, the cul-de-sac option. What does that do to the, does that push
any of the lots to non-compliance for size or hard cover?
Kate Aanenson: No.
Councilman Lundquist: It pushes the house back, houses back and takes out the trees.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. The first, we wouldn’t give a variance for a private street if the only
goal was to get additional lots. So first you have to demonstrate, if you met the ordinance, that
you could do it. So we need to go through that exercise to see if it meets city code. Then based
on that we evaluate what makes more sense based on grading and tree loss, environmental
features, so that led us to the recommendation. There’s an existing horseshoe driveway. These
homes are kind of in the same line as the existing home. It has the deep setback. If you were to
look at, this is hard to see. If you can zoom in. The existing home sits right here so if you went
with the cul-de-sac, it pushes the house more to the back, affecting what has been the privacy of
those homes that are behind that, so it creates a greater separation. A larger lot depth by using
the private drive. I did forward to you an e-mail that had some concerns regarding height
setbacks. The shoreland district. The height, 35 feet. If that’s the maximum height. Obviously
all the houses would be in excess of that being at 50 foot setback and 20 from the commonality
26
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
of the private drive. So again we did go through the different concerns of the cul-de-sac or the
private street. One of the other concerns was, at the Planning Commission was the, people
heavily traveled on that sidewalk. Again there’s one touch down point as opposed to the cul-de-
sac. I’m not sure with the cul-de-sac you’re getting additional parking issues with the private
drive. Again it’s wider for most of that and it’s not, you could make the common portion way
back here and bring this drive and actually have it narrower but based on, because the lots are
over sized you get a wider area for turn around so we think that works well.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions for staff.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Kate, what is our policy regarding historical structures. Just not that
I’m saying it is but I’m just wondering.
Kate Aanenson: Well, that is one area. We do have some Chaska brick homes. That’s
something that we talked to the Planning Commission. It’s come up and we’ve started doing
inventory and there has never been a consensus but that’s on our to do list at the Planning
Commission is start looking at that. It was raised by one of our commissioners so we will be
looking at it. I think it’s significantly on some of the Chaska brick homes. The one that we do
have that’s on the register is the old St. Hubert’s is the only building that we have on the
historical register. The old, old St. Hubert’s. They’re in their third location.
Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Ms. Aanenson, on the private street, and looking at your
colored map there might be easiest. What is the, as the private street comes in across Lots 1 and
2 up to Lot 3, what’s the distance between the front property line there on Lot 2, which is the
right-of-way of Minnewashta Parkway and the right-of-way of the private street easement?
Kate Aanenson: Right there?
Mayor Furlong: Right. Approximately.
Kate Aanenson: Oh, another 10 feet. It’s probably 20 to 25 feet.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, so there’s separation distance there for cars coming in and lights and
possibly somebody coming down from a safety standpoint.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: The private street, there’s a large retaining wall across the front of what will be
Lot 2 and 3 if this site plan is approved. With the private street that retaining wall is retained.
Kate Aanenson: That was one of the goals too. That was the other complexity of putting in that
cul-de-sac. You’re grading a lot more. Pushing that in. Making steeper slopes. This kind of
we’re working with existing grades, which is one of the reasons why this driveway ended up on
that side. You’re working with the grade. Certainly you couldn’t move that, do additional
grading but again the goal was to try to use what’s existing there.
27
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
Mayor Furlong: And I guess that leads to my next question with regard to the driveway on Lot
2. Working with the grades. Putting it on the north side of that lot puts it up next to Lot 3. I
know we’ve dealt with turn arounds and private streets in making sure we have sufficient room.
To make sure that a delivery truck coming into Lot 2 has sufficient room to turn around, the
private street if I understand correctly is a shared access point as opposed to a driveway which is
a single or access for a single property.
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct.
Mayor Furlong: Can that private, what sort of turn around do we have designed into that private
street at that end? Could it be extended into Lot 3 so that Lot 3 owners know that people coming
off Lot 2, that is still a private street.
Kate Aanenson: Correct. Originally that’s what this was showing. That that common portion of
it, and now that that interpretation, that that’s extracted from your lot configuration, that can be
added back in and that would give a greater commonality portion and it would provide that back
up. If they couldn’t put it internally on their own property, a back up.
Mayor Furlong: And I guess I’m thinking delivery trucks and those types of things.
Kate Aanenson: Garbage.
Mayor Furlong: Garbage as well. Making sure that we have sufficient turn around there.
Kate Aanenson: Yes. We’ve spoken to the applicant about that and they are going to
accommodate that.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Do we put that in to the subdivision somewhere? In there.
Kate Aanenson: Sure. We can find a place to make that modification.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this time? Seeing none, is
the applicant here? This evening. Would you like to come forward and address the council on
any matters? You’re welcome to at this time.
Robert Rick: I don’t see a need. I just need to make a comment that.
Mayor Furlong: Why don’t you come forward to the microphone then.
Robert Rick: Yeah my name is Robert Rick. I live at 4700 Otter Lake Road in White Bear
Lake, Minnesota. I’d just like to thank staff. They were pleasant to deal with and you know
gave us a lot of guidance and insight as we went through that whole process so I just want to say
thanks to staff for that. And then if there is any comments I’d like to be able to rebut along with
my surveyor.
28
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Very
good. Again certainly we’d welcome public comments at this time. Residents or other
interested parties who’d like to come forward and address matters to the council, they’re
certainly welcome. We have reviewed the Planning Commission minutes here and are aware of
those issues raised there but certainly people are welcome to come forward at this time. Please
come to the podium and state your name and address. No? Okay, very good. We’ll bring it
back to council then for discussion and comments.
Councilman Peterson: Seems reasonable. Let’s move ahead.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. With regard to condition number 25 that I think was added as part of the
Planning Commission. Ms. Aanenson, perhaps that’s the place with regard to safety issues or
turn around accessibility. Is there something you wanted, or is there.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I guess you can even add it onto condition number 26. If you look up on
Lot area 3, there is no commonality of that driveway. 30 foot right-of-way. 20 foot paved
surface. Based on that they could take, put some additional and not, and still stay within that
15,000 square foot minimum so I guess I would recommend that we add a condition that a
common driveway be extended to that lot.
Mayor Furlong: By common driveway, a private street?
Kate Aanenson: Private street, correct. That would provide a back up and that would still meet
the minimum square footage. Whatever that portion may be. 10-15 feet.
Mayor Furlong: To provide turn around access.
Kate Aanenson: Correct.
Councilman Lundquist: What’s the chances that condition number 25 becomes a cul-de-sac?
Kate Aanenson: Well, by approving this site plan you’ve eliminated the cul-de-sac. I think
again that was raised at the Planning Commission regarding the amount of traffic on
Minnewashta Parkway, which is a heavily used trail. Just concerning the good sight lines and I
think we went through that regarding. I’m not sure, and the City Engineer had discussed this too,
whether the cul-de-sac with the wider opening, does that provide any additional parking? Maybe
not. And we believe there’s good sight lines coming out. Right now there’s 2 driveways onto
Minnewashta Parkway where this is now there’s just one control point. So you’re adding, and
there is one existing home. You’re just putting in 2 additional so the Planning Commission and
Assistant City Engineer felt that that…
Councilman Lundquist: With the turn around, I mean realistically are you going to get a private
street in there that you can turn a delivery vehicle or other?
Kate Aanenson: At 20 foot of pavement, I believe so.
29
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
Mayor Furlong: I guess that’s the thing. If you build a hammer head with part of it going into
Lot 3.
Paul Oehme: You need a hammer head to turn a vehicle around.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and there’s a lot of area between those that we could accommodate that.
Mayor Furlong: The issue I’m dealing with is one to avoid conflicts between neighbors. With
people backing into Lot 3 on the driveway and two, to make sure from a safety standpoint that
cars are exiting going forward. That no delivery trucks are backing out onto Minnewashta. So
those are my goals. How you accomplish those.
Kate Aanenson: Right, so extend the private street such that there’s a back up area on Lot 3.
Mayor Furlong: And if it’s paved the same width and is part of the private street into Lot 3,
hopefully it will be viewed as usable by everybody too.
Councilman Lundquist: And it wouldn’t be easier to just put a cul-de-sac in there?
Kate Aanenson: Well you could. You could. You push the houses back further. So now
you’re closer to those neighbors who’ve enjoyed the greater separation. You’ve lost more trees.
And with the cul-de-sac, I’m not sure how much parking with their driveway locations, between
the driveways that you’d get.
Councilman Lundquist: Well you’re not going to get any parking either way. I mean
realistically you’re not going to park in the cul-de-sac. They’re not going to park on the private
street.
Kate Aanenson: And it does push the, there’s additional grading then to push that cul-de-sac or
that retaining wall there with the slopes.
Paul Oehme: And the cul-de-sac is at a pretty significant grade too. The plan as shown here is at
about 7%. It’s almost at our max grade too so.
Kate Aanenson: And then the driveways would go up from that.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay, I just want to make sure that we don’t create some ugly looking
mess in there where you can’t get around. You can’t turn around. You’ve got all of that stuff
going on.
Mayor Furlong: Right. I think staff and the developer are capable of figuring out how to do that.
I think extending the private street into Lot 3 accomplishes a few things. One it sets expectations
for the future property owners as well as providing the safety in the access. The turn around.
Councilman Lundquist: Fair enough.
30
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. Maybe we can put an option together with the final
plat showing how that turn around could exist without losing site coverage on Lot 2.
Councilman Labatt: How did we deal with, Highlands of Bluff Creek? The old, we did a
hammer head there.
Kate Aanenson: Did a hammer head, that’s correct.
Councilman Labatt: And we designed that hammer head so it would, a fire truck and ambulance.
Kate Aanenson: Garbage truck.
Councilman Labatt: So everyone…
Kate Aanenson: That’s correct, and that would be the intent here.
Councilman Labatt: So let’s just apply the same standards as we did there to here.
Todd Gerhardt: Yeah the key thing in this is to make sure that you don’t go over in the site
coverage on Lot 2, right? So trying to find that blend between Lots 2 and 3 is going to be the,
and dealing with a few grade issues in there too. Nothing an engineer can’t handle.
Mayor Furlong: Very good. Any other discussion on this item? If not, is there a motion?
Councilwoman Tjornhom: I’ll give it a shot. I make the motion City Council approves the
preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-25 for Minnewashta Creek Hills for 3 lots and a variance
to run a private street as shown on the plans received July 20, 2005, subject to the following
conditions 1 through 25.
Councilman Labatt: With the addition of 26?
Mayor Furlong: Do you want to add 26? Which is what we were. What is the proposed
language?
Kate Aanenson: Provide adequate turn around on Lot 3.
Mayor Furlong: For extending the private street.
Kate Aanenson: Yeah.
Councilman Lundquist: Kind of say yeah, what she said.
Councilwoman Tjornhom: Yeah, whatever…
Mayor Furlong: And based upon the comments… Okay, very good. Thank you. Is there a
second?
31
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?
Councilwoman Tjornhom moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council
approve the preliminary plat for Planning Case 05-25 for Minnewashta Creek Hills for 3
lots and a variance to run a private street as shown on the plans received July 20, 2005,
subject to the following conditions:
1.Environmental Resources Specialist Conditions:
a.Tree preservation fencing shall be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any
construction. Fencing shall be maintained until construction is completed.
b.Any preserved trees removed will be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
2.Park and Recreation Conditions:
a.In lieu of any land dedication, full park fees shall be collected at the time of platting.
With the one existing home, the total park fee for Minnewashta Creek Hill will be
$8,000.
b.Additional trail construction is not required as a part of this project; however during
demolition and construction, the existing pedestrian trail shall be protected and
remain open. No construction equipment shall be parked on or use the trail as a
staging area during construction. In addition, all match points encountered on the
trail for demolition and/or construction shall be professionally constructed.
3.Detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plans must be submitted
with the building permit for each lot.
4.The driveway grade must be adjusted so that runoff from the driveway will sheet drain to
the east. The grades east of the proposed private drive must be adjusted to provide a
drainage swale along the east side of the driveway to the proposed catch basin.
5.Any proposed retaining wall over four feet high requires a building permit and must be
designed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota.
6.Tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. All disturbed
areas, as a result of construction, shall be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately
after grading to minimize erosion.
7.A 75-foot minimum rock construction entrance must be added to the entrance that will be
accessed during construction.
8.If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant
will be required to supply the City with a detailed haul route and traffic control plan.
32
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
9.The developer shall also extend storm sewer from the existing storm sewer manhole
within Minnewashta Parkway at the south end of the property. The upstream storm sewer
structure shall have a catch basin cover and a three-foot sump.
10.The lateral sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the existing trunk utilities must
be north of the proposed private drive. The developer shall extend 8-inch lateral sanitary
sewer from the existing manhole (top elevation 951.23’).
11.A manhole must be installed wherever a bend is proposed in the sanitary sewer.
Individual sanitary sewer services must be 6-inch diameter.
12.Six-inch lateral watermain shall be wet tapped from the existing trunk utility.
13.A gate valve must be installed immediately west of the wet tap.
14.A hydrant is required at the end of the proposed watermain for flushing purposes.
15.Additional drainage and utility easements may be required based on the revised utility
plan. Easements shall be minimum 20-feet wide centered over each utility.
16.According to the City’s Finance Department records, the parcel was previously assessed
for one sanitary sewer and water hookup, therefore sanitary sewer and water hookup
charges must be paid for two lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458.00 for
sanitary sewer and $2,955.00 for water-main.
17.Public utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's
latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
18.Detailed construction plans and specifications must be submitted at time of final plat.
19.The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply
the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to
guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval.
20.Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but
not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, MCES, and Watershed District.
21.The driveway easement must clearly stipulate that the owners of Lots 1-3, Block 1,
Minnewashta Creek Hill shall own and maintain the private drive and the private storm
sewer north of the private driveway. The private street must be built to a 7-ton design,
20-foot width. The developer will be required to submit inspection reports certifying this.
22.Water Resource Coordinator Conditions:
a.The grading plan shall be revised to show silt fence down slope of all disturbed areas.
Chanhassen’s standard detail for silt fence (Plate 5300) shall be included in the plans.
33
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
b.Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1.
All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover
year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can
Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area
10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.)
Flatter than 10:1 21 days
These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any
exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as
a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch
or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water.
c.Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and
street sweeping as-needed.
d.The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat
recording, is $5,355.
e.The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory
agencies as necessary (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II
Construction Site Permit), (for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of
approval.
23.Building Official Conditions:
a.A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division
before building permits will be issued.
b.Demolition permits must be obtained prior to demolishing any structures on the site.
c.Separate water and sewer services must be provided for each lot and must have a
separate connection to the public sewer or to a manhole which is connected to the
public sewer.
d.Curb box valves cannot be located in driveways.
e.Permits are required for retaining walls. Walls over four feet high must be designed
by a professional engineer.
f.The developer must submit a proposed name for the private drive.
24.Fire Marshal Conditions:
a.The new proposed private street will need a street name. Submit name to
Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval.
b.No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must
either be removed from site or chipped.
c.Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of
a new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code
Section 501.4.
34
City Council Meeting – August 22, 2005
d.A fire apparatus access road shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed
load of fire apparatus and shall be serviced so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire Code Section 503.2.3.”
25. The applicant will work with staff to address the issues of safety of the private street
accessing onto Minnewashta Parkway, drainage towards the lake, and providing
appropriate parking and turn around areas.
26. The applicant will extend the private street in order to provide an adequate turn around on
Lot 3.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0.
AWARD OF BID, LAKE SUSAN PARK PLAYGROUND.
Todd Hoffman: Thank you Mayor Furlong, members of the City Council. This morning we
opened bids for the Lake Susan Park playground equipment. It’s the equipment portion only of
the project. We had two qualified bidders. Flanagan Sales was the specified bidder and Midwest
Playscapes was approved as an equal. The bid amount from Flanagan Sales was $64,951.58 and
Midwest was higher at $69,979.02. Both bids were under the $77,500 budget allocated for
equipment at this site, and it’s recommended that the City Council award the Lake Susan Park
playground bid to Flanagan Sales, Inc. of St. Paul, Minnesota in the amount of $64,951.58.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions.
Councilman Lundquist: Todd, as you’ve gone through the other playgrounds, we’ve done a
great job of enlisting the neighborhoods in putting those up. Lake Ann doesn’t really have a
neighborhood per se. Do we have any plans to get a group out there or any Eagle Scout projects
or something like that coming up or is it, is it your intention to put these up using city staff?
Todd Hoffman: With city staff. Lake Susan, early on in the process we solicited input and
wanted to see if the neighborhood to the south would be interested. We didn’t have a lot of
interest and so we decided that we would do the installation ourself. The playground, the
existing playground at Lake Susan has been taken down. The concrete will be coming in in the
next week and a half and then when this playground is ordered and delivered it will be delivered
straight to the site and we’ll have it up in probably about a week’s time.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Furlong: Overall with all the playgrounds being done, we just approved tonight on our
consent agenda the refurbishing.
Todd Hoffman: Carver Beach and Minnewashta.
Mayor Furlong: I’m sorry, Carver Beach?
35