Loading...
CC Minutes 1-22-07 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Mayor Furlong: Trying to catch up to the rest of the council here. Made and seconded. Any discussion? Resolution #2007-08: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council order the 2007 Rehabilitation Project 07-02 and authorize the preparation of plans and specifications. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. ST THE ARBORS, LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, ZIMMERMAN FARM 1 ADDITION (7537 AND 7570 DOGWOOD ROAD); APPLICANT CARLSON CUSTOM HOMES, INC.; PLANNING CASE 07-01: REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL; COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT TO RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY; SUBDIVISION OF 20 ACRES INTO 22 LOTS AND 3 OUTLOTS. Public Present: Name Address th Donald Peterson 15725 15 Place No., Plymouth Bruce Carlson 1440 Bavarian Shores Drive, Chaska Deanna Brandt 7570 Dogwood Road, Excelsior Marjorie Getsch 7530 Dogwood Road, Excelsior John & Adella Getsch 7500 Dogwood Road, Excelsior Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor. As you indicated, the applicant Carlson Custom Homes and Peter and Dee Brandt are requesting three actions tonight. One is for a land use amendment. The other is a rezoning and the third action is a subdivision. This subject site is located, access via…41, off of Dogwood. There are two existing homes on the site. The current zoning on the property is… So this would be the Westwood Church…I'm not showing you 41 so the continuation of the road would just…and then the Dogwood Road access. Also wanted to tie that…comprehensive plan. This property is guided, part of it is guided for low density and part of it is guided for large lot. In the staff report, the section that deals with the land use amendment, which is on page 4. In 2000 the staff updated the comprehensive plan…zoning ordinance is required. In this circumstance, because there was no utilities to the subject site, the Planning Commission felt at that time not to proceed with that… As also noted in the, back on the project, that in order for this project to go through there needs to be a sewer and water up there to Dogwood Road which is being pursued with the engineering project, so this project…it will not be final platted unless the sewer and water project for Dogwood Road is approved. So the two are tied together. With that, when that comes back…there is a road easement on the northern portion of the plat. When that comes back for final plat, a vacation of the road… Having said that I want to spend a few minutes going through the…and talk about what happened at the Planning Commission. …staff report itself, the number of lots, it's 20 acres and 22 lots and 3 outlots. The site itself, as I indicated is bordered by the Arboretum on the south. There is a substantial…on the site. The existing home. The Brandt home and this existing 15 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 home. Those were going to stay. Currently access to the property would come off the temporary cul-de-sac on the Westwood Church property. They did that road as public street and the intention for that was to provide access to the back of this property at this time. We're also requesting with this plat utility and drainage easements…provide access, some time in the future a minimum utility easement to the Crimson Bay Road. That is not being done at this time but in the future we see that as an opportunity to provide utilities to that area. There's 3 wetlands on the site, all shown in pink, and then the lakeshore lots, and there are setbacks as required by ordinance… When this plat was first reviewed at the Planning Commission, some of the lots regarding the setbacks from the wetlands…making those work better because they'll have driveways coming around to the rear side, working with the grade of the site so the lot, subdivision itself is in compliance with… Again the street cross section, which that will be a part of the discussion later, meets the city's current standards. So then I'd like to go back and talk a little bit about what happened at the Planning Commission. This item was tabled at the Planning nd Commission for a couple different reasons. The first one on January 2, the Arboretum had some concerns regarding visibility and access to their property. Currently there's an electric fence that's offset. As noted in the staff report it's 15 to 22 feet off the property. The Arboretum was concerned about access to the property and for security and the electric fence itself. So with that we have requested, if you can zoom in on this. We went to the web site of a fixed knot fence, so that's what you're looking at here. This is a 6 inch grid. The concern that the Planning Commission had, as well as the staff and the developer was actually the size and height of the fence. The fence being 8 feet high. The city's ordinance only allows 6 1/2 foot. Obviously some of the amenities on this lot would be adjacent to the Arboretum itself. If you look at the lot layout of Lot C, so not all of these lots abut the Arboretum property…so those are the only two lots that have direct access, and because electrical fence is offset, the Planning Commission and staff as well as the developer agreed to mark that, that there is an electric fence. Private property. And also part of the testimony that the folks on Crimson Bay…similar circumstance with the electric fence along their property line, which also abuts the Arboretum, which would be typical… That would be this property. Crimson Bay Road, which also abuts the Arboretum… that they haven't had a problem with that, and that also…. Certainly we want these people to be respectful of the Arboretum property but we haven't had a nuisance fence issues or spraying issues…Arboretum as far as that facility. Again as stated in the staff report and then also noted by the city attorney that agricultural operations are exempt from the nuisance ordinance so anybody buying there… Then the other issue was the storm water pond itself. The storm water itself was oversized, that's in this area here to accommodate additional runoff. That was a ndth concern. We believe that has been addressed. So after the tabling on January 2…the 16 and the commission again did recommend approval with the modified conditions in the staff report. So again…subdivision regulation requirements, attached conditions and they start on page 13. There's 3 motions. Again one for the land use amendment, one for the rezoning and the other one would be the third motion would be to address the subdivision regulations. So with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. Councilman Peterson: Kate, the only thing that I had that was confusing to me was, there was some discussion that the Arboretum wanted the developer to replace the fence. Why are we taking out, why is the fence being taken out in the first place? 16 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: Well, it's 15, as stated in the staff report and you can see in the site plan itself, it's 15 to 22 feet. Typically we don't have people go onto other people's property. I'm not sure how that would work. Again for aesthetics we felt that going that 3 foot fence along here…they could get around it. We'd have to fence more of that. Councilman Peterson: Okay, so we're not saying replace the, they're saying add another fence? Not replace the existing electric fence? Kate Aanenson: Oh I think that was their original intent. To replace, and then probably would take down the electrical fence…attractive nuisance that that may be. So I think the goal was to post it private property, because you have enough buffer there, the 15-20 feet and the buyer will be apprised of that. And again the testimony with Crimson Bay… Mayor Furlong: I guess just to clarify that if I could. That was a request from the Arboretum, but the Planning Commission and the staff, this report with the conditions do not require the developer to put, to do anything with regard to a fence on that property. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: It is only to put up the signs and notification. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other questions? Councilman Peterson, anything else at this time? Councilwoman Tjornhom, questions? Questions? Councilman Litsey: Just so I'm clear on this fence issue. Once the fence is put in place, is the electric fence coming down? Kate Aanenson: No, we're not recommending the additional fence so the electric fence would stay in place, as it is currently on Crimson Bay Road. The goal is to post it private property and electrical fence and that would be it. Councilman Litsey: Are there any alternatives to the electric fence that would be viable? Kate Aanenson: Well that was, the electrical fence, as stated by the Arboretum was to manage the deer and that sort of thing because they have experimental things on their property. Councilman Litsey: Right. Kate Aanenson: So this was an alternative that was recommended by the DNR, was to use that type of fence. Again for aesthetic reasons, we don't allow that fence, and they felt that would be… Would some of those property owners put their own wooden fences up? That may happen but that's on an individual case by case basis, depending on what they do with their property and it depends on… Again I think the best testimony is from Crimson Bay… 17 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Councilman Litsey: They're okay with it. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Councilman Litsey: Yeah. Okay, thanks. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Ms. Aanenson, a couple. On the, you said that this project's tied to or contingent upon the street projects for Dogwood. Help me, I couldn't see that. Is that one of the conditions? I saw it referenced in the findings of fact, but is it specific? Are any of these specific conditions on that? Or do we just need to do that because I think. Kate Aanenson: I believe that's… Councilman Peterson: If you look at page 298, it says no development shall occur on either 5 acre lots until the completion of the feasibility study and plans for the road are determined. Mayor Furlong: Is that in the staff report or the conditions of the motion? Councilman Peterson: Staff report. It's not in the. Kate Aanenson: …and what we're doing tonight is preliminary plat which is…for one year. It would not come to final plat… Roger Knutson: If that's a condition, it should be listed as a condition, yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And then the other question I had with regard to, if we could put up the map of the site plan. You mentioned extending Dogwood to the, that line to the south. You mentioned utility easement. Is that also a right-of-way easement that will not be extended at this time? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so there is a right-of-way and utility easement, both. Kate Aanenson: ...on the plat. Mayor Furlong: Yeah. Yeah, that right there. Just look at where I'm pointing on my screen. Yep, that's a perfect picture. That section below the elbow. Right where your hand is. Kate Aanenson: Right through there, correct. Mayor Furlong: Yep. So preserving right-of-way as well as utility easements through that section. 18 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct, and it will not be done at this time. That's a future decision. We're showing how the Brandt property on this portion could be subdivided in the future. It'd have to come back through the subdivision… Mayor Furlong: So those 3, on Lot 3, are those part of this preliminary plat? Kate Aanenson: All this is owned by the Brandt's, so they're showing how this can be subdivided, which was our request. One of the concerns that we had. Mayor Furlong: But at this time it's not subdivided? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay, because I see the 1, 2, 3 there on Block 3. So is it just Blocks 1 and 2 that are being subdivided at this time? Kate Aanenson: Correct. And that will show up on the final plat. The preliminary plat has…when it comes back for final plat. Again he needs to show that Crimson Bay, Crimson Bay had septic to it and also has a substandard access onto Highway 5, so what we want to do as planners, as city engineers, our goal is to provide alternatives some time down the road for additional access to the property. It may be a right-in/right-out only but. Then I also wanted to mention too that when…land use amendment, while we're changing this lot, these lots, to be consistent. The rest of Dogwood, it will come back when that project is ordered to make that also consistent to be low density because right now it's still in large lot. So the only thing that would still be large lot is going to be the Crimson Bay area. So that's…some of the folks on the Dogwood Circle, both sewer and water is available and they subdivide, so we changed that to be consistent too. When that project's ordered, there'll be future access. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Any other questions at this time? If not there was a request for some public comments. At this time I will open up the podium and invite interested parties to come up and make some public comment. There was a public hearing at the planning commission I know but certainly please come forward and. If you can start by stating your name and address for the record. Deanna Brandt: My name is Deanna Brandt. I'm a co-applicant of the subdivision, along with my husband Peter and Carlson Custom. Good evening Mr. Mayor and city council members and city staff. I've been a Dogwood Road resident for over 15 years, owning the property for 18 years. My husband's in Switzerland. He would be talking right now. We've got, can you zoom into this part here? Okay. This entire piece that you're seeing on your entire map that I gave to each of you shows the, exactly the same thing that Kate had shown you. The orange road, the orange solid line shows you the proposed 31 foot wide road that will be an extension of West th 78 Street, and the dotted orange line, running across here, shows the continuation of the proposed 31 foot wide road. And as Paul explained it to me, this is the city standard for new subdivisions. It's, this is the way it is. I understand that. The green area down below is part of the properties that are not part of, there's land and homes there that are not part of the new subdivision. The blue line is what we are, we on Dogwood Road would like to see continued as 19 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 a 24 foot wide road that the Planning Commission, or I mean excuse me, the planners and engineers have already got Dogwood Road as a 24 foot wide road but all of a sudden when it hits that magic point right there, because that, because of this land being in the new proposed subdivision, all of a sudden it goes 31 foot wide. It just balloons up. For the reason that because half of this, or you know on one side of it is new subdivision and that's following the rules. Well the other half of it in the green is not new subdivision, so we're trying to maintain, those of us that live on Dogwood Road, our goal is to maintain the Dogwood Road experience if you will. It's horrendously skinny in some places and, but we've always been able to pass each other. It's a pretty long dead end road. We've made due. Ambulances have come up. Fire trucks have come up. Everybody's come up, and we are widening it to the 24 foot wide road. So now 24 foot wide is good enough for the rest of Dogwood Road and it's a perfectly functional 24 foot wide that's already accepted. Why can't the other approximate 550 feet of orange dashed line continue to be the 24 foot wide road? And then it can change once it takes that sharp perpendicular 90 degree th turn into West 78 Street. What we're trying to do is preserve as much as we can. The loads of mature trees that we have in there, it's just what we're trying to preserve. And for the record, working with Paul and Alyson and Bob has been phenomenal. Our Dogwood Road family, and you can call us that because we pretty much are all here. We show up to these things big time. We are all very appreciative of the work that they have done. It's been nothing short of exemplary. Really. So whether this goes through or not, we're still happy campers. Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Mr. Oehme, comments. Thoughts. Paul Oehme: Sure…what our standards are. They're typically larger lot developments, larger homes, larger lots. Typically bigger vehicles pass through. These neighborhoods are owned… We've had comments that 31 foot wide roads aren't wide enough for some neighborhoods now but this is our standard that we've adopted. That the council has, can make to change that to something narrower but under this type of development it's our recommendation to stick with the 31 foot wide road. If granted, we are narrowing the road down on the Dogwood side under the 06-06 project. That's due to the right-of-way constraints that we have out there. But in…with other street reconstruction projects that we've… In new developments we try to stay to the 31 foot wide road. Kate Aanenson: I was just going to add to that. Mayor Furlong: Yes. Kate Aanenson: As Mrs. Brandt…this project's been on and off, on and off so I think we've all kind of gotten to know the…but I just want to make sure, if you look, the current road right-of- way, it's a temporary cul-de-sac. And the road is actually moving so with this project we're trying to work with Westwood. Maybe moving it. We've had numerous meetings trying to find the right right-of-way but certainly the road width and how it moves affects people's ability to get, not only preserve trees but additional…public property. But just to be clear again, this is the 31 foot here, and…as it goes past this plat, then it would actually tie back in with the old Dogwood… 20 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Councilman Peterson: So on that map Kate, walk me through this. You said 31 but where does the 24 start and end? Kate Aanenson: Right at this plat, because you're stretching. Mayor Furlong: 24 goes north, right? Kate Aanenson: Correct. So they stretch it from…where the city engineer's trying to retrofit. Bring utilities down to the existing right-of-way and preserving some of those trees. Paul Oehme: It wouldn't be an abrupt change. It'd be a 15 to 1 taper so the…30 feet tapering down to a narrower section. th Councilman Peterson: So it starts, when you do 78 it's 31. And that's Dogwood there, right? Your bend at Dogwood. Kate Aanenson: Correct. New Dogwood. Councilman Peterson: The new Dogwood, so it tapers down to 24 there. Kate Aanenson: Right at the end of that… Mayor Furlong: One of the questions you said is when you utility services are provided along Dogwood. There's an opportunity for additional subdivision of the existing properties. How many homes are currently along the lakeshore there and what's the potential for additional? Paul Oehme: I believe there's an additional 2 properties along Dogwood that can potentially be subdivided. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Plus these 3 that we're seeing here? Paul Oehme: Correct. Kate Aanenson: Some time in the future, correct. Mayor Furlong: So, okay. Additional lots. Alright. John Getsch: Can I make a comment? Mayor Furlong: Please. John Getsch: My name is John Getsch and I have property that is, it actually goes right down here. If you take off this corner, go right towards the lake. One of my concerns with the road th narrowing down there is people will come around the corner here on 78, come around here thinking that this is you know a full width street. Come down that stretch will narrow down gets…and say okay we need to turn around. Set back in driveways and then turn around and 21 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 head back up. And the idea was to try and keep this consistent along here with, because this is all trees coming along narrow, and it would keep that all the way to here and here would be where it would widen out and with the grading and stuff that's going on here, this is one of the trees that are going to be gone. So when this area, and part of what the property owners did here. Carlson…are trying to preserve trees by using the existing…power line route. And trying to keep it narrow with the trees in there so you have that kind of almost a north woods feeling going through there. And that's my comment on that we'd like to try and save that. Kept this narrow as, makes sense and consistent with the rest of Dogwood Road. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other public comment? Thank you for coming up sir. Yes. Donald Peterson: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Donald Peterson and I'm here representing Carlson Custom Homes as a project manager. I'll be the manager of the project and we do not have any issues, but we agree with the recommendations of the staff and the Planning Commission on all the items that have been discussed so far. We, there are a couple issues that I'd like to just make you aware of. One of the things is that the recommendation is that the plat be approved subject to the City Council authorizing the Dogwood improvement project. We are in total understanding of that. If Dogwood doesn't get done, and you don't order that project, then we don't have a plat. We've been working with the staff for just a little over a year now and Bruce has owned that property, Bruce Carlson has owned that property for almost 8 years. He's tried a couple of times to subdivide. That didn't go ahead because we didn't have an agreement on Dogwood Road. Now it looks like we've got a proposal that's going to meet the neighbors needs and meets our needs. Our assessment on this project is going to be very, very large and we did for that reason reduce the lots, 2 lots from 24 lots to 22 because we wanted, we have to have something that's the best that we can produce. And so we have reduced our lots down to 22. And these will be you know expensive homes, but the project is really nice. Those lots are about as nice as we can do. I would ask you then that you consider moving the plat on. We have to do quite a few things for the final plat. One of these of course would be having an agreement on Dogwood Road, but we have reviewed staff's recommendations on it. We have no problems with it. We also do not have a problem if the owners on Dogwood want to have a 24 foot road all the way from the curve, all the way down. We can live with that too. The planning staff and the engineering department wants to see this as 31 because it's in a new plat portion, we don't have a problem with that. Either way that you decide to go on that, we just ask that we, that the plat be considered on the plat and not on the width of the roadway. We will have to have an agreement on that roadway width before you approve the final plat in any means. There's one other item that I'd like to point out. This may be more appropriately addressed at final plat time but I wanted to make you aware of something that we would request that you consider. Carlson Custom Homes owns a home that's located right on Lot 4 here. They've owned that for about 8 years and there have been a couple of proposed for large lot subdivision and now we've come up with this proposal. That existing house has an existing well and it has an existing septic system which is, it's a mound system that's located on a portion of Lot 3. Our assessment and city charges on this project are going to be well over a million dollars and the city staff recommends that we pay those assessments up front, while the others are paid on a I think a 6 or 8 year payment plan. We ask your consideration that we be allowed to as soon as the final plat is approved, put this house on the market in order to generate some cash to pay all these fees, and if you, we would propose that we 22 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 would do that by putting a temporary easement on Lot 3. This would probably be done at final plat time so that this home could use the existing septic system until the time that the sewer is done and we can hook up to the sewer line. If you wanted to place a restriction on the sale of Lot 3 until that was all done, that would be acceptable with us, but we are requesting that when you get to final plat time that you would consider allowing us to utilize the existing operating septic system until such time that the city sewer is in and we can hook up to it. We would be happy to escrow money for the assessments and for the hookup that would be required so that you would be assured that that would be done. But that would allow us to generate a sizeable amount of cash to be able to plow into this project to pay all of these fees. I think that's probably, should be considered at the final plat time but I wanted to make you aware of our request on that. And I'd be happy to answer any other questions you might have. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Peterson? No? Okay, thank you. Yes. Mrs. Brandt. Deanna Brandt: Mrs. Brandt again. One last thing I wanted to say in regards to that 24 foot wide Dogwood Road continuation. There is a signed petition, and I think Alyson's got it in her folder by every resident on Dogwood Road stating that that's what we want. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Okay. Any other comments from the public? Okay, thank you everyone. I'll bring it back to council for any additional questions of staff. Yes. Councilwoman Tjornhom: The 24 foot road, it's probably in my packet and I haven't read it but did the fire marshal, chief, did they have any comments or an opinion regarding the road size? Paul Oehme: Yes. I did talk to our Fire Marshal and the 24 foot wide is the narrowest that he'd recommend, but we've got to understand too, that's the paved surface. There is a shoulder associated with the…road section there and the proposed current use they have a 12 foot wide ditch. That ditch section along that roadway so you know narrowing the roadway down to 24 versus a 31, even under this scenario, I was looking at the grades, in terms of tree preservation, I don't think, in my estimation there's going to be any significant trees that will be salvaged if you narrow the roadway just based upon the size…this road out there so, that's just a consideration. Councilman Peterson: Because of the ditch? Paul Oehme: Because well, because of the ditch and because of just the grades to build a newer section of Dogwood Road. Mayor Furlong: So are we looking at curb and gutter along the entire length of Dogwood Road there? Paul Oehme: That's another thing too is you know, we are, that is one of the options that we would be bringing before council at a later date when we have the council consider that feasibility study. One of the options is to include that curb and gutter. Now if you go with curb and gutter, that does push the road out to 26 foot wide from face to face, the curb, so but we do narrow the ditch section, where there's no ditch section… 23 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Mayor Furlong: So some tree preservation perhaps. It depends on where it is. Paul Oehme: It depends on where it is and you are cutting into the hill so there are some, there will be some trees that will be taken down there. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Litsey: So with the widening of the road, it's really taking up shoulder space more or less, is that what you're saying? That's there now. Paul Oehme: Right. It's just for grade purposes to build a road to it's current… There is going to be some grading work out there. There will be some trees, not in the roadway, that will have to be taken down because of the grades. Councilman Litsey: And when it narrows and goes north, are there future plans at this point for that? Paul Oehme: Right. Councilman Litsey: How much traffic are we looking at in the future perhaps? Paul Oehme: Well when the staff took a look at this, this development, we're anticipating actually less traffic going down Dogwood north of here than there is right now because you've got an improved section of road here. It's going to be much quicker to get out on a 31 foot wide road than neck down and…so in terms of traffic you know, it'd probably be less. Councilman Litsey: I guess I'd be interested in hearing comments from residents about what was just said in terms of it would have minimal impact on the trees. Mayor Furlong: Yeah I mean I think, well I was just going to say, there seems to be some options that have still not been decided with regard to the Dogwood project itself. So maybe the thing to do is let's, you know we hear this, we're doing preliminary at this point so. Kate Aanenson: Correct…asking for a variance and I think that's what the developer wants too. Putting together…so I don't know if you want to give a range on street width. Minimum… Mayor Furlong: Well I guess, okay. Roger Knutson: They're asking, if it's below 31 feet they're requesting a variance. Unlike a zoning variance, it doesn't have to go anywhere but to you for a subdivision variance. What I was, is there any way you could postpone, puts the developer maybe at a little disadvantage but postpone the decision on the road width until you have additional information based on the improvement project? 24 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Mayor Furlong: That's what I'm hearing probably makes the most sense because as part of that project there'll also be additional opportunities for the residents to get involved. I mean I'm not, by asking you to look at it, I don't know that we're necessarily authorizing it. But at the same time I mean I'm open to other ideas but it seems to me we don't have enough to decide one way or the other and yet I don't think holding up the entire project based upon the request of the neighbors is fair to the developer. But we've got you know, the Dogwood project itself is something that, this can't go forward without the Dogwood project so I think let's find some answers on the Dogwood project and that may lead us to a direction here. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members, I think we have this on as a work session. The Dogwood Road project in our first meeting in February and then I don't know where we are on plans and specs or authorization to do plans and specs and assessment hearing. Paul Oehme: We're still negotiating some right-of-way issues with some of the… Mayor Furlong: Okay. I guess my question then for Mr. Knutson would be, if we, if it requires a variance to narrow the width from 31, can we approve the plan tonight without a variance and still make that variance at the time of the final plat? Roger Knutson: Mayor yes, but maybe you just want to note as a condition that the width of, however you describe this segment. Dogwood north or. Aanenson: Yeah, the Dogwood segment. Roger Knutson: The Dogwood segment is reserved to be decided based upon additional information. Something along those lines so you just, in your approval note that that decision is yet to be made. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Yeah, let's move to other comments or questions on the rest of the development. Or on this issue, if somebody wants to make a comment there. Councilwoman Ernst. Councilwoman Ernst: I just have one other question. So tonight I've really not heard of any disadvantages, other than the fact that it doesn't fall within the 31 feet and also the fact that potentially the fire truck may have some challenges getting down that road, although it doesn't sound like he's very, he's real concerned about it. Are there any other disadvantages to having it 24 feet versus 31? Paul Oehme: Well there's no parking that would be allowed in a 24 foot wide road. And 24 foot wide roads, especially if we're going to have curb and gutter in the paved section, on a new road, two larger vehicles passing by each other is, it's narrow. It's not. Councilman Peterson: It's scary. Mayor Furlong: It's really narrow. 25 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: And those lots do have access via Dogwood. Mayor Furlong: Some of the lots on this development. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Would have, would be on the Dogwood, or at least on this section of Dogwood. As the existing homes on the west side. Other questions or comments on the development in it's entirety? Councilwoman Tjornhom, thoughts. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I think the Planning Commission kind of sifted through all those big clumps of clutter that we don't have to do tonight as regards to the electric fence. I don't think I've ever dealt with anything like that where there is an electric fence bordering someone's back yard and how do you handle that? You know I still am a little leery about that but I guess I've got to just have faith that a sign is going to make everyone happy for the next 100 years. When it's sold and re-sold but the Arboretum is a great asset to our community and I think that you know, it's a win-win for everybody. Donald Peterson: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Yes. Mr. Peterson. Donald Peterson: If I could clarify something regarding that fence. The Planning Commission recommended that we make a disclosure to any buyer that would come in. We will have a mandatory owners association because we have 3 outlots that we have to maintain, etc so we will have an owners association. Now we have agreed that we will make a full disclosure that there is an electric fence beyond their property line. We will also allow our residents, if they choose, to fence their back yard. They can do that so we will have a disclosure in all our advertising material. We'll have a disclosure in our homeowners documents that states there is, the present operation is an apple orchard. That they do use insecticides and…signs down there and according to the Planning Commission recommendations stating the electric fence be on so people will be well aware of what's there. If they choose to fence in their back yard, we will provide ornamental recommendations so that we get a nice looking fence. And we have no right or obligation we feel to build a fence or to object to a fence on their property. If the Arboretum chooses to build a fence, there's nothing we can do about it. We're happy with what we've got, but if they choose to build a fence, that's their right. According to city recommendations so if that point clarifies. Councilwoman Tjornhom: No…can live in harmony. Especially those people who have the deer in their back yard that want to get over. I think it's going to be a great development. I think it's a good asset to our community. It's a long time coming. I think there's been a lot of long meetings and a lot of long nights with the whole thing and I feel bad about the road. It doesn't sound like there's a lot of hope for saving trees and I've been down that road. It's beautiful and you kind of feel like you are going up to your cabin, even though you're not, so I wish you the best of luck with the trees but other than that, I don't think I have any other comments. 26 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other comments. Councilman Litsey: Just echo the same thing. It looks like a good project overall. I don't know all the history behind it because I'm new to the council but it looks like you've come up with a real good project and I do have a comfort level now with those items that have to be disclosed so I'm glad those were put in there so, if we can deal with the road issue, and I'll make a point of looking at it. I guess I'm comfortable with moving forward with the development proposed but separating out the road issue. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Other thoughts. Councilman Peterson: You know I've sat through most of those meetings in different versions of this and I'm proud to say I like this one the best. I think this has got the highest probability of success obviously so, you know with regard to the road, I think a lot of where I would come from in the road is what are the probabilities of the north really being redeveloped and kind of redone also? I mean I don't like the idea of going from 31 to 24 with no aspect of 24, whatever we get higher, you know then I think it’s a waste. But so that's where I think staff, I'd like to hear what the probability of that, if it's still 24, going to a more safer road. You don't want to drive on a 24 foot road with a car coming. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Or a garbage truck. Councilman Peterson: Yeah, you wouldn't. You couldn't then, but so other than that I think it's a great project and let's move ahead. Mayor Furlong: Okay thank you. I think no reason to take a lot of time. It's a good project. There's been a lot of thought put into it and I know that there's been a lot of work, and especially cooperation with the developer and with residents along Dogwood and I thank everybody for all their time and effort. And I think ultimately this is going to be a good project and I think that the city project of upgrading Dogwood Road is going to be an asset, not only for the public but for the residents along the road and I'm very pleased that we're moving forward with that. There's been as much cooperation as there is so, I think this is, I think we should move forward. If there are other comments, be happy to take them. Otherwise I think the motion begins on page 13 of the staff report. 307 on the PDF and the only two things that I heard, and maybe there was a third, is that we should make all 3 motions, or my recommendation would be all 3 motions would be contingent upon the what? Authorization or. Kate Aanenson: …staff report. Mayor Furlong: Is it in the report or in the conditions? Kate Aanenson: In the conditions of approval. It's under…and the reason why you didn't see it. Councilman Peterson: 06-06. 27 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: It's 6(g). Preliminary plat approval contingent upon. It should be final plat shall be contingent upon approval of the construction project 06-06, which is the sewer and water project. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so just the preliminary plat? None of the. Kate Aanenson: The final plat…so (g) says final plat is contingent upon. Mayor Furlong: (g) should be final, and it's only with regard to that motion that it's required? Kate Aanenson: For the subdivision. Mayor Furlong: For the subdivision. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: The rezoning are fine? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Don't need to be contingent upon that? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Well we wouldn't go forward with the rezoning until… Roger Knutson: That's already spelled out. The zoning is tabled until the plat comes back. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: And then just. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so we're good on that. And the other one is just to add a condition. Kate Aanenson: Reserving Dogwood right-of-way. Mayor Furlong: The final with the Dogwood will be determined at the final plat? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: And which condition do you want that to be Kate? Kate Aanenson: If you want to make it number 10. Mayor Furlong: Alright. With that is there a motion? Councilman Peterson: Yeah, what he said. 28 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 Mayor Furlong: Probably not good enough for Mr. Knutson over there. Yeah what he said if we attach the findings of fact, right? Then it's okay? Roger Knutson: Now you stole my thunder. Mayor Furlong: Alright, alright. We've got motions A, B and C in the staff report. (g), item what is it? 6(g) has been amended to say final plat versus preliminary. Strike the word. Condition number 10. The final width of Dogwood Road will be determined at final plat, is that sufficient? Can somebody say so moved? Councilman Peterson: So moved. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Ernst: Second. Mayor Furlong: Second. Any questions on the motion? We'll deal with all 3 motions in a single motion without objection. Seeing that, any discussion? Resolution #2007-09: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the City Council approve Comprehensive Land Use Map Amendment from Residential- Large Lot to Residential-Low Density for Lots 1 through 3, Block 3 of the preliminary plat of The Arbors contingent upon Metropolitan Council review. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the City Council approve the Rezoning from RR, Rural Residential to RSF, Single Family Residential for the land within the plat of The Arbors subject to final plat approval for The Arbors. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for the Arbors creating , plans 22 lots, 3 outlots and public right-of-way prepared by Otto Associates, dated October 31, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1.The house designs, locations and driveway configurations for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, must be revised to maintain the required wetland setback. 2.Full park fees in lieu of parkland dedication and/or trail construction shall be collected as a condition of approval for The Arbors. The park fees shall be collected in full at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. 3.Fire Marshal’s Conditions: a.A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure 29 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. b.Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. c.Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction of the new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire Code Section 501.4. d.Fire apparatus access roads 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 State Fire Code Section 503.2.3. e.Submit proposed cul-de-sac name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. f.No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 4.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.Existing wells and on-site sewage treatment systems on the site must be abandoned in accordance with State Law and City Code. d.The developer must submit a list of proposed street names for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. e.Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must be obtained prior to construction. f.Separate sewer and water services must be provided each lot. 5.City Forester’s Conditions: a.Tree preservation fence shall be installed at the edge of the grading limits prior to any construction. Fencing shall be in place and maintained until all construction is completed. 30 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 b.Any trees removed in excess of proposed tree preservation plans, dated 10/31/06, will be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 diameter inches. c.A minimum of two trees shall be planted on each lot. d.Tree conservation easements on Lots 5, 8, and 9, Block 1 shall be enlarged beyond what is shown on plans dated 10/31/06. e.Tree conservation easements shall be located on Lots 1-3, 5, 8-9, Block 1. f.The applicant shall replace Colorado spruce shown on landscape plan with concolor fir or Norway spruce. 6.City Engineer’s Conditions: a.In order to meet the 10% maximum allowable driveway grade on Lots 1 through 3, Block 1, the builder may have to put steps in the garage to accommodate the grade change. b.The dead pool volume of the pond needs to be increased by 360 cubic feet to meet the MPCA Phase II requirements. c.The proposed 1036 foot contour on Lots 12 and 14, Block 1 must be shifted so that the backyard grade is minimum 2%. d.The proposed major contours must be a different line weight or type. e.Based on the grading plan, the home on Lot 5, Block 1 will be a walkout, not a full basement. f.The top and bottom of wall elevations of the wall must be shown on the grading plan. g.Final plat approval shall be contingent upon the approval and construction of Project 06- 06. h.Watermain must be minimum 18 inches above or below the sanitary sewer. i.Access for Lots 2 and 3, Block 3 will be addressed and constructed when those lots are final platted. j.An encroachment agreement is required for the gravel drive and turnaround within the th Dogwood Road right of way south of West 78 Street. 7.Water Resources Coordinator’s Conditions: a.The applicant shall classify Wetland 2 using the results from the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method for Evaluating Wetland Functions (MnRAM Version 3.0). An 31 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 electronic version of the completed MnRAM evaluation shall be submitted to and approved by the city to establish the classification of Wetland 2 so the appropriate wetland buffer and setback requirements can be determined. b.A wetland buffer 50 in width and a 50 foot setback from the wetland buffer must be maintained around Wetland 1. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City’s wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. Wetland buffer and setback requirements for Wetland 2 are contingent upon review and approval of the MnRAM for that wetland. c.The proposed driveways and structures on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 appear to be within the wetland setback for Wetland 2. The applicant shall submit house plans that will meet the required setbacks on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. d.The proposed conservation easement shall be revised to envelop Wetland 2 and the required wetland buffer. e.A NPDES Phase II Construction Site Storm Water Permit will be required from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for this site. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required in conjunction with this application. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City so it can be reviewed by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District prior to the preconstruction meeting for the project. f.The proposed storm water pond shall be constructed prior to disturbing upgradient areas and used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. Diversion berms/ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond and a temporary pond outlet shall be provided. The outlet could be a temporary perforated standpipe and rock cone. The plans shall be revised to include a detail for the temporary pond outlet. g.It shall be noted on the SWPPP that all areas that will not be permanently stabilized within the timeframe required by the NPDES permit shall be temporary mulched and seeded. A note shall be included in the dewatering section of the SWPPP that states: “If construction of the proposed temporary/permanent sediment pond is not completed prior to dewatering, the City’s on-site construction observer must approve proposed dewatering methods prior to beginning dewatering.” h.The plans shall be revised to incorporate Chanhassen’s standard details for erosion and sediment control, including 5302A and 5302D. Proposed erosion and sediment controls for individual lots shall include perimeter controls (silt fence), rock driveways, street sweeping, inlet control and temporary mulch after final grade and prior to issuing the Certificate of Occupancy. i.The applicant shall provide erosion and sediment control along the south and east property lines to prevent discharge of sediment onto adjacent properties. 32 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 j.All silt fence that is not laid parallel to the contours shall have J Hooks installed every 50 -75 feet. This shall be noted on the plans and discussed at the preconstruction meeting. k.Energy dissipation shall be provided at the inlet to the proposed pond and at the end of the discharge pipe that outlets to the wetland within 24 hours of pipe installation. The discharge location for the outlet of the proposed pond shall be evaluated to ensure that the proposed discharge will not cause erosion issues. Reinforced erosion control matting may be required. l.A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the stormwater pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf reinforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. The overland route from the EOF to Lake Minnewashta shall be shown on the plans and shall be encumbered by a drainage and utility easement. m.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 n.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. o.Inlet protection may be needed prior to installation of the castings for the curbside catch basins. In that case, all storm sewer inlets shall be protected by at least fabric draped over the manhole with a steel plate holding the fabric in place. p.The plans shall be revised to show a rock construction entrance (minimum 75 feet in length) wherever construction traffic will access the site. The rock construction entrance shall be constructed in accordance with Chanhassen’s Standard Detail 5301. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. q.At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $74,570.50. r.The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering)) and comply with their conditions of approval. 33 City Council Meeting - January 22, 2007 8. The developer shall provide in both their sales material and within the association covenants full disclosure about the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum location, use of electric fence, research operations, and agricultural operations including the spraying of trees. 9. The developer shall install signage on Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, and Outlots B and C warning of the electrical fence on the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum property.” 10. The Dogwood Road roadway width shall be determined with the Final Plat. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. FOX HILL, 6570 CHANHASSEN ROAD, APPLICANT, 10 SPRING HOMES, INC.: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY INTO THREE (3) SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITH VARIANCES. Public Present: Name Address Sheryl Deppa 4920 Sparrow Road, Minnetonka Charles R. & Mary Klingelhutz 6570 Chanhassen Road nd Scott Rosenlund 622 West 82 Street, Chaska Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the council. This is a little less complex subdivision in the fact that it's 3 lots, although there's two actions required. One is a variance for a private street…and the subdivision itself. The subject site is located on 101, just south of Fox Hollow Drive. The council recently approved a subdivision…6 lots so this is, there's an existing home on the property right now. The same applicant is doing both projects. And just again to pass onto you the zoning in the area. The surrounding property actually is a PUD. The most recent Fox Den was given an RSF which does traditional single family lots so, as did this subject site. I just want to point that out because some of these lots actually behind are actually a little bit smaller in the PUD… Again, all of this area is guided low density, which all of the lots considered to meet the standard. So with the existing home on the site the applicant has to demonstrate that through the current ordinances you could get 3 lots, so this subdivision meets city ordinances with a public street. Fox Court. In reviewing this the staff felt that an increased, by putting a public street to handle those 3 lots, it increased the hard surface coverage and there were significantly more trees loss and because the cul-de-sac, such a short cul-de-sac would not provide access to…there might be a more efficient way to serve…this home currently has it's driveway on 101…again not the best layout. So in working with the applicant, we did want to make desired from the staff perspective, alternative… The one issue that was addressed at the Planning Commission and the staff also addressed is…that large lot, basically an acre and a half. As pointed out in the staff report, if you take some of the hard surface, that area that's common, so the area that's common, driveway starts here. Again providing a back up here. The Planning Commission challenged staff if this is the best way to subdivide…private street, and what we've learned with a private street, it provides enough width and enough back up area so you're not backing into someone's private driveway so this is the common portion of the driveway… That's 34