The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-26_LAKESIDE - SIENNA CORPORATION (FILE 1 OF 3)M Securities 6/152012 6/152012 H Escrows ■ Cash Escrow Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 Site Plan Agreement $5,000(emsion control/landscaping) Received 11-22-06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt #28056 Notify Bob Cmute ms; 6/7/07 - Bob, status? Kim 6/13/07 - Per Bob check status 6/1/08. Kim 62/08 - Bob, status? Kim Per Bob, check status 6/1/09. Kim 7/7/09 - Notified Bob & Jill. Kim 7/9/09 - Per Alyson, do not release escrow. Check status 6/1/10. Kim 6/4/10 -Notified Alyson/Bob/Jill. Kim 6/9/10 - Per Jill, continue to hold since site is site under construction and landscaping has not been completed. Check status 10/15/10. Kim 11/18/10 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 11/18/10 - Per Jill, we can probably secure the landscaping on any unfinished lots through the site plan process, but 1 guess I'd like to continue holding it if no one's requesting it. I can do a final inspection next summer. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 7/8/II-Notified BobtAll. Kim 8/3/11 - Per Jill project is still under construction. Check stains 6/15/12. Kim 8/l/12 -Notified Jill. Kim 8/15/12 - Per Jill, the city used $4,887.25 to complete the landscaping as follows: -6/30/12 Paid $2,498.50 to Park & Prairie -725/12 Paid $2,498.75 to Park & Prairie Balance of $2.75 r airs in accotmt 815-8201-2024. Activity closed. Ol[000011broFlcr W1d3012T2MPM S- us R%gNY P»et M T W T Fg rl� W M 4 -.: _..3.. q_.5 ..5...7_8...9..io.i.9 10 i'+2 i3 id 1596iY 181.18, 17 18 19 20 2' - 22 29 21 1524 25 z n 2a N ao dt--' .... 6/15/2012 6/1f%7012 O Escrows 0 Cash Esbmw 1� 1/1 Manning Case 6 ISne Plan Agreement $5,000 (erosion of/landscaping) v -06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt #28056 Xk& Bob Generous / 6Y7/07 -Bob, status? Kim \6/13/07 - Per Bob check status 6/1/08. Kim \ rysD\ 6?J08 - Bob, status? Kim Per Bob, check status 6/ I/09. Kim \\,J 7/2/09 -Notified Bob & Jill. Kim 4.61 7/9/09 -Per Alyson, do not release escrow. Check status 6/1/10. Kim 6/4/10- Notified Atyson/Bobdill. Kim 69/10 - Per All, continue to hold since site is site under construction and landscaping has not been completed. Check status 10/15/10. Kim Il/18110-Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 11/18/10 -Per Jill, we can probably seem the landscaping on any unfinished lots through the site plan process, but I guess I'd like to continue holding it if no one's requesting it. I can do a final inspection next summer. Check stains 6/15/10. Kim 7/8/11 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 8/3/11 - Per Jill project is still under construction. Check status 6/15/12. Kim 8/1/12 -Notified Jill. Kim ..................................._.----------........... __ _ _ _ _.......................................... ............. OlpfeNYOpnpacw Mr20r29&W— SS. P=R Pw, Jul 2000 ON 2000 errber2000 S M T W T F S T F S M T W T F 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 4_.5.5_.78101112 3...a. _.5 6..]. 9_.9 9 16 11 1z 13.14 15 17 16 */9 10.11 12 13 14 15 1616 1 ] 16 19 20 21.22 2< 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 2323 24 25 26 27 H 29 if _- 2d 25 26 27 28 29 9030 31 ____. _.___.... ..._...... . ...... _. _._ ,Z- Securities (Start Due S . _P Category >. Descnplion I 6/15/11 6/15/11 F Escrows 0 Cash Escrow Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 Site Plan Agreement $5,000 (erosion ccntrolflandscaping) Received 11-22-06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt#28056 Notify Bob Generous 6!1/07 -Bob. status? Kim 6/13/07 - Per Bob check status 6/1/08. Kim 612/08 - Bob, status? Kim Per Bob, check status 6/1/09. Kim 7/2/09 - Notified Bob & Jill. Kim 7/9/09 - Per Alyson, do not release escrow. Check status 6/1/10. Kim 6/4/10- Notified Alyson/Bob/Jill. Kim 6/9/10 - Per Ji II, continue to hold since site is site under construction and landscaping has not been completed. Check status 10115/10. Kim 11/18/10 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 11/18/10 - Per Jill, we can probably secure the landscaping on any unfinished las through the site plan process, but I guess rd like to continue holding it if no one's requesting it. I can do a final inspection next summer. Check status 6/15/ 10. Kim ................ _............ ........ ... .............._.-_�y_'' —.� � _ ...-...__............ __....... C_Av-e..... _....... _-_......... _-------- "' ----------- -................._.............-..............................__.............._...._._._................_...__._------.__.._....__.._..._._ .......................... _......... ................ _........ _.._.... __.............. _...... _........................................................................................................ __................ ....................... ..... _........ _................................ ...... _...... ....... .. .....__...._.. ............ ......... _................................. ............. .................. _... _................................... 021110W-Cwelop, C� lulwloe12aim Sasw" P -Pm Pvae1 A, CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 11/22/2006 1:45 PM Receipt No. 0028056 CLERK: katie PAYEE: SIENNA CORP LAKESIDE -PLANNING CASE 06-26 SECURITY FOR SITE PLAN PERMIT ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 5,000.00 Total Cash Check 36632 Change 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 • AMERICANA CITY OF CHANHASSEN COM BANK 153429 7700 MARKET BLVD., P.O. BOX 147 CHANHASSSEN, SEN. 75-196-91199 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1140 Pay TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT AND 75 / 100 To the order of Park and Prairie, LLC 1761 Ringneck Drive A �� Excelsior, MN 55331 Data 7/26/2012 Amount $2,498.75 V 11.1534291" 1:09 Check Date: 07/26/2012 Check Amount: 2,498.75 1: 30 0 28 1 3111 Vendor No: Parand Vendor Name: Park and Prairie, LLC Vendor Acet No: Invoice Number Date Description Amount 1572 07/13/2012 Lakeside Development tree plan 2,498.75 0 R E4 & t -a, �A I �� Bill To City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd PO Boa 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: Jill Sinclair Invoice Date Invoice # 7/13/2012 1572 RECEIVED Jul 16 2012 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Payment for Services ch#153245 of 5 - 9)1C I - 2 L� 24 Thank you for using the services of Park & PrairieM -2,498.501 -2,498.50 Subtotal $2,498.75 Sales Tax (7.275%) $0.00 Total $2.498.75 Payments/Credits $0.00 Balance Due $2.498.75 1761 Ringneck Drive 9 Excelsior • MN • 55331 • parkandprairie@q.com • 612-217-3717 Terms Due Date Net 15 7/28/2012 Description Qty Rate Amount i Lakeside Development Tree Planting Bid Supply & Install 6 B&B Black Hills Spruce 5 405.00 2.025.00 Supply & Install 5' B&B Japanese Tree Lilac, multi -stem 3 295.00 885.00 Supply & Install 2" B&B Princeton Elm 1 419.00 419.00 Supply & Install 8' B&B River Birch, multi -stem 3 310.00 930.00 Supply & Install #7 Cont. Common Purple Lilac 9 54.25 48825 Supply & Install Common Purple Lilac 3 41.66667 125.00 Supply & Install Little Princess Spirea 3 41.66667 125.00 • All prices quoted include planting, initial watering, and mulching. Payment for Services ch#153245 of 5 - 9)1C I - 2 L� 24 Thank you for using the services of Park & PrairieM -2,498.501 -2,498.50 Subtotal $2,498.75 Sales Tax (7.275%) $0.00 Total $2.498.75 Payments/Credits $0.00 Balance Due $2.498.75 1761 Ringneck Drive 9 Excelsior • MN • 55331 • parkandprairie@q.com • 612-217-3717 e & LA City ol'Chanhassen 771w Market Blvd PO Bos 147 Chanhassen. MN 55317 Alm: Jill Sinclair Description i Ibkesidc Development True Planting Bid i Supply & Install 6' B&B Black Hills Spruce ! Supple & Install 5' B&B Japanese "free lilac. multi -stem Supply & Install 2" B&B Princeton Elm Supply & Install 8' B&B River Birch. multi -stem Supply & Install C7 Cont. Common Purple Lilac i Supply & Install Common Purple Lilac Supply & Install Little Princess Spirea • All prices quoted include planting. initial watering, and mulching Ihanl; you for using the scn ices of Pato: & Pmiric!!! 5 3 1 3 9 3 3 Invoice -, Date � Invoice # , --- 6/27/2012 1572 405.00 295.00 419.00 310.00 54.25 41.66667 41.66667 Subtotal Sales Tax (7.276%) 2.025.00 885.00 419.00 930.00 ' 488.25 ; , 125.00 125.(w 4, i i S4.997.25 r S00(l Total 54.99725 Payments/Credits Balance Due L---- 1761 RINGNECK DRIVE • EXCELSIOR 0 NN 0 55331 0 PARKANDPRAIRIE®Q•COM • 612-217-3717 so.(w 51.997 25 Terms Due Date Net 15 712/2012 1 Rate Amount 405.00 295.00 419.00 310.00 54.25 41.66667 41.66667 Subtotal Sales Tax (7.276%) 2.025.00 885.00 419.00 930.00 ' 488.25 ; , 125.00 125.(w 4, i i S4.997.25 r S00(l Total 54.99725 Payments/Credits Balance Due L---- 1761 RINGNECK DRIVE • EXCELSIOR 0 NN 0 55331 0 PARKANDPRAIRIE®Q•COM • 612-217-3717 so.(w 51.997 25 AMERICANA CITY OF CHANHASSEN COMMUNITY BANK 7700 MARKET BLVD., P.O. BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 5531775-196-919 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1140 Pay TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT AND 50 / 100 To the order of Park and Prairie, LLC 1761 Ringneck Drive Excelsior, MN 55331 1:09 L90 L9691: 30 0 2 Check Date: 07/05/2012 Vendor No: Parand Check Amount: 2,498.50 Vendor Name: Park and Prairie, LLC Vendor Acct No: Invoice Number Date Description 062712 02/03/2012 Lakeside Development (50% pyl Date 7/5/2012 153245 Amount $2,498.50 Amount 2,498.50 M RECEIVED E & LAN CA ITY OF CHANHASSEN JUN 13 2012 � � C 1pA I �i City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: Jill Sinclair Estimate Date Estimate # 6/12/2012 1569 Description Qty Rate Total Lakeside Development Tree Planting Bid Supply & Install 6' B&B Black Hills Spruce 5 405.00 2,025.00 Supply & Install 5' B&B Japanese Tree Lilac, multi -stem 3 295.00 885.00 Supply & Install 2" B&B Princeton Elm 1 419.00 419.00 Supply & Install 8' B&B River Birch, multi -stem 3 310.00 930.00 Supply & Install 97 Cont. Common Purple Lilac 9 54.25 488.25 • All prices quoted include planting, initial watering, and mulching. I accept the above estimate and authorize Park & Prairie LLC to 0.00 do the work as specified. All work will be scheduled upon acceptance of the bid. Plant and hardscape materials will be guaranteed for 1 year from date of installation. 50% payment will be required prior to job start, with remaining balance due within 7 a days of comVKZCP Signature V— / ��ti- gzt,l ZuL4 0.00 Date V4 0.00 �,►L_A<- L 24x8. o Thank you for using the services of Park & Prairie!!! otal/ $4,747.25 Sales Tax (7.275°/x) $0.00 Total 2 1761 RINGNECK DRIVE a EXCELSIOR 0 MN a 55331 a PARKANDPRAIRIE0Q.COM 9 612-217-3717 Park & Recreation Sincerely, Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.2271400 Robert Generous, AICP Fax: 952.227.1404 Senior Planner Planning d Natural Resources BG:ktm Phone: 952.22T1 130 July 9, 2014 CITY OF CIIANNSEN Enclosure 7700 Market Boulevard Mr. John Ossanna PO Box 147 Construction Finance, Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 6125 Blue Circle Drive Fax: 952.227.1310 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Re: Letter of Credit No. 127007 for Lakeside Site Plan Permit 2006-26 Fax: 952.227.1110 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Dear Mr. Ossanna: Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering The above -referenced project has been completed in general conformance with Site Phone: 952.227.1160 Plan Agreement 2006-26. Therefore, we are returning your original Letter of Credit Fax: 952.227.1170 No. 127007. Finance you should have an If y y questions, please contact me at 952-227-1131 or by email at Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Park & Recreation Sincerely, Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.2271400 Robert Generous, AICP Fax: 952.227.1404 Senior Planner Planning d Natural Resources BG:ktm Phone: 952.22T1 130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Enclosure Public Works 7901 Park Place c: Steve Obermueller, Wooddale Builders, Inc. Phone: 952.2271300 Fax: 952.227.1310 g.\plani planning cases%06-261akeside1ater of credit release letter 07-09-2014.docx Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Life . Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow CITY OF CHANHASSEN Construction Finance, Inc. RECEIVED 6125 Blue Circle Drive JUL 13 2011 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 CHANHASSENPLMMINO MPT Ph. (952) 974-3883 * Fax (952) 974-3883 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. 127007 Date: 07 -08-2011 TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of Wooddale Builders. Inc. and in your favor, our hrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $ 5.000.00 , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank. The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. 127007 , dated July 08. 2011 , of Construction Finance.lnc . b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen. c) Be presented for payment at 6125 Blue Circle Drive, Minnetonka, MN 55343 , on or before 4:00 p.m. on July 08.2012 . This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be July 8" f each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, hiternational Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. BY: Its Status Report Sunday, June 01, 2014 Plan Jul 20Au ust 2000 a tember 2000 M T W T f S M T W T F M T W T F 1 3 4 5 1 2 .Z ..3..4...5...5...2..8 fi_y.. 8...9..191112 3..4..5...0..7...8...9 } 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 h4 95 i5 i2'i5 Y4 Wii i3 13 14 15 15 15,1215'19 26 21 22 20 21'22 23 24 25'25 111814'W21 ff 23242528 zS2519 2728 29 30 31 242s'25 2125 29 36 ....31 ...................... ............................. ............................. ® Securities Start Due S P Category Description 6/1/2014 6/1/2014 O LC #127007 expires 7/8/12 from Construction Finance, Inc. (automatically renews annually) Replaces expired LC # 1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 Landscaping) LAC #1200 expired 10/30/07 from Eagle Valley Bank (Replaced with L.0 #127007) Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, htc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 11/9/07 - LC expired on 10/30/07. Kim called bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin Thielfoldt from bank called and said he would issue a new LC to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed early next week. Check status 11/14/07. Kim 11/16/07 - Left message with Shannon at Eagle Valley Bank as to status of renewal LC. Waiting for callback Kim 11/29/07 - Called Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. He is working on reissuing I.C. Check status 12/10/07. Kim 1/2/08 - Left message for Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Kevin retuned call and left message that LC was in process and would be mailed next week. Check status 1/11/08. Kim 1/10/07 - Received replacement letter of credit #1200 in the amount of $5,000 to expire 10/30/08. Kim 9/15/08 - Bob, This LC expires on 10/30/08. Please advise. Kim 9/16/08 - Sent letter to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC renewal. Check status 10/1/08. Kim 10/1/08 - Kim sent reminder email to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 10/15/08. 11/7/08 - Letter of Credit has expired. Forwarded previous email to Kevin and Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 11/12/08. Kim 12/10/08 - Sent another reminder email to Kevin at bank requesting LC reaewal status. Kim 1/27/09 - Sent email reminder to Kevin at bank requesting renewal status. Kim 2/6/09 - Sent letter to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC be renewed. Check status 2/13/09. Kim 8/13/09 -Notified Bob Generous. Kim 8/13/09 - Per Bob no new building permits will be issued until the letter of credit is renewed. HOLD 6/4/10 - Notified Bob Generous. Kim 7/8/10 - Notified Bob Generous and Jill Sinclair. Kim 7/11/10 - Received replacement LC #127007 from Construction Finance, Inc. for $5,000 to annually renew on July 8. Cbeck status every June 1. Kim 6/5/12 - Per Bob the site is still under construction. Chock status 6/1/13. Kim 6/6/13 - Notified Bob. Per Bob, extend until 6/1/2014. Kim 6/2/14 -Notified Bob. Kim 6/26/14 - Per Jill LAC can be released. Activity closed. KM ®toWSDerebMwcq' N 14MIOUM1 s=ERWMP=Pmu y Pq I Status Report Sunday, June 01, 2014 Plan Jul 2000 Au ust 2000 M T W T F S M T W T F M T F 11 2 3 4 5 I ..3...4._5 _8.......8 .fi...1...8...9 ..10.1.1..12 .3 ..4..5...6 ... x...8..-9. '9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1314 15 161] 19'19 1011'12 17 147151'8 1617181920 2122 20 21222324 2526 1]1819'202122'23 2324 26 26'2] 2629 2128 29 30 31 2425 26 27 2B 29'96 3l)Bi...................... ............................. ............................. Securities IStan Due S P Category Description I 6/1/2014 6/1/2014 O LC #127007 expires 7/8/12 from Construction Finance. Inc. (automatically renews annually) Replaces expired LC #1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 landscaping) �.- LC #1200 expired 10/30/07 from Eagle Valley Bank (Replaced with LC #127007) lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Counsel, $2,500 Landscapin Notify Bob Generous. 11/9/07 - 1-C expired on 10/30/07. Kim call bank and left message requesting renewal until I0/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin Thi foldt from bank called and said be would issue a new LC to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed y next week. Check status 11/14/07. Kim 11/16/07 - Left message with Shannon Eagle Valley Bank as to status of renewal L.C. Waiting for call back. Kim 11/29/07 - Called Kevin at Eagle V Hey Bank. He is working on reissuing L.C. Check status 12/10/07. Kim 1/2/08 - Left message for K ' at Eagle Valley Bank. Kevin returned call and left message that LAC was in process and would be fled next week. Check status 1/11/08. Kim 1/10/07 - Received replac cut letter of credit #1200 in the amount of $5,000 to expire 10/30/08. Kim 9/15/08 - Bob, This LC pires on 10/30/08. Please advise. Kim 9/16/08 - Sect letter t evin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC renewal. Check status 10/1/08. Kim 10/1/08 - Kim sent rider email to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 10/15/08. 11/7/08 - Letter of relit has expired. Forwarded previous email to Kevin and Eagle Valley Bank. Cheek status 11/1 08. Kim 12/10/08 - Sent other reminder email to Kevin at bank requesting UC renewal status. Kim 1/27/09 - Sent '1 reminder to Kevin at bank requesting renewal status. Kim 2/6/09 - Sent crier to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC be renewed. Check status 2/13/09. Kim 8/13/09 - otified Bob Generous. Kim 8/13/09 er Bob no new building permits will be issued until the letter of credit is renewed. HOLD 6/4/10 Notified Bob Generous. Kim 7/8/1 -Notified Bob Generous and Jill Sinclair. Kim 7/1 /10 - Received replacement LC #127007 from Construction Finance, Inc. for $5,000 to annually on July 8. Check status every Jane L Kim 6 5/12 - Per Bob the site is still under construction. Check status 6/1/13. Kim /6/13 - Notified Bob. Per Bob, extend until 6/1/2014. Kim 2/14 - Notified Bob. Kim ora,.o...eaMcw. �M'x M e.mrnv.ft Fvl Status Report Sunday, June 01, 2014 PIan.0R6 M16 2000 02i'*L, t 2000 temper 2000 T F T F M T W T F S 14 5 ..5.......8 9 ..10 i1 12 .3..4...5 - _E...9 2131415 16 17 18 19 i0 1112 13 14 io 16 920 2122 3242529 i7 1819.20.2122.236 2'! 2829 0 31 24.25 28 21.28 25 30............... ................ ............................. Securities 1&Wt Due S P Category Deacnption I 6/12014 6/1/2014 F LC #127007 expires 7/8/12 from Construction Finance, Inc. (automatically renews annually) Replaces expired LC #1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 (52,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 landscaping) LC # 1200 expired 10/30/07 from Eagle Valley Bank (Replaced with LC #127007) Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 11 /9/07 - L.0 expired on 10/30/07. Kim called bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin Thielfoldt from bank called and said he would issue a new L.0 to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed early next week. Check status 11/14/07. Kim 11/16/07 -Left message with Shannon at Eagle Valley Bank as to status of renewal LC. Waiting for call back. Kim 1129/07 - Called Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. He is working on reissuing L.C. Check status 12/10/07. Kim 12/08 - Left message for Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Kevin returned call and left message that LC was in process and would be mailed next week. Check status 1/11108. Kim 1/10/07 - Received replacement letter of credit #1200 in the amount of $5,000 to expire 10/30/08. Kim 9/15/08 - Bob, This L.0 expires on 10/30/08. Please advise. Kim 9/16/08 - Sent letter to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC renewal. Check status 10/l/08. Kim 10/1/08 - Kim seat reminder email to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank Check status 10/15/08. 11/7/08 - Letter of Credit has expired. Forwarded previous email to Kevin and Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 11/12/08. Kim 12/10/08 - Sent another reminder email to Kevin at bank requesting L.0 renewal status. Kim 127/09 - Seat email reminder to Kevin at bank requesting renewal status. Kim 2/6/09 - Seat letter to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting L.0 be renewed. Check status 2/13/09. Kim 8/13/09 - Notified Bob Generous. Kim 8/13/09 - Per Bob no new building permits will be issued until the letter of credit is renewed. HOLD 6/4/10 - Notified Bob Generous. Kim 7/8/10 - Notified Bob Generous and Jill Sinclair. Kim 7/11/10 - Received replacement LE #127007 from Construction Finance, Inc. for $5,000 to annually renew on July 8. Check status every Jane 1. Kim 6/5/12 - Per Bob the site is still under construction. Check status 6/1/13. Kim 6/6/13 - Notified Bob. Per Bob, extend until 6/12014. Kim OlaOe ne'rek0e1rr�0�P. a' M13 x11031 AM a-aWu �-PmMy Py 1 Status Report Friday, June 01, 2012 PIan.OR6 2000 ,at 2600 Spumtkeer 2000 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F 11 2 3 4 5 . 2 3 4_.5._6 _. 7...H .'a 7 8 .9..10 11 f2 3...4..5 6 7 8..9 9 10 11 12 -13 14 15 1394 IS 16 17 18 19 ib 11.12 13 14.1515 1 i8 19262122 20 2122 2324 2526 i1. 18 19 26 21 22 23 23.24 2526212825 27 2828 30 31 - 24 25 26 27 2829 35 3b31 _..........___.... ............................. ............. _. _.__. _... Securities [Start pue S P Category Description 6/1/2012 6/1/2012 F LC # 127007 expires 7/8/12 from Construction Finance, Inc. (automatically renews annually) Replaces expired LC # 1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, 52,500 Landscaping) LC #1200 expired 10/30/07 from Eagle Valley Bank (Replaced with LC #127007) Lakeside Site Pian Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 Landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 11/9/07 - LC expired on 10/30/07. Kim called bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin Thielfoldt from bank called and said he would issue a new LC to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed early next week. Check status I 1 /14/07. Kim 11/16/07 - Left message with Shannon at Eagle Valley Bank as to status of renewal LC. Waiting for call back. Kim 11/29/07 -Called Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. He is working on reissuing LC. Check status 12/10/07. Kim 1/2/08 - Left message for Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Kevin returned call and left message that LC was in process and would be mailed next week. Check status 1/11/08. Kim 1/10/07 - Received replacement letter of credit 41200 in the amount of $5,000 to expire 10/30/08. Kim 9/15/08 - Bob, This LC expires on 10/30/08. Please advise. Kim 9/16/08 - Sent leder to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC renewal. Check status 10/ 1/08. Kim 10/1/08 -Kim sent reminder email to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 10/15/08. 11/7/08 -Letter of Credit has expired. Forwarded previous email to Kevin and Eagle Valley Bank. Check status 11/12/08. Kim 12/10/08 - Sent another reminder email to Kevin at bank requesting LC renewal status. Kim 1/27/09 - Sent email reminder to Kevin at bank requesting renewal status. Kim 2/6/09 - Sent letter to Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank requesting LC be renewed. Check status 2/13/09. Kim 8/13/09 - Notified Bob Generous, Kim 8/ 13/09 - Per Bob no new building permits will be issued until the letter of credit is renewed. HOLD 6/4/10 -Notified Bob Generous. Kim 7/8/10 -Notified Bob Generous and Jill Sinclair. Kim 7/11/10 - Received replacement LC # 127007 from ConsWction Finance, Inc. for $5,000 to annually renew on July 8. Check status every June 1. Kim ................................................................................................................................................... ®Lows pGv¢MgnPM Cdp 7;I UNII a13 44 PM S -Stat P=PnMy Pagel Meuwissen, Kim From: Generous, Bob Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 2:09 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: FW: Letter of Credit Attachments: 20110711133129185. pdf Here's the scanned LC for Wooddale. Do you want to save it somewhere? From: Dodie Taylor (mailto:dodiet(a wooddalebuilders.com1 Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 1:41 PM To: Generous, Bob Subject: RE: Letter of Credit Hello Bob, Attached is a scanned copy of the letter of credit you requested. They can mail you the original hard copy if you require a hard copy but hopefully this can at least get you started for the permits. Let me know if you require anything else. Thanks, Dodie Taylor Controller Wooddale Builders, Inc. 6109 Blue Circle Dr, Suite 2000 Minnetonka, MN 55343 952-345-0543 From: Generous, Bob [mailto:benerous(alci.chanhassen.mn.usl Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 10:54 AM To: dodiet(&wooddalebuilders.com Subject: Letter of Credit Dodie: Here we go again. The letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of $5,000 must be in place before we can issue any building permits. Thanks, Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1131 bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Construction Finance, Inc. 6125 Blue Circle Drive Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 Ph. (952) 974-3883 * Fax (952) 974-3883 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. 127007 Date: 07 -08-2011 TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of Wooddale Builders. Inc. and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of S 5.000.00 , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank. The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. 127007 , dated July 08, 2011 , of Construction Finance.lnc . b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen. c) Be presented for payment at 6125 Blue Circle Drive, Minnetonka. MN 55343 , on or before 4:00 p.m. on July 08.2012 . This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year teens unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be July 816 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn tinder and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. _ BY Administration February 6, 2009 CITY OF Lakeside Site Plan Permit 2006-26 CIIANMSEN Mr. Kevin Thielfoldt Fax: 952.227.1110 Vice President/Commercial Loans 7700 Market Boulevard PO Bax 147 Eagle Valley Bank, N.A. Chanhassen, A 55317 2501 Hanley Road Fax: 952.227.1190 Hudson, WI 54016 Administration Re: Renewal Request for Letter of Credit No. 1200 Phone: 952.227.1100 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 2006-26 Fax: 952.227.1110 /� 1 Fax: 952.227.1110 Wooddale Builders Bwldin9. RM:952.227.1180 Dear Mr. Thielfoldt: Fax: 952.227.1190 B*M9 The above -referenced Letter of Credit No. 1200 in the amount of $5,000 expired Phone. 9522271160 on October 30, 2008. Upon review of the project, it appears the project has not Fax: 952.227.1170 been completed in general conformance with the site plan agreement. This is considered a breach of contract. According to Section 9D of the General Rnawe Conditions of the Site Plan Agreement, the City shall deny all building permits for Phone: 952227.1140 Wooddale Builders, Inc. until the letter of credit is reinstated. Therefore, the Fax: 952.227.1110 above -referenced letter of credit must be renewed for another year to Park & Recreation automatically renew for successive one-year periods until the project is complete. Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Please issue a replacement letter of credit immediately. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 952-227-1131 or by email at RecreationCenterbgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. 2310 Couhcr Boulevard Phase: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Sincerely, Planning & CITY OF CHANHASSEN Natural Resources Senior Planner Phone 952.227.1130 /� 1 Fax: 952.227.1110 �7 Pubk Works Robert Generous 1591 Park Road Senior Planner Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 RG:ktm Senior Cerner Phone: 952.227.1125 c: Steve Obermueller, Wooddale Builders, Inc. Fax: 952.227.1110 gNplan\2006 planning ca\06-26 lakeside\lc 1200 renewal letter-l.dm Web Site www.ci.chanhmennn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Life -Providing for Today and Planning falomarow CITY OF 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Plane: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 ReapGan Caller 2310 Cook Boulevard Phale:952.227.1400 Fac: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phalle: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 serdor Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 web site wvnv uchanhassen.mnus September 16, 2008 Mr. Kevin Thielfoldt Vice President/Commercial Loans Eagle Valley Bank, N.A. 2501 Hanley Road Hudson, WI 54016 Re: Renewal Request for Letter of Credit No. 1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 2006-26 Wooddale Builders Dear Mr. Thielfoldt: Upon review of our records, it appears Letter of -Credit No. 1200 in the amount of $5,000 is scheduled to expire on October 30, 2008. Upon review of the project, it appears the project has not been completed in general conformance with the site plan agreement. Therefore, the above -referenced letter of credit must be renewed for another year to expire on October 30, 2009. Please issue a replacement letter of credit at your earliest convenience to be received by the City no later than October 30, 2008. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 952-227-1131 or by email at bgencrous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Robert Generous Senior Planner RG:ktm c: Steve Obermueller, Wooddale Builders, Inc. gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-26 lakeside\lc 1200 renewal lener.doc Chanhassen is a Community for Lite - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Status Report 9/15/08 plan.OR2 U 2000 Pu ust 00 emher2000 M T W T F S S M T W T F M T W T F 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 ...7 8. 9 9 10 1112 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 101112 13 14 15 16 r5 17 18.19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 18 19 20 21 22 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2] 28 29 30 91- 24 25 26 27 28 29 9b W31 ............... .__ .._ _. _... __.. ..._. _._.. Q,f Securities [Start Due S P Category Description I 9/15/08 10/30/08 F I -C #1200 expires 10/30/07 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders. Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 Landscaping) Notify Bob Generous 11/9/07 - LC expired on 10/30/07. Kim called bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin Thielfoldt from bank called and said he would issue a new LC to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed early next week. Check status 11/14/07. Kim 11/16/07 - left message with Shannon at Eagle Valley Bank as to status of renewal LC. Waiting for call back. Kim 11/29/07 - Called Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. He is working on reissuing LC. Check status 12/10/07. Kim 1/2/08 - Left message for Kevin at Eagle Valley Bank. Kevin returned call and left message that LC was in process and would be mailed next week. Check status 1/11/08- Kim 1/10/07 - Received replacement letter of credit #1200 in the amount of $5,000 to expire 10/30/08. Kim ii O LOOS DevelppmaR oat W" at 11:31 W S -Status P-Pno" W. B. A. CAP iLC}SQ3�31244 0 2007 Wisconsin Bankers Assaciation I Distributed by FIPCOO IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Boxes Checked Are Applicable. Boxes Not Checked Are Not Applicable. Sank. N.A. RECEIVED 2501 Hanley Road Hudson WI 54016 JAN 10 2007 (NAME AND ADDRESS OF ISSUING BANK) CITY U C iAWAE'Se" BENEFICIARY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. DATE City of Chanhassen 1200 October 30, 2007 770 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 WE HEREBY AUTHORIZE YOU TO DRAW ON US FOR THE ACCOUNT OF Wooddale Builders, Inc. UP TO AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF Five Thousand and 00/100 ($5.000.00 ) AVAILABLE BY YOUR DRAFTS AT SIGHT TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY Draws can be made from the City of Chanhassen, with affidavit of non-compliance to item 5, 'Security' as it relates to boulevard restoration/erosion control, of Site Permit #06-26 dated January 19, 2007 between the City of Chanhassen and Wooddale Builders, Inc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: ALL BANKING CHARGES OTHER THAN ISSUING BANK'S ARE FOR BENEFICIARY'S ACCOUNT. PARTIAL DRAWINGS ® PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED. ALL DRAFTS MUST BE MARKED "DRAWN UNDER LETTER OF CREDIT OF Eaole Valley Bank. N.A. (NAME OF ISSUING BANK) NO. 1200 DATED October 30, 2007 THIS LETTER OF CREDIT IS SUBJECT TO THE INTERNATIONAL STANDBY PRACTICES (1998), INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PUBLICATION NO. 590. WE AGREE WITH YOU TO PAY DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS LETTER OF CREDIT IF PRESENTED AT THIS OFFICE TOGETHER WITH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT ON OR BEFORE THE CLOSE OF OUR BUSINESS ONOctober 30 2008 October 30. 2007 (DATED) Eaule Valley Bank, N.A. NAME OF BANK . ii - L 7 V AUTHOR DSI DSI E�� BY Kevin D. Thielfoldt, VP/Commercial Loans JW 2000 Au us12000 temper 2000 S H T W T F S S M T IT F S M T W T F 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 -8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7. 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 15.14 15 16 17 18 19 10.11 12 13 14 15 f9 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2D21 22 23 24 25 26 1] 18 19 20 21.2223 23 24 25 26 27 28 2J V 28 29 30 3124 25 26 27 26 29 - 3031. Securities Start Due S P Category DescnDtion 11/15/07 11/14/07 F LC#1200 expires 10/30/07 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 11/9/07 - LC expired on 10/30/07. Kim caged bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30/08. Waiting for response. Kevin 7hieifoldt from bank called and said he would issue a new LC to expire 10/30/08 and would be mailed early next week. Check status 11/14/07. Kim 0 2( p7 Lo,. Derebpmenl Cary. 11/9'e]al 1027 AM s=steles F=Pm� Ppat Status Report 9/15/07 plan.OR2 F30314mm 000 PL 12000 Se tetter 2000 T F S S M T W T F S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 _.6 _. 7...8 _0._ 8...9..10 11 12 3 ...4 5 6 7 8 __.913 14 15 13X14 15 18 17 18 19 10 11.12 13 14 15 16 2021 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17.18.19 20 21.22 23 29 29 27 28 29 30 31--- 24 2526 27 2829 30_. ___ __.. ...._ ____...... ._._. _... _..__._ Securities [Start Due S P Category Description -( 9/15/07 10/30/07 F LC#1200 expires 10/30/07 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5.000 ($2.500 Erosion Control, $2,500 Landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 02007 Lone ce,ebgnem C P. i2 al tt29M � P-Pno" Pepe+ Status Report 9/15/07 plan.OR2 Jul 2000 at 2000 rrber 2000 S M T W T F h1 T W T F M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 345�8 ]]0 9 10 1 12 3-6.5 6 789 18'iY'12'18'11 14 15 16 1]-18 19 10.11.12 13 141516 17 701#2021 '21 22 2324.23 26 i] 18.19 20 21 22 23 24 23 20 27 28 .28 29 30 31 -- 24 25 25 27 20 2930 jW Securities 9/15/07 10/30/07 O LC #1200 expires 10/30/07 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Control, $2,500 Landscaping) Notify Bob Generous. 11/9/07 - LC expired on 10/30/07. Kim called bank and left message requesting renewal until 10/30108. Waiting for response. 0 2M7 L.-nrebp t Co, 111W07 at 10:1 AM s=s1eWS F=Frpnry Pega l W. B. A. GP(UC)102 MN (9/03) 31243 ® 2W3 Wisconsin Bankers Association I Distributed by FIPCOS IRREVOCABLE DOCUMENTARY LETTER OF CREDIT Boxes not checked are not applicable. Eagle Valley Bank N.A.)— OVO-LCI —(ucl IG ) 2501 Hanley Road Hudson, WI 54016 (NAME AND ADDRESS OF ISSUING BAND BENEFICIARY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. DATE City of Chanhassen 1200 January 19, 2007 770 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 WE HEREBY AUTHORIZE YOU TO DRAW ON US FOR THE ACCOUNT OF Wooddale Builders, Inc. UP TO AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF Five Thousand and 00/100 ($5,000.00 1 AVAILABLE BY YOUR DRAFT(S) AT ® SIGHT ❑ ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS (IN TRIPLICATE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED): Draws can be made from the City of Chanhassen, with affidavit of non-compliance to Rem 5, "Security" as it relates to boulevard restoration/erosion control, of Site Permit #06-26 dated January 19, 2007 between the City of Chanhassen and Wooddale Builders, Inc. COVERING SHIPMENT OF: SHIPPING TERMS: SHIPMENT FROM: TO: PARTIAL SHIPMENTS TRANSSHIPMENTS ❑ PERMITTED ❑ PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED DOCUMENTS MUST BE PRESENTED TO ® ISSUING BANK ❑ NEGOTIATING BANK WITHIN DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF SHIPMENT BUT ON OR BEFORE EXPIRATION DATE OF LETTER OF CREDIT. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: TIED TO LOAN #122260 ALL BANKING CHARGES OTHER THAN ISSUING BANK'S ARE FOR BENEFICIARY'S ACCOUNT. PARTIAL DRAWINGS ® PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED. ALL DRAFTS MUST BE MARKED "DRAWN UNDER LETTER OF CREDIT OF Eagle Valley Bank, N.A. (NAME OF ISSUING BANK) NO. 1200 DATED January 19, 2007 THIS CREDIT IS SUBJECT TO THE UNIFORM CUSTOMS AND PRACTICE FOR DOCUMENTARY CREDITS (REVISION IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF THIS CREDIT), PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE® WE AGREE WITH YOU TO PAY DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS CREDIT IF PRESENTED AT THIS OFFICE TOGETHER WITH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT ON OR BEFORE THE CLOSE OF OUR BUSINESS ON October 30, 2007 ('EXPIRATION DATE`). ❑ WE AGREE WITH THE DRAWERS, ENDORSERS AND BONA FIDE HOLDERS OF DRAFTS DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS CREDIT, THAT SUCH DRAFTS WILL BE PAID ON DUE PRESENTATION AT THIS OFFICE IF NEGOTIATED TO A BANK ON OR BEFORE ('EXPIRATION DATE-). IF THIS CREDIT IS AVAILABLE BY NEGOTIATION, THE AMOUNT OF ANY DRAFT DRAWN UNDER THIS CREDIT MUST BE ENDORSED ON THE REVERSE THEREOF BY THE NEGOTIATING BANK. Eagle Vallev Bank. N.A BY Irj/jAI�n bN r AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE Minnesota 112003 Kevin D. Thielfoldt, Vice President SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT #.06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated January 19, 2007, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC., (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for 36 housing units and a community building with pool (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described as: Lots 1 through 11, Block 2, Oudot E and Outlot F, Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota, 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enter into this Permit and furnish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007. Plan B: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006. Plan C: Landscaping Plan prepared by Minnesota Green, dated November 11, 2006. Plan D: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Plan E: Building elevations prepared by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Associates, stamped Received January 8, 2007. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required screening and landscaping by October 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terns of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURESFOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waiver; totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. Steve Obermueller Wooddale Builders, Inc. 5435 Feld Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into this site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. b. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. c. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. d. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. e. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. f. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. g. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. h. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #94. i. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the fust story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF CHANHASSEN M Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor AND: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this—day of 200_, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC 4 DEVELOPER: M Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200_ by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 5 of Wooddale Builders, Inc. NOTARY PUBLIC CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 0 7. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attomeys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severabiliri. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City s failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recordine. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. 1. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall famish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this_ day of 200_. L -M STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200 _ by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 Rol NOTARY PUBLIC MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAN AGREEMENT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this day of 200 . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 200 , by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 11 NOTARY PUBLIC Status Report t • _ emc.: zoao T F S 1A T W T F S 45 2 .3..4 ..5 ..fi...f. .y..6910,1� i2 .3..a 9...9 'td 7f f2'1314 74157617 18 4$ 1d ii- 12.13 14 i5 16 tj 18 14 20 27 21 22 23 2I 25 18 992421 22.23 24 26 26 27% 2629-3ddt' i6..262]28 25 3d 31 .................. .................... .................'-. _ _.. Securities PartJDue S P Category Description 6/15/2012 6/15/2012 ® Escrows J Cash Escrow Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 Site Plan Agreement $5,000 (erosion commUlandscaping) Received 11-22-06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt #28056 Notify Bob Generous 6/7/07 -Bob, status? Kim 6/13/07 - Per Bob check status 6/1/08. Kim 6/2/08 - Bob, status? Kim Per Bob, check status 6/1/09. Kim 72/09 - Notified Bob & Jill. Kim 7/9/09 - Per Alyson, do not release escrow. Check status 6/1/10. Kim 6/4/10 -Notified Alyson/Bob/Jill. Kim 6/9/10 -Per Jill, continue to hold since site is site under construction and landscaping has not been completed. Check status 10/15/10. Kim 11/18/10 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 11/I8/10 - Per Jill, we can probably secure the landscaping on any unfinished lots through the site plan process, but 1 guess I'd like to continue holding it if no one's requesting it. I can do a final inspection next summer. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 7/8/11 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 8/3/11 - Per Jill project is still under construction. Check status 6/15/12. Kim 8/1/12 -Notified Jill. Kim 8/15/12 - Per Jill, the city used $4,887.25 to complete the landscaping as follows: -6/30/12 Paid $2,498.50 to Park & Prairie -725/12 Paid $2,498.75 to Park & Prairie Balance of $2.75 remains in account 815-8201-2024. Activity closed. .................................................................................................... ............................................... ..__.___...._.._............................................. _...._............. ........................................................................... ....... ormsDe..W,p Cwl 1)nwm12a20enr s=sr.rs r--mromr SCANNED Pepel Status Report Friday, June 15, 2012 Plan.OR6 Ju y 2000 Au ust 2000 e,, el2000 S M T VV T F S S M T N✓ T F S S M T VJ T F S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 a...5 6 -._e ..6�.. 6. _9 10 11 12 3...4..5 6 a...9 9 " 11 +.2.13 14.15 13.14,75 16 1] 18 19 10.11--12 13 11 '5.16 16 ' '2..13 29 21.22 28121 ;t2 33 24 25�% 17 16 19 23 21 22 23 23 24 .5 252 29.29 27.28 29 30 31 2425 25 1' 20 2930 3031.. .. ..........._.... .....__. _. _... J Securities Start. Due .9 P Cate . Dac,ueh. 6/15/2012 6/1% 12 O Escrows J Cash Escrow Planning Case 6 Site Plan Agreement a �—J $5,000 (erosion olAandscaping) -06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt #28056 Xk& Bob Generous / 6/7/07 -Bob, status? Kim `/13/07 - Per Bob check status 6/1/08. Kim D1 6/2/08 - Bob, status? Kim Per Bob, check status 6/1/09. Kim \r� V 7/2/09 -Notified Bob & Jill. Kim 7/9/09 - Per Alyson, do not release escrow. Check status 6/1/10. Kim 6/4/10- Notified Alyson/9ob/Jill. Kim 6/9/10 - Per Jill, continue to hold since site is site under construction and landscaping has not been completed. Check status 10/15/10. Kim 11/18/10 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 11/18/10 -Per Jill, we can probably secure the landscaping on any unfinished lots through the site plan process, but 1 guess I'd like to continue holding it if no one's requesting it. I can do a final inspection next summer. Check status 6/15/10. Kim 7/8/11 -Notified Bob/Jill. Kim 8/3/11 - Per Jill project is still under construction. Check status 6/15/12. Kim &1/12-Notied Jill. Kim .................................................. 461 __ ...........__................................._............... _ ....... o L.� eevelop eom WIM12n 8wSCANNED P,1 It City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Cf[UF (952) 227-1100 To: Karla Vehrs Lindquist & Vennum PLLP 4200 IDS Center 80 South 8`h Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 612-371-2449 Re: Lakeside Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 6/30/10 upon receipt 85 Photocopies — 8Y: x 11 $.25 $21.25 2 Photocopies — 11 x 17 $.50 $1.00 4 Photocopies — 24 x 36 $10.00 $40.00 Postage $5.00 $5.00 TOTAL DUE i $67.25 Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! SCANNED V CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 07/30/2010 10:58 AM Receipt No. 0134243 CLERK: katie PAYEE: Lindquist & Vennum 4200 IDS Center 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis MN 55402 Lakeside Copies ------------------------------------------------------- Copy/Fax ----------------------- Copy/Fax 63.24 Sales Tax 4.01 Total Cash Check 372171 Change 67.25 0.00 67.25 0.00 SCANNED I City of Chanhassen Wo7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Uff OF (952) 227-1100 To: Mr. David Krco Beisel & Dunlevy, P.A. 282 US Trust Building 730 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402-2444 Invoice Re: Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 01/20/10 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1 CD containing requested documents from Lakeside Planning Case File No. 06-26 $25.00 $ 25.00 SUBTOTAL TAX (6.5%) TOTAL DUE $ 25.00 $ 1.72 $26.72 make an checks payable to: City of Chanhassen If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call Kim Meuwissen at (952) 227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESSI SCANNED U CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 01/22/2010 10:48 AM Receipt No. 0120371 CLERK: bethany PAYEE: Beisel & Dunlevy PA 282 US Trust Building 730 2nd Avenue S Minneapolis MN 55402 Lakeside - Planning Case 06-26 -------------------------------------- 25.00 Sales Tax 1.72 Total Cash Check 3874 Change 26.72 0.00 26.72 0.00 BEISEL,& DUNLEVY PA -OPERATING ACCOUNT City of Chanhassen Date Type Reference 1/21/2010 Bill 06-26 Associated Bank Che BEISEL & DUNLEVY PA-oPERAnNG ACCOUNT City of Chanhassen Date Type Reference 1/21/2010 Bill 06-26 Associated Bank Che 1/21/2010 Original Amt. Balance Due Discount 26.72 26.72 Check Amount 1/21/2010 Original Amt. Balance Due Discount 26.72 26.72 Check Amount PWg1ClMTIW USEN 91MEMVHDPE �MU 0 3874 Payment 26.72 26.72 26.72 3874 Payment 26.72 26.72 26.72 owpo Cao Cly (,(Z- (o-�-4S3D, Learn to Build a Beautiful Rain Garden Create a beautiful area to attract birds and butterfl ies, protect our water resources, and manage rain water w workshop will be taught and facilitated by Metro Blooms. The first 90 minutes of the workshop will teach I gardens, effectively use native plants, trees and shrubs to create a beautiful landscape, and employ eco -frier of the evening, Metro Blooms Landscape Design Assistants and Scott County Master Gardeners will be on garden layout, plant selection, and assist with personal rain garden designs. The cost to attend the workshol Space is limited, so register today. You may register one of three ways. 1. Online with a credit card. Go to www.metroblooms.org, click the 2009 Rain Garden Workshops link, select the workshop date you want and follow the prompts to register. 2. Send a $20 check payable to Metro Blooms, Attn: Noelle Hechtman, 3629 Quebec Avenue S., St. Louis Park, MN 55426. Be sure to include with your check the workshop location you prefer, your name, address, zip code, phone number with area code, and e-mail address. 3. By phone. Call 612-554-9261 and we can take your information over the phone. Chanhassen Rain Garden Wo Thursday, March 19, i 6:00 — 9:00 p.m. Where: Chanhassen Senio. 7700 Market Blvd For a complete listing of 2009 workshop locations go to www.metroblooms.org and click o Sponsored by Metro Blooms with support from the City of Cbanhassen and Lower Minnesota River Wi APR -02-2009 THU 07;18 AM WOODDALE BUILDERS FAX NO, 952 345 0544 WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC. MEMO: Wooddale Builders. Inc is moving to a New location! Our new location will still be located in The OPUS 2 Complex and our NEW address is: 6109 Blue Circle Drive Suite 2000 Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. 01/01 Our Main Office phone and fax # will remain the same Office: 952-345-0543 Fax: 952-345-0544 (Our staff will still have voicemail, but NO Direct Dial numbers) PLEASE NOTE THE DATES OF OUR MOVE! WE WILL BE MOVING ON APRIL 16,17 & 18 AND FULLY OPERATIONAL ON APRIL 20TH AT OUR NEW LOCATION. OFFICE PHONES, FAX AND EMAILS WILL NOT BE OPERATIONAL DURING TART TIME. IF YOU NEED TO CONTACT US PLEASE CONTACT US BY CELL: STEVE SCHWIETERS 612-363-3598 STEVE OBERMITELLER 612-363-4902 TROY GEREREN 61.2-363-3695 Directions to Wooddale Builders NEW Office Location: From 169 Take the LondonderryBren Rd Exit Head West on Londonderry —go thru the set of Lights Stay left and take Green Oak Drive To Bren Rd East, take Left at lights Proceed to Blue Circle Drive 6109 Blue Circle Drive on Left From Crosstown or Riwav 62 62 to Shady Oak Rd Exit — Go North 'Y2 block to Red Circle Drive Take R. to Yellow Circle Drive and it turns into Blue Circle Drive —watch for Blue signs 6109 Blue Circle Drive on Left SCA,gIIED 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 liollineerioll Phare: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 FinallIN Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park 8 Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site vimci.chanhassen. mn.us o(0 -2c. February 6, 2009 Mr. Kevin Thielfoldt Vice President/Commercial Loans Eagle Valley Bank, N.A. 2501 Hanley Road Hudson, WI 54016 Re: Renewal Request for Letter of Credit No. 1200 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 2006-26 Wooddale Builders Dear Mr. Thielfoldt: The above -referenced Letter of Credit No. 1200 in the amount of $5,000 expired on October 30, 2008. Upon review of the project, it appears the project has not been completed in general conformance with the site plan agreement. This is considered a breach of contract. According to Section 9D of the General Conditions of the Site Plan Agreement, the City shall deny all building permits for Wooddale Builders, Inc. until the letter of credit is reinstated. Therefore, the above -referenced letter of credit must be renewed for another year to automatically renew for successive one-year periods until the project is complete. Please issue a replacement letter of credit immediately. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 952-227-1131 or by email at bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Robert Generous Senior Planner RG:ktm c: Steve Obermueller, Wooddale Builders, Inc. gAplanl2006 planning cases\06-26 lakesideVc 1200 renewal letta-Ldoc Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow SCANNED Thomas J. Campbc;'. Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Soren M. Mattick John F. Kelly Henry A. Schaeffer, III Alina Schwartz Samuel J. Edmunds Cvnthia R. Kirchoff Marguerite M. McCarro 1380 Corporate Center Curve Suite 317 • Eagan, MN 55121 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 sww.ck-law.com CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Associatic- Direct Did: (651) 234-6215 L E-mailAddress: rknutsotr(7ack-law.com January 5, 2009 Ms. Carla J. Kilpatrick Senior Vice President, Business Banking Home Federal Savings Bank 1016 Civic Center Drive NW Rochester, MN 55903-6947 RE: LAKESIDE PLANNED UNrrDEVELOPMENT CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA Dear Ms. Kilpatrick: kgk 'I 2009 r1i`l OF GHANHASSE� Our office represents the City of Chanhassen. In 2006, the Chanhassen City Council rezoned the Lakeside plat property from R12, High Density Residential District, to PUD -R, Planned Unit Residential District. The only allowed uses of the property are: 15 twinhomes, 6 three -unit townhomes, 4 four -unit townhomes, 39 unit condo building, 53 unit condo building, 77 unit condo building, community building with a pool, and a recreational beach lot. A PUD is an integrated development that cannot be changed piecemeal. The community building, pool and recreational beach lot are designated uses under the PUD ordinance and cannot be put to different uses. X72 cc: Todd Gerhardt, City Regards, Status Report 9/15/07 plan.OR2 ir Securities 9/15/07 10/30/07 LC #1200 expires 10/30/07 Lakeside Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Wooddale Builders, Inc.) $5,000 ($2,500 Erosion Ccatrol, $2,500 Landscaping) Bob Gme . O xoor loon Davelopncn Cwo. ias 1. rise x0/ s=Sulu v=P" PtPt w. s. a 31243 ; O 2003 Wisconsin Bankers Ae iatiw / Disldbeled by FIPCOM IRREVOCABLE DOCUMENTARY LETTER OF CREDIT Boxes not checked are not applicable. Eacle Valley Bank. N.A. 2501 Hanley Road Hudson, WI 54016 (NAME AND ADDRESS OF ISSUING BANK) BENEFICIARY LETTER OF CREDIT NO. DATE City of Chanhassen 1200 January 19, 2007 770 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 WE HEREBY AUTHORIZE YOU TO DRAW ON US FOR THE ACCOUNT OF Wooddale Builders Inc UP TO AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF Five Thousand and 00/100 ($5,000.00 ) AVAILABLE BY YOUR DRAFT(S) AT ® SIGHT ❑ ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS (IN TRIPLICATE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED): Draws can be made from the City of Chanhassen, with affidavit of non-compliance to item 5, 'Security' as it relates to boulevard restoration/erosion control, of Site Permit #06-26 dated January 19, 2007 between the City of Chanhassen and Wooddale Builders, Inc. COVERING SHIPMENT OF: SHIPPING TERMS: SHIPMENT FROM: TO: PARTIAL SHIPMENTS TRANSSHIPMENTS ❑ PERMITTED ❑ PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED DOCUMENTS MUST BE PRESENTED TO ®ISSUING BANK ❑NEGOTIATING BANK WITHIN DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF SHIPMENT BUT ON OR BEFORE EXPIRATION DATE OF LETTER OF CREDIT. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: TIED TO LOAN #122260 ALL BANKING CHARGES OTHER THAN ISSUING BANK'S ARE FOR BENEFICIARY'S ACCOUNT. PARTIAL DRAWINGS ® PERMITTED ❑ NOT PERMITTED. ALL DRAFTS MUST BE MARKED 'DRAWN UNDER LETTER OF CREDIT OF Eagle Valley Bank. N.A. (NAME OF ISSUING BANK) NO. 1200 DATED January 19 2007 THIS CREDIT IS SUBJECT TO THE UNIFORM CUSTOMS AND PRACTICE FOR DOCUMENTARY CREDITS (REVISION IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF THIS CREDIT), PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE® WE AGREE WITH YOU TO PAY DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS CREDIT IF PRESENTED AT THIS OFFICE TOGETHER WITH THIS LETTER OF CREDIT ON OR BEFORE THE CLOSE OF OUR BUSINESS ON October 30, 2007 ('EXPIRATION DATE'). ❑ WE AGREE WITH THE DRAWERS, ENDORSERS AND BONA FIDE HOLDERS OF DRAFTS DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THIS CREDIT, THAT SUCH DRAFTS WILL BE PAID ON DUE PRESENTATION AT THIS OFFICE IF NEGOTIATED TO A BANK ON OR BEFORE ('EXPIRATION DATE'). IF THIS CREDIT IS AVAILABLE BY NEGOTIATION, THE AMOUNT OF ANY DRAFT DRAWN UNDER THIS CREDIT MUST BE ENDORSED ON THE REVERSE THEREOF BY THE NEGOTIATING BANK. Ea le Vallev Bank. N.A- NAIWIE gPeANK """' l BY ..C7.(.t�n TTTTTT AUTHORED SIGNATURE Kevin D. Thielfoldt, Vice President Minnesela 11/2003 t CITY OF CHMSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227. 1180 Fax 952227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park 8 Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fac 952227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952 227.1404 Planning A Natural Resources Phone: 952.221.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: %%7.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www achanhasseo.mn. us September 6, 2007 Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Re: Landscaping and erosion control for Lakeside trail Dear John, The finished Lake Riley trail was inspected today by city staff, Brian Wellman, and Tim Wegner. The trail was found to be installed well and with as minimal impact as possible. There are a few follow up items for the project. First, the silt fence installed along the lake shall be kept in place and maintained properly for 12-24 months. When there is sufficient vegetative growth to ensure that no erosion into the lake will occur, the fence shall be cut off at ground level so as to avoid any disturbance below ground. Secondly, further management of buckthorn needs to happen throughout the entire lakeshore property. Chemical control will be necessary to eliminate stump sprouts. This work is best done now, during the fall. Thirdly, in the steepest section of the property, further erosion control measures will need to be taken. A fiber blanket shall be installed in areas of 1:1 slope that are lacking sufficient vegetative or duff cover. In addition to the blanket, seeding and planting must occur. MNDOT's seed mix 5B or BWSR U7 could be used for the shaded backslope. In addition to the seed, some plantings of native shrubs will assist in holding the soil in place and replacing the buckthorn. Black chokeberry, serviceberry, gray dogwood, and snowberry would be appropriate species from which to choose. Please notify me when these items have been completed. If you should any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. 1 Sinclair/jJ�jW�I� vironmental Resources Specialist C: Brian Wellman, Accent Development Lakeside Planning File, Case #06-26 The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. ac-, -ate Wetland Conservation Act / Section 404 Wetland Replacement Plan Lakeside Local Governmental Unit: Project Proposer: Consultant to Project Proposer: City of Chanhassen Lori Haak 7700 Market Blvd. P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark Wilson Riley Purgatory/Bluff Creek Watershed District 4700 W77th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 'L 2 3 zoo? E"dG"'EERIAIG D PI NEERengineering EPr< Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Edina, Minnesota 55435-5318 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 210 851h Ave. N.W. Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 Wetland Permit Application NA -026620-0313 (V2.02 for MS WORD) 10/29/04 Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects USE THIS APPLICATION FOR ANY PROJECT AFFECTING A LAKE, RIVER, STREAM OR WETLAND, INCLUDING: Local Government Unit Approval Pursuant to Mimesom Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Permit to Work in Public Waters Department of the Army Permit (33 CFR 325) Note: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) will forward application forms to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for processing if state water quality certification is required from the MPCA. You do not need to send this application to the MPCA. This application packet includes: Part I: The BASIC APPLICATION and the COE APPLICATION to be filled out by all applicants (see htstructions). PART H: The REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT to be completed only for projects that impact wetlands and require a replacement plan for wetland mitigation. If you're not sure whether your project requires a replacement plan, call your Local Government Unit (LGU) or Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office for guidance. Do not proceed with your project until you have received all required approvals from your LGU, the DNR and the COE. ff you wish to confirm the status of your application at any time, contact the agencies directly (see Instructions, page 2). Proceeding with work before alt required authorizations are obtained may result in fines or other penalties, and may include a requirement to restore the project site to original condition. If you have questions or need assistance with filling out these forms, contact your local SWCD office, your LGU, your Area DNR Waters office, or your COE field office (see Instructions, page 2). If you believe that your project may be subject to watershed district, local zoning, or any other local regulations besides those of your LGU, contact those office(s) directly. If you are a Federal Farm Program participant and your project affects a wetland or water body on agricultural land, your eligibility for USDA benefits may be affected. Contact a Natural Resources Conservation Service office for further information. A QUICK LOOK AT THE PROJECT APPLICATION PROCESS Electronic Sles: Forms can be downloaded and filled out using Microsoft Word. Your input will be restricted to fill-in fields where users can enter text or check boxes. These areas appear gray on the screen, but not on the printed document. Send copies of these completed application forms to your LGU, your Area DNR Waters office, and your COE regulatory office. Any of the agencies may make initial contact with you to: a) inform you that it has no jurisdiction over your project; b) request additional information needed; or c) inform you of applicable fees. When your application is considered complete and appropriate fees have been received (if requested) it will be distributed for appropriate review. Following agencies' reviews, you will be informed if it has been approved, approved with changes or conditions, withdrawn, or denied- For eniedFor information about state laws, riles and regulations that direct this process go to the web site www.revism.leg.state.mn.us. For information on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations go to the web site www.mvp.usace.army.mil. Instructions for Part I HELP 1: Every applicant must 511 out Section 1. The applicant is the person, agency, company, corporation, or other organization that owns, leases, or holds other legal rights to the land where the project is located. Indicate names of multiple applicants on a separate sheet HELP IA: Fill out Section IA only if you have designated an authorized agent An authorized agent may be an attorney, builder, consultant, contractor, engineer, or any other person or organization designated by the applicant to represent him/her in this process. An agent is not required HELP 5: Purpose, description and dimensions of project: State briefly (in a sentence or two) what you propose to do and why it is needed. Also, describe whether your project will involve any of the following: - Construction of structures, filling, draining, dewatering, removing, excavating or repair. - Construction of an access path, bridge, culvert, dam, ditch, dock, driveway, riprap, road, sand blanket, shore protection, or tile line. - Construction of any structures on fill, piles or a float -supported platform. If so, describe. - Dredging or discharging (placing fill material) into a wetland or other water body (including the temporary placement of material). If so, explain the specific purpose of the placement of the material (such as erosion control) and indicate how it will be done (such as with a backhoe or dragline). If dredged material is to be discharged on an upland site, identify the location of the site. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Instructions, Page 1 Include an overhead view drawing showing the work to be undertaken and its relative location on the property. Show items such as property boundaries or lot dimensions; location and extent of shoreline, wetlands and water, location and dimensions and footprint of the proposed project, structure or activity (include length, width, elevation and other measurements as appropriate); points of reference such as existing homes, structures, docks or landscape features; indication of north; and location of spoil and disposal sites (if applicable). Hand drawn, computer generated or professionally prepared drawings are acceptable, as long as they contain all necessary information clearly, accurately, and in adequate detail. Please include specific dimensions whenever possible. You may also include photos, if you wish. HELP 7: For information regarding adjacent landowners, contact the tax assessor where the project is to be developed. HELP 8: H any part of the work has already been completed, describe the area already developed. Include a description of structures completed; any dredged or fill material already discharged (including type of material and volume in cubic yards); acres or square feet filled (if a wetland or other waterbody); and whether the work was done under an existing permit (if so identify the authorization, if possible). HELP 9: Other permits, reviews or approval related to the project may include the following: conditional use permit plat approval; zoning variance; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit state disposal system permit (includes dredged material disposal); watershed district/watershed management organization permit (stormwater, erosion, floodplain); environmental assessment worksheet/rnvironmental impact statement hazardous waste site; feedlot permit groundwater appropriation permit or county/township driveway/road permit Are you aware of any archeological or cultural resource determinations or surveys completed concerning the project or replacement site by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or others? If yes, please explain on a separate sheet or attach a copy of any determinations or surveys. Final Checklists (Part I) ® Have you completed all of Part I (Page 1), plus the Federal application (Page 2)? ❑ Did you (and your agent, if applicable) sign Section 10 on page I? ❑ Have you signed the Application for the Department of the Army Permit (Page 2) to seek Federal authorization of your project? ❑ Have you included the necessary attachments for Part V Attachments now include: ® Site Locator Map (Section 3) ® Type of Project (Section 4) (if additional space was needed) ® Overhead View of Project (Section 5 and HELP 5) ® Project Purpose, Description and Dimensions (Section 5) (if additional space was needed) Attachments may ahm include: ❑ Applicant Contact Information (HELP 1) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Location (Section 3) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Project Alternatives (Section 6) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Photographs ❑ Adjoining Property Owners (Section 7) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Work Already Completed Section (Section 8) (if you answered YES) ❑ State Historic Preservation Office determination or survey Submitting Your Application Make three copies of the entire application and all attachments. Keep the original, and mail a complete copy of your application to each of the local, state, and Federal entities listed below. Be sure to include Part 1 and all attachments with each application. LOCAL: Send to the appropriate Local Government Unit (LGU). If necessary, contact your county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) web site (www.bwsr.state.mn.us) to determine the appropriate LGU. STATE: Send to your Area DNR Waters office, attention Area HydrologisL If necessary, contact your county Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) office or visit the DNR website (www.dnr.state.nm us) to locate the Area Hydrologist for your location, or contact a Regional DNR office: NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: 2115 Birchmont Beach Road N.E. 1201 East Highway 2 1200 Warner Road 261 Highway 15 South Bemidji, MN 56601 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 SL Paul, MN 55106 New Ulm, MN 56073 Phone: 218-755-3973 Phone: 218-327-4416 Phone: 651-772-7910 Phone: 507 359-6053 FEDERAL: Send to the appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory field office Brainerd: SL Paul: La Crescent: U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch 10867 E. Gull Lake Drive N.W. Arany Corps of Engineers Centre 1114 South Oak Street Brainerd, MN 56401-9051 190 5th Street East La Crescent MN 55947-1338 Phone: 218-829-8402 St. Paul, MN 55101-9051 Phone: 507-895-8059 Phone: 651-290-5375 WEB SITES: BWSR www.bwsr.state.mm.us U.S. ACOE: www.mvp.usare.anny mil DNIZ- wAw state.mn.us Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Instructions, Page 2 Two Harbors: U.S. COE, Regulatory Branch 1554 Highway 2, Suite 2 Two Harbors, MN 55161 Phone: 218-834-6630 MPCA: www.pcastate.mous NA -026620-03B (V.2.02 for MS WORD) 10/29/04 Minnesota Local/State/Federal Appification Form for Water/Wetland Projects For Internal Use Only Application No. Field Office Code Date Initial Application Received Date initial Application Deemed Complete PART I: BASIC APPLICATION "See HELP' directs you to important additional information and assistance in Instructions, Page 1. L LANDOWNERIAPPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION (See Help 1) Name: Sienna Corporation Phone: (952)835-2808 Complete mailing address: 4940 Viking Drive, STE 608, Edina, Minnesota 55435-5318 IA. AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Help L4) (Only if applicable; an agent is not required) Name: Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Phone: 651-251-0639 Complete mailing address: 2422 Enterprise Drive, Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120 2. NAME, TYPE AND SIZE OF PUBLIC WATERS or WETLANDS IMPACTED (Attach Additional Project Area sheets if needed) Name or I.D. # of Waters Impacted (if applicable; if known): (Check all that apply): ❑Lake []River ®Wetland type ❑ 1 ❑ 1L ❑ 2 ® 3 ❑4 ❑ 5 ❑ 6 ❑ 7 ❑ 8 Indicate size of entire lake or wetland (check one): ® Less than 10 acres (indicate size: ) ❑ 10 to 40 acres ❑ Greater than 40 acres 3. PROJECT LOCATION (Information can be found on property tar statement, property title or title insurance): Project street address: Lake Riley Dr. Fire #: City (if applicable): Chanhassen V. Section: NE Section: 24 Township #: 116N Range #: 23W County: Carver Lot #: Block: Subdivision: Lakeside Watershed (name or #) Minnesota River #33 Attach a simple site locator map. If needed, include on the map written directions to the site from a known location or landmark, and provide distances from known locations. Label the sheet SITE LOCATOR MAP. 4. TYPE OF PROJECT: Describe the type of proposed work Attach TYPE OF PROJECT sheet if needed. See narrative 5. PROJECT PURPOSE, DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS: Describe what you plan to do and why it is needed, how you plan to construct the project with dimensions (length, width, depth), area of impact, and when you propose to construct the project This is the most important part of your application. See HELP 5 before completing this section; see What To Include on Plans (Instructions, page 1). Attach PROJECT DESCRIPTION sheet See narrative Footprint of project: 0.02 acres or 767 square feet drained, filled or excavated. 6. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES: What alternatives to this proposed project have you considered that would avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands or waters? List at least TWO additional alternatives to your project in Section 5 that avoid wetlands (one of which may be "no build" or "do nothing"), and explain why you chose to pursue the option described in this application over these alternatives. Attach PROJECT ALTERNATIVES sheet if needed. See narrative 7. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: For projects that impact more than 10,000 square feet of water or wetlands, list the complete mailing addresses of adjacent property owners on an attached separate sheet (See HELP 7) 8. PORTION OF WORK COMPLETED: Is any portion of the work in wetland or water areas already completed? ❑ Yes ®No. If yes, describe the completed work on a separate sheet of paper labeled WORK ALREADY COMPLETED. (See HELP 8) 9. STATUS OF OTHER APPROVALS: List any other permits, reviews or approvals related to this proposed project that are either pending or have already been approved or denied on a separate attached sheet See HELP 9. 10. I am applying for state and local authorization to conduct the work described in this application. I am familiar with the information contained in this application. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part I is true, complete, and accurate. I possess the authority to undertake the work described, or I am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant Signature ofopplicant (Landowner) Date Signature of agent (if applicable) Date This block most be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity and has the necessary property rights to do so. If only the Agent has signed please attach a separate sheet signed by the landowner, giving necessary authorization to the Agent Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wedand Projects Page 1 the public burden for this collection of informatiom is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should require 5 hours or less. This includes the time fm reviewing instructions, searching eaisung data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Servicc Dominate of Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jederson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 222024302; and to the Office of Management .it Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that nohvniustanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to ant penalty for failing to comply with a co0ecnm of information if it does nm display a currently valid OMB control number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to eillid of these addresses. Completed applications most be submitted to the Duand enginem having jurisdiction ova the location critic proposed activity. PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT: Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Aa, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Ad, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and Sanduaries Ad, 33 USC 1413, Sectron 103. Principal purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine uses: This information maybe shared with the Department of Justice and otherFederal, stare, and local government agencies. Subntission of requested infurmar m is vohmtary; however, if information is ant provided, the i appl.cation cannot be evaluated no, cm a permit be issued. ITEMS I THROUGH 4 TO BE FILLED IN BY THE CORPS 1. APPLICATION NO. 1 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 1 3. DATE RECEIVED 1 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED YOU DO NOT NEED TO COMPLETE ITEMS 6-10 and 12-25 in the SHADED AREAS. AU applicants must complete non -shaded items 5 and 26. If an agent is used, also complete items 8 and 11. This optional Federal form is valid 5. APPLICANT'S NAME Sienna Corporation 8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required) Anna Brenes. Wetland Specialist 6. APPLICANT -S ADDRESS 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS NO. 10. 11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION (if applicable. complete only if auihorl:ing an agent) I hereby authorize Anna Brenes, Pioneer Engineering to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to famish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application. APPLICANT - S SIGNATURE: DATE 12 `i%TLE (see instructions) 13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable) 15 LOCATION OF PROJECT 16, OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see immictions) 17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE 18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY 19. PROJECT PURPOSE 20. REASON(S) FOR DISCHARGE 21. TYPES OF MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OF EACH TYPE IN CUBIC YARDS 22. SURFACE AREA IN, .ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED 23. IS ANY PORTION OF THE WORK ALREADY CO.MPLETEP YES _ NO IF YES, DESCRIBE COMPLETED WORK. 24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY" OWNERS_ 25_ LISTOFOTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVAISfDF1,'1ALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL .AGENCIES FOR WORK DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION. 26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant Signature of applicant Date Signature of agent (if any) Date The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant), m it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if the statement in Block I1 has been filled out and signed. IS U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up with any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations in makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both. ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent: CECW-OR) Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wedand Projects Page 2 FOR LGU USE ONLY: Determination for Part 1: ❑ No WCA Jurisdiction ❑ Exempt: No. _ (per MN Rule 8420.0122) ❑ No Loss: _ (A,B,...G, per MN Rule 8420.0220) ❑ Replacement required — applicant must complete Part 11 COMPLETE THE SECDON BELOW ONLY IF REPLACEMENT IS NOT REOUIRED• .Application is (check one): ❑ Approved ❑Approved with conditions (conditions attached) ❑ Denied Comments/Findings. LGU qfficial signabve Date Now and Title For Agricultural ■ad Drainage exemptions (MN Rule 5420.0122 Subps. I and 2B), LGU has received proof of recording of restrictions (per MN Rule 8420.0115): Cotmty where recorded Date Docrmtent # assigned by recorder LWo icidsigalure Date Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/We0and Projects Page 3 Instructions For Part II Complete those portions of Part II: Replacement Plan Supplement for which information is readily available (such as location, existing land use, size of impact area, etc.) A person certified in wetland delineation must determine items pertaining to specific wetland impacts (wetland type, predominant vegetation, watershed name, etc.) Contact the local soil and water conservation district (SWCD) office for further information on obtaining such items. What to Include on Plans Detailed overhead views of replacement site(s) (Part II), as well as profile view(s) of replacement site(s) (Pan IT, may be either hand drawn, computer generated or professionally prepared, as long as they contain all necessary information clearly, accurately, and in adequate detail. Please include specific dimensions whenever possible. You may also include photos, if you wish. Overhead views of Part II replacement site(s) should include the following items that pertain to your project: Property boundaries and/or lot dimensions. Location and extent of shoreline, wetlands and water. Location and dimensions of proposed project, structure or activity. Include length, width, elevation and other measurements as appropriate. Points of reference (such as existing homes, structures, docks or landscape features). Location of inlet and outlet structures. Indication of north. Location of spoil and disposal sites (if applicable). Areas of wetland and upland plants established. Profile views (side or cross-sectional views) should include the following items that pertain to your project: Location and dimensions of proposed project, structure or activity. Include elevation, depth, soil profile, side slope and other measurements as appropriate. Proposed water level elevation. Final Checklists Part II: Replacement Plan Supplement ® Have you completed all of Part H (pages 3-5)? ® Did you (or your agent) sign Section 19 on page 5? ® Have you included the necessary attachments for Part H? Attachments must include: ® Ifthe project includes any wetland banking (complete or partial), include Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form (Section 14) ❑ If the project includes any project -specific replacements (complete or partial), include: Description of Replacement Wetland(s) Construction (Section 15) Copy of vegetation management plan (Section 15) Scale drawing of overhead view or replacement wetland (Section 18) Scale drawing of profile view of replacement wetland (Section 18) Attachments may also include: ❑ Additional description of Wetland Impact Charts (Section 11) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Additional Description of Replacement Wetlands charts (Section 17) (if additional space was needed) ❑ Additional soils information for created replacement wetland(s) (Section 18) (if available) Note: To deposit surplus wetland credits in the State Wetland Bank, submit a Wetland Banking Application directly to your LGU (Section 16). Preparing Your Application for Mailing ❑ To apply for both state and Federal authorization, your application must include Part I (Page 1), the Federal application (Page 2), and attachments as indicated on Final Checklist for Part I (Instructions, Page 2). ❑ Your application must also include Part H (Pages 3-5) and additional attachments as indicated on Fina( Checklist for Part 1I (above). ❑ Make three copies of the entire application and all attachments. Keep the original, and mail the three copies to the appropriate local, state, and Federal agencies (see Instructions for Part I for addresses). Minnesota Local/Staie/Federal Application Forms for WatedWetlaad Projects Instructions Page 3 PART II: REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT For assistance in completing Part 11, contact your Local Government Unit or a professional consultant 11. DESCRI MON OF WETLAND IMPACTS: Complete the chart below: 1) Use one mw of boxes for each wetland impact; 2) If your project has more than one wetland impact, reference your overhead view (part of Section 5) to this chart by identifying and labeling "fust impact" and "second impact" on your overhead view; 3) If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first dotted line and leave the others blank, 4) If you have chosen to identify more than am wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted Imes to indicate each wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type within that impact area; 5) If you do not have access to some of this information, call your LGU or SWCD office for assistance. (Photocopy chart for more impacts, if needed) DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND IMPACTS Wetland impact (as noted on overhead view) Watershed name or number (if known) County, Section, Township, Range Wetland type' Predominant vegetation in impacted wetland area Size of area impacted (in acres or square feet) Existing land use in project area (check all that apply) 33 Carver, 24, 3 reed canary 767 SF ® Housing 116,23 grass ❑ Commercial First ------------------- ------------------ --------------- El Industrial impact ❑ Parks/recreation areas ® Highways and ------------------- ------------------ --------------- associated rights-of-way ❑ Forested ❑ Farmsteads/agricultural ❑ Vacant lands ❑ Public and semi-public (schools/gov't facilities) SecondElAirports ------------------- ------------------ --------------- E]Extractive (gravel impact pits/quarries) ® Other: golf course 'If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first dotted line and leave the others blank If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted lines to indicate each separate wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type with that impact area. TOTALS OF AREA(S) BWACI'ED FOR EACH WETLAND TYPE ON CHART (indicate acres ® or square feel ❑) Type: 1: IL: 2: 3 0.02 4_5_6_7_8:_R:_ 12. SPECIAL. CONSIDERATIONS: Are you aware of any special considerations that apply to either the impact site(s) or the replacement site(s)? ❑ Yes ® No (Examples: the presence of endangered species, special fish and wildlife resources, sensitive surface waters, or waste disposal site.) If YES, list and describe briefly. 13. SHORELAND IMPACT ZONE: Please identify each wetland impact site noted in Section 15 that is within 1000 feet of a lake or 300 feet of a river. Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Page 4 14. HOW PROPOSED REPLACEMENT WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED: Indicate how proposed replacement will be accomplished (check only one box below and continue as indicated): ® A. Wetland banking only Complete Application jor Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form and include with your application. Copies of this form are available from you LGU, or download a copy from www.bwsrstme.mn.us Skip to Section 19, page 6 (You do not need to complete Sections 15-18). ❑ B. Project -specific replacement only Continue with Section 15 below. ❑ C. A Combination of wetland banking and project -specific replacement Complete Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Form and include with you application. Copies of this forth are available from you LGU, or download a copy from www.bwsr.state.mn,us Continue with Section 15 below. 15. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLAND(S) CONSTRUCTION (Complete this section only if you marked Boz B or Box C in Section 14 above): Describe in detail how replacement wetland(s) will be constructed. If several methods will be used, describe each method. Details should include the following: 1) type of construction (such as excavated in upland, restored by file break, restored by ditch block or revegetated); 2) type, size and specifications of outlet structures; 3) elevations relative to Mean Sea Level or established benchmarks or key features (such as sill, emergency overflow or structure height); 4) what best management practices will be implemented to prevent erosions or site degradation; 5) proposed timetable for starting and ending the project; and 6) a vegetation management plan- Write this description on a separate sheet of paper labeled DESCRIPTIONOF REPLACEMENT WETLAND CONSTRUCTION. 16. SURPLUS WETLAND CREDITS: If using project -specific replacement (Box B or Box C in Section 14 above), will the replacement result in any surplus wetland credits that you wish to have deposited in the State Welland Bank for future use? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, submit a Wetland Banking Application directly to your LGU. Copies are available from your LGU, or download a copy from www.bwsr.state.mn.us 17. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS: Complete the chart below: 1) Use one row of boxes for each wetland replacement site; 2) If your project has more that one wetland replacement site, reference your overhead view (part of Section 5) to this chart by identifying and labeling "fust replacement site" and -second replacement site' on your overhead view; 3) If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given replacement site, use the first dotted line(s) and leave the others blank; 4) If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type in a given replacement site, use the extra dotted lines to indicate each separate wetland type, and identify type(s) of replacement credits and -restored or created" for each separate wetland type with that replacement site; 5) If you do not have access to some of the information, or if you do not know your replacement ratio, call your LGU or S WCD office for assistance. Photocopy chart for more wetland replacements. if needed.) DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS Identify 'Circular Watershed County Section, Wetland Type(s) of replacement credits Restored Wetland name or Township, Type' (in acres or square feet) or replacement number created? site (if known) Range New Wetland Public Value Indicate (as noted on Credits (NWC) Credits (PVC) R or C overhead view) Name of First----------- ------------------------------------------- ------------ replacement site----------- ---------------------- ----------------------- ------------- Name of Second----------- ---------------------- ----------------------- ----------- replacement site---------- - ------- ---------------------- 'Circular 39 wetland types: Indicatel, IL, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, R, or U. If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area, use the first TOTAL NWC TOTAL. PVC dotted line and leave the others blank If you have chosen to identify more than one wedand type within a given wetland impact area, use the extra dotted lines to indicate REQUIRED REPLACEMENT RATIO' each separate wetland type, and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type within that impact arca. (If known) Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Page 5 18. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROJECT -SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT (Required only if you marked Box B or Box C in Section 14): For projects involving at least some project -specific replacement, include the following additional information: ❑ Two drawings to scale of the replacement wetland. Include both overhead view and profile (side view or cross-sectional view). See What to Include on Plans (Instructions, Page 3) fm a detailed description of what should be included in these drawings. Without drawings, year application will be considered incomplete. ❑ For created replacement wetlands, include additional soils information (if available) that indicates the capability of the site to produce and maintain wetland characteristics. Note 1: For replacement wetlands located on pipeline easements, you need to receive endorsement of your project from both the easement holder and the Minnesota Department of Public Safety's Office: of Pipeline Safety. Before start of construction, the owner of any utilities must be notified. The landowner or contractor is responsible for giving this notice by calling "Gopher State One -Call" at 652-454-0002 (Twin Cities Metro Area) or 1-800-252-1166 (all other locations). Note 2: For extensive or complex projects supplementary information may be requested at a later dated from one or more of the responding agencies. Such information may include (but not be limited to) the following_ topographic map, water table map, soil borings, depth soundings, aerial photographs, environmental assessment and/or engineering reports. 19. SIGNED AFFIRMATION: FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING REPLACEMENT BY WETLAND BANKING ONLY. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part II is tau complete and accurate; and I affirm that the wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Wetland Bank. FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING EITHER PROJECT -SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT ONLY OR A COMBINATION OF WETLAND BANKING AND PROJECT -SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT: Part A: The replacement wetland. I affmn that the replacement wetland was not Previously restored or created under a prim approved replacement plan or permit; AND Drained or filled under an exemption during the previous 10 years; AND Restored with financial assistance from public conservation programs; AND Restored using private funds, other than landowner funds, unless the funds are paid back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration; and the individual or organization notifies the local government unit in writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement. Part B: Additional assurances (check all that apply): ® The wetland will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland. ® An irrevocable bank letter of credit, performance bond, or other acceptable security has been provided to guarantee successful completion of the wetland replacement ® The wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Weiland Bank Part C. For projects involving any project -specific replacement: Within 30 days of either receiving approval of this application or beginning work on the project, I will record the Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants on the deed for the property on which the replacement wetland(s) will be located; and I will at the same time submit proof of such recording to the LGU. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all information in Part II is true, complete and accurate; and I affum all statements in Part A and C, as well as checked as ninince(s) in Part B. Signature or applicant or agent Date FOR LGU USE ONLY Replacement plan is (cheek one): ❑ Approved ❑Approved with conditions (conditions attached) ❑ Denied LGU official signature Dine LGU has receive evidence of title and proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland: County where recorded Dare Donnnent # assigned by recorder LGU offrcial signature Date Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects Page 6 Wetland Permit Application Sequencing Narrative WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT / SECTION 404 WETLAND REPLACEMENT PLAN NARRATIVE AND APPLICATION FOR SEQUENCING FLEXIBILITY Lakeside Chanhassen, Minnesota July 10, 2007 This narrative is submitted as a component of the Wetland Conservation Act / Section 404 permit application for the proposed Lakeside residential development project in the City of Chanhassan, Carver County Minnesota and includes further description of the following items from the application: (3) project location, (4) type of project, (5) project purpose, description and dimensions, (6) project alternatives, and (9) status of other approvals. 3. PROJECT LOCATION The Lakeside residential development project is located at the northeast comer of Lyman Blvd and Lake Riley Road (Location Figure) in the City of Chanhassen. The property consists of multi -family housing surrounded by a noise berm associated with T.H. 212 to the north, residential development and roadway to the east and west, and Lake Riley to the south. 4. TYPE OF PROJECT Sienna Corporation is proposing a new condominium housing project on a site that previously contained dilapidated apartment buildings on the north side of Lake Riley. The site is being redeveloped as a multi -family residential use consistent with existing land use and zoning ordinances. The site had become run down, and was in need of intervention to deal with crime and maintenance concerns that the previous apartments were known for. 5. PROJECT PURPOSE, DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS The site was rezoned from high density R12 to PUD, and plans were approved by the City Planning Commission in June 2006, followed by City Council in July 2006. Project construction consists of site grading, infrastructure such as roads, utilities and building construction, of which major portions have already been installed. Relevant parts of the preliminary plan set are included as Appendix A. Existing Wetland Resources and History Two wetlands (A and B) on the project site were delineated and documented by a report completed by Peterson Environmental in 2005 (Appendix B). An Incidental Wetland Request was made for both wetlands based on a historical aerial photo review completed by Peterson Lakeside — Wetland Permit Narrative July 10, 2007 Page 2 Environmental Consulting. Both wetlands appear to have been incidentally created for drainage and stormwater management; however, the LGU concluded that although Wetland B appears to have been created when the ditch to the north of the wetland stopped functioning between 1951 and 1957, it was created more than 25 years ago, and therefore considered jurisdictional. Wetland B Wetland B is classified as a palustrine emergent semi -permanently flooded wetland that is partially drained or ditched (PEMCd; Circular 39 Type 3), dominated by reed canarygrass and black willow. Wetland B was inundated at the time the delineation was completed in October 2005. Wetland B is located in the northwest corner of the site. The City's Wetland Management Plan categorizes the wetland as a Manage 2 wetland. The aerial photograph review completed for this wetland indicates that the area of the wetland has been altered by farming, grading, filling, and berming over a period of 70 years. Review of historical aerial photos indicates that the wetland was not present on the site until the 1950s when the ditch to the north appears to have stopped functioning. It was determined that the wetland was not exempt because Minnesota Rule 8420.0122, Subp. 2.C. states that "wetlands that were incidentally created and have been in existence for more than 25 years may not be drained or filled." Preliminary Plan for Lakeside The attached grading plan illustrates the location and amount of fill proposed to Wetland B (Appendix A, Wetland Impact Exhibit, and Figure 1). The placement of fill is proposed to widen the buffer area of the wetland. Table 1 illustrates the required amount of wetland mitigation for impacts to Wetland A. Table 1. Wetland Impacts and Proposed Wetland Bank Replacement Calculations Existing Size Proposed Fill/ Required Wetland Wetland Circular 39 (s.f. / acres) Impact in Replacement Type Wetland Calculations (NWC and PVC) B 3 31,363/ 0.72 767/0.02 0.04 ac PROPOSED OFF- 0.02 ac NWC SITE MITIGATION (NWC) from an approved wetland bank site PROPOSED OFF- 0.02 ac PVC SITE BUFFER (PVC) from an approved wetland bank site Lakeside — Wetland Permit Narrative July 10, 2007 Page 3 6. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Sequencing Analysis Grading and drainage activities in the area surrounding the current Wetland B during the last fifty years changed the terrain so that drainage of the basin area was noticeably reduced. Subsequently, the change in drainage resulted in the collection of surface water that supported the establishment of hydrophytic vegetation. The area has also been impacted over time by surrounding development, and most recently by the construction of a noise berm for the new alignment of Trunk Highway 212. Over time, the functions and values of the wetland have likely significantly diminished. The applicant has endeavored to avoid and minimize direct and indirect wetland impacts on the project site to the extent practicable, while protecting the existing features. The applicant considered two alternatives that would completely avoid wetland impacts. These alternatives are: No Action Alternative The no action alternative (Figure 2) meets the wetland buffer and building setback requirements, but would result in the reduction of the multifamily unit to an architecturally unfeasible design. The community builder for this neighborhood is constructing only 3 and 4 unit buildings. Additionally, this plan would require that major utility infrastructure previously installed by the developer and approved by the City be realigned, creating an economic burden. The "tight" curve in the road created by the road alignment, and the elevation of the Condominium building in Figure 2 result in the following undesirable and unsafe conditions: o Driveways that do not meet the 2% grade requirement for the 4 unit multifamily homes on the interior of the road in the southwest corner of the site, and o A road alignment that creates potentially unsafe turn radii for emergency vehicles. Sienna Corporation proposed to revitalize the previously developed site with a planned unit development, and the original City -approved 2006 site plan was determined to meet the market demand for units of the type proposed in the approved plan. Total Wetland Avoidance Build Alternative The original site plan (Figure 3) resulted in further indirect impacts to the wetland, and did not meet the wetland buffer and building setback requirements. The proposed site plan (Figure 1) represents a gain of 10 feet in meeting building setback and buffer requirements. Indirect impacts will occur to the wetland as a result of increased development and re- development surrounding the wetland on all sides. MnDOT's design plans for Trunk Highway 212 improvements included a noise berm on the south side of the highway from Dell Road to Highway 101 which appears to encroach in the buffer along the northern boundary of the wetland, adding to indirect impacts that will further reduce wetland viability. Sienna Corporation is proposing to offset and mitigate impacts to Wetland B from encroachment of a Lakeside — Wetland Permit Narrative July 10, 2007 Page 4 building footprint in the buffer along the south side, by means of purchasing offsite wetland bank credit in an approved wetland bank site. Approved wetland bank credit is currently available for purchase within the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District in Carver County, where long term wetland viability can be assured, and equal or greater public value and functions of the replacement wetland are certain. tion of Impacts The applicant has avoided direct wetland impacts to the extent possible, given the constraints posed by the existing and proposed development in the surrounding area. Project plans underwent several adjustments and changes in efforts to meet buffer setback requirements. The current site plans were previously approved by the City Council and Planning Commission in 2006. A small amount of fill is proposed to increase the buffer width of Wetland B. The buffer will provide some protection from surface water runoff and associated pollutants. On site mitigation is not proposed because of the increased potential for indirect impacts to the wetland, and the potential for further diminishing functions and values due to surrounding development. Compensatory Mitigation The wetland impact will result in a larger buffer area, providing increased protection from surface water runoff and associated pollutants. Although the larger buffer will provide some added protection, impacts from surrounding development will continue to diminish the wetland's functions and values. Because the wetland has been impacted significantly over time, and surrounding development activities will continue to contribute to indirect impacts, Sienna Corporation is proposing to replace the proposed impacts at a 2:1 ratio through the purchase of wetland bank credits from an approved site in the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District in Carver County to provide the following: • equal or greater compensatory mitigation area and greater functions and values for direct impacts to Wetland B • a wider buffer area along the southern boundary of the wetland to provide some protection from surface water runoff and associated pollutants Sequencing Flexibility According to the Minnesota Rules Chapter 8420, 0520, Subp. 7a: A. Sequencing flexibility cannot be implemented unless alternatives have been considered and unless the proposed replacement wetland is certain to provide equal or greater functions and public values as determined based on a functional assessment reviewed by the technical evaluation panel using a methodology approved by the board The project sponsor must provide Lakeside — Wetland Permit Narrative July 10, 2007 Page 5 the necessary information and the local government unit must document the application of sequencing flexibility in the replacement plan approval. B. Flexibility in application of the sequencing steps may be applied, subject to the conditions in item A, as determined by the local government unit if.• (1) the wetland to be impacted has been degraded to the point where replacement of it would result in a certain gain injunction and public value; (2) preservation of a wetland would result in severe degradation of the wetland's ability to function and provide public values, for example, because of surrounding land uses and the wetland's ability to function and provide public values cannot reasonably be maintained through other land use controls or mechanisms; (3) the only feasible and prudent upland site available for wetland replacement or development has greater ecosystem function and public value than the wetland Although this is a rare circumstance since there will usually be several options for siting the replacement wetland or development, it maybe appropriate if the project sponsor: (a) demonstrates impact minimization to the wetland; (b) agrees to perpetually preserve the designated upland site; and (c) completely replaces the impacted wetland's functions and public values; or (4) the wetland is a site where human health and safety is a factor. The applicant is requesting consideration for sequencing flexibility based on the following criteria: The wetland's current presence apparently is a result of a lack of maintenance activities and blockage of the ditch that drained the area to the north. As the site was developed in the 1970s, grading for site development may have affected the functioning of the ditch. In addition, the ditch has been fully removed by the grading activities related to U.S. Highway 212 construction. Activities within the basin in the last 70 years indicate that the basin has been affected by grading and agricultural activities that have influenced the ability of the basin to maintain wetland conditions. Therefore, this wetland cannot be considered to be natural or pristine, as is evidenced by: o the City's classification of the wetland as a `Manage 2' Basin, and o the City's decision regarding the previously submitted Incidental Wetland Exemption request. In its decision, the City indicated that the wetland may have resulted from human activities regarding the adjacent ditch and qualified for an exemption, however; these activities occurred more than 25 years ago. According to the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, ditches must be maintained within a 25 -year period, and if not, any wetlands resulting from a lack of maintenance activities are not exempt. This implies that the wetland still has an artificial basis for creation, and even though it does not qualify for an exemption, it does build the case for consideration of the disturbed nature of the basin for sequencing flexibility. Lakeside — Wetland Permit Narrative July 10, 2007 Page 6 The basin was completely cultivated during the years 1937, 1940, 1957, and portions of it were cultivated in 1963. Subsequent years indicate that the site had been developed as apartments, and agricultural activities ceased. The basin itself clearly has a history of being farmed until site development in the 1970s as indicated in all available photographs until the time of development. No vegetation signatures were apparent in these earlier photographs to indicate that any native upland or wetland vegetation had persisted in or adjacent to these basins during this period of farming. This lack of continuity of vegetation would indicate the recent development of the basin's vegetation and therefore has implications that would reduce its functions and values. • The basin has a history of being partially or effectively drained by the adjacent ditch, and previously had an outlet control structure. Currently, the wetland itself is isolated, but a catch basin is located nearby to capture overflow drainage. • Vegetation in the basin has developed within the last thirty years. • The soils have a history of disturbance from the previous farming activities, but are showing signs of recent profile development. • Avoidance of both direct and indirect wetland impacts have considered through alternative site design. The alternative design would require re -grading and realignment of utilities that have already been installed and approved by the City, making the alternative design economically unfeasible. • A no action alternative would result in an architecturally unfeasible design of a multi- family unit. Market analysis shows that current demand for the product presented on the approved plan is strong. Changing the product that has already demonstrated a strong sales potential in today's sensitive housing market is economically unfavorable. • Over time, the wetland was directly and indirectly impacted by berming, grading, filling, farming, and increased surrounding development. The basin is becoming more isolated by site development. Stormwater impacts to the basin will increase from recent and proposed grading and development surrounding the basin. The watershed for the basin has been altered by area activities including the construction of the noise berm along U.S. Highway 212. Overtime, the basin's watershed area has been reduced and impervious surfaces have been increased making the basin's hydrology more "flashy". Through removal of the basin's surface outlet, and providing an overflow outlet outside the basin, its hydrology will be significantly altered. Mitigating for wetland impacts offsite would result in equal or greater public value. • Minimizing the potential for indirect impacts to the wetland will be achieved by increasing the buffer width along the southern boundary of the basin, and by seeding the buffer with a native plant mix. FINAL PLAT Wetland Bank Withdrawal Application APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF WETLAND CREDITS FROM THE MINNESOTA WETLAND BANK Return Original to BWSR — Transaction may not be processed without original signatures I. PROPOSED USER OF CREDITS Name(s) Sienna Corporation Address: 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Edina, Minnesota 55435-5318 City State ZIP Day Phone (952)835-2808 Other Phone ( ) 1 3. OWNER / SELLER OF CREDITS int No. 1115 Watershed No. 33 y: Carver of Seger. Elroy Knauer (Name of Authorized Representative) (Signature of 2. Impact Site Information Carver Major Wttshd No.33 NE/. /. Sec 24, Twp. 116, Rge 23 of Wetland Impact: 0.02 acres and Types Impacted: 3 Setting': flow through [pick one: shoreland / riverine / floodplain flow through I tributary / isolated] ired Replacement Ratio: 2:1 WCA / local / COE mt to be replaced using Bank Credits:0.04 ant replaced on site: 0 ct Name: Lakeside at Bearpath Attach replacement plan if additional detail is needed. 4. Regulating Authority(ies) Approving the Use of Wetland Bank Credits Replacement Plan approved by (check all that apply): ❑ Local WCA LGU: (Print agency name) Local Permit # ❑ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Permit # ❑ MN Dept. of Natural Resources: Permit # ❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service: Permit # ❑ Other authority involved: ❑ Enclosed 6.5% transaction fee. payable to "Board of Water & Soil Resources." 5. CREDITS PROPOSED TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM ACCOUNT NO. Credit Acres Wetland Topo. Setting' Cost Sub -Group' NWC or PVC withdrawn Type (per acre) A NWC 0.02 flow-through $32,670 B PVC 0.02 upland buffer $15,246 [pick one] [pick one] [pick one] [pick one] Totals: 'Letters signify credit sub -groups, which represent wetland areas with different wetland characteristics. 2Circular 39 types: 1, 1L, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, R, U (for Upland Buffer). 'Topographic setting types: shoreland, riverine, floodplain, flow-through, tributary, isolated. 1 acre = 43,560 sq. R Page 1 of 2 BWSR Form: wea-bank-05 (online withdrawal form).doc Revised 1/04/05 6. CERTIFICATION OF USER OF WETLAND CREDITS The proposed user of credits hereby certifies that he/she: a) either owns the subject wetland credits or has entered into an agreement to purchase said credits, subject to the approval of all applicable regulatory authorities and b) has filed appropriate plans, specifications and application forms with all applicable regulatory authorities that describe the wetland or water resource impacts for which the subject wetland credits will be utilized for mitigation purposes. John Vogelbacher User of Credits PRINT Name 7. REGULATORY AUTHORITY APPROVAL(S) The following authorized representatives of the regulatory authority (ies) identified on page 1 of this application hereby certify that they have: a) verified that the subject wetland credits are deposited in the account of the owner / seller, b) approved a wetland replacement plan or other water resource impact under their jurisdiction, and c) approved the proposed use of the wetland bank credits described herein. PRINT Name of WCA LGU Official Signature of Authorized WCA LGU Official Date PRINT Name of Other Regulatory Official (if any) Signature of Other Authorized Official Date Agency Address of Other Regulatory Official 8. CERTIFICATION OF OWNER / SELLER OF CREDITS I am the holder of the aforementioned account in the State of Minnesota Wetland Mitigation Bank and hereby certify that: 1) the credits described in this application have either been sold to the user of credits or I will use them to mitigate wetland impacts for my own project, 2) I have received payment in full from the buyer (if applicable), 3) the credits have not been sold or used in any way to mitigate wetland losses other than for the project and location identified in the project site information block on the previous page, 4) the subject wetland credits should be withdrawn my account, 5)1 will not have a negative balance of credits after the subject credits are debited from my account, and 6) the Annual Fee for this account has been paid (or will be with an enclosed check). Authorized Signature of Owner / Seller of Credits Date 9. BWSR APPROVAL AND DEBITING OF ACCOUNT I hereby certify that the credits have been properly debited from the subject account, effective the date of signature. Authorized Signature Date Upon approval by BWSR, a copy of this instrument will be mailed to the user of the credits, all regulatory authorities involved, the account holder and the Board Conservationist A letter will also be sent to the account holder acknowledging the debit and new account balance. _ IMPORTANT REMINDERS 1. The Owner / Seller of the credits is responsible for submittal of this form, containing original signatures, to the BWSR Welland Bank Administrator so the affected account can be properly debited. 2. No impacts to any wetland or other water resource may commence until the credits have been debited from the Minnesota Wetland Mitigation Bank and a copy of this approval has been mailed to the regulatory authority(ies), the account holder and the user of the credits. 3. It is a criminal offense for a seller of wetland credits to sell credits more than one time. It is the responsibility of the account holder to report any credit sales that are not noted on the most current official BWSR account balance. Page 2 of 2 BWSR Form: wca-bank-05 (online withdrawal form).doc Mail to: Bank Coordinator. Board of Water R Soil Resources Revised VO4/05 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Appendix A: Site Location, Proposed and Alternative Project Figures, Wetland Impact Exhibit LOCATION Lake Riicy Data Sources: 2006 NAIP Aerial Photograph, City of Chanhassen Planning Case No.06-26 Legend = Approximate Boundary Wetland B Lakeside at Bearpath Chanhassen, Minnesota Project #205207, Created 6-07-07 Sienna Corporation 825 412.5 0 N PICNEERengineering 825 Feet s `v Lake Riicy Data Sources: 2006 NAIP Aerial Photograph, City of Chanhassen Planning Case No.06-26 Legend = Approximate Boundary Wetland B Lakeside at Bearpath Chanhassen, Minnesota Project #205207, Created 6-07-07 Sienna Corporation 825 412.5 0 N PICNEERengineering 825 Feet Figures m a 0 1 LAKESIDE Figure 2 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA B—W° im o>memro s \ \� r 83_0 1_ LAKE R1LEY ROAD EAST I _Ll1372.6¢ �+'�-; R•,.:." v, m _ °' �^ `t R \ 4i ° m ;t, S• °i-4 w m b I 1 NW"20400'1 \ ? PI44"VNEERengineering OVR.ENGINEERS LANDPLANNERS LANDSURVEYDRS LANDSCAPE AROUTEC1S 2422 Fnuaprise Drive 1C2 201 85th Avenue N.W. Mendota HCoon Rapids � P Heights, MN 55120 Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (657)681-1914 Fn:681-9488 (763) 783-1880 Fn:783-1883 GRAPHIC SCALE 150 0 75 150 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 150 feet 0 0 .A LAKESIDE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA Figure 3 PI 42NEEReng'ineering MMENGNEERS tANDPLANNPRS tANDSORVEYORS L4NDSCAPEARC}VIECTS 34� Ent-Pn Drive 301 85th Avenue N.W. Mendota Heights, MN 55170 Coon Rapids Office Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (651)681-1914 Fax:681-9488 (763) 783-1880 Fax:783-1883 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 150 feet GRAPHIC SCALE 150 0 75 150 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 150 feet � 1 / 1 RIM E:00 00 I INV E �00 0 r+ o PI8NEERengineering CIVR. ENGRJEERS LAND PLANNERS L14D SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHrrEM rel 0 L CI J _ WETLAND ,a + / > \ EOIL BORING EV.610 903.72/ 2422 Enterprise Drive Coon ids Office 201 85th Avenue N.W. CRa Mendota Heights, MN 55120 P Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (651)681-1914 Fax:681-9488 (763) 783-1880 Fax:783-1883 QA, y`0>- WETLAND FILL 40 767 SF ♦ '00 ///z OI L #1 7 �1 .74/ 1 --'40 SOIL .ING #1 1 Fi ctx IN �o O� Oro c MH %1x0.411 210. s °, Jo J / I 0 15 30 60 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET i I 1 B(` 7' 147 61 � 6_6% It {f 10, \O 1 1 i11Cu, r 1 8. h` o 0--01 6% 01 Q 0 \ S E \ El _V.= 1 \ g \`Irn o 04 I F- T m IN �o O� Oro c MH %1x0.411 210. s °, Jo J / I 0 15 30 60 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-1110 TO: Wooddale Builders, Inc. 5435 Feltl Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE JOB NO. 2/1/07 2005-26 ATTENTION Steve Obermueller RE: Lakeside ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via LJ��"V-.1-e Sim Pion erm .� the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ® For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS COPY TO: ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return El ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints SIGNED: 4 im A)�A-k-A, LA-�ggj� Kim Meuwissen, 52) 227-1107 If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated January 19, 2007, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC., (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for 36 housing units and a community building with pool (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described as: Lots 1 through 11, Block 2, Outlot E and Outlot F, Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enter into this Permit and furnish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007. PlanB: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006. Plan C: Landscaping Plan prepared by Minnesota Green, dated November 11, 2006. Plan D: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Plan E: Building elevations prepared by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Associates, stamped Received January 8, 2007. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required screening and landscaping by October 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURESFOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. Steve Obermueller Wooddale Builders, Inc. 5435 Feld Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into this site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. b. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. c. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 2 d. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. e. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. f. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. g. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. h. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. i. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. j. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit 'B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF ANHAS( BY: 1 k.aw.t AND: //`fsr✓✓r Todd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3/Aay of 200 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the ty of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. . I , „ ,/ NOT PUBLIC �iF7IN RJ. ENGELHARDT tary Public-innesota ommission E'q. J_31 2010 El 4 - STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF Nein ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Zeday o �-- 2001 by,kV4 n� r nr� o I oy- of Wooddale Builders, Inc d DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 M-.11 MIA CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developers expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developers and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 0 7. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attomeys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site constriction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmasters request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severabiliri. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. 7 G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recordine. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. I. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. I Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances, and Regulations. tions. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless 0 the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. W t .1, Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this /rday of - r"M 200f STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF Ped,7e�ih ) The 200 Zby _ foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of Q NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 10 MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAl4 AGREEMENT which holds a mortgage on the subj%t profcry, .7e development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this A day of 2017 l �1 i STATE OF lv sOTA-j COUNTY Or 3l (- * ) The 20tH by — DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, WN 55317 (452)227-1100 (ss, was acknowleaged before me thisLL day of A �� NOTARY PUBLIC c,r�;�s ZIr�/woo 11 ZI/ZI 'd bb909V£Z96 'ON XdA MEMO 31H000OM Rd 6620 INA LOOZ-61-NUf Ma Wooddale Builders, Inc. Chanhassen: Lakeside at Lake Riley Town Home Project WOODDALE BUILDERS, MVC. Exterior Color Flections I Il -M R9 2^'Id.ld l la -J,_7 R2 Item Building #12 Building #11 Building #10 Building #9 Siding: Rough Sawn Shake, Sunset Cedar Shaded by MN. Exteriors Shaded Nailite Rough Sawn Shaka, Classic White by MN. Exteriors Nailite Rough Sawn Shake. Antlque Grey Shaded by MN. Exteriors Noilite Rough Sawn Shake, Harvest Cedar shaded by MN. Exteriors Roofing: Timberline in Charcoal Blend Timberline in Charcoal Bland Timberline in Charcoal Blend Timberline In Charcoal Blend 1T odows: White White White White Stone Frorxt Hedberg, 70% Fon du Lac 30°% Sun Prairie Hedberg, Montana Ledge Suede Grey Brock White, Southern Ledgestone Bucks County Hedberg. Split face Pointed. Desert Soffrt/FWCia: Rol lax Frost by MN. Exteriors Rollex Frost by MN. Exteriors Rollex frost by MN. Exteriors Roltex Frost by MN. Exteriors Exterior Trim: SW7007 While (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SVV7007 Whlte (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Fxteric rs, Painted by Painter) Front Doors: Paint Color: SW6106 Kilim Beige Paint Color, SW7031 Mega Greige Paint Color. SW7031 Mega Greige Paint Color. SW7031 Mega Graige Overhead Doors: SW7007 Wbile SW7007 White SW7007 While SW7007 White Front Storm O tiona! White White White White Board B Batten: Summer Wheat Adobe Clay Adobe Clay Adobe Clay LOUVerS: SW7007 WhBe (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) Trex Color: Saddle Saddle Winchester Grey Woodland Brown Aluminum Rails: White White White White Gutters: White White White White Downspouts: Match Siding as close as possible Match Siding as close as possible Match Siding as close as possible Match Siding as close as passible N Wooddale Builders, Inc. Chanhassen: Lakeside at Lake Riley Town Home Project �L WOODDALE BUILDERS, W. 3 R9 Exte6ior Colo elections L 1- _ ►s�dJ,l 1 -7 R7 ts� L_ t ions ►Si-Ar1ri CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JAN 2 9 2007 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Item Building #16 Building #15 Building #14 Building #13 Siding-, g' Nellie Rough Sawn Shake, Antique Grey Shaded by MN. Exteriors Naillte Rough Sawn Shake, Harvest Cedar shaded by MN. Exteriors Nailile Rough Sawn Shake, Sunset Cedar Shaded by MN. Exteriors Nailite Rough Sawn Shake, Classic White by MN. Exteriors Roofing: Timberline In Charcoal Blend Timberline in Charooal Blend Timberline in Charcoal Blend Timberline in Charcoal Blend KIndows: White White White White $tone Front: g, Meseta Field Ledge Eldorado Hedberg, Cultured Stone, OrystackLedgestone Suede Ochs, Coronado Malian Villa Portobello Brack White, Orystack Ledgesiona Mist Soffrt/Fasaa: Rollex Frost by MN. Exteriors Rollex Frost by MN. Exteriors Rollex Frost by MN. Exteriors Rollex Frost by MN. Exteriors Exterior Trim: white (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter{ Exteriors, SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) Front Doors: Paint Color. SW7031 Mega Greige Paint Color: SW7031 Mega Greige Paint Color. SW6106Kilim Beige Paint Color. SW7072 Online Overhead Boors: SW7007 White SW7007 White SW7007 White SW7007 While Front Storm O Fiona! : White White White White Board 8 Batten: Adabe Clay Adobe Clay Summer Wheat Harbor Stone Louvers. SW7007 White (Materiats by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Pointer) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) SW7007 White (Materials by MN. Exteriors, Painted by Painter) Trex Color: Winchester Grey Woodland Brown Saddle Saddle Aluminum Raps: While White White White (Mutters; White White White White Downspouts., Match Siding as close as possible Match Siding as close as possible Match Siding as dose as possible Match Siding as close as possible 1 lz yyf; pq C n, ` I \ 38 e C IL 3 K \ >• r f aff EJ i - o i ' = _ . - . c� Rte+ Ss aMt � r sE� •§ '.yP .. �Si7� 3 :fish .f _g %!-! ' 9 a i-i99q .Sa•... ii- L_J CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-1110 TO: Charles Cudd Co. International Market Square 275 Market Street, Suite 445 Minneapolis, MN 55405 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL JOB NO. Bruce Smith RE: Lakeside Per -&h is. do KL7 record �ie.l�lc�n I7Prmt:� ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ® For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FORBIDS DUE ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO: SIGNED: N enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. 227-1107 SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated July 24, 2006, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and CHARLES CUDD CO., (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for 36 housing units and a community building with pool (referred to in this Permit as the "project'). The land is legally described as: Lots 1 through 4, Block 1, Outlots H and Outlot C, Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enter into this Permit and furnish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2006. Plan B: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2006, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006. Plan C: Landscaping Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Plan D: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Plan E: Building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped Received May 26, 2006. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required screening and landscaping by October 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURES FOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. Bruce Smith Charles Cudd Co. International Market Square 275 Market Street, Suite 445 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into this site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. b. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. c. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. d. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. e. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. f. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. g. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. h. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. i. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. CITY O HANHAS BY: T/ham as A. Furlong, Ma or AND: G 4 odd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (sS COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2Alay of 2001, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of thkothe f Ch sen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuanauthority granted by its City Council. w N T Y P LIC 7!'EN J. ENGELHARDT a.. ry Public -Minnesota �`+',e.'a.r My can.O.. Expires Jen 31.2010 DEVELO BY its G� STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (SS. COUNTY OF f+£"AI-0J4 ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this IgT* day of A A u h2y 200 -7 by e f a z" A s m, rH c Fo off�Charles CCW, LLC. MARK W.POFF NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA NOTARY LIC My Commission Expires Jan. 31,2010 DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 0 Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attorneys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severabiliri. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancv. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City s failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recordine. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. I. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. J. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are fust provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall famish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless 8 the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. E CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this (TTA day of JiWuA K Y '2001. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF ACAJAEPiA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this lgrlt day of 3AWII- 2001 by Uatr A sMmf CFo NOTARY P LIC MARK W. POFF " NOTARY PUBLIC - MNNE SOTA My Commission bp1les Jar, 31 2010 DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAN AGREEMENT Builders Development & Finance, Inc., which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this 19 day of January, 2007 . Builders Development & Finance, Inc. By Rich*d J. hwegman Its Vice President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OFED&L�S__ ) ( ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 19 day of January, 2007, by Richard J. Schwegman, the Vice President of Builders Development & Finance, Inc., on behalf of the Corporation. DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 I1 i �,ii /ea /��1, / NOTARY PUBLIC CYNTHIA M. wBSTLUND J?' 2010 Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Matthew K. Brokl' John F. Kelly Soren M. Mattick Henry A. Schaeffer, III Alin Schwartz Craig R. McDowell Marguerite M. McCarron • Also Licensed is Wisconsin 1380 Corporate Center Curve Suite 317 • Eagan, MN 55121 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 www.ch-law.eom CAMPBELL KNUTSON RECEIVED JAN 4 - 2007 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Professional Association •4t Direct Dial: (651)134-6111 E-mailAddress: snelson@ck-law.com January 2, 2007 Ms. Kim Meuwissen City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: CHANHASSEN—MISC. RECORDED DOCUMENTS ➢ Site Plan Permit #06-26 — Sienna Corporation (Lot 1, Block 3, LAKESIDE) Dear Kim: Enclosed for the City's files please find original recorded Site Plan Permit #06-26 with Sienna Corporation approving a site plan for the construction of the foundation of the community building on Lot 1, Block 3, Lakeside. The site plan permit was filed with Carver County on December 6, 2006 as Document No. A455002. Regards, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Y• S san R. Nelson, Legal Assistant SRN:ms Enclosure SCANNED Document No. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER /� 455002 CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA Fee $ 46.00 Check#: 16616 Certified Recorded on 12-06-2006 at 01:00 ❑ AM�PM 455002 IIIIII I IIIIII III III orr e CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated November 21, 2006, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and SIENNA CORPORATION, (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for the construction of the foundation of the community building (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described as: Lot 1, Block 3, Lakesi�e� AU County, Minnesota. Hbl1`�loN 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enters into this Permit and furnishes the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 3, 2006, Plan B: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 17, 2006. Plan C: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 17, 2006. Plan E: Building foundation prepared by Royal Oaks Design, Inc., stamped November 16, 2006. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install the foundation by July 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. BCIINNED 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURESFOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control and site restoration. b. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. c. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. d. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. e. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. g. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. h. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. i. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. j. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. k. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 1. 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. in. 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. n. 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. o. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. P. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the fust story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit 'B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF BY: Thom A. Furlong, "r AND: ' / odd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (sS COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thitAt of NeMb 200-6 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. T NOTARY P LIC KIM LMEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010 rd STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF en i n The finegoing rent 200 was acknowledged before me thisa/5' day of7(�e by 0 t� c��L b0.C��—,r the Vice President of Sienna Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, on its behalf. JWSHA:RON ANN DAY NOTARY PUBLIC ftMo-Minrteaota�an fir« re st. zott DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City s rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is fiill compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be wan -anted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attomeys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third panties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occunancv. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. 7 G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waiver; shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recordine. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. J. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances, and ReaWations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall famish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. W J CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by Mem. Dated this_ day of STATE OF MINNESOTA (ss; COUNTY OF 111 M The foregoing instrument was acknowledged ore me this day of 200 _ by / DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 10 NOTARY PUBLIC MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO STPE PLAN AGREEMENT �/}GC�5T lA7'r which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated thiso2l-4 day of 0Y&,rAV-- 2006. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF enh i ) EAGLE /CREST � CCAA/PITAL BANK The foregoing ins4u mCe/�nt was acknowledged before me this a /� day oflb- I ut « v Ke' 1/ i n N C ..1�� e— the President of Eagle Crest Capital Bank, a federally chartered savings bank under the laws of the United States, on nenalt of the bank. SHARON ANN DAY NOTARY PUBLIC47 vvv" �' Notary Public -Minnesota `: nq commissrn m a 31, 2Mt DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 11 CITY OF Cg NSEN TOC Markel Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952,227A 180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952 227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Far.: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952127.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site wew.ci chanhassen.mrrus December 19i', 2006 Mr. Steve Licht Charles Cudd Co. 275 Market St., Suite 445 Minneapolis, MN 55405 Re: 8847 and 8855 Lake Riley Road. Dear Mr. Licht, The preliminary plan review for the above named buildings is complete to the extent possible. The plans have been reviewed by the Building Inspection Division and the Planning Division. The plans will still need to be approved by the Planning Division, Engineering Department and the Building Inspection Division. The Building Division review does not include plumbing, mechanical or fire suppression review. The following is a list of items that either does not comply with the 2003 Minnesota State Building Code or more information is needed to complete the plan review. 1. Tall wall engineered design is required for all walls over 10 feet in height. The design should include lateral loads for window and door openings. 2. Provide engineered design or beam manufacturers specifications for headers and beams. Some appear to be insufficient. Submit revised plan. 3. Firestop designs for all penetrations of rated assemblies are required. Submit revised plan. 4. Sheet A5.1. Party wall assembly WP3230, does not show sound board. Submit revised assembly and/or plan. 5. Detail 5 on sheet 1.2 shows 2' deck cant, sheet 5.0 shows 3'. Provide engineered design for 3' deck cantilever. Submit revised plans. 6. Provide beam at front porch supporting roof trusses. Submit revised plans. 7. Planning division comment. Contact Josh Metzer @ 952-227-1132. Plan must be revised to incorporate windows on the garage door and type of shingles must be noted on plan. 8. Engineering Department comment. Survey must comply with city requirements. 9. Fire Department access must be maintained at all times Sincerely, Q� DV ',fl Vv Doug Hoese Building Inspector 952-227-1194 cc: Jerry Mohn, Building Official, City of Chanhassen Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director, City of Chanhassen Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal, City of Chanhassen City of Chanhassen—File G:\SAFETY\DOUGH\Plan Review\8847-55lakerileymodel.doc la h'�i'0(, The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a chanting downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association Author's Direct Did: (651)1346212 E-mallAddress: snelson@ck-law.com November 29, 2006 RECEIVED DEC 0 4 2006 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson HAND DELIVERED Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Mr. Dennis Moore Joel J. Jamnik Custom Home Builders Title, LLC Andrea McDowell Pa,` - 2655 Campus Drive Matthew K. Brokl Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 John F. Kelly Soren M. Mattick RE: LAKESIDE, Chanhassen, MN Henry A. Schaeffer, III Developer: Sienna Corporation Aiina Schwartz Craig R. McDowell Dear Dennis: Marguerite M. McCarru This office is legal counsel for the City of Chanhassen. The City hereby releases to you in ' At..+ro I icenscd in Wisconsin escrow the official final plat Mylars for LAKESIDE, together with a paper reduction (1 = 200' scale) of the final plat for the County Auditor's office. Also enclosed please find the following documents which need to be recorded simultaneously with the plat: • Development Contract between the City and Sienna Corporation dated November 13, 2006. • Grant of Permanent Access/Trail Easement from Sienna Corporation in favor of the City. • Conditional Use Permit #06-26 granted by the City for a recreational beach lot on Outlots I and J, LAKESIDE. The plat and the enclosed documents all appear to be in order and you may record the same with Carver County subject to the following conditions: 1) You should not release the plat to anyone except under the conditions specified in this letter. 2) A Mortgagee Consent to Plat by Eagle Crest Capital Bank (copy enclosed) needs to be filed with the plat. John Vogelbacher of Sienna Corporation will provide you with the original executed Consent. 3) The enclosed development contract, grant of permanent access/trail easement and conditional use permit need to be recorded simultaneously with the plat, 1380 Corporate Center Cur, c and before any new or additional mortgages against the subject property, if Suite 317 • Fagan, MN 55121 any. 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 I have this firth's check in the amount of $294.00 to cover the recording fees for the www.ck-law.com enclosed final plat Mylars and the above referenced documents as outlined on the enclosed summary sheet. SCANNED Mr. Dennis Moore Custom Home Builders Tide, LLC November 29, 2006 Page 2 If the conditions for recording the plat cannot be satisfied within thirty (30) days, the plat and all related documents should be returned to me. Once all documents have been recorded with the County, please provide this office with the appropriate recording information by requesting the County Recorder to complete the enclosed blue "Filing of Documents" sheet and forward the same to me in the self-addressed, stamped envelope provided. If you have any questions, please call. Regards, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association S san R. Nelson, Legal A sistant SRN:ms Chanhassen City Attorney's Office Enclosures cc: Alyson Fauske, Asst. City Engineer (letter only) Bob Generous, Senior Planner (letter only) John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation (letter only) Agreed to and accepted this day of November, 2006. CUSTOM HOME BUILDERS TITLE, LLC BY: Dennis Moore CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-1110 TO: Campbell Knutson, PA 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL -DATE JOB NO. 11/29/06 2006-26 ATTENTION Sue Nelson RE: Document Recording ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 11/21/06 06-26 1 Site Plan Permit 06-26 Lakeside Community Building foundation ❑ FORBIDS DUE For Recording ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return ® For Recording ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO: John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints t — - SIGNED: rim Meuwissen (952) 227-1107 SCANNED If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated November 21, 2006, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and SIENNA CORPORATION, (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for the construction of the foundation of the community building (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described as: Lot 1, Block 3, Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enters into this Permit and furnishes the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 3, 2006, Plan B: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 17, 2006. Plan C: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated November 17, 2006. Plan E: Building foundation prepared by Royal Oaks Design, Inc., stamped November 16, 2006. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install the foundation by July 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall famish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURES FOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control and site restoration. b. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. c. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. d. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 2 e. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. f. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. g. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. h. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. i. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. j. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. k. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 1. 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. in. 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. n. 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. o. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. P. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the fust story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF BY: Thomas A. Furlong, r AND: �� odd Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (as COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thi dr umay of �/t°M%r� , 200-U by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. T - NOTARY PU LIC �" at KIM I MEUWISSEN € Notary Public -Minnesota My Commission Expires Jan 31. 2010 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF Ven e i n The forgoing ffptrument was acknowledged before me this /"" day of lrv-&� , 200k by -John of Sienna Corporation. =��. SHARON ANN DAY Notary Publ�Minnesota --.,..:.�. My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2011 DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 _rd/,J . �.. l i. ,.541 � knel V.,q -,Wm;d Ij.j 13 LM, CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 0 7. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attorneys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be Performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. 7 G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recording. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. I. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment S sty ems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws Ordinances and Regulations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless E3 the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this_ day of 200. UZ STATE OF MINNESOTA ( ss COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200 _ by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 10 NOTARY PUBLIC MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAN AGREEMENT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this a<-' day of ov&-44 V--, 2006. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF eiihe ;n ) The 209L by j was acknowledged before me this,)/6t day of%ZA?b� 1 � , -- SHARON ANN DAY Notary Pubfio-Minnesota My Cown!Ww EVkw Jan 31,2W DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 11 Jul 2000 Au uSt2000 a +ember 2000 m r w r F S S M T w r F g S M T w T F 5 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 2 3 4 56 ]8 6 7 8 9.101112 3 55 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 93 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11.12 13 14 15 96 16 17 18 19.20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18.19 20 21 2223 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 90 s130 ........_.. _... _._...._ _.. _.... ..... Securities Start Due 5 P Ca Dewe tion 6/1/07 7/1/07 F Escrows, 0 Cash Escrow Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 Site Plan Agreement $5,000 (erosion controVlandscaping) Received 11-22-06 Check 36632 from Sienna Corporation Receipt#28056 Notify Bob Generous 02Wllou Oaualynienl Owp. 111A aIt00BPM 5=Slats P -Pinny SCANNED -ZSO Page 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 11/22/2006 1:45 PM Receipt No. 0028056 CLERK: katie PAYEE: SIENNA CORP LAKESIDE -PLANNING CASE 06-26 SECURITY FOR SITE PLAN PERMIT ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 5,000.00 Total 5,000.00 Cash Check 36632 Change 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 LAKESIDE - PLANNING CASE 06-26 $5,000 Security for Site Plan Permit 06-26 (Boulevard Restoration/Erosion Control) Sienna Corporation Check #36632 SIENNA CORPORATION 36632 CITY OF CHANiHASSEN SS_nnn nn IIYV VI�.L UX IL INvulItAMUUNI XMUUIYI rX1U UIJl.VU1YI IXKcN Nc I V.Ill XMVUIYI 2 20-7E 120.00 LS PERMI FOUNDATI 11/21/OE N $5,000.00 CITY OF CHANiHASSEN SS_nnn nn 11-a> - L%, -111P18NEERengineering 2038511=0. X.I. CNd FNGQiFl]25 1.1ND PL11ih'FAS IAND SURVEYORS LANasGAPE ARCffiIFCR 2422 Emaw. Drive Coon Rapids,MN55433 Madou Hagg .MN 55120 (763) 7831880 F :7831883 Coon Rapids Office 051)681-1814 Fu681-9488 PROPOSED TRAIL EASEMENT LAKESIDE 11/22/06 POINT OF Northeast corner of East line of Outlot D, 7�BEGINNING i.Outlot D. LAKESIDE i�LAKESIDE S00°20'00"E 259.69 16 98 101'101I 49 �0. P °g4 30 �3a OUTLOT C OUTLOT D PROPOSED ii / \ \ ' y ;' TRAIL EASEMENT <- \ ?O�o'ti X5 1 inch - 5 pfet OUTLOT A PROPOSED TRAIL EASEMENT: An 20.00 foot easement for trail purposes over, under, and across that part Outlot C and Outlot D, LAKESIDE, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Outlot D; thence South 00 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East, assumed bearing along the east line of said Outlot D, 259.69 feet to the beginning of the centerline to be described; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 00 seconds West, 16.98 feet; thence southwesterly 33.27 feet along a tangential curve concave to the southeast having a radius of 49.00 feet and central angle of 38 degrees 54 minutes 30 seconds; thence South 50 degrees 45 minutes 31 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 35.24 feet; thence southwesterly 15.05 feet along a tangential curve concave to the southeast having a radius of 49.00 feet and central angle of 17 degrees 35 minutes 52 seconds; thence southwesterly 21.35 feet along a reverse curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 51.00 feet and central angle of 23 degrees 59 minutes 22 seconds; thence South 57 degrees 09 minutes 01 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 54.74 feet to the westerly line of said Outlot C and said centerline there terminating. Said easement lines are prolonged or shortened to terminate at the easterly line of said Outlot D and the westerly line of said Outlots C and D. Said easement contains ±3,579 square feet (±0.08 acres). 205207Dsc_Trl-1.dwg (1) Coon Rapids Office PICNEERengineering West line of Lot 1, 20185th Avenue N.W. Coon Rapid,, MN 55433 crm.EHceames urvn RIAMIFAS t.w.SURVEYORS L4NUSC4PE ARCRtIEClS Mendota Heigh. Office 2422 Ent± ,Dme M.Ao. Heighu, MN 55120 (763)783-1880 Fex:78}1883 Coon Rapids Office (651)681-1914 Faa:681-9488 PROPOSED TRAIL EASEMENT OUTLOT A o NOt°72'29"W 7a 11 i 7 . K� R{Lc PROPOSED TRAIL EASEMENT: LAKESIDE 11/22/06 PROPOSED ��EASEMENT CNO3 t O \ °00'03�W 65.75 \ `O 1\ R n A n r A C vnV ", 1 7- finch1 = 50lee, 1 2� POINT O _ BEGINNING An easement for trail purposes over, under, and across all of Outlot A, LAKESIDE, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. FOOD] An 20.00 foot easement for trail purposes over, under, and across that part of Lot 1, Block 3, LAKESIDE, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 1, Block 3; thence North 80 degrees 38 minutes 32 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Lot 1 bears North 00 degrees 20 degrees 00 seconds West, a distance of 21.80 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence North 39 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds East, 5.35 feet; thence northeasterly and northerly 56.23 feet along a tangential curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 75.00 feet and central angle of 42 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds; thence North 03 degrees 00 minutes 03 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 65.75 feet; thence North 22 degrees 46 minutes 12 seconds East, 65.38 feet; thence North 27 degrees 19 minutes 58 seconds West, 53.60 feet; thence North 01 degrees 12 minutes 29 seconds West, 74.11 feet; thence North 13 degrees 28 minutes 16 seconds West, 60.00 feet, and said centerline there terminating. Said easement contains ±7,609 square feet (±0.17 acres). 205207Dsc_Trl-1.dwg (2) '7 "i m West line of Lot 1, E Block 3, LAKESIDE u—m° _ (Assumed to bear North 00°20'00' West) ;«o v m tl L_ ❑0Y 40 t CNO3 t O \ °00'03�W 65.75 \ `O 1\ R n A n r A C vnV ", 1 7- finch1 = 50lee, 1 2� POINT O _ BEGINNING An easement for trail purposes over, under, and across all of Outlot A, LAKESIDE, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota. FOOD] An 20.00 foot easement for trail purposes over, under, and across that part of Lot 1, Block 3, LAKESIDE, according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 1, Block 3; thence North 80 degrees 38 minutes 32 seconds West, assuming the west line of said Lot 1 bears North 00 degrees 20 degrees 00 seconds West, a distance of 21.80 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence North 39 degrees 57 minutes 30 seconds East, 5.35 feet; thence northeasterly and northerly 56.23 feet along a tangential curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 75.00 feet and central angle of 42 degrees 57 minutes 33 seconds; thence North 03 degrees 00 minutes 03 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 65.75 feet; thence North 22 degrees 46 minutes 12 seconds East, 65.38 feet; thence North 27 degrees 19 minutes 58 seconds West, 53.60 feet; thence North 01 degrees 12 minutes 29 seconds West, 74.11 feet; thence North 13 degrees 28 minutes 16 seconds West, 60.00 feet, and said centerline there terminating. Said easement contains ±7,609 square feet (±0.17 acres). 205207Dsc_Trl-1.dwg (2) '7 6SIENNA November 21, 2006 Mr. Bob Generous City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 I I—ZI—bfe Suite 608 - 4940 Viking Drive • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 •952-835-2808 FAX:952-835-7008 By: Messenger RE: Lakeside community building foundation site plan agreement Dear Bob, Enclosed are the completed site plan agreement form and a $5,000 check for surety on the foundation permit for the clubhouse building at Lakeside. I have also enclosed a redline copy of the draft template site plan agreement that you sent me earlier this year so that you can see the changes made to the executed copy enclosed. Please feel free to give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vice President Enc. Planners ■ Developers ■ Contractors CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated -November 21, 2006, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation, pa rpo on, (the "City', and SIENNA CORPORATION, (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan forlhe construction of the foundation of the community buildingireferred to in this Permit as the "project'j. The land is legally described as: Lot 1. Block 3, Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer -enters into this Permit andfumishes the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terns shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated -November 3, 2006, Plan B: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated -November 17, 2006. Plan C: JJtility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated -November 17, 2006. Plan E: Buildingfoundation prepared by Jtoyal Oaks Design. Inc,, stamped- her 16, 2006. 14. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install jhe foundation by July I, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. -Deleted: July 24 Deleted: 231 housing aorta ad a DdeW:..nh Pow Deleted: e w D tlead: rtnais6 Deleted: May 19 Deleted: revised J. 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007. Deleted: May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24 Formatted: Indent: len: 0", Fust lire: 0" Deleted: lend Pmg Plan prq.0 d by Pioneer Enginmmg, dared May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006.1 1 Plan D:. Deleted: May 19, 2006, reviwd June Deleted: elevations Deleted: Harriss Arcbiu.:K Dalehd: Recmd May 26 Delated: e0 requved screening and 1®dsupivg by October 1 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURESFOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion contra and site restoratiory b. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. c. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. d. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. Deleted:, Deleted: and la dxaping e. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. f Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. g. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. h. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. i. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. j. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. k. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. I. 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. m. 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. n. 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. o. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. p. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. per; _ 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (sS COUNTY OF CARVER ) Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_day of 200_, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC I 4 DEVELOPER: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 200_ by of Sienna Corporation. DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 5 NOTARY PUBLIC I CITY OF CHANHASSEN STIR PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The paries recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and Citys rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All [roes, grass, and sod required in the approved landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. Dekmtl: . �. 6 7. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attomeys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attorneys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmasters request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Permit. D. Breach of Contract Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recording. This Permit shall nm with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. 1. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. J. Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances and Regulations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless ; the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day of 200. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF ) Lm The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200 _ by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 10 NOTARY PUBLIC Y MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAN AGREEMENT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in fill force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this _ day of 200 . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 200 by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 11 NOTARY PUBLIC 11-13-010 1'k CITY OF CHOUSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PC Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.727.1300 Fax: 952227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Ak IDIk (401A.1%`I bill TO: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Public Works Director I '/D FROM: Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer DATE: November 13, 2006 d RE: Lakeside Development Contract On October 23, 2006 City Council approved the final plat, development contract and construction plans for the Lakeside development. After Council approval, the developer submitted requested changes to the development contract. Staff and the City Attorney have reviewed the changes and find them acceptable. In general, the changes are: 1. Paragraph 6 Security. The security amount is based on the estimated cost to install improvements to serve the units within the final plat only. The letter of credit can not be reduced below 10% of the original amount until all of the proposed improvements are installed and a warranty is provided for public improvements. 2. Paragraph 7 Notice. The telephone number was revised. 3. Paragraph 8 Other Special Conditions A. Securities and Fees. The letter of credit amount was revised. B. Planning Department Conditions of Approval, 1) A building permit may also be issued for the community club house. C. Engineering Department Conditions of Approval 2) A building permit may also be issued for the community club house. The condition regarding updating the grading plan to show the new driveway alignment to Building A was deleted since the driveway will remain as proposed. 18) Lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to service the lots and Web Site blocks within the final plat shall be installed first. Once these wwwa chanhassen.mn.us segments of sanitary sewer and watermain have been installed and tested the developer may elect to extend the remainder of the lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to serve future phases of the development. The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A gest place to live, work, and play. 28) The following was added: In the event such asphalt is not installed by the above date the Developer shall install prior to November 15, 2006 alternate asphalt roads in a location and design as approved by the City Fire Marshall and the City engineering department. D. Environmental Resources Conditions of Approval 5) The applicant shall work with staff to revise the slopes within 30 feet of the normal water level of Pond 1 to provide adequate access for future stormwater infrastructure maintenance activities. 7) The SWPPP shall be revised as follows: a. Include a sequencing/timing discussion of the erosion and sediment control with includes, but is not limited to: i. Sediment basin installation (prior to or concurrent with grading) ii. Silt fence installation iii. Grading iv. Stockpiles (stabilization) v. Temporary and permanent cover b. Include information on seed mixes to be used. i. Type (temporary or permanent cover) and mix name ii. Location to be used iii. Blanket type, if proposed and seed to be used with the blanket c. If land disturbances are proposed atlon the beachlot, the SWPPP must include details of the proposed erosion and sediment control measures d.Temporary seed and mulch must be defined in the SWPPP (ie. when to use it and what seed mix) e. Wimco curb inlet protection is proposed; however, beehive structures (surface drainage) should also be protected with Wimco inlet protection or similar BMPs. f. Reduced copies of the grading, erosion and sediment control plans should be included in SWPPP g. Remove unnecessary plans from the SWPPP (e.g., lighting) h.Include existing conditions plan that shows grades prior to grading activity. 4. Paragraph 14 of General Conditions, Warranty. A warranty will only be required for public improvements. The Development Contract dated October 23, 2006 was not recorded, therefore these changes appear in a new Development Contract dated November 13, 2006. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Lakeside Development Contract dated November 13, 2006. GAENGTROIECCSIK-0Uakeside (Lakeview [tills site)\11-13-06 DC chmgesAm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA LAKESIDE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) TABLE OF CONTENTS SPECIAL PROVISIONS PAGE 1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL............................................................................SP-1 2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL........................................................................SP-1 3. DEVELOPMENT PLANS............................................................................................SP-1 4. IMPROVEMENTS........................................................................................................SP-2 5. TIME OF PERFORMANCE.........................................................................................SP-2 6. SECURITY....................................................................................................................SP-2 7. NOTICE.........................................................................................................................SP-3 8. OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS................................................................................SP-3 9. GENERAL CONDITIONS ............................................................................................SP-9 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. RIGHT TO PROCEED.................................................................................................GC-1 2. PHASED DEVELOPMENT.........................................................................................GC-1 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT STATUS................................................................................GC-1 4. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS......................................................................GC-1 5. IMPROVEMENTS.......................................................................................................GC-1 6. IRON MONUMENTS..................................................................................................GC-2 7. LICENSE......................................................................................................................GC-2 8. SITE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL.........................................................GC-2 8A. EROSION CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING OROTHER BUILDING...................................................................................GC-2 9. CLEAN UP...................................................................................................................GC-3 10. ACCEPTANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS....................................GC-3 11. CLAIMS........................................................................................................................GC-3 12. PARK DEDICATION..................................................................................................GC-3 13. LANDSCAPING..........................................................................................................GC-3 14. WARRANTY...............................................................................................................GC-4 15. LOT PLANS.................................................................................................................GC-4 16. EXISTING ASSESSMENTS.......................................................................................GC-4 17. HOOK-UP CHARGES.................................................................................................GC4 18. PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING.....................................................................................GC-4 19. SIGNAGE.....................................................................................................................GC-5 20. HOUSEPADS..............................................................................................................GC-5 21. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS.................................................................................GC-5 22. DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT.........................................................................................GC-6 22. MISCELLANEOUS A. Construction Trailers........................................................................................GC-6 B. Postal Service....................................................................................................GC-7 C. Third Parties......................................................................................................GC-7 D. Breach of Contract............................................................................................GC-7 i E. Severability.......................................................................................................GC-7 F. Building Permits...............................................................................................GC-7 G. Waivers/Amendments.......................................................................................GC-7 H. Release..............................................................................................................GC-7 I. Insurance........................................................................................................... GC -7 J. Remedies...........................................................................................................GC-8 K. Assignability.....................................................................................................GC-8 L. Construction Hours...........................................................................................GC-8 M. Noise Amplification..........................................................................................GC-8 N. Access...............................................................................................................GC-8 O. Street Maintenance............................................................................................GC-8 P. Storm Sewer Maintenance ................................................................................GC-9 Q. Soil Treatment Systems....................................................................................GC-9 R. Variances...........................................................................................................GC-9 S. Compliance with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations......................................GC-9 T. Proof of Title.....................................................................................................GC-9 U. Soil Conditions...............................................................................................GC-10 V. Soil Correction................................................................................................GC-10 W. Haul Routes.........................................................................................................GC-10 X. Development Signs..............................................................................................GC-10 Y. Construction Plans...............................................................................................GC-10 Z. As -Built Lot Surveys...........................................................................................GC-11 ii CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) LAKESIDE 6y� '' 1 1►. AGREEMENT dated November 13, 2006 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and, Sienna Corporation (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for LAKESIDE (referred to in this Contract as the "plat"). The land is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A". 2. Conditions of Plat Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on condition that the Developer enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 30 days after the City Council approves the plat. 3. Development Plans. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. With the exception of Plan A, the plans may be prepared, subject to City approval, after entering the Contract, but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A: Final plat approved October 23, 2006, prepared by Pioneer Engineering. Plan B: Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan dated October 6, 2006, prepared by Pioneer Engineering. Plan C: Plans and Specifications for Improvements dated October 6, 2006, prepared by Pioneer Engineering. Plan D: Landscape Plan dated May 19, 2006, prepared by Pioneer Engineering. SP -1 4. Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: A. Sanitary Sewer System B. Water System C. Stone Water Drainage System D. Streets E. Concrete Curb and Gutter F. Street Lights G. Site Grading/Restoration H. Underground Utilities (e.g. gas, electric, telephone, CATV) L Setting of Lot and Block Monuments J. Surveying and Staking K. Landscaping L. Erosion Control 5. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements except for the wear course on public streets by November 15, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City Engineer. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 6. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all improvements, and construction of all improvements required to improve the platted lots within the fust plat Lakeside plat, the Developer shall fumish the City with a letter of credit in the form attached hereto, from a bank acceptable to the City, or cash escrow ("security") for $642,935.02. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: Site Grading/Erosion Control/Restoration Sanitary Sewer Watermain Storm Sewer, Drainage System, including cleaning and maintenance Streets Sub -total, Construction Costs: Engineering, surveying, and inspection (7% of construction costs) Landscaping Street lights: 18 lights x $1,200.00/light Sub -total, Other Costs: $ 17,700.00 $ 65,883.00 $ 67,507.00 $ 165,386.00 $ 192.318.00 $ 508,794.00 $ 35,615.58 $ 18,476.80 $ 21,600.00 $ 75,692.38 Total Cost of Improvements: $584,486.38 110% of Total Cost of Improvements: $642,935.02 gym This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The security shall be subject to the approval of the City. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this Contract. If the required public improvements are not completed at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the draw shall be used to cure the default. With City approval, the security may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid, but in no case shall the security be reduced to a point less than 10% of the original amount until (1) all improvements have been completed for all phases of the Lakeside development, (2) iron monuments for lot comers have been installed, (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied, (4) the required "record" plans have been received by the City, (5) a warranty security is provided for public improvements, and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City. 7. Notice. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following address: John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Edina, MN 55435 Phone: 952-835-2808 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 8. Other Special Conditions. A $642,935.02 letter of credit or escrow for the developer -installed improvements, the $148,358.08 cash administration fee and the fully -executed development contract must be submitted and shall be submitted prior to scheduling a pre -construction meeting. The cash fee was calculated as follows: Administration Fee: $23,476.80 Attorney Fee for Review and Recording of Plat and Development Contract: 450.00 GIS Fee: $25 (plat) + ($10/parcel x 28 parcels) 305.00 Surface Water Management Fee: 47,333.00 Park Dedication Fee: (4 units x $5,000/unit) + (11 units x $3,800/unit) 61,800.00 Arterial Collector Fee: 2.8722 developable acres x $2,400.00/acre 6,893.28 Street Lighting Charge (one year of electricity): 27 lights x $300.00/light 8,100.00 Total Cash Fees $ 148,358.08 SP -3 B. PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Model permits will be issued for the community club house, Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. 2. The developer shall dedicate public access easements over the sidewalks along Lake Riley Road East and Riley Lake Drive and the trail connection in the northeast comer of the development, which connect Lyman Boulevard to the Highway 312 underpass and trail in Eden Prairie C. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase 11 Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 2. The five apartment buildings, bituminous driveways, gravel path and playground on the site must be removed before building permits will be issued, with the exception of the model and community club house permits. 3. The overflow elevation of the wetland must be at least one foot below the lowest opening of any adjacent building. 4. The invert elevation of CB 217 must be 895.6 feet or lower. 5. A draintile stub to serve the future lot to the north must be installed at CB 217 with this phase. 6. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be noted on the grading plan. 7. Include the missing 884 -foot contour north of Pond 2. 8. Delete the extra 884 -foot contour west of Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. 9. A drainage and utility easement is required over the wetland. The easement shall encompass the wetland, wetland buffer and high water level of the wetland. 10. Pavement grades within the development shall not exceed 10%. SP -4 11. Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2% and shall not exceed 3HA V. 12. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 13. Staff suggests that the storm sewer west of the retaining wall along the back of the lots within Block 1 be shifted to the west so that any excavation of this storm pipe will not undermine. 14. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 15. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 16. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 17. All retaining walls within a drainage and utility easement require an encroachment agreement. 18. Lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to service the lots and blocks within the final plat shall be installed first. Once these segments of sanitary sewer and watermain have been installed and tested the developer may elect to extend the remainder of the lateral sanitary sewer and watermain to serve future phases of the development. 19. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 20. Any road closure of Lyman Boulevard due to utility extension must be coordinated through the Engineering Department at least 10 days prior to the requested closure. 21. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 22. The developer's contractor must contact the City of Chanhassen Construction Manager, at least 48 hours in advance of connecting to any public utility. 23. The 100 -scale utility plan cover sheet must show all proposed utilities and retaining wall(s). 24. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. WW 25. A preconstruction meeting is required before building permit issuance. 26. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 27. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 28. The developer must have the base course of asphalt in at the following locations by November 15, 2006: north end of Lot 3, Block 2 to Lake Riley Road East, and north of Lot 4, Block 1 to Lyman Boulevard. In the event such asphalt is not installed by the above date the Developer shall install prior to November 15, 2006 alternate asphalt roads in a location and design as approved by the City Fire Marshall and the City engineering department. 29. Install pedestrian ramps at all curbs and street crossings of trails and sidewalks. 30. The developer shall pay the $6,893.39 Arterial Collector Fee with the final plat. D. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 2. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high water, OHW (865.3), of Lake Riley. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 3. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot I, Lakeside, shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. SP -6 4. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units proposed for Outlots F and H, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 5. The applicant shall work with staff to revise the slopes within 30 feet of the normal water level of Pond 1 to provide adequate access for future stormwater infrastructure maintenance activities. 6. The SWPPP should be revised to include the grading plan, erosion and sediment control plan. 7. The SWPPP shall be revised as follows: a. Include a sequencing/timing discussion of the erosion and sediment control with includes, but is not limited to: i. Sediment basin installation (prior to or concurrent with grading) ii. Silt fence installation iii. Grading iv. Stockpiles (stabilization) v. Temporary and permanent cover b. Include information on seed mixes to be used. i. Type (temporary or permanent cover) and mix name ii. Location to be used iii. Blanket type, if proposed and seed to be used with the blanket c. If land disturbances are proposed atton the beachlot, the SWPPP must include details of the proposed erosion and sediment control measures d. Temporary seed and mulch must be defined in the SWPPP (ie. when to use it and what seed mix) e. Wimco curb inlet protection is proposed; however, beehive structures (surface drainage) should also be protected with Wimco inlet protection or similar BMPs. f. Reduced copies of the grading, erosion and sediment control plans should be included in SWPPP g. Remove unnecessary plans from the SWPPP (e.g., lighting) h. Include existing conditions plan that shows grades prior to grading activity i. The grading plan and SWPPP shall indicate that dewatering activities need authorization from on-site observer prior to dewatering occurring 8. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 9. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation. SP -7 10. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 11. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 12. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 13. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 14. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 15. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 16. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. 17. The SWMP fee for Lakeside — Phase I (including Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-12, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 3; and Outlots A, I and J, with credits assigned accordingly) is $47,333.00. 18. The developer shall provide additional details regarding Pond 2 including the intended purpose of the pond and elevation of the proposed flared end section. E. CITY FORESTOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 2. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. CME 3. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 4. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern corner of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. 5. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. F. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The developer shall pay $61,800.00 park dedication fees for the first phase of the development prior to final plat recording in lieu of parkland dedication. 2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 3. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, shall be installed with the fust phase of the development. 9. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Contract are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein. SP -9 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (SEAL) Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Sienna Corporation: fEw STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) John Vogelbacher, Vice President The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2005, by John Vogelbacher of Sienna Corporation, on behalf of the company. DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 61217 NOTARY PUBLIC EXHIBIT "A" TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT Legal Description of Property Parcel 1: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEPTING therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. Parcel 2: Outlot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this day of 20 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20_, by NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 FEE OWNER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this day of 20_ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20—, by NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. _ Date: TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of (Name of Developer) and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter of Credit in the amount of $ available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the undersigned bank The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated 2 , of (Name of Bank) 11, b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Manager of the City of Chanhassen. c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) on or before 4:00 p.m. on November 30, 2 This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless, at least forty- five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date (which shall be November 30 of each year), the Bank delivers written notice to the Chanhassen City Manager that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Chanhassen City Manager, Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and is actually received by the City Manager at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 500. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. FN Its CITY OF CHANHASSEN DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) E -' LIMIT "B" C ►1 ItILiR61 1. Right to Proceed. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, 3) the plat has been recorded with the County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Title's Office of the County where the plat is located, and 4) the City Engineer has issued a letter that the foregoing conditions have been satisfied and then the Developer may proceed. 2. Phased Development. If the plat is a phase of a multiphased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks. 3. Preliminary Plat Status. If the plat is a phase of a multi -phased preliminary plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within two (2) years after preliminary plat approval. 4. Changes in Official Controls. For two (2) years from the date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. 5. Improvements. The improvements specified in the Special Provisions of this Contract shall be installed in accordance with City standards, ordinances, and plans and specifications which have been prepared and signed by a competent registered professional GC -1 engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and other pertinent agencies before proceeding with construction. The City will, at the Developer's expense, have one or more construction inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer shall also provide a qualified inspector to perform site inspections on a daily basis. Inspector qualifications shall be submitted in writing to the City Engineer. The Developer shall instruct its project engineer/inspector to respond to questions from the City Inspector(s) and to make periodic site visits to satisfy that the construction is being performed to an acceptable level of quality in accordance with the engineer's design. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. 6. Iron Monuments. Before the security for the completion of utilities is released, all monuments must be correctly placed in the ground in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 505.02, Subd. 1. The Developers surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. 7. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 8. Site Erosion and Sediment Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion and sediment control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion and sediment control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion and sediment control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion and sediment transport. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion and sediment control plan and schedule of supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion and sediment transport at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion and sediment control requirements. Erosion and sediment control needs to be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored, even if construction has been completed and accepted. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion and sediment control, the City will authorize the removal of the erosion and sediment control, i.e. hay bales and silt fence. The Developer shall remove and dispose of the erosion and sediment control measures. 8a. Erosion Control During Construction of a Dwelling or Other Building. Before a building permit is issued for construction of a dwelling or other building on a lot, a $500.00 cash escrow or letter of credit per lot shall also be furnished to the City to guarantee compliance with City Code § 7-22. 9. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 10. Acceptance and Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and acceptance by the City of the work and construction required by this Contract, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property. After completion of the improvements, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developer's engineer will make a final inspection of the work with the City Engineer. Before the City accepts the improvements, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and the Developer and his engineer shall submit a written statement to the City Engineer certifying that the project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The appropriate contractor waivers shall also be provided. Final acceptance of the public improvements shall be by City Council resolution. 11. Claims. In the event that the City receives claims from laborers, materialmen, or others that work required by this Contract has been performed, the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materiahnen, or others are seeking payment out of the financial guarantees posted with the City, and if the claims are not resolved at least ninety (90) days before the security required by this Contract will expire, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125% of the claim(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attomeys' fees. 12. Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay full park dedication fees in conjunction with the installation of the plat improvements. The park dedication fees shall be the current amount in force at the time of final platting pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinances and City Council resolutions. 13. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with Plan D. Unless otherwise approved by the City, trees not listed in the City's approved tree list are prohibited. The minimum tree size shall be two and one-half (21/2) inches caliper, either bare root in season, or balled and burlapped. The trees may not be planted in the boulevard (area between curb and property line). In addition to any sod required as a part of the erosion and sediment control plan, Plan B, the Developer or lot purchaser shall sod the boulevard area and all drainage ways on each lot utilizing a minimum of four (4) inches of topsoil as a base. Seed or sod shall also be placed on all disturbed areas of the lot. If these improvements are not in place at the time a certificate of GC -3 occupancy is requested, a financial guarantee of $750.00 in the form of cash or letter of credit shall be provided to the City. These conditions must then be complied with within two (2) months after the certificate of occupancy issued, except that if the certificate of occupancy is issued between October 1 through May 1 these conditions must be complied with by the following July 1st. Upon expiration of the time period, inspections will be conducted by City staff to verify satisfactory completion of all conditions. City staff will conduct inspections of incomplete items with a $50.00 inspection fee deducted from the escrow fund for each inspection. After satisfactory inspection, the financial guarantee shall be returned. If the requirements are not satisfied, the City may use the security to satisfy the requirements. The City may also use the escrowed funds for maintenance of erosion control pursuant to City Code Section 7-22 or to satisfy any other requirements of this Contract or of City ordinances. These requirements supplement, but do not replace, specific landscaping conditions that may have been required by the City Council for project approval. 14. Warranty. The Developer wan -ants all public and private improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the public improvements, or 2) a letter of credit for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the public improvements. A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor installing public sewer and public water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. B. The required warranty period for all work relating to public street construction, including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to two (2) years from the date of final written acceptance. C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is one full growing season following acceptance by the City. 15. Lot Plans. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an acceptable Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control including silt fences, and Tree Removal Plan shall be submitted for each lot for review and approval by the City Engineer. Each plan shall assure that drainage is maintained away from buildings and that tree removal is consistent with development plans and City Ordinance. 16. Existing Assessments. Any existing assessments against the plat will be re -spread against the plat in accordance with City standards. 17. Hook-up Charges. The Developer also acknowledges overall sanitary sewer and water trunk availability to the site and the hook-up charges established by the City as reasonable compensation for oversizing costs previously incurred, as well as, long-term maintenance. Said hook-up charges are collectible at time of building permit unless a written request is made to assess 104w, the costs over a four year term at the rates in effect at time of application. If paid with the building permit, the party applying for the building permit is responsible for payment of these fees. 18. Public Street Lighting. The Developer shall have installed and pay for public street lights in accordance with City standards. The public street lights shall be accepted for City ownership and maintenance at the same time that the public street is accepted for ownership and maintenance. A plan shall be submitted for the City Engineers approval prior to the installation. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall pay the City a fee of $300.00 for each street light installed in the plat. The fee shall be used by the City for furnishing electricity and maintaining each public street light for twenty (20) months. 19. Signage. All street signs, traffic signs, and wetland monumentation required by the City as a part of the plat shall be furnished and installed by the City at the sole expense of the Developer. 20. House Pads. The Developer shall promptly furnish the City "as -built" plans indicating the amount, type and limits of fill on any house pad location. 21. Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall pay an administrative fee in conjunction with the installation of the plat improvements. This fee is to cover the cost of City Staff time and overhead for items such as review of construction documents, preparation of the Development Contract, monitoring construction progress, processing pay requests, processing security reductions, and final acceptance of improvements. This fee does not cover the City's cost for construction inspections. The fee shall be calculated as follows: i) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is less than $500,000, three percent (3%) of construction costs; ii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is between $500,000 and $1,000,000, three percent (3%) of construction costs for the fust $500,000 and two percent (2%) of construction costs over $500,000; iii) if the cost of the construction of public improvements is over $1,000,000, two and one-half percent (21/2%) of construction costs for the first $1,000,000 and one and one-half percent (11/2%) of construction costs over $1,000,000. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall deposit with the City a fee based upon construction estimates. After construction is completed, the final fee shall be determined based upon actual construction costs. The cost of public improvements is defined in paragraph 6 of the Special Provisions. 10W B. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for all costs incurred by the City for providing construction and erosion and sediment control inspections. This cost will be periodically billed directly to the Developer based on the actual progress of the construction. Payment shall be due in accordance with Article 21E of this Agreement. C. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attomeys' fees. D. In addition to the administrative fee, the Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attomeys' fees. E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction, including but not limited to the issuance of building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as, but not limited to, sewer availability charges ("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees. G. Private Utilities. The Developer shall have installed and pay for the installation of electrical, natural gas, telephone, and cable television service in conjunction with the overall development improvements. These services shall be provided in accordance with each of the respective franchise agreements held with the City. H. The developer shall pay the City a fee established by City Council resolution, to reimburse the City for the cost of updating the City's base maps, GIS data base files, and converting the plat and record drawings into an electronic format. Record drawings must be submitted within four months of final acceptance of public utilities. All digital information submitted to the City shall be in the Carver County Coordinate system. 22. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. GC -6 23. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the pre -construction meeting for installation of public improvements. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the acceptance of the public improvements unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmasters request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. The City is not a guarantor of the Developer's obligations under this Contract. The City shall have no responsibility or liability to lot purchasers or others for the City's failure to enforce this Contract or for allowing deviations from it. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Contract by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. The City may also issue a stop work order halting all plat development until the breach has been cured and the City has received satisfactory assurance that the breach will not reoccur. E. Severability. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Building Permits. Except for the models and community club house, building permits will not be issued in the plat until sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer have been installed, tested, and accepted by the City, and the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the site graded and revegetated in accordance with Plan B of the development plans. G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Release. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property . After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the Developer's request the City Manager will issue a Certificate of Compliance. Prior to the issuance of such a certificate, individual lot owners may make as written request for a certificate applicable to an individual lot allowing a minimum of ten (10) days for processing. GC -7 I. hisurance. Developer shall take out and maintain until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $500,000 for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for failure to give the required notice. J. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, expressed or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. K. Assipnabiliri. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. L. Construction Hours. Construction hours for required improvements under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Under emergency conditions, this limitation may be waived by the consent of the City Engineer. Any approved work performed after dark shall be adequately illuminated. If construction occurs outside of the permitted construction hours, the Developer shall pay the following administrative penalties: Fust violation $ 500.00 Second violation $ 1,000.00 Third & subsequent violations All site development and construction must cease for seven (7) calendar days M. Noise Amnflfication. The use of outdoor loudspeakers, bullhoms, intercoms, and similar devices is prohibited in conjunction with the construction of homes, buildings, and the improvements required under this contract. The administrative penalty for violation of construction hours shall also apply to violation of the provisions in this paragraph. N. Access. All access to the plat prior to the City accepting the roadway improvements shall be the responsibility of the Developer regardless if the City has issued building permits or occupancy permits for lots within the plat. GC -8 O. Street Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for all street maintenance until streets within the plat are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed by the Developer when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on same and directing attention to detours. If streets become impassable, the City may order that such streets shall be barricaded and closed The Developer shall maintain a smooth roadway surface and provide proper surface drainage. The Developer may request, in writing, that the City plow snow on the streets prior to final acceptance of the streets. The City shall have complete discretion to approve or reject the request. The City shall not be responsible for reshaping or damage to the street base or utilities because of snow plowing operations. The provision of City snow plowing service does not constitute final acceptance of the streets by the City. P. Storm Sewer Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system (including ponds, pipes, catch basins, culverts and swales) within the plat and the adjacent off-site storm sewer system that receives storm water from the plat. The Developer shall follow all instructions it receives from the City concerning the cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system. The Developer's obligations under this paragraph shall end two (2) years after the public street and storm drainage improvements in the plat have been accepted by the City. Twenty percent (20%) of the storm sewer costs, shown under section 6 of the special provisions of this contract, will be held by the City for the duration of the 2 -year maintenance period. Q. Soil Treatment Systems. If soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are fust provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the platting process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. R. Variances. By approving the plat, the Developer represents that all lots in the plat are buildable without the need for variances from the City's ordinances. S. Compliance with laws. Ordinances, and Regulations. In the development of the plat the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; 2. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District(s); 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. T. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers to enter into this Development Contract. GC -9 U. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. V. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature of suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. On lots which have no fill material a soils report from a qualified soils engineer is not required unless the City's building inspection department determines from observation that there may be a soils problem. On lots with fill material that have been mass graded as part of a multi -lot grading project, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City issues a building permit for the lot. On lots with fill material that have been custom graded, a satisfactory soils report from a qualified soils engineer shall be provided before the City inspects the foundation for a building on the lot. W. Haul Routes. The Developer, the Developer's contractors or subcontractors must submit proposed haul routes for the import or export of soil, construction material, construction equipment or construction debris, or any other purpose. All haul routes must be approved by the City Engineer X. Development Signs. The Developer shall post a six foot by eight foot development sign in accordance with City Detail Plate No. 5313 at each entrance to the project. The sign shall be in place before construction of the required improvements commences and shall be removed when the required improvements are completed, except for the final lift of asphalt on streets. The signs shall contain the following information: project name, name of developer, developer's telephone number and designated contact person, allowed construction hours. Y. Construction Plans. Upon final plat approval, the developer shall provide the City with two complete sets of full-size construction plans and four sets of 11"x17" reduced construction plan sets and three sets of specifications. Within four months after the completion of the utility improvements and base course pavement and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with the following: (1) a complete set of reproducible Mylar as -built plans, (2) two complete full-size sets of blue line/paper as -built plans, (3) two complete sets of utility tie sheets, (4) location of buried fabric used for soil stabilization, (5) location stationing and swing ties of all utility stubs including draintile cleanouts, (6) bench mark network, (7) digital file of as -built plans in both .dxf & .tif format (the Axf file must be tied to the current county coordinate system), (8) digital file of utility tie sheets in either .doc or .tif format, and (9) a GC -10 breakdown of lineal footage of all utilities installed, including the per lineal foot bid price. The Developer is required to submit the final plat in electronic format. Z. As -Built Lot Surveys. An as -built lot survey will be required on all lots prior to the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. The as -built lot survey must be prepared, signed, and dated by a Registered Land Surveyor. Sod and the bituminous driveways must be installed before the as -built survey is completed. If the weather conditions at the time of the as -built are not conducive to paving the driveway and/or installing sod, a temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued and the as -built escrow withheld until all work is complete. Rev. 3/31/06 GC -11 Building Inspections MEMORANDUM PFax:9522.227190 TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager MY Cl l l OF FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner CgA MSEN pond, 11 lots for townhouses on the west side of the development (Wooddale Phone: 952.227.1160 DATE: October 23, 2006 7700 Market Boulevard Cudd Company), Outlot A which will contain the private street and utilities for PO e 147 Chanhasssen,n, MN 55317 SUBJ: Final Plat Approval for Lakeside IWminMrallon Planning Case No. 06-26 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 PROPOSAL SUMMARY Building Inspections The applicant is requesting final plat approval for the first phase of Lakeside PFax:9522.227190 consisting of 18 lots, 10 outlots and right-of-way for public streets. The first Fax: 952.227.1790 phase of the development consists of the community building and storm water Engineering pond, 11 lots for townhouses on the west side of the development (Wooddale Phone: 952.227.1160 Builders, Inc.), 4 lots for twin homes on the east side of the development (Charles Fax: 952.227.1110 Cudd Company), Outlot A which will contain the private street and utilities for Finance the project and Outlots I and J, the recreational beachlot site. The balance of the Phone: 952.227.1140 outlots will be platted in the future for additional residential development. Fax 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation All subdivision improvements, streets, sewer, water, storm water and site grading Phone 952 227.1120 will be done in one phase, which will continue into mid 2007 before being Fax: 952.227.1110 completed. As part of the preliminary plat, the developer was proposing matching Center RecreationCoulter the grades on the property in Eden Prairie. The City of Eden Prairie will not permit 2310 Couher Cou Boulevard Phone: 952.2271400 any grading on their property. The developer has, therefore, incorporated Fax: 952.227,1404 retaining walls along the easterly property line. The platting (and building) of the rest of the development will occur on a more consumer -driven basis. Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 The subdivision complies with the Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD - Fax 952227 1110 R) regulations for Lakeside. Staff is recommending approval of the final plat for Public works Lakeside Phase I. 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.2271300 BACKGROUND Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Coder On July 24, 2006, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.221.1110 A. Rezoning of the property located within the Lakeside development, from Web site High Density Residential District (R12) to Planned Unit Development - wwwci.chanhassenmus Residential (PUD -R) incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report subject to the final plat approval for the Lakeside development. B. Preliminary Plat for Lakeside. C. Site Plan for 231 housing units and a community building with pool, with a Variance for building height for the condominium units consistent with the Building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects. 11CANWu The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A goat place to live, work, and play. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 2 D. Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with a Variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units be within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lotFINAL PLAT REVIEW The applicant is requesting final plat approval for the first phase of the development consisting of 18 lots, 10 outlots and right-of-way for public streets. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The 26 -acre site is bordered by Highway 212 to the north, Bearpath Golf Course to the east, Lyman Boulevard to the south and North Bay detached townhomes to the west. There are five apartment buildings, bituminous driveways, a gravel path and a playground on the site; these must be removed before building permits will be issued, with the exception of the model permits. Model permits will be issued for Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. The high points of the property are on the north side and at the southeast corner. The north side of the site drains to the wetland on the northwest corner of the property. The remainder of the site drains to a culvert that extends under Lake Riley Drive East and to the pond located within the North Bay development. Runoff from the development will be conveyed to the proposed pond in the northeast comer of Lakeview Roa&East and Lyman Boulevard. The developer's engineer has submitted hydrology calculations for the site. The City's engineering consultant, Kimley-Horn & Associates, has reviewed the calculations and has determined that the proposed design meets City and MPCA requirements. The wetland in the northwest comer is perched. Therefore, maintaining a three-foot separation between the water level in the wetland and the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes is not feasible. A variance from Section 18-40 (4) d of the City Code is required. The developer must provide perimeter draintile along the north side of this building to artificially lower the groundwater elevation so that it will be a minimum of three feet below the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent home. The storm sewer to serve this future lot will be installed with the first phase; therefore, the invert elevation of CB 217 must be 895.6 feet or lower; this elevation is based on the groundwater elevation listed in the soil borings. A draintile stub must be installed at CB 217 with this phase. The lowest opening of the homes adjacent to the wetland must be a minimum of one foot above the overflow elevation of the wetland. These homes will be final platted at a future date. The lowest floor elevation of the future unit north of Pond 2 must be a minimum of three feet above the high water elevation of the pond. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be noted on the grading plan. Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2% and shall not exceed 3H: 1V. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 3 Include the missing 884 -foot contour north of Pond 2. Delete the extra 884 -foot contour west of Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. The grading plan must be revised to reflect the new driveway orientation to the underground parking within Building A. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. A drainage and utility easement is required over the wetland. The easement shall encompass the wetland, wetland buffer and high water level of the wetland. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner if any off-site grading is required. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. RETAINING WALLS There are numerous retaining walls proposed throughout the project. Staff has numbered the retaining walls (see attached Retaining Wall Exhibit) to simplify the descriptions of the walls. Wall Number Length (approximate) Maximum Height (approximate) Wall Number Length (approximate) Maximum Height (approximate) 1 720 feet 12.5 feet 12 690 feet 12.5 feet 2 75 feet 4.5 feet 13 60 feet 4 feet 3 105 feet 14 feet 14 255 feet 5.5 feet 4 510 feet 16.3 feet* 15 90 feet 6 feet 5 300 feet 11 feet* 16 30 feet 1 foot 6 1 30 feet 5 feet 17 30 feet 2 feet 7 90 feet 2.7 feet 18 60 feet 3.7 feet 8 30 feet 4 feet 19 30 feet 1 foot 9 195 feet 3 feet 20 30 feet 2 feet 10 1,125 feet 5.8 feet 21 60 feet 3.6 feet 11 720 feet 2.5 feet** 22 90 feet 10 feet * These high points are at approximately the same location, therefore the combined wall height would be 27.3 feet. ** These high points are at approximately the same location, therefore the combined wall height would be 15 feet. Once the grading plan is corrected: • The length of Wall 15 will likely be reduced. • Walls 16 and 19 will likely be eliminated. • Walls 17/18 and 20/21 will be reduced in height and length, or eliminated. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 4 Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. All retaining walls within a drainage and utility easement require an encroachment agreement. UTILITIES The developer proposes to extend lateral sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within the development. All utilities within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. Watermain will extend from the existing watermain within Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Road East. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped. The hydrant layout must be revised as follows: • Sheet 3: Move the hydrant north of future unit 118 to the north side of future unit 117. • Sheet 3: Add a hydrant on the south side of the parking area, across the road from Lot 1, Block 1. • Sheet 4: Add a hydrant in between future units 139 and 140. Sanitary sewer will extend from two locations within Lake Riley Road East: at the proposed intersection of Lake Riley Trail and just north of the intersection at Lyman Boulevard. Any road closure of Lyman Boulevard due to utility extension must be coordinated through the Engineering Department at least 10 days prior to the requested closure. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. The developer's contractor must contact Gordy Stauff, City of Chanhassen Construction Manager, at least 48 hours in advance of connecting to any public utility. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots; therefore, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. Staff suggests that the storm sewer west of the retaining wall along the back of the lots within Block 1 be shifted to the west so that any excavation of this storm pipe will not undermine the retaining wall(s). The 100 -scale utility plan cover sheet must show all proposed utilities. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also 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 Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 5 final plat approval. A preconstruction meeting is required before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the MPCA, Dept. of Health, Carver County and Watershed District. EASEMENTS The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. This easement was obtained in 1979 over the sanitary sewer pipe that connected to the Lake Ann Interceptor. Flow from a portion of the Rogers Addition south of Lyman Boulevard was pumped from a lift station that was located at Lake Riley and Lyman Boulevards. In 1993 gravity sanitary sewer was installed from Lakeview Road East (North Bay Addition) to the intersection of Lake Riley and Lyman Boulevards. New forcemain was installed within Lyman Boulevard to the gravity sanitary sewer which is just west of Quinn Road; from there the flow continues west to Highway 101. In 1995 the North Bay development connected the Lakeview Hills sanitary sewer to the new gravity lateral sanitary sewer. The old sanitary sewer line north to the Lake Ann Inceptor was removed/abandoned with the North Bay improvements. STREETS Access to the site will be from Lakeview Road East and Lyman Boulevard. The access to Lyman Boulevard will be approximately 340 feet east of the Lake Riley Road intersection. Staff supports the proposed access spacing due to the severe grades to the east. A median will be installed at the street intersection with Lyman Boulevard and will provide 17 -foot wide ingress and egress lanes. All streets within the development will be privately owned and maintained. The streets will be 24 feet wide and will widen to 33 feet at several locations to provide dedicated on -street parallel parking spaces. Guest parking lots and drop-off aisles will be constructed in front of Buildings A, B and C when those buildings are final platted. Due to the timing of final approval for this project, the developer proposes to pave Riley Lake Drive north of Lot 3, Block 2 to Lake Riley Road East, and north of Lot 4, Block 1 to Lyman Boulevard. This development is adjacent to Lyman Boulevard; therefore, the Arterial Collector Fee due for the first phase is as follows: 2.8722 developable acres x $2,400.00/acre = $6,893.39. The future phases of this development will be subject to the fee at the time of final plat. Pavement grades within the development shall not exceed 10%. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 6 COMPLIANCE There are no minimum lot dimensions or lot areas estabhshed for the Lakeside Planned Unit Development. The overall project is limited to 231 dwelling units consisting of twin homes, townhouses, and three condominium buildings and their ancillary uses. Setbacks The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following table displays those setbacks. # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 50 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 50 percent site coverage. LOT INFORMATION TABLE Parcel Setback Standards Highway 212 50 feet East(Perimeter) Lot Line 50 feet -townhouses/twin homes; Building Height — Condominiums with a minimum of 30 feet Lyman Boulevard 50 feet/30 feet for beach lot West(Perimeter) Lot Line 50 feet Twin Home separation between buildings 15 feet Townhouse separation between buildings 20 feet Minimum Driveway length (to back of curb, trail or sidewalk) 25 feet Hard Surface Coverage 50 % Wetland: Buffer and buffer setback 16.5 feet and 40 feet Lake Riley 75 feet # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 50 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 50 percent site coverage. LOT INFORMATION TABLE Parcel Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes L 1 B1 4,465 43 104 Twin home unit L2 B1 4,465 43 104 Twin home unit L3 B1 4,465 43 104 Twin home unit L4 B1 4,465 43 104 Twin home unit L5 BI 12,743 NA NA Common area Ll B2 3,978 47 86 Town house unit L2 B2 3,612 42 86 Town house unit L3 B2 4,042 47 86 Town house unit L4 B2 4,042 47 86 Town house unit L5 B2 3,612 42 86 Town house unit L6 B2 3,612 42 86 Town house unit L7 B2 14,042 47 86 Town house unit L8 B2 14,042 47 86 Town house unit Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 7 Parcel Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes L9 B2 3,612 42 86 Town house unit L10 B2 3,612 42 86 Town house unit L11 B2 4,042 47 86 Town house unit L12 B2 33,699 NA NA Common Area Ll B3 65,656 98 295 Community Building/storm water pond Outlot A 143,743 NA NA Private Street/Parkin Outlot B 106,711 NA NA Future condominium site Outlot C 120,409 NA NA Future twin home sites Outlot D 145,142 NA NA Future condominium site Outlot E 29,716 NA NA Future town house sites Outlot F 101,279 NA NA Future town house sites Outlot G 68,790 NA NA Future condominium site Outlot H 115,993 NA NA Future twin home sites Outlot I 34,860 NA NA Beachlot Outlot J 30,341 NA NA Beachlot ROW 75,866 Lyman Blvd. & Lake Riley Road East (1.74 acres) TOTAL 1,035,890 23.78 acres REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. *This condition has been met. Riley Lake Drive (main road) and Riley Lake Trail (east -west street). 2. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. *This condition has been met. 3. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrants and any to be relocated. *This condition has been met. 4. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 8 *This condition still applies. 5. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). *This condition shall be modified as follows: All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high water, OHW (865.3), of Lake Riley. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 6. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. *This condition has been met. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. *This condition shall be modified as follows: All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot I, Lakeside, shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 8. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 shall be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. *This condition has been met. 9. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units proposed for Outlots F and H, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 10. The applicant shall provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond 1 to Lake Riley. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 9 *This condition has been met. 11. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. *This condition has been met. 12. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. *This condition still applies. 13. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The SWPPP should be revised to include the grading plan, erosion and sediment control plan. 14. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. *This condition has been met. 15. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. *This condition still applies. 16. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation *This condition still applies. 17. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. *This condition still applies. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 10 18. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). *This condition still applies. 19. The proposed storm water pond shall be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond shall be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans shall show how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berms and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. 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. *This condition has been met. 20. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B shall be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type 1 silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan shall be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and shall be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. *This condition shall be modified as follows: Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 21. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. *This condition still applies. 22. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. *This condition still applies. 23. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. *This condition still applies. 24. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 11 *This condition still applies. 25. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The SWMP fee for Lakeside — Phase I (including Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-12, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 3; and Outlots A, I and J, with credits assigned accordingly) is $47,333.00. 26. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. *This condition still applies. 27. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. *This condition still applies. 28. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. *This condition still applies. 29. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. *This condition still applies. 30. The applicant shall increase landscape plantings along the east property line to minimum bufferyard requirements. *This condition has been met. 31. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern corner of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. *This condition still applies. 32. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. *This condition still applies. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 12 33. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The five apartment buildings, bituminous driveways, gravel path and playground on the site must be removed before building permits will be issued, with the exception of the model permits. 34. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. *This condition does not apply. 35. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. *This condition does not apply. 36. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The overflow elevation of the wetland must be at least one foot below the lowest opening of any adjacent building. 37. The proposed grading in the northwest comer near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 comply with city standards. *This condition does not apply. 38. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. *This condition has been met. 39. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. *This condition shall be modified as follows: Pavement grades within the development shall not exceed 10%. 40. Ground (ie. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. *This condition shall be modified as follows: Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2% and shall not exceed 3H:1 V. 41. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. *This condition has been met. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 13 42. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. *This condition still applies. 43. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. *This condition has been met. 44. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. The developer must receive approval from the City of Eden Prairie for grading in to the Outlot for Bearpath 3rd Addition. *The City of Eden Prairie will not permit any grading on their property. The developer has, therefore, incorporated retaining walls along the easterly property line. This condition shall be modified as follows: An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. *This condition still applies. 46. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. *This condition still applies. 47. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. *This condition still applies. 48. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. *This condition is duplicated in the next condition and may be deleted. 49. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. *This condition still applies. 50. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 14 *This condition still applies. 51. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. *This condition still applies. 52. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. *This condition has been met. 53. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. *This condition can be modified as follows: The developer shall pay $61,800.00 park dedication fees for the first phase of the development prior to final plat recording in lieu of parkland dedication. 54. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. *This condition still applies. 55. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, shall be installed with the first phase of the development. Based on the review of the subdivision construction plans, staff recommends that the following conditions be added: 1. The developer shall provide additional details regarding Pond 2 including the intended purpose of the pond and elevation of the proposed flared end section. 2. Install pedestrian ramps at all curbs and street crossings of trails and sidewalks. 3. Model permits will be issued for Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 15 4. The invert elevation of CB 217 must be 895.6 feet or lower. 5. A draintile stub to serve the future lot to the north must be installed at CB 217 with this phase. 6. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be noted on the grading plan. 7. Include the missing 884 -foot contour north of Pond 2. 8. Delete the extra 884 -foot contour west of Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. 9. The grading plan must be revised to reflect the new driveway orientation to the underground parking within Building A. 10. A drainage and utility easement is required over the wetland. The easement shall encompass the wetland, wetland buffer and high water level of the wetland. 11. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 12. All retaining walls within a drainage and utility easement require an encroachment agreement. 13. Any road closure of Lyman Boulevard due to utility extension must be coordinated through the Engineering Department at least 10 days prior to the requested closure. 14. The developer's contractor must contact Gordy Stauff, City of Chanhassen Construction Manager, at least 48 hours in advance of connecting to any public utility. 15. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 16. Staff suggests that the storm sewer west of the retaining wall along the back of the lots within Block 1 be shifted to the west so that any excavation of this storm pipe will not undermine. 17. The 100 -scale utility plan cover sheet must show all proposed utilities the retaining wall(s). 18. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 19. A preconstruction meeting is required before building permit issuance. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 16 20. The developer must have the base course of asphalt in at the following locations by November 15, 2006: north end of Lot 3, Block 2 to Lake Riley Road East, and north of Lot 4, Block 1 to Lyman Boulevard. 21. The developer shall pay the $6,893.39 Arterial Collector Fee with the final plat. 22. The developer shall dedicate public access easements over the sidewalks along Lake Riley Road East and Riley Lake Drive and the trail connection in the northeast comer of the development, which connect Lyman Boulevard to the Highway 312 underpass and trail in Eden Prairie. SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FINDINGS The city may grant a variance from the regulations of the subdivision ordinance as part of the plat approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist: 1) The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. Finding: The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The wetland is perched, meaning that it is hydraulically isolated and located on a higher outcropping than surrounding land. It would be unfeasible to bring the entire site above the wetland. 2) The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape and topographical conditions of the land. Finding: The hardship is caused by the particular physical surroundings, shape and topographical conditions of the land. The wetland is perched, meaning that it is hydraulically isolated and located on a higher outcropping than surrounding land. 3) The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property. Finding: The conditions upon which the request is based are unique to this site and not generally applicable to other properties. The wetland is perched, meaning that it is hydraulically isolated and located on a higher outcropping than surrounding land. It would be unfeasible to bring the entire site above the wetland. 4) The granting of the variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. Finding: The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of the subdivision chapter, the zoning ordinance, and comprehensive plan. The applicant will provide a minimum one foot separation above the emergency overflow of the wetland.. The applicant's request is reasonable. Staff is recommending approval of this request. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 17 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The Chanhassen City Council approves the Final Plat for Lakeside creating 18 lots, 10 outlots and right-of-way for public streets (plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated 10/02/06) with a variance from Section 18-40 (4) d of the Chanhassen City Code subject to the following conditions: A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 2. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high water, OHW (865.3), of Lake Riley. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 3. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot I, Lakeside, shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 4. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units proposed for Outlots F and H, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 5. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. 6. The SWPPP should be revised to include the grading plan, erosion and sediment control plan. 7. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 18 8. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 9. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation 10. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 11. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 12. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 13. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 14. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 15. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 16. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. 17. The SWMP fee for Lakeside — Phase I (including Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-12, Block 2; Lot 1, Block 3; and Outlots A, I and J, with credits assigned accordingly) is $47,333.00. 18. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 19. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 20. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 19 21. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 22. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern corner of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. 23. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. 24. The five apartment buildings, bituminous driveways, gravel path and playground on the site must be removed before building permits will be issued, with the exception of the model permits. 25. The overflow elevation of the wetland must be at least one foot below the lowest opening of any adjacent building. 26. Pavement grades within the development shall not exceed 10%. 27. Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2% and shall not exceed 3H:1 V. 28. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 29. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 30. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 31. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 32. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 33. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 34. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 35. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 36. The developer shall pay $61,800.00 park dedication fees for the first phase of the development prior to final plat recording in lieu of parkland dedication. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 20 37. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 38. The trail connection at the northeast comer of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, shall be installed with the first phase of the development. 39. The developer shall provide additional details regarding Pond 2 including the intended purpose of the pond and elevation of the proposed flared end section. 40. Install pedestrian ramps at all curbs and street crossings of trails and sidewalks. 41. Model permits will be issued for Lots 3 and 4, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 2. 42. The invert elevation of CB 217 must be 895.6 feet or lower. 43. A draintile stub to serve the future lot to the north must be installed at CB 217 with this phase. 44. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings must be noted on the grading plan. 45. Include the missing 884 -foot contour north of Pond 2. 46. Delete the extra 884 -foot contour west of Lots I through 3, Block 2. 47. The grading plan must be revised to reflect the new driveway orientation to the underground parking within Building A. 48. A drainage and utility easement is required over the wetland. The easement shall encompass the wetland, wetland buffer and high water level of the wetland. 49. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 50. All retaining walls within a drainage and utility easement require an encroachment agreement. 51. Any road closure of Lyman Boulevard due to utility extension must be coordinated through the Engineering Department at least 10 days prior to the requested closure. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside Final Plat— Planning Case 06-26 October 23, 2006 Page 21 52. The developer's contractor must contact the City of Chanhassen Construction Manager at least 48 hours in advance of connecting to any public utility. 53. Staff suggests that the storm sewer west of the retaining wall along the back of the lots within Block 1 be shifted to the west so that any excavation of this storm pipe will not undermine. 54. The 100 -scale utility plan cover sheet must show all proposed utilities the retaining wall(s). 55. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 56. A preconstruction meeting is required before building permit issuance. 57. The developer must have the base course of asphalt in at the following locations by November 15, 2006: north end of Lot 3, Block 2 to Lake Riley Road East, and north of Lot 4, Block 1 to Lyman Boulevard. 58. The developer shall pay the $6,893.39 Arterial Collector Fee with the final plat. 59. The developer shall dedicate public access easements over the sidewalks along Lake Riley Road East and Riley Lake Drive and the trail connection in the northeast corner of the development, which connect Lyman Boulevard to the Highway 312 underpass and trail in Eden Prairie. " ATTACHMENTS 1. Final plat. 2. Development Design Standards 3. Retaining Wall Exhibit gAplan\2006 planning casm\06-26 lakesideV;nal platValcmde (p memo.doc s'S ' Fgx ?I 94 j3 � i f � m3�C gay xT 3 a °i- ; fF �x',4 •SVT S'�t:. Qc i 3 6 ice# jH � ,; i a t t � \W •• ' "`��11 �� fid. '�. y � YE_ Fj )!j Ei jx� {f•}a� a 61 m �`. \'f„rz, c%: s; ? T� �s a � � w 3:{€( W,lily !� -- �i k iIt' — 1uc- ;3!{i tt z H 12 { 3 �• -'a r r 4 i Nn ii � I c ex �I•[ !!349 x {7si ' .�- sa. S2 33 t =a ♦ �f ” • S! ;i3 a. cx e • _s _ I zz ;fes c jo: I z a I Vv. I 31 I \3 T�y1y�y {jp 0 All Sri E i Yib SI 8 sa N j!. os s;:E e5 � a3: i� i3 I I _ • o i ��` i i i--• i ail ; R" Q •• n R SY a Ya DHy " I iia= �+ • � v •of ° I .; $;Q tea;' -C'�� • >rO -------------- z z! Adopted July 24, 2006 DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Lakeside Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD for a mix housing type multi -family development. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be twin homes, townhouses, and three condominium buildings and their ancillary uses. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. The type of uses to be provided on common areas shall be low -intensity neighborhood -oriented accessory structures to meet daily needs of residents. Such uses may include a bus shelter, community building, development signage, fountain, garden, gazebo, maintenance shed, picnic shelter, pool, playground equipment or tennis courts. C. Setbacks The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following table displays those setbacks. # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. Setback Standards Highway 212 50 feet East(Perimeter) Lot Line 50 feet -townhouses/twin homes; Building Height — Condominiums with a minimum of 30 feet Lyman Boulevard 50 feet/30 feet for beach lot West(Perimeter) Lot Line 50 feet Twin Home separation between buildings 15 feet Townhouse separation between buildings 20 feet Minimum Driveway length (to back of curb, trail or sidewalk) 25 feet Hard Surface Coverage 50 % * Wetland: Buffer and buffer setback 16.5 feet and 40 feet Lake Riley 75 feet # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 50 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 50 percent site coverage. d. Building Materials and Design 1. Townhouses • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of fiber -cement or vinyl siding or shake and brick or stone. • No two adjacent structures shall be of the same color scheme. • Colors used shall be varied across color tones. • All units shall utilize minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles. • Each unit shall have a minimum of one overstory tree within its front landscape yard. • All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building, landscaping or decorative fencing. • Garage doors shall be decorative and have windows. 2. Community Clubhouse • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of stone and stucco and fiber -cement. • Natural cedar shakes roofing. Condominium Building • Building height shall be limited to 48 feet. Building exterior material shall be a combination of 80 percent or greater stone and brick. Accent and trim areas in fiber -cement lap siding and shake. Roofing shall be a minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles (pitched roofs). e. Signage Signage shall comply with city standards for Residential Districts. f. Landscaping Landscaping shall comply with the landscaping plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Retaining Wall Exhibit • Lakeside at Bearpath SWMP Fee Summary Total Area 1145055 26.29 Size (sf) Size ✓I.ot 1, Block 1 4465 A.ot 2, Block 1 4465 .*Lot 3, Block 1 4465 --rot 4, Block 1 4465 ✓l.ot 5, Block 1 12743 -"Lot 1, Block 2 3978 ✓Lot 2, Block 2 3612 ✓Lot 3, Block 2 4042 -'Lot 4, Block 2 4042 ✓L.ot 5, Block 2 3612 /Lot 6, Block 2 3612 ✓Lot 7, Block 2 4042 ✓Lot 8, Block 2 4042 ✓Lot 9, Block 2 3612 ✓Lot 10, Block 2 3612 ✓Lot 11, Block 2 4042 ✓Lot 12, Block 2 33699 --rot 1, Block 3 65565 vOutlot A 143743 Outlot B 106711 Outlot C 120409 Outlot D 145142 Outlot E 29716 Outlot F 101279 Outlot G 68790 OudotH 115993 V Outlot I 34860 ✓Outlot J 30431 )(ROW 75866 dup 6.12 th 4.75 apt 7.36 pool/pond 1.51 pvt street 3.3 beachlot 1.5 public street 1.74 19.74 10.9.06 TOTAL -. �y7, 933" Use 0.10 Duplexes 0.10 Duplexes 0.10 Duplexes 0.29 0.70 Duplexes 0.09 Townhomes 0.08 Townhomes 0.09 Townhomes 0.09 Townhomes 0.08 Townhomes 0.08 Townhomes 0.09 Townhomes 0.09 Townhomes 0.08 Townhomes 0.08 Townhomes 0.09 Townhomes 0.77 1.74 Townhomes 1.511 1.51 Pond/Pool/Poolhouse 3.301 3.30 Private street 2.45 Future apartments 2.76 Future duplexes 3.33 Future apartments 0.68 Future townhomes 2.33 Future townhomes 1.58 Future apartments 2.66 Future duplexes 0.801 0.8 Beachlot 0.701 0.7 Beachlot 1.74 Public street 26.29 31% 24% 37% 8% Prepared by Lori Haak 10/9/2006 Page 1 SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE 10/5/06 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Duplexes Site Area in Acres Storm water pond Lots 1-5, Block 1 0.7 Outlot C (future) 0 Outlot H (future) 0 ROW (3146 of 3.3 acres) 1.02 $ 2,500.00 Assessable area 1.72 ZONING CLASSIFICATION Medium Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY 1 DOOMS Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 1,800.00 1.72 $ 3,096.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 1.72 $ 7,568.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 1 -' 0.5 $ 1,800.00 $1,548.00 Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ - $ 1,548.00 SWMPFEE $ 10,664.00 SWMP CREDITS $ 1,548.00 TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 9,116.00 SWW FEE WORKSHEET DATE 10/5/06 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Townhomes Site Area in Acres Storm water pond Lots 1-12, Block 2 1.74 Outlot E (future) 0 Outlot F (future) 0 ROW (24% of 3.30 acres) 0.79 Assessable area 2.53 ZONING CLASSIFICATION Medium Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTrrY 14 D1 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 3,100.00 2.53 $ 7,843.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 2.53 $ 11,132.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 2.5 , 0.5 $ 3,100.00 $ 3,921.50 Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ - $ 3,921.50 SWMPFEE $ 18,975.00 SWMP CREDITS $ 3,921.50 TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 15,053.50 i e SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE 10/5/06 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Apartments Site Area in Acres Storm water pond Outlot B (future) 0 Outlot D (future) 0 Outlot G (future) 0 ROW (37% of 3.30 acres) 1.22 Assessable area 1.22 ZONING CLASSIFICATION High Density FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total WATER QUALM $ 3,400.00 1.22 $ 4,148.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total WATER QUANTITY $ 6,400.00 1.22 $ 7,808.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 1.22 0.5 $ 3,400.00 $ 2,074.00 Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ - SWMP FEE $ 11,956.00 SWMP CREDITS $ 2,074.00 TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 9,882.00 $ 2,074.00 I , I SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE 10/5/06 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Miscellaneous Site Area in Acres Lot 1, Block 3 (Pond and pool) 1.51 ROW (8% of 3.30 acres) 0.26 Assessable area 1.77 ZONING CLASSIFICATION Medium Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 3,100.00 1.77 $ 5,487.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 1.77 S 7,788.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY r01-( UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 1.77 05 $ 3,100.00 $ 21743.50 Outlet structure h 1 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 SWMP FEE $ 13,275.00 SWMP CREDITS $ 5,243.50 TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 8,031.50 $ 5,243.50 SWW FEE WORKSHEET DATE 10/5/06 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Beachlots Site Area in Acres Outlot I (Beachlot) 0.80 Outlot I (Beaclhlot) 0.70 Assessable area 1.50 ZONING CLASSIFICATION Medium Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 1,800.00 1.50 $ 2,700.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 1,700.00 1.50 $ 2,550.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0 0.5 $ 1,800.00 $ - Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ SWMP FEE $ 5,250.00 SWMP CREDITS $ - TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 5,250.00 r Legal Advisor: Krebsbach and Haik, Ltd.R Riley 225 South Sixth Street. Suite 4320 Purgatory 6112 33nnea3771400 FaMN x: 8 2 333-6959 B I u ff Creek Engineering Advisor: Bart Engineering 4700 West 77th Street Watershed District Minneapolis, MN 952 832-2600 Fax:ax: 95 952 832-2601 Web Site: http//www.rileypurgatorybluffcreek.org October 4, 2006 Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Edina, MN 55435 Re: Permit #2006-23: Lakeside: Chanhassen Dear Mr. V ogelbacher: The Board of Managers of the Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans and grading and land alteration permit application as submitted to the District for the Lakeside development in Chanhassen. The Managers approve of the grading and land alteration permit subject to the following conditions: L All conditions as outlined in the attached General Provisions are applicable. 2. All areas altered yet this construction season must be restored by December 1, 2006. Areas must ultimately be restored by September 15, 2007. 3. If the existing structure on the site shown to be razed is served by a private domestic water supply well, the well must be abandoned in accordance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Department of Health criteria. A copy of the well abandonment certification must be submitted to the District's legal advisor otherwise the permittee shall certify to the District in writing that no private domestic water supply wells are located on the property. 4. The District will require that the proposed retaining wall adjacent to the stormwater management basin on the site be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer. The design of the wall must include the hydraulic impacts on the retaining wall resulting from the ponding basin. 5. The District will require a covenant be placed on the title to Lot 12, Block 3 indicating that the low floor elevation for the structure on this lot be set at or above elevation 882.7 M.S.L. which is 2 feet above the 100 -year frequency flood elevation of Pond 2 as calculated by Pioneer Engineering. This covenant must be submitted to the District's legal advisor for review and approval. If you have any questions regarding the conditions of the District's permit, please call us at 952-832-2600. Sincerely, bert .Obermeyer BARR ENGMEEERING CO. Engineers for the District Approved by the Board of Managers MPZUR,TORY-BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT % "'� 6 President Date: _NAL � c: Paul Haik Paul Cheme Lori HaakL Board of Managers ::0DMA\PCD0CS\D0CS\247623U Howard Peterson Mark Dillon Conrad Fiskness Michael Casanova Erin Ahola Permit: #2006-23 Project Name: Lakeside: Chanhassen Approval Date: October 4 2006 General Provisions 1. All erosion control measures shown on the plans must be installed prior to commencement of grading operations and be maintained until all areas altered on the site have been restored. If silt fence is used, the bottom flap must be buried and the maximum allowable spacing between posts is 4 -foot on center. All posts must be either 2" x 2" pine, hardwood, or steel fence posts. If hay bales are used, all bales must be staked in place and reinforced on the downstream side with snow fence. The silt fence must be orange in color, which will be more evident and easier to locate for removal at the completion of the project. 2. All areas altered because of construction must be restored with seed and disced mulch, sod, wood fiber blanket, or be hard surfaced within two weeks from the completion of construction or no later than September 15, 2007. 3. Upon completion of construction and restoration of areas disturbed, the permit applicant is responsible for the removal of all erosion control measures installed throughout the site. 4. Street sweeping must be undertaken and completed on an as -needed basis. 5. At the entryway onto the site, a rock filter dike being a minimum of 2 feet in height and having maximum side slopes of 4:1 must be constructed. This rock filter dike will enable construction traffic to enter the site and also provide an erosion control facility. 6. The District must be notified in writing a minimum of 48 hours prior to commencement of construction. Upon receipt of this notification, a field inspection of the project site by the District's engineer will be undertaken to ensure that all erosion control measures have been properly installed. Construction cannot commence until this field inspection has been completed. 7. Upon completion of the project, the permit applicant is required to complete and submit the middle portion of the attached permit, indicating that the project has been completed. Upon receipt of this application, a field inspection of the site by the Districts engineering advisor will be undertaken to ensure that all areas have been properly restored and that all erosion control measures throughout the project site have been removed. 8. The Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD), its officers, employees and agents review, comment upon, and approve plans and specifications prepared by permit applicants and their consultants for the limited administrative purpose of determining whether there is reasonable assurance that the proposed project will comply with the regulations and criteria of the RPBCWD and other state and federal agencies. The determination of the RPBCWD that issuance of this permit is appropriate was made in reliance on the information provided by the applicant. ::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS\247623U 9. The grant of this permit shall not in any way relieve the permittee, its engineer, or other professional consultants of responsibility, nor shall it make the RPBCWD responsible for the technical adequacy of the engineer's or consultant's work The grant of this permit shall not relieve the permittee from complying with all conditions and requirements ofthe permit, which shall be retained, by the permittee with the permit. 10. The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or regulations. 11. This permit is permissive only. No liability shall be imposed upon the RPBCWD or any of its officers, agents or employees, officially or personally, on account of the granting of this permit or on account of any damage to any person or property resulting from any act or omission of the permittee or any of its agents, employees, or contractors. 12. In all cases where the doing by the permittee of anything authorized by this permit shall involve the taking, using, or damaging of any property, rights or interests of any other person or persons, or of any publicly owned lands or improvements or interests, the permittee, before proceeding therewith, shall obtain the written consent of all persons, agencies, or authorities concerned, and shall acquire all necessary property, rights and interest. 13. This permit is not transferable. The permittee shall make no changes, without written permission previously obtained from the RPBCWD, in the dimensions, capacity, or location of any items of work authorized by this permit. 14. The permittee shall grant access to the site at all reasonable times during and after construction to authorized representatives of the RPBCWD for inspection of the work authorized by this permit. 15. This permit may be terminated by the RPBCWD at any time deemed necessary in the interest of public health and welfare, or for violation of any of the provisions of this permit, unless otherwise provided in the special provisions. 16. Construction work authorized under this permit shall be completed on or before date specified above. The permittee may, in writing, request that the RPBCWD extend the time to complete the project and shall state the reason for any requested extension. 17. If dewatering is required and sump pumps are used, all pumped water must be discharged through an erosion control facility prior to leaving the construction site_ Proper energy dissipation must be provided at the outlet of the pump system. ::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS\247623\1 2 1 1 / PI$NEERengi>,em;>g LAKESIDE CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED OCT 0 2 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT ?? GRAPHIC SCALE aw o w m w rrs ) vni SCANNED August 29, 2006 Generous, Bob From: Fauske, Alyson Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 2:42 PM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob; Gerhardt, Todd; Oehme, Paul Subject: 11-15-06 approval letter November 15, 2006 John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Edina, MN 55435 Re: Lakeside Development Dear John, Page 1 of 1 This letter is to confirm that on November 13, 2006, the Chanhassen City Council approved the revised development contract for the Lakeside development. The development contract will be signed by the appropriate City officials, then sent to the City Attorney's office with the mylars. Once our attorney has reviewed the development contract, they will notify your representative from Custom Home Builders Title for filing instruction. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-1164 or Bob Generous at (952) 227-1131. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHASSEN Alyson Fauske,P.E. Assistant City Engineer ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Bob Generous, Senior Planner Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Paul Oehme, City Engineer G:\ENG\PROJECTS\K-O\Lakeside (Lakeview Hills site)\I1-15-06 approval letter.doc 11/17/2006 CITY OF CIIONSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952127.1100 Fax 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web She wom ci.chanhassennn.us July 25, 2006 Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Re: Lakeside — Planning Case #06-26 Dear Mr. Vogelbacher: This letter is to notify you that on July 24, 2006, the Chanhassen City Council approved the following: A. "Rezoning of the property located within the Lakeside development, from High Density Residential District (R 12) to Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report subject to the final plat approval for the Lakeside development." B. "Preliminary Plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006 and a revised tree preservation plan dated received July 24, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 3. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrants and any to be relocated. 4. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 5. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and GQAWM The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a channing downtown, thriving businesses, winding hails, and beautiful parks. A g eatplace to live, work, and play. Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 2 shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 6. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 7. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 8. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 shall be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. 9. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 10. The applicant shall provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond 1 to Lake Riley. 11. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. 12. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. 13. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. 14. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. 15. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 16. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 3 17. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 18. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 19. The proposed storm water pond shall be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond shall be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans shall show how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berms and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. 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. 20. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B shall be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type 1 silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan shall be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and shall be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 21. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 22. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 23. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 24. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. 25. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. 26. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 4 27. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 28. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 29. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 30. The applicant shall increase landscape plantings along the east property line to minimum bufferyard requirements. 31. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern comer of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. 32. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. 33. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. 34. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. 35. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. 36. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. 37. The proposed grading in the northwest comer near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 comply with city standards. 38. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. 39. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. 40. Ground (ie. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. 41. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. 42. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 43. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. W. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 5 44. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. The developer must receive approval from the City of Eden Prairie for grading in to the Outlot for Bearpath 3rd Addition. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 46. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 47. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 48. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. 49. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 50. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 51. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 52. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. 53. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 54. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 55. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed." Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 6 C. "Site Plan for 231 housing units and a community building with pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006, with a Variance for building height for the condominium units consistent with the Building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped received May 26, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 4. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 5. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 6. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. 7. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 8. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire - resistive construction. 9. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 10. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 11. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 7 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 16. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the fust story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.12000 Minnesota Fire Code." D. "Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with a Variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lot, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 2. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 3. The area of Outlot B shall be recalculated to include only the area within the outlot above the OHW. The amount of shoreline for Outlot B shall be calculated along the OHW. The number of docks and slips permitted by the conditional use permit for the beach lot shall not exceed the number of docks and slips allowable by City Code for the actual beach lot area and frontage. Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 8 4. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 5. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of and materials for proposed path from Lyman Boulevard to the dock to minimize the impacts of runoff from the path to the shoreline and Lake Riley. 6. The proposed walking path along the shoreline shall be made of a pervious surface such as mulch, crushed rock or turf grass and shall not be located below the OHW. Special attention shall be paid to ensure that the path materials are not prone to erosion. The plans shall be revised to show the woodland gardens above the OHW of Lake Riley. 7. An individual permit shall be obtained from the DNR for any beach sand applications that do not meet the DNR standards for sand blanket applications without an individual permit. 8. One beach area shall be permitted to minimize impacts to the lake and to adjacent residents. 9. The applicant shall work with staff on the placement of the beach lot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The applicant shall also work with staff on the location of the woodland path and woodland gardens along the path" Enclosed is a site plan agreement that must be executed by Sienna Corporation. Return the agreement to me for city execution and recording at Carver County within 120 days of the approval (by December 1, 2006). If there is a separate property owner, they will need to sign the consent page at the end of the agreement. If there is a separate mortgage holder, they will need to sign the mortgage holder consent page. The required security specified in the site plan agreement shall be submitted prior to the city issuing a building permit. A copy of the executed agreement will be returned for your files. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. Final plat documents must be submitted to the City three weeks prior to the City Council meeting in which you wish to have your final plat approved. Enclosed is the list of items required for submittal for final plat approval. Prior to beginning any site grading or utility construction, you must receive approval from the City of Eden Prairie for grading into the Outlot for Bearpath Yd Addition and provide the City of Chanhassen with confirmation of such approval. In addition, you will need to either execute the site plan agreement or the development contract before beginning site development. Mr. John Vogelbacher Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 25, 2006 Page 9 If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-1131 or bzenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Sincerel Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner Enclosures c: Steve Liefschultz, Lakeview Hills, LLC Janet Jeremiah, City of Eden Prairie (with plans) ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Alyson Fauske, Assistance City Engineer Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Jerry Mohn, Building Official g.\plan\2006 planning ca \06-26 lakmide\appmval kver.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN ITEMS REQUIRED FOR FINAL PLAT CONSIDERATION The following items are required to be submitted a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to City Council meeting and payment of a $250.00 final plat review fee: Submit three (3) sets of full size construction plans and specifications for staff review and redline. • Utility plans shall show both plan view and profiles of all utilities (sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer lines). The plan view must show all drainage and utility easements. • Grading and drainage plans shall show dwelling type and elevations, wetlands and wetland buffer areas, stormwater pond NWL and HWL, EOF and catch basin and storm manhole numbers. • The construction plans and specifications shall be in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications & Detail Plates. • The plans shall include traffic signage and street light placement. 2. Drainage calculations for water quantity and quality ponding with maps showing drainage areas for pre -and post -development conditions and contributing areas to catch basins. 3. Hydraulic calculations and drainage map for the storm sewer design. 4. Tree Preservation Easements (if applicable). 5. Trail Easements (if applicable). 6. Engineer's Cost Estimate of Public Improvements: a. Sanitary sewer system. b. Water system. c. Storm sewer drainage system including cleaning and maintenance. d. Streets, sidewalk and trails. e. Erosion control. f. Site restoration (seeding, sodding, etc.). g. Site grading h. Street lights & signs i. Engineering, surveying & inspection j. Landscaping 7. Five (5) sets (folded) of final plat, one (1) set of reductions (81/2" x 11'), and a digital copy in .tif format. 8. Digital copy of the legal description of the property in a Aoc or .pdf compatible format. 9. Lot tabulations 10. 1" = 200' scale paper or mylar reduction of the final plat with just street names and Lot and Block numbers. 11. Legal description of the property/properties to be platted. Failure to provide any of the above items by the required deadline will result in delaying consideration of final plat before the City Council. Updated 02-03.06 g:AengVorms\ incl plat submittal.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN SITE PLAN PERMIT # 06-26 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AGREEMENT dated July 24, 2006, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), and SIENNA CORPORATION, (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Site Plan Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a site plan for 231 housing units and a community building with pool (referred to in this Permit as the "project"). The land is legally described as: Lakeside, Carver County, Minnesota. 2. Conditions of Site Plan Approval. The City hereby approves the site plan on condition that the Developer enter into this Permit and furnish the security required by it. 3. Development Plans. The project shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Permit, the written terms shall control. The plans are: PlanA: Site Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007. PlanB: Grading Plan dated prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006. PlanC: Landscaping Plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. Plan D: Utility Plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. PlanE: Building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped Received May 26, 2006. 4. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required screening and landscaping by October 1, 2007. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 5. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Permit, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank, cash escrow, or equivalent ("security") for $5,000.00 (boulevard restoration/erosion control). If the Developer requests a Certificate of Occupancy prior to the installation of site landscaping, then the developer shall provide to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount sufficient to insure the installation of said landscaping. PROCEDURES FOR LETTER OF CREDIT REDUCTION a. Requests for reductions of Letters of Credit must be submitted to the City in writing by the Developer or his Engineer. b. Partial lien waivers totaling the amount of the requested reduction shall accompany each such request. c. Any reduction shall be subject to City approval. 6. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Manager, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Manager at the following address: Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Boulevard, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, Telephone (952) 227-1100. 7. Other Special Conditions. a. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. b. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. c. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 2 d. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. e. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. g. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. h. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. k. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 1. 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. M. 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. n. 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. o. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. p. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. 8. General Conditions. The general conditions of this Permit are attached as Exhibit 'B" and incorporated herein. CMr9 .:U.:__ _ IM STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_day of 200_, by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor, and by Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. 4 DEVELOPER: IM Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF _ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of of Sienna Corporation. NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Sl'M PLAN PERMIT EXHIBIT "B" GENERAL . CONDITION 1. Right to Proceed. Within the site plan area, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security and fees have been received by the City, and 3) the City has issued a building permit in reliance on the foregoing conditions having been satisfied. 2. Maintenance of site. The site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved site plan. Plants and ground cover required as a condition of site plan approval which die shall be promptly replaced. 3. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with site plan development. 4. Erosion Control. Before the site is rough graded, and before any building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected, and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be certified seed to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched, and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion at the Developer's expense. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and City's rights or obligations hereunder. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless there is full compliance with the erosion control requirements. Erosion control shall be maintained until vegetative cover has been restored. After the site has been stabilized to where, in the opinion of the City, there is no longer a need for erosion control, the City will authorize removal of the erosion control measures. 5. Clean up. The Developer shall maintain a neat and orderly work site and shall daily clean, on and off site, dirt and debris, including blowables, from streets and the surrounding area that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. 6. Warranty. All trees, grass, and sod required in the approved Landscaping Plan, Plan C, shall be wan -anted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free at the time of planting. All trees shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer or his contractor(s) shall post a letter of credit or cash escrow to the City to secure the warranties at the time of final acceptance. 51 Responsibility for Costs. A. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from site plan approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including allomeys' fees. B. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Permit, including engineering and attorneys' fees. C. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Permit within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work and construction. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of 8% per year. 8. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than four (4) days in advance. This Contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 9. Miscellaneous. A. Construction Trailers. Placement of on-site construction trailers and temporary job site offices shall be approved by the City Engineer. Trailers shall be removed from the subject property within thirty (30) days following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. B. Postal Service. The Developer shall provide for the maintenance of postal service in accordance with the local Postmaster's request. C. Third Parties. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Pemmit. D. Breach of Contract. Breach of the terms of this Permit by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits. E. Severabiliri. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. F. Occupancy. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no one may occupy a building for which a building permit is issued on either a temporary or permanent basis until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities tested and approved by the city. 7 G. Waivers/Amendments. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City s failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. Recordin¢. This Permit shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. I. Remedies. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. I Construction Hours. The normal construction hours under this contract shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, from 9:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no such activity allowed on Sundays or any recognized legal holidays. Operation of all internal combustion engines used for construction or dewatering purposes beyond the normal working hours will require City Council approval. K. Soil Treatment Systems. ff soil treatment systems are required, the Developer shall clearly identify in the field and protect from alteration, unless suitable alternative sites are first provided, the two soil treatment sites identified during the site plan process for each lot. This shall be done prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Any violation/disturbance of these sites shall render them as unacceptable and replacement sites will need to be located for each violated site in order to obtain a building permit. L. Compliance with Laws. Ordinances. and Regulations. In the development of the site plan the Developer shall comply with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of the following authorities: 1. City of Chanhassen; I. State of Minnesota, its agencies, departments and commissions; 3. United States Army Corps of Engineers; 4. Watershed District; 5. Metropolitan Government, its agencies, departments and commissions. M. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Developer shall furnish the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that it has the authority of the fee owners and contract for deed purchasers too enter into this Development Contract. N. Soil Conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the City makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the property or its fitness for construction of the improvements or any other purpose for which the Developer may make use of such property. The Developer further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its governing body members, officers, and employees from any claims or actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants on the property, unless hazardous wastes or pollutants were caused to be there by the City. O. Soil Correction. The Developer shall be responsible for soil correction work on the property. The City makes no representation to the Developer concerning the nature or suitability of soils nor the cost of correcting any unsuitable soil conditions which may exist. 0 CONSENT Owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Permit, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this _ day of 200_. LM STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 200 _ by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 10 NOTARY PUBLIC MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO SITE PLAN AGREEMENT which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Site Plan Agreement, agrees that the Site Plan Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this day of 200 . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 20Q_, by DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 11 NOTARY PUBLIC City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 started and between 20 after 10:00 and 10:30 so it had a half hour basically before it was reported you know to grow so. It does seem, but I was happy with our response times I guess that we had, and you know the time, the daytime calls are definitely, we are short people and that's why we depend on mutual aid and getting other people there, but the response time was I think was adequate that we had so. But it does seem, as you're standing there, been there before waiting for the rest of the trucks to get there and it seems like a long time, especially with the fire rolling so. Councilman Lundquist: So that 8 minutes is a metric that you use internally or is that some kind of a national standard? Chief Gregg Geske: There are some national standards and NFPA guidelines. You know there are areas and are areas in our city where it takes longer to get, the lower Y for example. PI's and stuff takes longer for us to respond, but that's kind of a goal that we shoot for too, and most of the time we're, we're close to that response time too. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for the Chief at this time? No? Very good, thank you. Chief Gregg Geske: Thanks. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Jerry Paulsen: Jerry Paulsen, 7305 Laredo Drive. Good evening Mayor and council members. Mayor Furlong: Good evening Jerry Paulsen: We had a late e-mail which might have gotten to you. I put it on your desk there, in regards to impervious surface, just to clarify. The original impervious surface came at 32.0. After that, the second condition ... and brought it to 42.6%. But that excluded the right-of-way for the two streets which if you include that, and include the wetland, we're up to the larger area and the impervious surface we believe re -computes at about 47.1. If you add the gazebo, the hardscape material at the beach, the pool and the artificial water features, we may be pushing 50%. Just wanted to remind you of that. Mayor Furlong: And I appreciate you giving that to us. Did you give a copy to Ms. Aanenson as well? Maybe when we get to that agenda item, she can address that. I know there's some other e-mails that went back and forth and some responses the council got copied on so, thank you Mr. Paulsen. Appreciate that. Anybody else, visitor presentations? Very good, thank you. LAKESIDE, 125 LAKEVIEW ROAD, APPLICANT SIENNA CORPORATION: REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 2634 ACRES REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM R12, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUD -R, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -RESIDENTIAL, WITH VARIANCES; PRELIMINARY PLAT City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 FOR 29 BUILDING LOTS, TWO OUTLOTS, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PUBLIC STREETS; SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 234 UNIT RESIDENTLAL DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING TWO, THREE, FOUR, AND CONDOMINIUM UNIT BUILDINGS, AND A COMMUNITY BUILDING; AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT WITH VARIANCES. Public Present: Name Address David Vogelbacher Matthew Anderron Rick Denman Steven Mangold Gregory Kozulls John Harriss Tony L. Mary Beth Maki Steven Schwieteus Daryl McLinden Jerry Frederick Stephanie & Thomas Drees Chris Honaas-Wildfang Scott Frederiksen Bruce & Mary Jo Carlson Ginny & Pat Gaspard Andrew Pynch Phil Young Kevin McShane Apple Valley Golden Valley 6656 PLC 4852 Woodhurt Lane, Minnetonka Prior Lake Minneapolis 425 Portland Avenue 150 Lakeview Road E 10072 Gristmill 7321 Hillsdale Court 7297 Hillsdale Court 14727 Boulder Point Road 18397 Nicklaus Way 18626 Bearpath Trail, Eden Prairie 8988 English Tum, Eden Prairie 17615 Bearpath Trail 8724 North Bay Drive 6832 Hallmark Drive, Eden Prairie 180 South Shore Court Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the council. We did review this item at your last meeting on July 10`h. We did provide an executive summary, which we addressed the issues that you asked the staff to work with the development and most specifically with the elimination of setback variance along the easterly side. Additional landscape buffering and preservation of additional trees through the reduction or elimination of grading, and checking into the OHW. We did provide that and that was one of the other e-mails that went through. It does show up on the entire packet that you got. If you look through all the grading plans, it's on page 2. Showing this first, this dark line, and it is, the impervious surface was calculated. Everything above that. Again the impervious surface is allowed at 50%. We believe that there's a difference in interpretation of calculating that and the corrected would be the 44%. hi the staff report there is no mention of the exact percent. What we said is that needs to be to the 50%, which we will ensure that it meets that. Having said that, I'll go through the changes that have been made since the last time we met. Councilman Lundquist: Kate um, that will insure us on that impervious will be done between a preliminary and final? Q,,Wr•'3s 6 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Absolutely, yeah. And if there's changes. Obviously it'd have to stay below 50 because it would need a variance and so we have those changes that we'll be showing. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So the changes, this is a black and white, but maybe I can just show. What's, the multi family building as we corrected at the last meeting, needs to meet the setback of the height. Right now it's shown on the 42, as it would be with the pitched roof. The rest of the buildings all meet the 50 foot setback, even building C, which would be this back building right in here. What that does is there's a 3 unit here and a 3 unit here, so those have been eliminated in order to, what it does is it changes. What they were trying to create is some different view sheds. As you look, it wasn't a straight line. Kind of a soldierisk, you remind the planning staff sometimes when we put those units, so it actually had a little bit of a curve to the street, so what this did is, took that curve out and now they're kind of more aligned, but it does now meet the setback requirements, so that variance has been eliminated. As I mentioned Building C also now is in compliance with that setback. It is outside the shoreland district so it doesn't need the height variance, so then there's still the issue on the height itself. But before I go to that, I just want to touch a little bit on the grading and the landscaping. That was the other issue you asked us to look at. The developer has eliminated any grading on the back side of condominium A, which would be adjacent to the lake side and the Bearpath side. And meeting with Eden Prairie, it appears that they're going to move the trail to the most easterly side of their outlot, so they've eliminated the grading, if I can translate that into kind of the tree preservation that's there. What's shown highlighted in green, and I did pass this out. There are a few extra copies over at the table. I did pass it out to the council, in case you can't see that. But those were the significant ones. The burr oak. Larger, 28 inch, 30 inch, but it would include everything but I just wanted to show that. So everything behind the larger building, the condominium building would, all those trees would be preserved. What the applicant is asking for, and now meeting the setback would still be on those twin units as you move down towards the condominiums, that they still have the opportunity to grade. Certainly that's in Eden Prairie and that's at their discretion to approve that. We are recommending approval with the condition, and I've handed out to you the modified conditions, and that's reflected in, if you want to tum to conditions of approval. And again I have extra copies of this at the table too. That would be reflected on page 29 of 33, and condition number 44. That the developer must receive approval from the City of Eden Prairie for grading into the outlot. So any action tonight would still require Eden Prairie to approve it. Again the goal there is to, while they're, to make the view sheds nicer. What I wanted to show, we did ask for renderings so you have an idea of what the change, can you zoom in on that maybe a little bit. So this, as we put in the staff report on your cover memo, exactly where this is on the 15th fairway is about 482 feet from that lot, looking towards, do you have it out of focus? Looking towards what you would see right now. And the other questions, so this is with the pitched roof, which is what the staff is recommending on the, we wanted the pitched so it matches kind of what's in the North Bay and the most visible one that you would see also from the Bearpath homes. Then this would be the perspective from the lake itself. And again with that beachlot, a majority of those trees would be saved. That beachlot itself is going on the other most westerly piece. On the beachlot... It'd be over on this piece right here. So but City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 the majority of these trees have been, would be saved. So that's why, that's a pretty accurate representation. Councilman Labatt: How far out on the lake are you in this picture? Kate Aanenson: I did ask that. I'm not sure if they had some way to calculate that. John Harriss: 300 yards. Councilman Labatt: So 900 feet. Kate Aanenson: We did ask that and I didn't get the correct, so there you go. So those are those two. We did also ask for a perspective. What it would be with a flat roof. Now this is the exact building. This doesn't have the pitch on it, so this would be, so this building, I just want to be clear, is the same materials. You can see, because if you look in the booklet it's a little bit harder based on the distance that you're looking at it from the booklet. This has the same materials on the building itself. This would be at 37 feet, so you'd only need a 2 foot variance. Again the staff is still supporting the pitched roof. Again being the proximity and the visibility, that we think a pitched roof looks better. Councilman Lundquist: Kate, can you put the rendering of the 15 total. Kate Aanenson: Sure. Kind of put those two in maybe. So with those, the only other variance that was on there that I think you pretty much spoke to already was the beachlot association. The fact that some of those lots fall outside the 1,000 foot, which is also the shoreline district. That you seem to support that, so we didn't spend too much time addressing that issue. We addressed that already. So with that I believe those are the issues that you asked us to look at. And we are still recommending approval with the conditions as modified that we kind of add to it, and I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Furlong: So in summary, two weeks ago we were looking at a request for setback variance and now there, with the changes there's no setback variance required. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: On any of the buildings. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And while you looked at the Building A with a flat roof, it would still require. Kate Aanenson: A 2 foot variance. Mayor Furlong: A 2 foot variance and you're recommending. 0 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 Kate Aanenson: The 8. Mayor Furlong: 8 or 6 more than what was... Kate Aanenson: 6, correct. Mayor Furlong: With the pitched roof. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And also recommending the other variance then would be, well there's a height variance on both A and B being requested and recommended by staff. And then the. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and let me just clarify again on Building B. Based on this orientation and where it is on the site. It's difficult to see whether you're on Lyman or whether you're on the golf course side. Getting those kind of blocked from the other building, and the tree line from the lake. And then Building C doesn't need a variance because it's outside the shoreline district. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Then the final is the beachlot which we discussed last week as well. The beachlot variance. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: For in terms of including all the units... Kate Aanenson: It seemed to make sense to put everybody in, yeah. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Questions for staff at this time. Follow up questions. Councilman Lundquist: Kate, the grading. Original grading plan that came two weeks ago showed some grading behind Building A. Kate Aanenson: That is correct. Councilman Lundquist: So that's been revised. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Councilman Lundquist: So that the grading, because I'm looking at, is that what this dotted line on this one is? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. If you look at the original grading plan, if I could just show this really quick. You would see that the grade, 910 was actually pushed up into that similarly up into the outlot where the trail would be. That would ultimately be the possession of the City of Eden Prairie for the trail. That has also been eliminated, as has the grading behind this building itself. 0 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 They're just going to bench that in so there won't be any grading on those trees back in there, so all those trees will be preserved. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. So that wouldn't, when we're looking at this rendering then, if they're not going to grade there, there should be more. Kate Aanenson: Trees? Councilman Lundquist: There should be more trees on there then what's there now? Kate Aanenson: I would agree because if you look at it, it looks like just the higher. You're not seeing the willows and some of those scrub trees that would be on, kind of on this side. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: There's also, as you said, on that tree preservation, there's additional trees showing that there are the green ash. It'd also be saved so there would be more trees. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Then on here, with the revised grading plan. Okay. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, so we identified that so the rest of the grading plan would still be consistent with moving that, and again that's a requirement that Eden Prairie would have to approve. If they don't approve it and they have to modify their grading plan, it would come back before this body to approve something different. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So this is only modifying the grading plan for behind Building A. Otherwise it was, and that's in your conditions of approval as modified but otherwise the existing grading plan would still be in place. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Could you clarify the area behind the condo project along the Eden Prairie border? If they're not grading into that area, where there be thinning out of any trees or anything? Kate Aanenson: No. It's my understanding it's not going to touch it. Correct? John Vogelbacher: No. Todd Gerhardt: Good question. Mayor Furlong: And with regard to grading again, at our last meeting they talked about with the revised grading, this was the first revision of, the most revision at our last meeting dealt with [Ell City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 storm water and the flow between I guess to the north of Building A and the first set of twin homes there. Is that still, from a storm water management, is that still. Kate Aanenson: This is the high point right in here so we'll kind of look at how we need to look at that. There shouldn't be too much flow. I did talk to the Assistant City Engineer looking at how much water's going to come back through that. Now that the trail's on the other side, we'll have grade going the other way. There shouldn't be too much water that we would route around the building. Mayor Furlong: It would come east/west into. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, and I think we can work with them without much impact to the site to make that happen. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Then my other question on, okay. And I guess this speaks, I guess this grading because I'm going to continue to follow up on Councilman Lundquist's question. Condition 37 talks about changes with emergency overflow again. Now this is the northwest corner so I assume this is west of Building C, up by the North Bay development. That was a concern that was raised at the Planning Commission. I thought we had addressed that but my question, I guess two questions here. What has changed there. Second, one foot above the emergency overflow. Is that standard? Is that enough? We've had some issues in the past where the emergency overflow gets blocked or changed somehow. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. We can clarify where we are on the site. We're down in this area over here. Yeah. That was the area that was mentioned. I believe we've addressed that. That was an issue that I ignored to add. Mayor Furlong: Okay, and I guess has the grading plan changed at all there from the last meeting? Kate Aanenson: No, it has not. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And so this requirement of the first floor elevations being 1 foot above the emergency overflow, then my question is 1 foot current standard there? Is that enough? Paul Oehme: I think the current standard right now is 3 feet. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So why are we at 1? Paul Oehme: I don't know that for sure right now. The, I know there was some discussion about changing the elevations of some of the, finished floor elevations there so, I don't know exactly why, why it's at 1 foot correctly. So we'll have to look at it. Kate Aanenson: Between now and final plat. Also the fact that Building C shifted slightly. There's certain fixed touch down points on this project. Those being the entrance to the condominiums, as there's some challenging topography. Those are fixed points that we have to, 11 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 the developer had to work around, so there is a retaining wall on the back side of that. So we'll look at that. Whether it needs to be the 3. Mayor Furlong: Would we want to say 1 foot then at this point in the preliminary or is that... Kate Aanenson: It can be adjusted. Councilman Labatt: I would say the standard. If the standard is 3 feet. Paul Oehme: Right. Councilman Labatt: We should leave it at 3 feet and then change it if we need to. Mayor Furlong: I guess my question is that something, well I guess that's why I'm raising the question because 1 foot seems low but. Kate Aanenson: It was 3 feet and it got struck to 1 ... reason for that so, whatever that needs to be, we'll make sure and we'll point that out in the update. When it goes to final plat, what the issue was there. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Work with staff I guess or to staff's approval at this point unless there's, I mean it was obviously because as Ms. Aanenson said, it went from 3 to 1. There's a reason for it. Kate Aanenson: There's a rationale and I'm sorry, I don't. Mayor Furlong: It went from lowest to first, right. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: Whether they're lookout, walkouts, we'll have to look at that. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: I think it has to do with those row of townhouses on the west side, and floor elevation there is why that had to get adjusted. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: But we'll look at that before the final plat. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Any other questions that kind of go into, that went with the grading? There's been a change in grading there. Any other questions for staff? I guess at this point, since this was brought back, or tabled with specific direction, I guess I'd ask, I don't know 12 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 if we have to go through a repeat of last meeting in terms of applicant presentations and everything, but I certainly want to make sure the council has an opportunity to ask any questions that you have, whether it's of staff or it's of the applicant or if there's any other information the council is interested in receiving clarifications, either on the staff report or questions of the applicant. Councilman Labatt: So Kate, just to clarify. So the issue with the height, on the Building B. On the corner there. Kate Aanenson: That's Building A. Councilman Labatt: A, I'm sorry. You're still recommending the variance for the pitched roof. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Councilman Labatt: Okay, thanks. Mayor Furlong: Is there a quick comment? Or a question of us or. John Vogelbacher: Just a comment. Clarification. Mayor Furlong: Okay. John Vogelbacher: John Vogelbacher with Sienna. We were talking about the tree clearing, and I just want to be certain that the council, there wasn't any confusion as to what we're proposing, and in our initial presentation at the last council meeting I believe we identified 3 significant trees. Three large trees that were behind Building A that would be, had been preserved. And since that time we've modified the grading plan to eliminate all grading behind that building so that basically right now we've identified 10 trees. Not all of them are significant but they are nice trees. The bulk of the trees there are ehn and box elder, and that's the bulk of the trees that are behind the building, and the ones that are in Eden Prairie. There's no question that we'll have to go through a process to have the City of Eden Prairie approve whatever we do in the City of Eden Prairie. But in terms of what our presentation is, is currently what we have is 10 trees that are nice. They're all either ash. Predominantly most of them are burr oak and good healthy trees, and those are the ones that on the grading plan are identified as being preserved, and we can do that because we're not doing any grading behind the building, so I just wanted to be clear that our proposal would be to clean that area up and to save the significant trees and species, and just wanted to be sure that the council was aware of what our intentions were as we go over and visit with Eden Prairie. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Councilman Lundquist: So on the Chanhassen side, behind Building A, other than those 10, it's your intention to clean out all of the elms and all of the lesser trees in there? 1K1 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 John Vogelbacher: That's correct. That's correct, right. So we have actually identified the exact trees and their location on the grading plan as to the ones that would be preserved and the rest we would be looking to remove and to finish that area with a trail and turf and such so. Councilman Lundquist: Any idea how, what the percentage or, so you're 40 feet from the line and that line is essentially 40 feet from the fence that's there now, right? John Vogelbacher: Yes. Councilman Lundquist: Pretty close to. Okay, alright. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Very good. Again, this was brought back so I guess at this point I would open it up to the council for discussion and/or as part of that discussion, any clarifying questions. As we move towards consideration of the proposal and the recommended motions. Thoughts. Comments. Councilman Lundquist: Glad to see the progress on the setback variances. I think it's debatable whether the curved street is better than straight, or not, and how that looks. But it is good to eliminate that variance and create that buffer there as well I believe. For the height variance, I guess although I was you know the driver behind looking to reduce that or eliminate that height variance, that flat roofed building doesn't appeal to me really, compared to the pitched roof, so I like the pitched roof better. It matches the buildings along side of it, and you know what's in that area so, I'm inclined to go for the pitched roof there. The third variance, I didn't have any issues on. I think we've got, you know we're still in a, maybe the cart before the horse a little bit here with some you know confusion and things going on with the City of Eden Prairie and on that side and this side, so but I guess what we'll look at, what I'll look at tonight is, trust that the City of Eden Prairie's going to do what they think is best too for that overall and help us create that buffer like we talked about last time so I'm comfortable with where we're at on changes here. Pulling those back. Still like to encourage, see you know as we come back between now and final plat, if there's some other, the rendering is good to see that. Like to see that picture is a lot easier to tell what's going on. I'm glad to see that the lakeside is buffered heavily, which is good. Makes me feel a lot better from that and from the road there. Will be minimal impact. But to see you know, guess I'm going to rely on the City of Eden Prairie then to you know push that landscape piece through that when that trail goes through that 40 foot buffer to see if there isn't something else more that we can do on the buffering in that building and go from that, so with the changes that are there, you know it's not 100% ideal I guess but I'm convinced that there's going to be something on this site eventually and as we talked last time, the architecture is still strong. It's a good product overall so I'd like to, I'm comfortable going forward now and you know it will be on the developer's shoulders then to work out the other piece and that 40 foot outlot and see what they can come up with to help buffer the Eden Prairie side of the project. I know that the residents on the Chanhassen side here are comfortable with what they've got and seeing that Lakeview guarded now, I'm comfortable with that as well. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Very good, thank you. Other comments. Councilwoman Tjornhom. 14 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 Councilwoman Tjornhom: Well I think I'll just stick to my comments I made at our last meeting. This project I think speaks for itself. I think it's going to be an asset to our town. I think that progress, positive progress was made when you think about the fact that there are, that the setback variance has been deleted and that they have made an effort to save some more trees to make a better buffer. I'm going to go along with staff's recommendation for the 8 foot variance for the pitched roof. I think that's a much better product than a flat roof. And of course last time I supported the beachlot variance and so I just, I'm thrilled that this ... coming before us and I wish them good luck. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt. Councilman Labatt: You know I don't disagree with anything that Councilwoman Tjornhom or Mr. Lundquist have said tonight on this project. It is a great opportunity for our city to take care of 26 acres of land and redevelop it. The issues that Kate had addressed earlier, the height, I would agree wholeheartedly with Building A to go with the pitched roof, and not the flat top. That flat top says nothing and. Mayor Furlong: You're not talking about my haircut or anything. Councilman Labatt: No. Not the haircut. So I like the, I like the pitched roof. Happy to see the request for the variances on the eastern setback is gone. And the beachlot I can support that variance too. Mayor Furlong: Alright, thank you. Appreciate the comments. Last week, or excuse me, 2 weeks ago last meeting when we considered this, you know we asked as a council, staff to look into some potential changes to eliminate the variances. We've talked about that tonight. There were some changes on the part of the applicant that we wanted to make sure, even though they appeared to meet the requirements, that they did take the time to do that. And then also for staff to incorporate comments at the meeting into the Findings of Fact and I think that was certainly done as well with the distributed, those distributed with the staff report. I think the other thing that occurred to me as I was reading through the report here is, where we are and the few things that we're discussing at this point is at the culmination of a very long process. And I know, as I've been involved in this council, this current property has been an issue for the city. For the nearby residents on all sides, and there were desires knowing that this property eventually would be redeveloped, there were desires to make improvement in the area. I think a lot of those improvements have been incorporated into this development. In fact just about all of them, even up to the point now that, as Councilwoman Tjomhom said, you know the, it was alluded to as well by Councilman Lundquist. Eliminating the request for the setback variance. I think that's an improvement. We can debate curved street versus straight. We may have different opinions there, but I think I'll always try to lean towards eliminating requests for variances as opposed to not to. But I think while we might be able to debate that, I'm sensing that there's very little debate on whether or not to go with the height variance on Building A, which isn't aesthetically pleasing decision to make and not one that I would support. So I think, you know I appreciate staff's effort. I appreciate the developer's effort. I appreciate all those that were involved in the process. Back even before this current developer got involved years ago, comments that I was receiving from our residents and others on how to improve this part of our town and I think this 15 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 will be an improvement and I think it's something that we've worked hard to get. So I'm pleased with where we are. I agree with staff's recommendation on all the various items and sounds like my fellow council members are in agreement with those as well. I think we've got a proposal now in front of us that is an improvement. We took a look at some options and I think Councilman Peterson was the one that said, let's look at some things and see if we're making, going to make some gains or not. I think that Building A is a classic example of looking at something and saying no. Don't want to go there and, but we looked at it, so I think from that standpoint that was good. With that, I want to thank everybody that's been involved in the process all the way along. Not only staff and the developer but residents as well that have participated in the process. I spoke to that last meeting about how sometimes the process may seem slow but I think there's sometimes it's important to take time to make sure we get it as good as we can, and I think we've reached that point at this time so, I'm looking forward to moving this forward and seeing this property be redeveloped based upon the plans that have been put before us this evening. Any other comments? Questions at this point. We've got a number of revised motions that have been distributed in hard copy as well so at this point, unless there are any. Councilman Labatt: Can I just ask for quick clarification? On page 28 of 33 then, number 37. Are we going to leave it as is or are we going to? How we going to deal with that 3 or 1? Mayor Furlong: I guess my question there or my thought would be to direct to staff how do you want to deal with that? Do we go with the 1? There was a reason for this revision taking place so we have to, have them work with staff. I'm assuming that there was a rational decision at the same time want to make sure that we're not going to cause the problem. Kate Aanenson: If it's okay, just on number 37 just say that the proposed grading plan in the northwest corner near the wetlands needs to be adjusted so that it meets city standards. So we can just leave it at that and then we'll clarify that when it comes back for final plat. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Does that make sense to you Councilman Labatt? Councilman Labatt: (yes). Mayor Furlong: And again, at this point we'll get any clarifying questions or other comments or discussion? If not, at this point I'd entertain a motion. We have what, four. A, B, C and D in front of us that have been distributed. Is there a motion? Councilman Labatt: May I'd move that we, City Council approves the rezoning of property located within the Lakeside development for High Density Residential District (R12) to Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R), incorporating the development standards contained within the staff report subject to the final plat and approval for the Lakeside development. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjomhom: Second. 16 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that motion? Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves the rezoning of property located within the Lakeside development from High Density Residential District (1112) to Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R), incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report, subject to the fmal plat approval for the Lakeside development. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: That motion prevails. Motion B. Councilman Labatt: I would move that we, City Council approves the preliminary plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, revised July 17, 2006. There's a typo there? Mayor Furlong: Nope. Councilman Labatt: With the revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006, and a revised tree preservation plan dated received July 24`s subject to the following conditions 1 through 55 with amending number 33 to read the proposed. Or 33. The proposed grading plan in the northwest corner near the wetlands needs to be adjusted so that it meets city standards. Mayor Furlong: And that was condition 37. Councilman Labatt: 37. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Thank you, is there a second to that motion? Councilwoman Tjomhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion? Comments. Seeing none we'll proceed with the vote. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006 and July 17, 2006, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006, and a revised tree preservation plan dated July 24, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 17 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 3. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrants and any to be relocated. 4. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 5. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 6. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 8. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 shall be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. 9. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 10. The applicant shall provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond I to Lake Riley. 11. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond I shall be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. 12. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement IF] City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. 13. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. 14. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. 15. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 16. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation 17. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 18. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 19. The proposed storm water pond shall be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond shall be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans shall show how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berms and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. 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. 20. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B shall be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type I silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan shall be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and shall be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 21. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 22. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 19 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 23. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 24. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. 25. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. 26. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 27. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 28. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 29. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 30. The applicant shall increase landscape plantings along the east property line to minimum bufferyard requirements. 31. No trees shall be removed behind the northwester comer of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. 32. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. 33. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. 34. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. 35. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. 36. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. 37. The proposed grading in the northwest comer near the wetland needs to be adjusted to meet city standards. 07-01 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 38. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. 39. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. 40. Ground (ie. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. 41. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. 42. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 43. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 44. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. The developer must receive approval from the City of Eden Prairie for grading in to the Outlot for Bearpath 3'a Addition. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 46. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 47. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 48. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. 49. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 50. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 51. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 52. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. 53. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 21 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 54. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 55. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: That motion prevails. Motion C. Councilman Labatt: I move that the City Council approves the plans, approves the Site Plan for 231 housing units and a community building with a pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006 and July 17, 2007? Isn't that a typo there? 2006. With a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006, and a variance for building height for the condominium units consistent with the building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped received May 26`s, subject to the following conditions 1 through 16. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjomhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on that motion? Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves the Site Plan for 231 housing units and a community building with pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2006, with a revised grading plan dated July 24, 2006, with a variance for building height for the condominium units consistent with the building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped received May 26, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. 3. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 22 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 4. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 5. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 6. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. 7. A fmal grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 8. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire - resistive construction. 9. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 10. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 11. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 16. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 23 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: That motion prevails. Motion D. Councilman Labatt: I move that the City Council approves Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beachlot with a variance from the requirement of 80% of the units live, 80% of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beachlot. Prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to the following conditions 1 through 9. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Labatt: Do we have to say with the Findings of Fact here? Roger Knutson: I'll get to that. I'll recommend that as your next motion after... Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Motion D has been moved. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on motion D? Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded that the City Council approves a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beachlot with a variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beachlot, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 2. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 3. The area of Outlot B shall be recalculated to include only the area within the outlot above the OHW. The amount of shoreline for Outlot B shall be calculated along the OHW. The number of docks and slips permitted by the conditional use permit for the beach lot shall not 24 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 exceed the number of docks and slips allowable by City Code for the actual beach lot area and frontage. 4. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 5. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of and materials for proposed path from Lyman Boulevard to the dock to minimize the impacts of runoff from the path to the shoreline and Lake Riley. 6. The proposed walking path along the shoreline shall be made of a pervious surface such as mulch, crushed rock or turf grass and shall not be located below the OHW. Special attention shall be paid to ensure that the path materials are not prone to erosion. The plans shall be revised to show the woodland gardens above the OHW of Lake Riley. 7. An individual permit shall be obtained from the DNR for any beach sand applications that do not meet the DNR standards for sand blanket applications without an individual permit. 8. One beach area shall be permitted to minimize impacts to the lake and to adjacent residents. 9. The applicant shall work with staff on the placement of the beach lot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The applicant shall also work with staff on the location of the woodland path and woodland gardens along the path." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: That motion prevails. Roger Knutson: Mayor, then it would be appropriate to adopt the Findings of Fact which are in your packet that relate to all the items you just voted on. Mayor Furlong: Relating to A. Roger Knutson: A through D. That is correct. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a motion to such effect? Councilman Labatt: So moved. Mayor Furlong: Thought I was losing you there. Thank you. Is there a second? Councilwoman Tjornhom: Second. 25 City Council Meeting — July 24, 2006 Councilman Labatt moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to adopt the Findings of Fact relating to motions A through D as presented in the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Mayor Furlong: Anything else on this matter? Todd Gerhardt: No. Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Thank you everyone. Very good. At this time I'll take a slight recess. Ask council to remain in our chairs. We'll start up again in just a minute. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Mayor Furlong: Any council presentations? Councilwoman Tjomhom: Mr. Mayor, I attended the I e anniversary of Centennial Hills. It was a beautiful day and good turnout and it was just a great celebration for all who participated in the past and are there now in the present and looking forward to being here for the next anniversary so, it was a good day. Mayor Furlong: Well we appreciate you representing the council at that event. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Mayor, just like to again, in regards to the fire last week. Pass along some positive comments that I received from some of my neighbors or several of the neighbors on Mr. Gerhardt, how he handled the situation. Got a lot of positive comments on offering assistance and help, along with the fire department to the resident there. The homeowners and those things and how that situation was handled and responding quickly to getting it boarded up and those things too. There was a lot of kids running through the neighborhood. The house is in pretty bad shape so, keep those curious little kids running around at a potential there so, and I did receive several positive comments from the neighbors on that so Todd, thank you for your efforts and much appreciated. Todd Gerhardt: Yep. Mayor Furlong: Very good. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor I'd just like to add a few comments to that. It's always amazing to go out to scenes like this and you think there's going to be all this chaos going on and you know when you don't train like the fire department does for this type of stuff, I mean every Monday they're over at the fire station training for some type of major event that's going to go on. A majority of it is fire but there's a variety of other things and when you go out to the scene and watch them in action, it's just amazing how organized it is. They run it like a business. They have the command area and they're tracking everybody. The rest of the firemen are waiting for direction. It's just very, very organized and Greg Geske and the rest of the firemen do a fantastic job with the help of Carver County Deputies and I'm just proud to be out there to watch it all and just stay out of the way and I'm the guy where, keep an eye on him. You know he's on the cell 26 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax 952,227 1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning A Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhawn.mn.us ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. DISCUSSION The applicant has prepared revisions to the plans and provided additional information to address some of the concerns that were brought out at the July 10`s meeting. Variance Issues 3 Revised MEMORANDUM 30 feet TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager 20 -foot variance from 50- FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner 0�� Clpl l�1p OF DATE: July 24, 2006 CHMSEN 41 feet height (pitched 37 feet (flat roof). Two - SUBJ: Lakeside — Planning Case #06-26 7700 Markel Boulevard PO Boz 147 Planned Unit Development Chanhassen, MN 55317 from 35 feet height limit. Administration EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Phone: 952.227.11 W 48 feet. 13 -foot variance Fax: 952.227,1110 from the 35 feet height from the 35 feet height This item was tabled by City Council at the July 10, 2006 meeting for review of the Building Inspections following issues: elimination of the setback variance along the eastern property line, P221 Fax: 952.227.1190 additional landscape buffering and preservation of additional trees through reduction 48 feet. or elimination of the grading in to the trail easement, and checking the OHW. City Engineering Council minutes from July 10, 2006 are item la of the July 24, 2006 City Council Phone:952.227.1160 1952.227,1170 packet. Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax 952,227 1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning A Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhawn.mn.us ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. DISCUSSION The applicant has prepared revisions to the plans and provided additional information to address some of the concerns that were brought out at the July 10`s meeting. Variance Issues Original Revised East perimeter setback, 30 feet Meet standards. *No 20 -foot variance from 50- variance required. foot setback. Heritage Building (A) 41 feet height (pitched 37 feet (flat roof). Two - roof). Six-foot variance foot variance from 35 feet from 35 feet height limit. hei ht limit. Isle Building (B) 48 feet. 13 -foot variance 48 feet. 13 -foot variance from the 35 feet height from the 35 feet height limitation. limitation. Building C — Outside the 48 feet. 48 feet. shoreland district. No variance required. 60% of units within 1,000 60% of units within 1,000 61% of units within 1,000 feet of beach lot, where feet. feet. 19% variance from 80% of the units are the 80% requirement. required to be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. *The Planned Unit Development ordinance requires a 50 -foot perimeter setback for townhouses, but a setback equal to the building height for multi -family buildings. (We have revised the design standards in the Planning Commission staff report accordingly.) ftAkWa The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A glial place to live, work, and play Todd Gerhardt Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 24, 2006 Page 2 of 3 Setback While the developer would prefer to have the 30 -foot setback to permit them to meander the private street, vary the orientation of the townhouses, and provide additional open space in the interior of the development, they have revised the plan to meet the eastern perimeter setback. This revision also reduces the number of townhouse dwelling units by two (see attachment 2). Building Height The developer has prepared an alternative for the Heritage Building maintaining the 10 -foot floor heights but incorporating a flat roof. This alternative reduces the building height to 37 feet. What is eliminated is the 14 -foot gable roof, which adds seven feet to the building height. However, what is lost is the aesthetic appeal of the building which uses the gabled roof to reinforce the residential character of the development, the continuity of the gabled roofs on the eastern edge of the development and the "country manor" look. So the question for the City is whether the reduction in the building height is worth the loss of the aesthetics of the Heritage Building (see attachment 3). The applicant has prepared a perspective of the Heritage Building as seen from the center of the vacant lot on the 15`s fairway (18638 Bearpath), which is 482 feet away. The second perspective is from Lake Riley. The focus of the rendering is to depict the size, scale and the materials to be used on the condo. The trees in the renderings currently exist (see attachments 4 and 5). The Isle Building (B) is located within the interior of the development 15 feet below the first floor elevation of the Heritage Building. The Isle Building is 230 feet from the east property line, 220 feet from Lyman Boulevard and 100 feet from the west property line. The building steps down to the west going from four stories to one story above the lower garage level, while the site grading drops approximately 10 feet. Building height means the vertical distance between the highest adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet above the lowest ground level, whichever is lower, and the highest point of a flat roof or average height of the highest of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. Grade or ground level means the average level of the finished surface of the ground adjacent to the exterior walls of the building or structure. Based on the review of the plans and the site grading and employing the definition for building height, the Isle Building has a calculated building height of 48 feet. Sec. 20-907. Height regulations. The height limitations stipulated elsewhere in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code do not apply to the following: (1) Barns, silos or other farm buildings or structures on farms; church spires, belfries, cupolas and domes, monuments, water towers, fire and hose towers, observation towers, chimneys, smoke stacks, flag poles, masts and aerials; communication transmission towers; parapet walls extending not more than four feet above the limiting height of the building. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside — Planning Case 06-26 July 24, 2006 Page 3 of 3 Grading The developer has revised the grading plan to eliminate the grading to facilitate the trail in Eden Prairie. The developer will work with the City of Eden Prairie to fit the trail through the trees and the topography east of the development site. The City of Eden Prairie is leaving the trail at an elevation of 916. Since there will be no grading to match the two properties, retaining walls and some slopes will be required. Landscaping The developer has committed to complete the landscaping that was approved as part of the Eden Prairie trail connection through Bearpath. Ordinary High Water Elevation (OHW) The OHW is specified on sheet 2 of 9 of the development review submittal plans. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the attached findings of fact and decisions and the four motions approving the development as specified on pages 25 - 32 in the staff report dated June 20, 2006. The revised motion in the staff report approves the proposed development with the building height variance and the association beachlot variance, but deletes the 30 -foot eastern property setback. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Decision. 2. Revised Cover Sheet Preliminary Plat. 3. Building Elevation — Flat Roof. 4. Building Perspective from Bearpath. 5. Building Perspective from Lake Riley. 6. Memo to Todd Gerhardt from Bob Generous Dated July 10, 2006. gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-26 takeside\executive summary2.dm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISIONS IN RE: Application of Sienna Corporation for Planned Unit Development rezoning property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots and two outlots; Site Plan Approval for a 233 -unit residential development; Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot; Variance to the standard that 80% of the units be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot; and Variance for building height. On July 10 and 24, 2006, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meetings to consider the above referenced applications. On June 20, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the applications, preceded by published and mailed notice, and has recommended approval. The City Council now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned High Density Residential District, R12. 2. The property is guided in the City's Comprehensive Plan for Residential — High Density. 3. The legal description of the property is set forth on the attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein. 4. With respect to the proposed rezoning from R12, high density residential, to Planned Unit Development, PUD -R, The City Council finds: a. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and furthers its goals and policies. b. The proposed rezoning is compatible with present and future land uses in the area. C. The proposal conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance with the granting of the variances. d. The rezoning provides for high quality design and internal transfer of density preserving desirable site characteristics and open space resulting in more efficient and effective use of the land. 126316v02 RNKA7/18/2006 1 The Subdivision Ordinance, City Code section 18-39, directs consideration of seven standards in considering approval of a subdivision. The City Council finds that all applicable standards have been met. The seven standards and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance, specifically the Planned Unit Development standards; 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 storm water 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 environmental damage; The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. The subdivision has: 1) adequate storm water drainage. 2) adequate roads. 3) adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 6. The Zoning Ordinance, City Code section 20-110, directs consideration of certain standards in evaluating a site plan. The City Council finds that all applicable standards have been met. The standards and our findings with respect to them are: a. The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive land use designation for residential — high density residential with a net density of 9.9 units per acre; b. The proposed development complies with the city's site plan requirements; C. The proposed development preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; 126316v02 RNKA7/18/2006 d. The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; e. The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; 2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. f. The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. 7. The standards for approval of variances are set forth in Mn. Stat. 462.357 subd. 6 and City Code section 20-58. The City Council finds that all applicable standards have been met. The standards and our findings with respect to them are: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. 1) The height and recreational beach lot variances allow reasonable use of the property that is otherwise prohibited by the standards in the zoning ordinance. I263I6vO2 3 2) The zoning ordinance standard that 80% of the dwelling units having the right to use the beach lot be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot is unreasonable for this planned unit development. There is no rational basis for excluding 93 units from the use of the association beach lot. This is a single neighborhood and all residents should have access to the beach lot. The exclusion would segment the planned community. 3) The height variance provides a reasonable use of the property. The height limitation would not permit the development of the site in conformance with the intent of the comprehensive plan, nor permit the high quality development required by the PUD ordinance. To obtain the necessary density, desirable open space now in the development would have been developed. Building "A" is buffered by a golf course and Building `B" is centered toward the middle of the development. Because of the location of the building, the "extra" building height will not have an adverse affect on surrounding property. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. The proposed variances are specific to the unique development design. C. The purpose of the variation is not granted to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but to fulfill the expectations of the city and the developer for the redevelopment of this site. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship, but is due to the city expectations and requirements for the redevelopment of the site. e. The granting of the variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. f. The proposed variations will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 8. The proposed recreational beach lot requires a conditional use permit under the City's zoning ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance, City Code section 20-232, directs consideration of certain standards in evaluating a conditional use permit. The City Council finds that all applicable standards have been met. The standards and our findings with respect to them are: a. The proposed beach lot will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. 126316v02 RNKA7/18/2006 b. The proposed beach lot will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. C. The proposed beach lot will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. d. The proposed beach lot will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed beach lot will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. E The proposed beach lot will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The proposed beach lot will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed beach lot will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed beach lot will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed beach lot will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed beach lot will not depreciate surrounding property values. The proposed beach lot will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in the conditional use permit standards with the granting of the distance variance. 9. The planning report #06-26 dated June 20, 2006, prepared by Robert Generous, et al., as revised, is incorporated herein. 126316vO2 5 RNK:N7/18/2006 Subject to the conditions set forth, the Chanhassen city Council approves the above referenced applications for: rezoning to PUD -R, preliminary plat, site plan, conditional use permit for recreational beach lot, height variance, and recreational beach lot variance. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council the 24th day of July, 2006. CITY OF CHANHASSEN IM ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager/Clerk 12631602 RNK:N7/18/2006 Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property Parcel 1: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter Of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEPTING therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured. at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. SCANNED t - Parcel 2: Outlot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property IME LINN ONESOman On■■ ONES Nom u■NI SSSS SSSS ■E■■ SSSS SSSS SSSS NONE none ■mm■ SSSS SSSS SSSS SSSS SSSS ..-� ■■EN SSSS SSSS SSSS SSSS SSSS SSSS GONE ■eaa SSSS memo ■e■E SSSS SSSS ■■ma A9VII-kwll - 4 o a _ x A9VII-kwll - 4 M� IF MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager y OF FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner IIC, u CIFf11NSF11 (�p DATE: July 10, 2006 9- 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 SUBJ: Lakeside — Planning Case #06-26 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227 1100 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fax 952.227.1110 Building Inspections The developer is requesting a Planned Unit Development rezoning the property Phone: 952.227.1180 from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, Fax: 952.227.1190 PID -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the Engineering project and a 13 -foot height variance on the 3 condominium buildings; Preliminary Phone: 952.727.1160 Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Fax: 952.227.1170 Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and Finance condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community Phone: 952.227.1140 building and pool; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Fax: 952.227.1110 Variances. Park 8 Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 The Planning Commission and staff are recommending approval of the proposed Fax: 952.227.1110 development subject to the conditions of the staff report. Recreation Center 2310 Coulter2d ACTION REQUIRED Phone:952.227.1400 Fax: 952227.1404 City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. Planning It Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY Fax: 952.227.1110 The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 20, 2006, to review the Public Works 1591 Park Road proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 1 to approve the Phone: 952.227.1300 proposed project. The majority of the Planning Commission believed that the Fax: 952.227.1310 granting of the variances as part of the development was a reasonable tradeoff to Senior Center facilitate the development of the project. The one vote against the project was due to Phone: 952,227 1125 the building height variance. There were numerous public comments against the Fax 952227.1110 granting of the variances (building height and setback) for the project. The Planning Web site Commission minutes are item la of the July 10, 2006, City Council packet. www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us Were the project to develop under the existing High Density Residential District, R12, the following setbacks would apply: front — 50 feet, side —10 feet, rear — 25 feet. Using the configuration of the proposed development, the setback from the east property line would be 10 feet to the side of Condominium Building A and 25 feet for the townhouse units. Both of these setbacks are less than the 30 -foot setback being proposed as part of the Lakeside development. A4'M^4 The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. Todd Gerhardt Lakeside July 10, 2006 Page 2 of 2 Staff has reviewed the development approvals for five recent multi -story, multi -family buildings within the city. Project Case Number Stories Height (feet) Number of Units Lake Susan Apartment Homes SPR #99-9 3 48.5 162 (3, 54 -unit apartment buildings Powers Ride SPR #99-19 3 40 344 (5 buildings) Presbyterian Homes SPR #01-13 4 49 90 -unit independent living unit building Presbyterian Homes SPR #01-13 3 40 73 unit assisted living unit building Village on the Ponds Building C SPR #02-07 4 50 54 Gateway North I SPR #06-05 3 35 146 All the developments included underground parking. The Village on the Ponds Building C and Presbyterian Homes buildings included street level retail uses. As can be seen by these building heights, there is no one building height used for these buildings. It should be further noted that while the development states a 48 -foot building height, this distance is to the top of the roof or parapet, which is by definition excluded from the building height calculation. However, to be conservative staff has included the 48 feet as the building height. Additionally, architectural features, such as towers, parapets screening rooftop equipment and other architectural features are exempted from the building height requirement. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the four motions approving the development as specified on pages 25 - 32 in the staff report dated June 20, 2006. ATTACHMENTS 1. PUD Rezoning Ordinance. 2. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated June 20, 2006. g:\plan\2006 planning c m\06-26,akesidekxecuuve summary.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning all property within the Lakeside plat, from R12, High Density Residential District, to PUD - R, Planned Unit Development Residential District, subject to the final plat approval for the Lakeside development. Section 2. The rezoning of this property incorporates the design standards contained in the Planning Commission staff report dated June 20, 2006. Section 3. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this _ day of , 2006. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on 2006.) gAplan\2006 planning cases\06-26 lakeside\pud rezoning ordinance.doc 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DATE: June 20, 2006 CC DATE: July 103, 2006 July 24, 2006 REVIEW DEADLINE: July 18, 2006 Extended to September 16, 2006 CASE #: 06-26 BY: AF, RG, KA, LH, JM, JS, NII. PROPOSAL: LAKESIDE— Request for a Planned Unit Development rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project and a 13 -foot height variance on the 3 condominium buildings; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community building and pool; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances. LOCATION: 125 Lakeview Road APPLICANT: Sienna Corporation Lakeview Hills, LLC 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Atm: Steve Liefschultz Minneapolis, MN 55435 12400 Whitewater Drive, Suite 2040 (952) 835-2808 Minnetonka, MN 55343 jvogelbacher@siemacorp.com PRESENT ZONING: R12, High Density Residential 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential — High Density (net density range 8 —16 units per acre) ACREAGE: 26.29 DENSITY: gross: 8.9 units per acre; net: 9.8 units per acre SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for a Planned Unit Development with Variances and Subdivision with Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- unit townhouses and three- story condominium buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot. LEVEL OF CITY IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi judicial decision. The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because of the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards in the ordinance. Location Map Lakeside 125 Lakeview Road East Planning Case No. 06-26 proposedT N_ Rice Marsh Lake Lake Riley I Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 2 of 34 PROPOSAUSUMMARY The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 26 acres from R12, High Density Residential, to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The project consists of 233 units in 28 structures: 15 twinhomes (30 units), 6 three -unit townhouses (18 units), 4 four -unit townhouses (16 units), condo A - 39 units, condo B - 53 units and condo C - 77 units. A community building with a pool for the development as well as a recreational beach lot are included as part of the development. Variance requests include a 30 -foot setback (rather than a 50 -foot setback) from the east property line, a 48 -foot building height (rather than a 35 -foot building height) for the 3 condominium buildings, and a variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the housing units be within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lot. On the north side of the project is the Highway 312 corridor. To the east of the development is the Bearpath Golf Community. South of the site is Lake Riley. To the west is the North Bay development. The northern two-thirds of the site is currently developed with 175 apartment units as part of the Lakeview Hills Apartments. These units will be demolished as part of the redevelopment of the site. The southern third of the site is undeveloped. An existing nonconforming beachlot is located on Lake Riley. The property north of Lyman Boulevard has a high elevation of 916 in the northeast comer of the site and a low elevation of 872 in the southwest comer of the property. The property generally slopes from the east down to the west. A wetland is located in the northwest corner of the site. This wetland will not be altered as part of the development proposal. There are scattered areas of woodland throughout the property. The land south of Lyman Boulevard generally slopes from the north down to Lake Riley with an ordinary high water (OHW) elevation of 865.3. There are areas of very steep slopes on the north side of the beach lot. The beach lot area is heavily wooded. These trees will be preserved as part of the development. A neighborhood meeting to review the redevelopment of the apartment property was held on Thursday, June 8th at 7:30 P.M. at the Chanhassen Recreation Center. Staff is recommending that the Lakeside Planned Unit Development be approved with the conditions outlined in the staff report. APPLICABLE REGUATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Chapter 20, Article II, Division 2, Amendments Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article IV, Conditional Use Permits Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection Chapter 20, Article VII, Planned Unit Development District Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 9, Design Standards for Multifamily Developments Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 3 of 34 BACKGROUND The Township of Chanhassen rezoned the property from Farm Residential to Commercial, Ordinance Amendment 1163-1 in July 1963. On January 25, 1993, the City Council approved Non -conforming Use Permit 92-8 for a recreational beach lot for Lakeview Hills Homeowners Association. The permit was issued subject to the following conditions: a. Installation and maintenance of a gate which would be locked day and night (but the residents of the complex would have lake access by keys furnished by management); b. Prohibit overnight boat dockage, prohibit overnight mooring, and prohibit overnight storage of boats on the beach itself; except for storage of canoe racks (application requests one canoe rack with 8 to 10 boats stored); c. All overnight storage will be limited to designated portions of the existing parking lots (north of Lake Riley Blvd.) and other designated portions of the property lying north of the apartment buildings; d. The dock length would be limited to 50 feet; e. Continued use of the boat launch; f. Planning Commission has not ruled pro or con as to the number 11 on the application itself but all other historic information has been agreed to. In May 1997, the City purchased approximately 26 acres of the Lakeview Hills Apartment site with funds from the Metropolitan Council's Right-of-way Acquisition Loan Fund. Of this area, 6.3 acres were actual right -0f --way for Highway 312, 9.5 acres were upland that was having access severed by the new highway and 10 acres were Rice Marsh Lake and wetland. In May 2005, the Minnesota Department of Transportation purchased the property from the City. The property is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Residential - High Density (net density range 8 —16 units per acre). Appropriate zonings for this land use designation include Planned Unit Development — Residential (PUD -R), Mixed Medium Density Residential (R8), Low and Medium Density Residential (RLM), High Density Residential, R12 or R-16 District. Zoning Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes PUD -R No minimum No minimum No minimum Must comply with comprehensive plan net density R8 (two family) 7,500/unit 50/unit 150 lam_4 Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 4 of 34 Zoning Area (sq. ft.) Fronta a (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes R8 (multi -family) 5,500/unit 50/unit 150 RLM (two family) 7,260/unit 50/unit 100 RLM (multi -family) 5,445/unit 30 100 R12 (two family) 7,500/unit 50/unit 155 R12 (multi -family) 3,600/unit 150 155 R-16 2,700/unit No minimum No minimum The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 26 acres from R12, High Density Residential, to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The project consists of 233 units in 28 structures: 15 twinhomes (30 units), 6 three -unit townhouses (18 units), 4 four -unit townhouses (16 units), condo A - 39 units, condo B - 53 units and condo C - 77 units. A community building for the development as well as a recreational beach lot are included as part of the development. The review criteria are taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Justification for Rezoning to PUD Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit density clustering for development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of density. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development. The proposed amendment and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. • The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide a full range of housing opportunities. • The city will seek opportunities to provide transitions between different uses of different types. • Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. The proposed amendment and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following housing goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 5 of 34 • A balanced housing supply with housing available for people of all income levels. • A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life -cycle. • Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property: DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Lakeview Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD for a mix housing type multi -family development. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be twin homes, townhouses, and three condominium buildings and their ancillary uses. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. The type of uses to be provided on common areas shall be low -intensity neighborhood -oriented accessory structures to meet daily needs of residents. Such uses may include a bus shelter, community building, development signage, fountain, garden, gazebo, maintenance shed, picnic shelter, pool, playground equipment or tennis courts. C. Setbacks The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following table displays those setbacks. Setback Standards Highway 212 50 feet East(Perimeter) Lot Line i30 50 feet - townhouses/twin homes; Building Height — Condominiums with a minimum of 30 feet Lyman Boulevard 50 feet/30 feet for beach lot West(Perimeter) Lot Line 50 feet Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 6 of 34 # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 50 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 50 percent site coverage. d. Building Materials and Design 1. Townhouses • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of fiber -cement or vinyl siding or shake and brick or stone. • No two adjacent structures shall be of the same color scheme. • Colors used shall be varied across color tones. • All units shall utilize minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles. • Each unit shall have a minimum of one overstory tree within its front landscape yard. • All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building, landscaping or decorative fencing. • Garage doors shall be decorative and have windows. 2. Community Clubhouse • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of stone and stucco and fiber - cement. • Natural cedar shakes roofing. Condominium Building • Building height shall be limited to 48 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of 80 percent or greater stone and brick. Accent and trim areas in fiber -cement lap siding and shake. • Roofing shall be a minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles (pitched roofs). e. Signage Signage shall comply with city standards for Residential Districts. f. Landscaping Setback Standards Twin Home separation between buildings 15 feet Townhouse separation between buildings 20 feet Minimum Driveway length (to back of curb, trail or sidewalk) 25 feet Hard Surface Coverage 50 % * Wetland: Buffer and buffer setback 16.5 feet and 40 feet Lake Riley 75 feet # Decks, patios, porches, and stoops may project up to seven (7) feet in to the required yard. * The entire development, including the public and private streets and Outlots, may not exceed 50 percent hard coverage. Individual lots will exceed the 50 percent site coverage. d. Building Materials and Design 1. Townhouses • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of fiber -cement or vinyl siding or shake and brick or stone. • No two adjacent structures shall be of the same color scheme. • Colors used shall be varied across color tones. • All units shall utilize minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles. • Each unit shall have a minimum of one overstory tree within its front landscape yard. • All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building, landscaping or decorative fencing. • Garage doors shall be decorative and have windows. 2. Community Clubhouse • Building height shall be limited to 35 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of stone and stucco and fiber - cement. • Natural cedar shakes roofing. Condominium Building • Building height shall be limited to 48 feet. • Building exterior material shall be a combination of 80 percent or greater stone and brick. Accent and trim areas in fiber -cement lap siding and shake. • Roofing shall be a minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles (pitched roofs). e. Signage Signage shall comply with city standards for Residential Districts. f. Landscaping Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 7 of 34 Landscaping shall comply with the landscaping plan prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006. SUBDIVISION REVIEW ACCESS/STREETS The development will be accessed via Lyman Boulevard, a collector roadway, and Lakeview Road East. The internal street system will be private. The private street will be 24 feet wide, with parking cutouts and perpendicular parking areas scattered throughout the development. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. Private Street In order to permit private streets, the city must find that the following conditions exist: (1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct 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. (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 the private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources including wetlands and forested areas. Finding: The proposed development is located south of future Highway 312 and west of the 15a' hole in Bearpath Golf Course. The proposed development is a self-contained neighborhood with no need to provide additional street access to adjacent properties. Inclusion of a public street would only increase the overall impervious surface within the development increasing site runoff and the need for storm water treatment. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL Drainage The proposed building on Lot 1, Block 1 is located within drainage and utility easements. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 should be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. The plans include a water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3; however, limited details are provided. The applicant should supply details about this water feature, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 8 of 34 proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. The applicant should provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond 1 to Lake Riley. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond I should be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. The storm water infrastructure within the proposed development provides benefit only to this development. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared -end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, should be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer should enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement should be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. Erosion and Sediment Control 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 should be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. The plans should be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond should be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail should be included in the plan. Energy dissipation should be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls should be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection should be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. Typical building lot controls should be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls should 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 (CO). The proposed storm water pond should be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond should be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans should show Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 9 of 34 how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berms and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. The outlet could be a temporary perforated standpipe and rock cone. The plans should be revised to include a detail for the temporary pond outlet. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B should be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type 1 silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan should be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and should be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence should be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and are required to be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence should be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. Plans should be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls should be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEES Water Quality Fees Because of the varying development types proposed for this development, the water quality fees for this development are broken down as follows: Parcel Size (ac.) Zoning Rate Per Acre Total Duplexes 4.78 Medium Density $1,800 $8,604 Townhomes 5.91 Medium Density $3,100 $18,321 Apartments 7.59 High Density $3,400 $25,806 Other 6.26 Medium Density $3,100 $19,406 TOTAL Water Quality Fee $72,137 The total water quality fees associated with this project are $72,137. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 10 of 34 Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Parcel Size (ac.) Zoning Rate Per Acre Total Duplexes 4.78 Medium Density $4,400 $21,032 Townhomes 5.91 Medium Density $4,400 $26,004 Apartments 7.59 High Density $6,400 $48,576 Other 6.26 Medium Density $4,400 $27,544 TOTAL Water Quantity Fee $123,156 The total water quantity fees associated with this project are $123,156. SWNIP Credits The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided on site to treat runoff from the site. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for oversizing in accordance with the SWMP or the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. WETLANDS The wetland delineation for the subject site showed two wetland basins on-site. The applicant applied for wetland exemptions on December 22, 2005 for both Wetland Basins A and B. On January 10, 2006, the City of Chanhassen issued an exemption decision for Wetland Basin A, a 0.03 acre, Type 3 wetland basin on the Lakeview Hills site. An incidental wetland exemption was issued for Wetland Basin A because the basin was found to be a constructed basin to maintain the drainage through the culvert under the historical driveway to Lakeview Hills and previous farm field. City staff reviewed the as -built plans of record and determined that the structure near Wetland Basin B was an inlet and therefore was not contributing to the hydrology of the wetland. Review of the HUG photographs submitted and Farm Service Agency (FSA) photographs at the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District revealed that the wetland area existed prior to the construction of the apartment complex (1963 FUG Photo). The berm on the south side of the wetland allowed the City to rule out the possibility that storm water from the complex was being directed into Wetland Basin B. The berm on the north side of the wetland appears to have formed in the early 1970s with the excavation of part of Wetland Basin B to open water. In examining the photos it appears the ditch to the north of the property stopped functioning Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 11 of 34 between 1951 and 1957, about the time the wetland signatures in the photos become visible. Wetland Basin B has been in existence for more than 25 years and is therefore jurisdictional wetland that cannot be considered for incidental or drainage exemptions. City staff concluded that Wetland Basin B was not eligible for incidental or drainage exemptions. The application for an exemption for Wetland Basin B was denied on January 10, 2006. Wetland Basin B is a 0.75 acre, Type 3, ag/urban wetland in the northwest comer of the site. The wetland is dominated by sedges, reed canary grass, willow, red osier dogwood, and quaking aspen. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet should be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) should maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. The proposed plans indicate encroachment of buildings in Lots 12 and 13, Block 2 into the wetland buffer setback. Buildings should be adjusted to maintain the wetland buffer setback. In addition, a trail behind Lots 12 and 13, Block 2 is routed through the wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. The trail should be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The retaining wall on Lots 12 and 13, Block 2 should also be located outside the wetland buffer. The plans should be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant should install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. LAKE RILEY The proposed project is within the shoreland district of Lake Riley. The ordinary high water level (OHW) of Lake Riley is not shown on the plans. The plans should be revised to depict the OHW of 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. Ashes from fire pits contain large amounts of nutrients that can contribute to decreased water quality. The proposed fine pit should be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and should be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). OTHER AGENCIES The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 12 of 34 RETAINING WALLS The proposed retaining walls are as follows: Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. UTILITIES The developer proposes to extend lateral sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within the development. All utilities within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. Watermain will extend from the existing watermain within Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Road East. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. Sanitary sewer will extend from two locations within Lake Riley Road East: at the proposed intersection and just north of the intersection of Lake Riley Road East and Lyman Boulevard. Due to the alignment of the existing sanitary sewer, it appears that the sanitary sewer extension cannot take place under traffic. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots; therefore, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. Length Maximum Height Location (approximate) (approximate) East of Lakeview Road East, between Building 550 feet 10 feet upper tier B, the pool house and the pond 8 feet lower tier East of the new access off of Lyman Boulevard, 190 feet 8 feet west of Building A North of Building B, next to the stairs 50 feet 10 feet East of the garden area between the proposed 800 feet 16 feet townhomes and twinhomes South of the wetland, between the proposed feet 12 feet townhomes and North Bay330 Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. UTILITIES The developer proposes to extend lateral sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within the development. All utilities within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. Watermain will extend from the existing watermain within Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Road East. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. Sanitary sewer will extend from two locations within Lake Riley Road East: at the proposed intersection and just north of the intersection of Lake Riley Road East and Lyman Boulevard. Due to the alignment of the existing sanitary sewer, it appears that the sanitary sewer extension cannot take place under traffic. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots; therefore, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 13 of 34 All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also 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. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the MPCA, Dept. of Health, Carver County and Watershed District. EASEMENTS The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. STREETS Access to the site will be from Lakeview Road East and Lyman Boulevard. The access to Lyman Boulevard will be approximately 340 feet east of the Lake Riley Road intersection. Staff supports the proposed access spacing due to the severe grades to the east. A median will be installed at the street intersection with Lyman Boulevard and will provide 17 -foot wide ingress and egress lanes. All streets within the development will be privately owned and maintained. The streets will be 24 feet wide and will widen to 33 feet at several locations to provide dedicated on -street parallel parking spaces. Guest parking lots and drop off aisles will be constructed in front of Buildings A, B and C. This development is adjacent to Lyman Boulevard, and is therefore within the Collector Roadway Traffic Impact Zone and subject to the $2,400.00/developable acre fee. PARKS AND RECREATION PROPOSED PARK AND OPEN SPACE ACQUISITIONS IN THE LAKE RILEY NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD Applying our guide of 1 acre of parkland for every 75 people, the developments planned or already constructed within the Lake Riley North Neighborhood will generate the need for a 5 to 7 -acre park/open space site. This neighborhood is defined for park planning purposes as the area between Lake Riley Boulevard and new Highway 212, east of and including the Southwest Station housing and transit site and west of and including the proposed Lakeside development. To provide a centrally located park site, staff is recommending a future parklopen space acquisition as a condition of approval for the future development of the Klingelhutz property. A portion of the park dedication fees collected from Lakeside will be used to finance the acquisition and development of this future park site. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 14 of 34 PRIVATE PARK AMENITIES WITHIN LAKESIDE The applicant is proposing a variety of private recreational amenities within their development. These include a garden -like walkway at the center of their housing units and a private beach lot proposed to contain a patio and walkway, gazebo, picnic area, fire pit and tot lot. TRAILS The development of Lakeside will permit the construction of a very important section of public trail. This new section of trail will be located on the north side of Lyman Boulevard traveling from the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and North Bay Drive east to the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie border. At this location, the trail will connect with trails proposed to be established in Eden Prairie. One of these trails will parallel the 15'h fairway of the Bearpath Golf Course and allow pedestrians to travel north under the newly built Highway 212 and beyond. Another Eden Prairie trail will continue east along Lyman Boulevard connecting to Lake Riley Park and the south LRT trail. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REGARDING PARKS AND TRAILS It is recommended that the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning parks and trails for the Lakeside PUD: 1. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 3. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed. LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION Tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations for the Lakeside development are as follows: Total upland area ("eluding wetlands and bluffs) 25.53 acres Total canopy area (excluding wetlands and bluffs) 6.3 acres Baseline canopy coverage 24% Minimum canopy coverage allowed 20% or 5.1 acres Proposed tree preservation 14.2% or 2.2 acres C%7'7�1'1 Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 15 of 34 Developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage allowed; therefore, the difference is multiplied by 1.2 to calculate the required replacement plantings. Difference in canopy coverage (5.1-2.2) 2.9 acres Multiplier 1.2 Total replacement area 3.48 acres or 151,588 SF Total number of trees to be planted 139 trees A total of 139 trees are required for reforestation in the development. The applicant is proposing a total of 121 trees as a part of the landscaping plan. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to show a minimum of 139 trees to be planted. Additional landscaping required for the development includes buffer yard plantings along the east property line. The following table summarizes the minimum requirements: The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the north and east bufferyards. Staff recommends that the minimum requirements be met for the east bufferyard. The north bufferyard abuts a sound wall for the Highway 212 right-of-way and is appropriately planted with evergreens and overstory trees. In the northwestern corner of the property there is a grouping of quaking aspen scheduled for removal. The majority of the group exists outside of the proposed silt fence and abuts the wetland. Staff recommends that no trees behind the silt fence be removed. Staff recommends that the applicant work with staff on the placement of the beachlot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The Required Proposed East property line - 17 overstory 0 overstory bufferyard B, 2188' 33 understory 0 understory 30' width 33 shrubs 0 shrubs North property line — 7 overstory 10 overstory bufferyard B, 650' 13 understory 20 understory 30' width 13 shrubs 0 shrubs West property line 0 overstory 22 overstory Bufferyard A, 1370' 11 understory 34 understory 25' width 11 shrubs 53 shrubs South property line 6 overstory 13 overstory Bufferyard B, 600' 12 understory 15 understory 30' width 12 shrubs 64 shrubs Boulevard trees — Lyman 12 overstory trees 13 overstory trees Blvd. The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the north and east bufferyards. Staff recommends that the minimum requirements be met for the east bufferyard. The north bufferyard abuts a sound wall for the Highway 212 right-of-way and is appropriately planted with evergreens and overstory trees. In the northwestern corner of the property there is a grouping of quaking aspen scheduled for removal. The majority of the group exists outside of the proposed silt fence and abuts the wetland. Staff recommends that no trees behind the silt fence be removed. Staff recommends that the applicant work with staff on the placement of the beachlot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 16 of 34 applicant shall also work with staff on the location of the woodland path and woodland gardens along the path. LOT INFORMATION TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes Ll B1 67,238 295 235 Community buildingtpool Ll B2 106,965 414 414 Condo A L2 B2 16,720 94 157 Twinhome 13 B2 14,380 96 142 Twinhome L4 B2 13,366 98 138 Twinhome L5 B2 13,005 97 132 Twinhome Lb B2 -B2 12,837 96 129 Twinhome L7 13,083 97 134 Twinhome L8 B2 13,917 101 140 Twinhome L9 B2 -B2 13,667 105 138 Twinhome DO 12,706 96 128 Twinhome Lll B2 19,598 121 138 Three -unit L12 B2 145,495 494 187 Condo C L13 B2 30,135 137 186 Three -unit L14 B2 27,624 188 142 Four -unit L15 B2 26,961 195 140 Four -unit L16 B2 23,501 108 134 Three -unit Ll B3 77,928 200 374 Condo B ff B3 14,616 104 146 Twinhome L3 B3 13,889 97 150 Twinhome L4 B3 14,125 98 152 Twinhome L5 B3 13,893 93 147 Twinhome L6 B3 14,040 90 144 Twinhome L7 B3 13,943 91 147 Twinhome L8 B3 26,926 139 162 Three -unit L9 B3 26,453 140 199 Three -unit L10 B3 27,138 205 143 Four -unit Ll l B3 26,259 190 136 Four -unit L12 B3 22,938 140 150 Three -unit Outlot A 140,445 Private street Outlot B 65,397 Recreational beach lot ROW 75,794 1.74 acres TOTAL 1,145,192 26.29 acres Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 17 of 34 GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The developer is proposing four housing products: twin homes, three -unit townhouses, four -unit townhouses and three and four-story condominiums. The intent of the project is for luxurious housing units at the upper end of housing prices. The townhouses are all either walkout or lookout style buildings. Charles Cudd Company is proposing the two and three -unit structures. Wooddale Builders, Inc. is proposing the four -unit structures. Building exterior material shall be a combination of fiber -cement or vinyl siding or shake and brick or stone. All units shall utilize minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles. Building rooflines are vaned and incorporate gable, hip and shed roof elements. Copulas are incorporated within some of the units. The condominium buildings are highly articulated with multiple projections and recesses in the elevation. Rooflines incorporate both pitched and flat roof elements with chimneys, gabled and hip dormers, and arched roof elements. Roof truss elements are incorporated as a decorative feature at the ends of the gabled roof sections. Roofing shall be a minimum timberline 30 -year asphalt shingles. Building exterior material shall be a combination of 80 percent or greater stone and brick. Some of the wider projected brick areas are bordered on the corners by block quoins as an accent to the brickwork. Stone is shown as a base level element, but is also brought up to the top of the second floor. Concrete sills provide separations between the different building materials. Windows and doors incorporate both cement and soldier course headers and sills. Accent and trim areas are fiber -cement lap siding and shake. Windows are multi -paned. Window planters are incorporated under some of the windows. Balconies and decks are provided throughout the building. Trellises provide cover for some of the balconies. a+u aawm p"Mm "u 1 The community clubhouse is proposed as a walkout structure. Building exterior material shall be a combination of stone and stucco and fiber -cement. Natural cedar shake roofing material will be incorporated in the building. The building elevations provide numerous windows. ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Architectural style. • Architectural style shall not be restricted. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and in relationship to its surroundings, guided by the provisions of this section. Site characteristics to be evaluated for this purpose include Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 18 of 34 building and landscaping, colors, textures, shapes, massing of rhythms of building components and detail, height of roof line, setback and orientation. Designs that are incompatible with their surroundings or intentionally bizarre or exotic are not acceptable. • Monotony of design, both within projects and between adjacent projects and its surroundings, is prohibited. Variation in detail, form, and sighting shall provide visual interest. Site characteristics that may be used for this purpose include building and landscaping, colors, textures, shapes, massing of rhythms of building components and detail, height of roof line, setback and orientation. All building shall have a minimum of 20 percent of accent material. Accent material may include brick, stone cut face block or shakes. The use of any EFIS shall not be on the first story of any building or one story in height. Finding: The proposed development has been well sited within the site. It attempts to fit into the environment in which it is located including incorporating the site topography in building layouts, terracing down to Lake Riley. The buildings offer much variety including colors, finishes, roof lines and materials. The buildings are oriented to correspond to the internal street system as well as maximizing views of Lake Riley and Bearpath Golf Course. Land use. All development shall create a unified design of internal order that provides desirable environments for site uses, visitors and the community. The following design elements shall be incorporated into a project: • The project shall create a unique neighborhood identity. • Creation of interconnecting neighborhoods in collaboration with adjoining landowners (street, walkways, preservation of natural features, parks and gathering places). • Each neighborhood has a focal point or gathering place including parks, greens, squares, entrance monuments, historic structures (silosfbarns) or public furniture (gazebos, benches, pergolas). Community features may include: landscaping, lighting, benches, tables • Recreation facilities (playgrounds, tot lots, swimming pools and gardens). • Diversity of product type and design to accommodate different age groups and individuals in different socio -economics circumstances. • Broad variety of housing choices --twin homes, row houses, town homes, flats above garages, apartments over shops, garden apartments, senior living opportunities and condominiums. Findings: The project creates its own luxurious enclave. Situated adjacent to Bearpath Golf Course and overlooking Lake Riley, the project is also connected through roads and trails to the rest of the community. Common areas including a community building, pool and recreational beach lot provide opportunities for focal points or gathering places. With three different housing Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 19 of 34 developers, the project provides diversity in housing types to accommodate individual tastes and expectations. Curb appeal. To encourage roadway image or curb appeal projects shall create a variety of building orientation along the roadways; attractive streetscape and architectural detail. All projects shall incorporate two or more of the following design elements: • Orientation to the street or access road: ■ Setbacks • Spacing between buildings and view sheds. • Architectural detail/decorative features. ■ Windows. ■ Flower boxes. ■ Porches, balconies, private spaces. ■ Location and treatment of entryway. ■ Surface materials, finish and texture. ■ Roof pitch. ■ Building height and orientation. • Location of garages. • Landscaping including fencing and berming. • Street lighting. • Screening of parking, especially in apartment and condominium developments. • Variations/differentiations in units including, but not limited to, color, material, articulation etc. Findings: The proposed development has been well sited within the site. It attempts to fit into the environment in which it is located including incorporating the site topography in building layouts, terracing down to Lake Riley. The luxury buildings offer much variety including colors, finishes, roof lines and materials. The buildings are oriented in multiple vectors to provide varying site lines and building elevations. Buildings are set back sufficiently to provide a minimum 25 -foot long driveway. Transportation diversity. All developments shall incorporate multi -modal transportation including two or more of the following elements: • Streets with trails incorporated. • Off road trials and bike paths. • Provisions for mass transit with bus stops and shelters incorporated into the developments. • Sidewalk connecting internal developments. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 20 of 34 Undulating sidewalks. Use of pavers or stamped concrete. On -street parking and use of roundabouts. Landscaped boulevards or medians. Findings: The proposed development offers two directions of access to the site as well as walking and biking opportunities in both sidewalks and its connection to the Chanhassen's and Eden Prairie's trail system. Integration of parks, open space, natural historic or cultural resources. • Integrate nature and wildlife with urban environment. ■ Trails and sidewalks. • Vistas. ■ Historic features. Preservation of natural features that support wildlife and native plants (slopes, trees, wetlands). Findings: The proposed development is oriented toward Lake Riley, yet separated from it by open space in the recreational beach lot. In addition, trail connections to the Chanhassen's and Eden Prairie's trail system are proposed. The terracing of the site provides additional opportunities for residents to overlook Lake Riley. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE The developer is proposing the use of a lower profile, decorative, goose neck style lighting fixture for area lighting. Within the goose neck is an area for addition of a symbol and lettering. Below is an example of the light fixture. The homeowners association shall be responsible for all costs for these lights. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 21 of 34 The developer is permitted monument signs at the entrances on Lyman Boulevard and Lakeview Road East. Monuments are limited in height to five feet and may contain a sign area of 24 square feet. A separate sign permit will be required for the installation of the signage. MISCELLANEOUS Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement, property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire -resistive construction. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The applicant has proposed one recreational beach lot that includes a gazebo, fire pit, grill, portable chemical toilet, two beach areas, picnic area, tot lot, walking path and one dock with 6 slips. A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for the beach lot. The proposed beach lot is approximately 65,805 square feet (1.51 acres) in area. The length of shoreline at the beach lot is over 800 feet. The minimum requirements to allow 2 docks with a maximum of 6 boats docked overnight at the beach lot (or 1 dock with 6 slips) are 50,000 square feet of beach lot area and 400 feet of shoreline. The developer is requesting a conditional use permit for a recreational beach lot with a variance to permit all the units within the Lakeside development to use the beach lot. Staff estimates that 40 percent of the 233 units (93 units) are not located within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. However, all the buildings are within 1,320 feet from the beach lot. Had the developer clustered all the condominium buildings on the south end of the project, this criterion would not be an issue. However, by distributing units in a harmonious manner to break up the massing of the project, they are required to request a variance. The property immediately to the west is a recreational beach lot for the North Bay development. To the west of that property, the City owns a parcel that will eventually be used as a lakefront park with a fishing pier. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 22 of 34 Recreational beach lots must comply with the following standards: Sec. 20-266. Recreational beach lots. Intent. Based upon experience, it is recognized by the city that the use of lakeshore by multiple parties may be an intensive use of lakeshore that may present conflicts with neighboring uses of lakeshore or the use of other lakeshore on the same lake or the lake itself. Further, beach lots may generate complaints if they are not maintained to the same standards as single-family lakeshore lots. Therefore, the city requires the following conditions for recreational beach lots, in addition to such other conditions that may be prescribed in the permit: (1) Recreational beach lots shall have at least 200 feet of lake frontage. (2) Except as specifically provided herein, no structure, ice fishing house, camper, trailer, tent, recreational vehicle, shelters (except gazebos) shall be erected, maintained, or stored upon any recreational beach lot. For the purpose of this section, a gazebo shall be defined as, "a freestanding roofed structure which is open on all sides." (3) No boat, trailer, motor vehicle, including but not limited to cars, trucks, motorcycles, motorized mini -bikes, all -terrain vehicles or snowmobiles shall be driven upon or parked upon any recreational beach lot. (4) No recreational beach lot shall be used for overnight camping. (5) Boat launches are prohibited. (6) No recreational beach lot shall be used for purposes of overnight storage or overnight mooring of more than three motorized or nonmotorized watercraft per dock. If a recreational beach lot is allowed more than one dock; however, the allowed number of boats may be clustered. Up to three sailboat moorings shall also be allowed. Nonmotorized watercraft such as canoes, windsurfers, sailboards and small sailboats may be stored overnight on any recreational beach lot if they are stored on racks specifically designed for that purpose. No more than six watercraft may be stored on a rack. The number of racks shall not exceed the amount of storage necessary to permit one rack slip per lot served by the beach lot; however, in no case shall there be more than four racks per beach lot. Docking of other watercraft or seaplanes is permissible at any time other than overnight. (7) The maximum number of docks on a recreational beach lot is three. No dock shall be permitted on any recreational beach lot unless the beach meets the following conditions: a. Shoreline of at least 200 feet per dock; and b. Area of at least 30,000 square feet for the first dock and additional 20,000 square feet for each additional dock. (8) No recreational beach lot dock shall exceed six feet in width, and no such dock shall exceed the greater of 50 feet or the minimum straight-line distance necessary to reach a water depth of four feet. The width (but not the length) of the cross -bar of any "T" or "I." shaped dock shall be included in the computation of length described in the preceding sentence. The cross -bar of any such dock shall not measure in excess of 25 feet in length. (9) No dock shall encroach upon any dock set -back zone, provided, however, that the owner of any two abutting lakeshore sites may erect one common dock within the dock setback zone appurtenant to the abutting lakeshore sites, if the common dock is the only dock on the two lakeshore sites and if the dock otherwise conforms with the provisions of this chapter. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 23 of 34 (10) No sail boat mooring shall be permitted on any recreational beach lot unless it has at least 200 feet of lake frontage. No more than one sailboat mooring shall be allowed for every 200 feet of lake frontage. (11) For purposes of this subsection, the following terms shall mean those beach lots which are located either within (urban) or outside (rural) the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary as depicted in the comprehensive plan. a. Urban recreational beach lot: At least 80 percent of the dwelling units, which have appurtenant rights of access to any recreational beach lot, shall be located within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lot. (The applicant has requested a variance from this provision to permit the entire development within Lakeside to participate in the beach lot.) b. Rural recreational beach lot: A maximum of 50 dwelling units (including riparian lots) shall be permitted appurtenant rights of access to the recreational beach lot. Upon extension of the Metropolitan Urban Service boundary into the rural area, the urban recreational beach lot standards will apply. (12) All recreational beach lots may be used for swimming beach purposes, but only if swimming areas are clearly delineated with marker buoys which conform to the United States Coast Guard standards. (13) All recreational beach lots shall have a buffer sufficient to insulate other property owners from beach lot activities. This buffer may consist of topography, streets, vegetation, distance (width or depth), or other features or combinations of features which provide a buffer. To insure appropriate buffering, the city may impose conditions to insulate beach lot activities including, but not limited to: a. Increased side or front yard setbacks for beach areas, docks, racks or other allowed recreational equipment or activities; b. Hours of use; c. Planting and maintenance of trees and shrubs; d. Erection of fences; e. Standards of maintenance including mowing and trimming; painting and upkeep of racks, docks and other equipment; disposal of trash and debris; f. Increased width, depth or area requirements based upon the intensity of the use proposed or the number of dwellings having rights of access. (14) To the extent feasible, the city may impose such conditions even after approval of the beach lot if the city finds it necessary. (15) Overnight docking, mooring, and storage of watercraft, where allowed, is restricted to watercraft owned by the owner/occupant or renter/occupant of homes which have appurtenant right of access to the recreational beach lot. (16) The placement of docks, buoys, diving ramps, boat racks, and other structures shall be indicated on a site plan approved by the city council. (17) Portable chemical toilets may be allowed as a condition of approval of a recreational beach lot. The maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some beach lots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened from residential neighbors or lake users. Any use of chemical toilets on recreation beach lots shall be subject to the following: a. The minimum setback from the ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet. Side and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 24 of 34 b. It may only be used Memorial Day to Labor Day and shall be removed from the lot during the rest of the year. c. It shall be securely anchored to the ground to prevent tipping. d. It shall be screened from the lake and residential property with landscaping. e. It shall be serviced at least weekly. f. Only models designed to minimize the potential for spilling may be used. g. Receipt of an annual license from the city's planning department. The license shall be issued unless the conditions of approval of this ordinance have been violated. All license applications shall be accompanied by the following information: 1. Name, address, and phone number of applicants. 2. Site plan showing proposed location of chemical toilets. 3. Name, address, and phone number of chemical toilet supplier. 4. Plan for commercially maintaining the chemical toilet, including a copy of any agreement for maintenance, and the name, address, and phone number of person responsible for maintenance. 5. A written description of how the applicant intends to screen the portable chemical toilet from all views into the property, including views from the lake. (18) No watercraft or boat lift shall be kept, moored, docked, or stored in the dock setback zone. (19) Gazebos may be permitted on recreational beach lots subject to city council approval and the following standards: a. Minimum setback from the ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet. b. No gazebo shall be closer to any lot line than the minimum required yard setback for the zoning district in which the structure is located. c. Maximum size of the structure shall not exceed 250 square feet. d. Maximum height shall not exceed 20 feet. e. Gazebos shall make use of appropriate materials, colors, and architectural and landscape forms to create a unified, high-quality design concept for the lot which is compatible with adjacent and neighboring structures. E Gazebos shall be properly maintained. Structures which are rotted, unsafe, deteriorated or defaced shall be repainted, repaired, removed, or replaced by the homeowners or beach lot association. g. The following improvements are prohibited in gazebos; screening used to completely enclose a wall, water and sewer service, fireplaces, and electricity. The area of Outlot B should be recalculated to include only the area within the outlot above the OHW. The amount of shoreline for Outlot B should be calculated along the OHW. The number of docks and slips permitted by the conditional use permit for the beach lot should not exceed the number of docks and slips allowable by City Code for the actual beach lot area and frontage. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay should be removed. Boat launches are not permitted on beach lots. The applicant should work with staff on the design of and materials for the proposed path from Lyman Boulevard to the dock to minimize the impacts of runoff from the path to the shoreline and Lake Riley. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 25 of 34 The proposed walking path along the shoreline appears to drop below the OHW of Lake Riley. The path must be located above the OHW. The walking path should be made of a pervious surface such as mulch, crushed rock or turf grass. Special attention should be paid to ensure that the path materials are not prone to erosion. Woodland gardens below the OHW are not permitted. The plans should be revised to show the gardens above the OHW of Lake Riley. Beach sand applications without an individual permit are limited by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to no more than 10 feet below the OHW, 50 feet in width and 6 inches deep. In addition, beach sand cannot be applied more than two times at any location, so protection of the sand blanket should be considered. Alternatively, an individual permit should be obtained from the DNR for any beach sand applications that do not meet the DNR standards for sand blanket applications without an individual permit. The applicant proposes two beach areas on the beach lot. It is recommended that one beach area be permitted to minimize impacts to the lake and to adjacent residents. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Chanhassen City Council Planning GeffHFAss adopt the following four motions A. "The Chanhassen City Council approves of the Rezoning of the property located within the Lakeside development, from High Density Residential District (R12) to Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report el€, subject to the final plat approval for the lakeside development." B. "The Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Gomiriissien meeffffneads approval of the Preliminary Plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006 ,subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrants and any to be relocated. 4. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 26 of 34 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 5. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 6. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 7. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 8. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 shall be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. 9. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 10. The applicant shall provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond 1 to Lake Riley. 11. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. 12. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. 13. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. 14. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. rr TINFIM Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 27 of 34 15. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 16. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation 17. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 18. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 19. The proposed storm water pond shall be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond shall be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans shall show how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berns and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. 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. 20. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B shall be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type 1 silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan shall be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and shall be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 21. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 22. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 23. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 24. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 28 of 34 25. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. 26. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 27. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 28. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 29. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 30. The applicant shall increase landscape plantings along the east property line to minimum bufferyard requirements. 31. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern comer of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. 32. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. 33. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. 34. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. 35. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. 36. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. 37. The proposed grading in the northwest corner near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the lewest first floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 are at least three feet one foot above the high water emergency overflow elevation of the wetland. 38. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. 39. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 29 of 34 40. Ground (ie. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. 41. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. 42. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 43. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 44. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 46. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 47. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 48. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. 49. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 50. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 51. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 52. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. 53. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 54. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail" All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 30 of 34 shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 55. The trail connection at the northeast comer of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed." C. "The Chanhassen City Council approves the approvalf Site Plan for 2314 housing units and a community building with pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, and July 17, 2007, with a Variance for building height for the condominium units consistent with the Building elevations prepared by Harriss Architects, stamped received May 26, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. 3. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 4. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 5. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 6. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. 7. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 8. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire - resistive construction. 9. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 31 of 34 10. 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 that fine hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 11. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 16. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code." D. "The Chanhassen City Council approves a planning GewAnissien reeeffimends approval of Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with a Variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lot, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 2. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 32 of 34 3. The area of Outlot B shall be recalculated to include only the area within the outlot above the OHW. The amount of shoreline for Outlot B shall be calculated along the OHW. The number of docks and slips permitted by the conditional use permit for the beach lot shall not exceed the number of docks and slips allowable by City Code for the actual beach lot area and frontage. 4. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 5. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of and materials for proposed path from Lyman Boulevard to the dock to minimize the impacts of runoff from the path to the shoreline and Lake Riley. 6. The proposed walking path along the shoreline shall be made of a pervious surface such as mulch, crushed rock or turf grass and shall not be located below the OHW. Special attention shall be paid to ensure that the path materials are not prone to erosion. The plans shall be revised to show the woodland gardens above the OHW of Lake Riley. 7. An individual permit shall be obtained from the DNR for any beach sand applications that do not meet the DNR standards for sand blanket applications without an individual permit. 8. One beach area shall be permitted to minimize impacts to the lake and to adjacent residents. 9. The applicant shall work with staff on the placement of the beach lot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The applicant shall also work with staff on the location of the woodland path and woodland gardens along the path." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced Copy Cover Sheet. 4. Reduced Copy Existing Conditions sheet 2 of 9. 5. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat sheet 3 of 9. 6. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat sheet 4 of 9. 7. Reduced Copy Preliminary Site and Utility Plan sheet 5 of 9. 8. Reduced Copy Preliminary Site and Utility Plan sheet 6 of 9. 9. Reduced Copy Preliminary Grading & Erosion Control Plan sheet 7 of 9. 10. Reduced Copy Preliminary Grading & Erosion Control Plan sheet 8 of 9. 11. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet Ll of 8. 12. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L2 of 8. Lakeside Planning Case 06-26 June 20, 2006 Page 33 of 34 13. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L3 of 8. 14. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L4 of 8. 15. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L5 of 8. 16. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L6 of 8. 17. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L7 of 8. 18. Reduced Copy Preliminary Landscape Plan sheet L8 of 8. 19. Reduced Copy Tree Preservation Plan TRI of 3. 20. Reduced Copy Tree Preservation Plan TR2 of 3. 21. Reduced Copy Tree Preservation Plan TRl of 3. 22. Lakeside Partial Site Plan. 23. Lakeside Building "A" Floor Plans. 24. Lakeside Building "A" Elevations. 25. Lakeside Building "A" Exterior Building Materials Narrative. 26. Lakeside Building `B" Floor Plans. 27. Lakeside Building `B" Elevations. 28. Lakeside Building `B" Exterior Building Materials Narrative. 29. Lakeside Site Sections. 30. Charles Cudd Co. Cover Sheet. 31. Artist's Concept Three -Unit. 32. Artist's Concept Two -Unit. 33. Coventry/Stratford 1St Floor Plan. 34. Coventry/Stratford Walkout level Floor Plan. 35. Coventry/Stratford Exterior Options Narrative. 36. Coventry/Stratford Exterior Options Building Material Sheets (3). 37. Wooddale Builders, Inc. Cover Sheet. 38. Wooddale Front Elevation (Shake Siding). 39. Wooddale Front Elevation (Lap Siding). 40. Wooddale Main Floor Plan. 41. Wooddale Builders, Inc. Exterior Color Selections Narrative. 42. Sienna Corporation Community Clubhouse Cover Sheet. 43. Clubhouse Front Elevation. 44. Clubhouse Exterior Material and Color Selections Narrative. 45. Memo from Mike Spack to Paul Cherne (Traffic Generation). 46. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List. gAplan\2006 planning c m\06-26 lakesidestaff report pc.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION u Application of Sienna Corporation for Planned Unit Development rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variance to the standard that 80% of the units be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. On June 20, 2006, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Sienna Corporation for Planned Unit Development rezoning property from High Density Residential District, R12, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit 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 High Density Residential District, R12. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential — High Density. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see attached Exhibit A) 4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. C. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance with the granting of the variances outlined in the staff report. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance, specifically the Planned Unit Development standards; 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 storm water 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 environmental damage; f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 6. Site Plan a. The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive land use designation for residential — high density residential with a net density of 9.9 units per acre; b. The proposed development complies with the city's site plan requirements; C. The proposed development preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; d. The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; e. The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; 2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. f. The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in this neighborhood Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. 1) The potential exclusion of 93 units from the association beach lot would be a hardship for the development since it would exclude neighborhood residents from enjoyment of common facilities. 2) The east perimeter setback variance would be a hardship due to nature of adjacent development. The PUD perimeter setback is usually necessary to separate a more intensive use from a less intensive use. However, the property to the east is a golf course with ample open space. 3) The height limitation would not permit the development of the site in conformance with the intent of the comprehensive plan, nor permit the high quality development as required by the PUD ordinance and envisioned by the project developer. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. The proposed variances are specific to the development design. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but to fulfill the expectations of the city and the developer for the redevelopment of this site. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship, but is due to the city expectations and requirements for the redevelopment of the site. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 8. Conditional Use Permits a. The proposed beach lot will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. b. The proposed beach lot will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. C. The proposed beach lot will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. td d. The proposed beach lot will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed beach lot will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. f. The proposed beach lot will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The proposed beach lot will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed beach lot will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. The proposed beach lot will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. The proposed beach lot will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed beach lot will not depreciate surrounding property values. 1. The proposed beach lot will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in the conditional use permit standards with the granting of the distance variance. 9. The planning report #06-26 dated June 20, 2006, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Planned Unit Development: Rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four - and condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances to the standard that 80% of the units be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20`s day of June, 2006. CHANHASSEN PLANNING CONMUSSION I gAplan\2006 planning casn\06-261akesideUndings of faadoc Its Chairman EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property Parcel l: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEPTING therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. SCANNED Parcel 2: Outlot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Planning Case No. 0b ae CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 1 9 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT rLEMOC rran i Applicant Name and Address: Owner Name and Address: &C-rit'JA LAKcUlEti7 14111s LL 40 V DR 0 (tiaN'Srzy L ¢ s�%t+tTz Ailinln/eOI)I 41AI S-1 -4-5r' I7-400 Wrra-F_WAi*t %R. :dtoyo Ar'rKA I Contact: _nbkrj Vo6Et,$Ae&-C,� Contact:srEJa" L,aFsc1...,.c.r2_ SS: Phone: 9S243S-L$o$ Fax:9sz-$.3S-7o0Phone: 9s2-4;3-oSsg Fax:9SZ-133-osx3 Email: SVa/fsacNER®S%e.vNaCoaO.Cotit Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP)4'Z< Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit V Planned Unit Development' $ 7 SO Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)' # Soo -C /, /&j;' / 433X S I IGI< V Subdivision' j(o� t 0'435- .29 bu /4.; /S- yir Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) Variance (VAR) #200 Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" - $50 CUP/SPR/VACNARNVAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB 440 TOTAL FEE $ jr 4,77-5' 0�* C K* An additional fee of $3.00 per/address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. SCANNED PROJECT NAME: LAST di LOCATION: �ZS Lah E Vitw Rd £,A57- LEGAL A5T LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S;eE R77v� 41t.� TOTAL ACREAGE: Z(i 3c( Pd S WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: 11 REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: I?6 DVA,40rim WALL 01 d4t 4440V r G'4� ✓�Ew !'IIS ACA4-rweri-r s as /A* /Yl/ w /CSF ot✓ne-R OCewp/EO �SipLi✓!<.gG de Ve lyf 4 j:lv e4U-eo li1aK� Si aE This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the speck ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. 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. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. 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 have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. 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. The documents and information 1 have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. d/f 8.tays� G,e�l.aaazon/ Signature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date GApLAMformsMevelopment Review Application.DOC SCANNED Rev. 12/05 CONSENT OF LAKEVIEW HILLS LLC 9 D Lakeview Hills LLC, ("Lakeview") the owner of the real property described in the m Development Review Application of Sienna Corporation, a copy of which is Attached N hereto, hereby joins in said Development Review Application, such joinder being subject N however to the following conditions, qualifications and limitations: 1. Lakeview shall not be liable, responsible or obligated for the payment of any fees, mcmws, bonds, costa or expenses required in connection with the Development Review Application or any permits, authorizations, consents, actions, or approvals sought, granted, given or taken pursuant thereto and the City of Chanhassen shall took solely to Sienna Corporation for the payment of any such fees, escrows, bonds, costs or expenses. 2, Lakeview shall not be liable, respansible or obligated to comply with any requiranertts of the City of Chanhassen or to take any other action in connection with the Development Review Application or any permits, authorizations, consents, actions, or approvals sought, granted, given or taken pursuant thereto and the City of Chanhassen shall look solely to Sienna Corporation for such performat"s and actions. 3. Any and all actions taken by the City of Chanhassen, its planning commission, its council or its staff shall be made conditional on Sionna Corporation acquiring fee title to the real property described in the Development Review Application and shall not became effective absent such acquisition of fee title by Sienna Corporation. Unless and until Sienna Corporation has become the fee owner of the real property described in the Development Review Application, said real property shall not be rezoned, changed as to guide plan designation, replatted, made subject to any assessments, fees or charges (whether current or deferred), devalued, limited as to the activities permitted to be conducted thereon, restricted as to the development thereof, subjected to conditions to or regulations of the use, operation, or development thereof, or otherwise altered as to its legal status. Lakeview Hills LLC M ' Steven B. Liefaehultz Preradem d. GT!19At1e]I 0 _Z (A A U 0 0 n 0 !d EXIIIBTT A Legal Description of Property Parcel 1: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEPTING therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrdes 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies Fast of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East Iine of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. Parcel 2: Outlot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property — a ��a�•a -� saa�ea- asap;s� lit yy g 55o S N Ile 12 i a38i i ,, '\ ��T•s ��8�� Fay5 I I' l 9 la /� Ili, S jw- IL I I 1 17 � I � Ii tN'✓� [i A � �� r -1 I t^I � 1 1 I �Mf l •ggb g V 9 }'j all ixt - , ' - ; j , �..•±�L_ tii IN tJ j3a , 52 lav 'x�i__.0.1 �� as N s�¢,.. �7fR�F>•�� .« S+ I L._J �: to p m � i�r �jea il � f.Bi,n eyln� 6ugrg 6YVP] I1 I r + Uzzioa.5. 33j�Ed a§3dxd 4 �3 83p ,x,sdd ! E o• a$: s=ax $$I=gi g `� �g d}Y dj5d IT oU x..]3 #f5• RZEdS OW Z •� _- — --- — -�yygYd5:i a z f-&s� �adgY d 3133 isi 3331 33dyz d§ Faq I I k id_dl•�}x}x}ixx:••ex} I. id; i d... a i d......; :@ ?`-1 ?i3 Z P, d3dfi TIM] E i TAM, 3aP61' �4 ;3 gc=3,UM to p m � i�r �jea il � f.Bi,n eyln� 6ugrg 6YVP] I1 I r + Uzzioa.5. 33j�Ed a§3dxd 4 �3 83p ,x,sdd ! E o• a$: s=ax $$I=gi g `� �g i�x�. dj5d s oU x..]3 #f5• RZEdS OW Z BEY. ddad- Billj Y ; a z f-&s� �adgY d U .IE 9•ExFd g€add Z P, d3dfi TIM] E i TAM, 3aP61' �4 ;3 gc=3,UM € .. ji COCD 4 an =W oN Z>ILI ao i = W c a oU z OW Z N � � a z U = U �f •d 29 $f �4 f � 4 lid ' 11.2 n D 4p 1i 1. i)gill 1 if /�� / �''jx{ LLam,, ai i ;YP a J 0 z 'W L w COCD 4 an =W oN Z>ILI ao i = W c a oU z OW Z N � � a z U = U z a~ N � � rn ap o N Z Z> Op Z UL c i O¢ � Z y a F � U z U \{ :m: riF | h § ■t � }CID/ ocr / � riF | h § }CID/ ocr / a1! L----..._..._..._-- z Lo Q) ¢0 x w Z> oU O¢ r F- 0 co 0 0 N 00 O Z 7 Al 1 9 �n ! §§ )k 0 Z N ZEg a O O Q Q O 2 N Zj Rz 00 2 g UU C Z O¢ j E 7 i U a S U yj J as ilim 'RIF! it v st. a :.a I. a A. y � v It h 1� o limpi z < a 3 E3i9Abt'i5p§i3A 3 0. z m ¢ a o6 v I N 6 I 1 m i N I 1 Q Q I � p j ¢ N n I tj i 3 u o — y6� I N F U � ¢ U 5� Y r U 3 I 1 Y I m U I O M F U I U rc ti 4 ------ fill w " N fiil I I c z z � ¢ w m a � Q 4 $} - .� §� !| \§ -- � � _ �r�•t§�g� -�� HhU\/(d� ih !$%$$/.%!l m \ | , q§4 U § .';7w. ). | ! §)! § / § ) $ k\ I } - \ ),M}/(§ , Ll }\ » B l / ---------- - . � , 2 �H•�� $k �� ƒi MIR , mmam! ` a., P1 /}\ (/ § 2} (\ ' & Z n y Ca o w z Q = 40 2 a 00 O O Q --e- I-- tiU 05 2 U Z w co a O O Z 2 j:) N Z M:w a U U O a u0W Z N U a U Z N cm o 0 =W ON z Z> eo z C)i U Z 0 Q m m z U qi U Mi 4 Z a J CL W H J a P a ICL W G W he .ad • E� �aP E z z W N N a x z a x v ij Z a L Ii .J L6 Z 2 Q Z W U) Z_ a z .J W U) W J L- .... .... ® Iuum: = [ :'�"'• _� !••2 3 ll ILw; ru .... 113 @ r �....1131....1ei1IsalII@lulmYl$II� @ M 1 mig W- load 11M @.4fi@ �� ■rte/\ /��®\ �� liar hu ul:ll ._ �= :ux u. i....: mll om _- °I °"�ii�°,',� Eol �� III®�,�� IN .=I Min ium NO011-M 14w� @' W CJi1 _ diili e: @� @ 'moi' @_: HI M� i u @IIs-. ®. ON I,'I' i.; IIM I. _.... Ini. a s ARCHITECTS LAKE SIDE CONDOMINIUMS Exterior Buildine Materials Narrative — Buildine A The exterior building materials for all of the condominiums have been selected for their sense of permanence, quality and innate integrity. In addition, virtually all of the materials selected are maintenance free, ensuring that these buildings will maintain their appearance through the years. The main field brick will be a rough formed modular or king size reddish brown brick, harkening back to older, European manor houses and country estates. Various brick details will be introduced, including quoins, corbellings, and a variety of historical brick bond patterns. It is extremely important, especially at grade, that these buildings exhibit a sense of detail and old world style craftsmanship. In addition, cast stone banding will run throughout the field, and accent floor lines and window and door headers. This material will be a limestone color, between gray and buff tones. It is intended at this point that the tower -like elements that are topped with hip roofs will be another color brick, to create a sense of hierarchy and articulation along the fagade. While falling within the same overall color family, this will be a lighter brick, but still wood formed, rather than a crisp, more modern brick. Running as a constant at the base, will be a rougher hewn cast stone, with large, somewhat regular units. This will reinforce the base of the building, tying it to the land, and again, reinforcing a sense of permanence. This stone will pick up some of the brown and red highlights of the brick, and also the grays of the cast stone banding. This stone will also define the walkout porches that are present at each ground floor unit. Powder coated dark bronze European style railings will be at each deck. The decks, constructed of wood and clad in Hardi-Plank cement siding, will also be supported with decorative brackets. At the building ends, the units will have covered porches. The decks will be painted a dark color, bronze, dark gray or green. The roof shingles are premium, heavy butt shingles, a bronze color, designed to simulate slate. In general the materials selection follows a pattern of the largest, most permanent materials being in contact with the ground, while the upper levels (gable ends in particular) are more finely detailed in wood. Several of the gable end roof elements are clad in cedar shingles with wide trim boards and window elements. Decorative sticking and bracketing is found at several of the gable ends. In addition, there are several bay window elements and trellis details that will be painted to complement the brick. The roof is also highlighted by several decorative chimneys that will be brick or stucco, topped with decorative metal chimney caps. The windows are also a major feature of the elevations. These will be aluminum clad wood, of a dark bronze frame color and authentic divided lites. v LAKESIDE BUILDING 'B' FLOOR PLANS 1 SIENNA CHANHASSEN, MN 6CANNEO SOUTH I SOUTHWEST 1 WEST ELEVATION �rDnnr-1ni� YY M;—:.;: m:;::;: Y Y ::� 11111 As weer o nur�nu a r r SOUTH ELEVATION . a a NOMI NOWMEAST I EAST ELEVATION • a LAKESIDE BUILDING V ELEVATIONS SIEN.NA CHANHASSEN, MN L ■:►► ARCHITECTS LAKESIDE CONDOMINIUMS Exterior Building Materials Narrative — Building B Building B, while utilizing the same overall palate of materials as Building A, introduces several new building elements, and a few new materials, to reflect the unique character and site of the building. Unlike Building A, which sits on a relatively flat hilltop plateau, Building B is situated on a hillside that transitions from a similarly scaled sister building on the east, to the lower density development to the west. As a result of the four story configuration, the building is flat roofed, with a pair of flanking gable elements that respond to the formal site axis created by the central green space on the north. The same brick concept will be utilized as with Building A, but with some additional elements: A formal two story entry space on the south, with a Porte Corchere at this entry. Cast stone trim elements and a great amount of glass are prominent here, accenting the formality of the entrance that faces the pond and lake. Several of the building elements protrude both horizontally from the main body of the building, as well as vertically, creating a highly articulated expression that strives to create a more humanly scaled structure, by breaking down the overall mass into more detailed forms. It is at this point, undetermined what the elements shown as smooth, non -colored elements will be. They will probably be smooth cast stone, rather than stucco. This will be determined in the coming week. As in Building A, several smaller scale architecture components are utilized to provide scale relief and a greater sense of detail: trellises, window boxes and bays, and large, covered porches. Overall, this building is intended to be a companion to A, yet responding to its unique position on the site, both as a prominent element facing the lake, and as an architecture terminus to the formal green space to the north. U) Z O P oz NM W w H y a H = z W a D= v W a CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 2 6 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT ED E -t lIGfVE-6 IR! 6UIL_EDF-R! y EXCELLENCE IN FINE HOME DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SCANNED • s � � �1 I &GOWNED r f f7f 6 0 r pp � BCAMNED SCANNED STRARFORD/ COVENTRY EXTERIOR OPTIONS As of 5/15/06 Option #1: Hardi Shakes — SW 2040 Resort Tan Siding - SW 2036 Pelican Tan Trim- SW 1128 Urban Putty Windows- Anderson Sandtone Stone- Chardonnay Country Ledgestone Shingle - Heather Blend Option #2: Shakes - HC -100 Gloucester Sage Siding- HC -102 Clarksville Gray Trim- SW 7008 Alabaster Windows- White Stone - Bucks County Southern 80% Ledgestone 20°% Fieldstone Shingle - Weathered Wood Option #3: Shakes- SW 1145 Artisan Tan Siding- SW 1142 Gourmet Mushroom Trim - Cudd Marshmellow Windows- White Stone- Aspen Country Ledgestone Shingle - Heather Blend a - M, 1' I 0 h WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC. CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 2 6 2006 C44LNHAWN PLANNING DEPT SCANNED 'a _� Wooddale Builders, Inc. Chanhassen: Lake Riley / Bearpath Town Home Project Exterior Color Selections Date: 69-2006 WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC. Building B Nailite Hand Split Shake, Traditional Cedar by MN Exteriors Timberline in Charcoal Blend White Ochs, Coronado Italian Villa Portabella Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Match Rollex Frost Match Rollex Ivory White White Rollex Ivory Building D Nailite Hand Split Shake, Weathered White by MN Exteriors Timberline in Charcoal Blend White Brock White, Cultured Stone Southern Ledgestone Bucks County Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Match Rollex Frost Match Rollex Deep Brown White White Rollex Deep Broom Building A Siding: Nailite Hand Split Shake, Cottage White by MN Exteriors Rooting: Timberline in Charcoal Blend Windows: White Stone Front: Ochs, Prestige Ledgestone Soffit/Fascia: Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Exterior Trim: Match Rollex Frost Front Doors: Match Rollex Fieldstone Grey Overhead Doors: White Front Storm: White Board & Batten: Rollex Fieldstone Grey Building C Siding: Nailite Hand Split Shake, Natural Cedar by MN Exteriors Roofing: Timberline in Charcoal Blend Windows: White Stone Front: Hedberg, Splitface Painted Desert Soffit/Fascia: Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Exterior Trim: Match Rollex Frost Front Doors: Match Rollex Evening Grey Overhead Doors: White Front Storm: White Board & Batten: Rollex Evening Grey Date: 69-2006 WOODDALE BUILDERS, INC. Building B Nailite Hand Split Shake, Traditional Cedar by MN Exteriors Timberline in Charcoal Blend White Ochs, Coronado Italian Villa Portabella Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Match Rollex Frost Match Rollex Ivory White White Rollex Ivory Building D Nailite Hand Split Shake, Weathered White by MN Exteriors Timberline in Charcoal Blend White Brock White, Cultured Stone Southern Ledgestone Bucks County Rollex Frost by MN Exteriors Match Rollex Frost Match Rollex Deep Brown White White Rollex Deep Broom SIENNA CORPORATION COMMUNITY CLUBHOUSE CIT RECEIVEDSSEN MAY 2 6 2006 CHANHASSEN PLAWrfAG WT cG.t rrnrFp '3 -� f Exterior material & color selections for Lakeside Clubhouse M Trim: Stone: 'M Material: 6" Hardiplank, fiber cement lap siding. Color: Carmel Latte (deep brown). Material: 3" Hardietrim, fiber cement. Color: Polar Bear (soft white). Material: Buechel Stone Co. cultured stone. Color: mixture of brown, red, grey and tan stones (irregular rectangular sizing). Material: Hand split Tapersawn cedar shakes — premium. Color: tan. ' 3268 Xenwood Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Data Collection phone 952.926.0916 Traffic Engineering fax 866.651.5058 Transportation Planning www.trafficdatainc com mspack@trafficdatainc.com Memo To: Paul Cheme, P.E., Pioneer Engineering From: Mike Spack, P.E. Date: 6/8/2006 Re: Traffic Generated by Lakeside at Bearpath — Chanhassen, MN Sienna Corporation is proposing to build no more than 233 owner occupied townhome and condominium units on the northeast corner of Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Road East in Chanhassen, MN. The site is currently occupied by 170 rental apartment units, which will be demolished with the redevelopment. The purpose of this memo is to compare how much traffic would be generated by the proposed owner occupied units versus how much traffic is currently generated by the rental units. A trip generation analysis was performed for the site based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7"' Edition, which is a compilation of traffic data from existing developments. The results are shown in Table 1. Table 1 — Trip Generation Comparison ITE Vehicle Trips Generated Land AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Use _ _ .-. _ _..-, ; Description Daily.". In Out In Out Existing Rental Apartments 220 to be Removed 1,142 17 69 69 37 170 Dwelling Units Proposed Owner Occupied Townhomes 230 & Condominiums to be Built 1,365 17 85 81 40 233 Dwellin Units Additional Traffic Expected from Site with Redevelopment 223 0 16 12 3 Daily trips are one way — one car in and one car out of the development (i.e. 1,142 daily hips = 571 vehicles enter and 504 vehicles exit) Paul Cheme, PE Page 2 Lakeside at Beamath Traffic Generation The proposed owner occupied units will have direct access to Lyman Boulevard via a new driveway. Approximately 55% of the traffic from the proposed development will use this new driveway. Table 2 shows the reduction in traffic on Lake Riley Road East north of Lyman Boulevard that is expected with the redevelopment. Table 2 - Trip Generation Comparison on Lake Riley Road East ITE Vehicle Tri s Generated Land AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Use Description Daily *In Out In Out Existing Rental Apartments 220 to be Removed 1,142 17 69 69 37 100% of traffic on Lake Rile Rd Proposed Owner Occupied Townhomes 230 & Condominiums to be Built 614 8 38 37 18 45% of traffic on Lake Rile Rd Reduction in Traffic Expected on Lake Riley Road East with Redevelopment 528 9 31 32 19 ' Daily trips are one way — one car in and one car out of the development (i.e. 1,142 daily trips = 571 vehicles enter and 504 vehicles exit) CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on June 8, 2006, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for Lakeside - Planning Case 06-26 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said 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 of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this XT" day of Juvt2- , 2006. Notary Publ —/ KIM T. 1 MEUWISSEN h Nota MY Cry public -Minnesota ommission Expires Jen 37, 2070 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start ' until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. LAKESIDE: Request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres Rezoning property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with Proposal: Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, 2 outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including 2-, 3-, 4- and condominium - unit buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances Applicant: Sienna Corporation Property 125 Lakeview Road East (Lakeview Hills Apartments site) Location: A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City s projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/06-26.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Questions & Generous by email at boenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Cly Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Nterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Mr endments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application In writing. Any Interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a repon on the subject application that induces all pennant information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the repo" and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the pudic to speak about the proposal as a pen of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council, The City Council may reverse, affirm or =city wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majonty vote of the City Council except reeonings and land use amendments from residential to 00mmelcialAndustnal. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their corplenty may take several months to complete. My person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check with the Planning Departhent regarding Its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s), • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City CouncilIf you wish to have something to be Included in the report, lease contact the Plari Stall person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start ' until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. LAKESIDE: Request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres Rezoning property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with Proposal: Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, 2 outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including 2-, 3-, 4- and condominium - unit buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances Applicant: Sienna Corporation Property 125 Lakeview Road East (Lakeview Hills Apartments site) Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the ro'ect. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City s projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/06-26.htm]. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Questions & Generous by email at boenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Cay Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned unit Developments, Site Plan Revlewa, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Nteratlons, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Cly ordinances require all property within $00 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff vMl give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a pan o1 the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Councll. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commssion's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simpie majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commlercialA ndustnal. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be pmcessed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their completlty may take several months to complete. My person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its statue and scheduling for the City Council treating. • A neighborhood spokespersoNrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project: with any Interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing. the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will ba induced in the report to :he City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, lease contact the Panning Staff person named on the notification. Disclaimer This nsp is neither a legally recorded map nor is survey and is not intended to be used as one. Ttiis maP is a compilation of records, information and data located in venous city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shovm, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this rrep are error free, and the City does nor represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracleng or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in Me depiction of geographic featuresd errs or discrepancies are found please roman 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this Map xknoMedges that Die City shall nn be liable for any carriages, and eVressly waives all dams, and agrees to defend indennlfy, and had hamYess the City from any and all dans brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties Which arae out o/ the users access or use of data Provided. Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records. infornaion and data located in various city, county, state and federal offs s and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant Mat the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are err free, " the City Was not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, theclting or any other purpose requiring ending measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errs or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is proNdeci pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknov4edges that the City shall not be liable for any danages, and expressly waives all Gams, and agrees to defend indennity, and hold hannim the City from any and all dams brought by User, its ernooyees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. WALTER E KOTCH TONYA L BATES KEITH A VANLIERE 8757 NORTH BAY DR 8755 NORTH BAY DR 8753 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 JILL KOLLMANSBERGER CRAIG M SHAFFER SCOTT B & SHANNON MCWHITE 8751 NORTH BAY DR 8768 NORTH BAY DR 8772 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7624 RENEE M EVANS TERI R HELLING LEE N GOLDSTEIN 8776 NORTH BAY DR 8780 NORTH BAY DR 8747 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 NATHAN K & SARAH R CHOWN KIM E SWANSON JEFFREY R MALLOW 8784 NORTH BAY DR 8744 NORTH BAY DR 8743 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 DIANE E HOFF EDWARD M RYAN & KENT C & SUSAN E KERSTEN 8740 NORTH BAY DR ANDREA R SCHEFFLER 8731 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 8732 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-7624 CHRISTOPHER J MERRITT RYAN A & JANE M WENNING KATHLEEN M LUCE 8727 NORTH BAY DR 7284 ROLLING ACRES RD 165 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-7745 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7625 CESAR C BECERRA & BRANDY CHRISTENSEN VICTORIA MARIA MORENO LEONORTH L LEDESMA 8712 8711 NORTH BAY DR 8708 NORTH BAY DR 8712 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7624 ROBERT & SUZANNE JANSSEN SALLY O'HALLORAN KELLY A BALTZELL 162 LAKEVIEW RD E 8707 NORTH BAY DR 8704 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7625 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7624 DANIEL R & APRIL M WEIR KENTON C EXNER & JAMES D & JEAN S KOTTOM 8703 NORTH BAY DR ROXY R MICKELSON 142 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 8701 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-7624 DEAN R BENSON NANCY G EVENSEN DAVID & LORI FREE 6256 UPPER PARKWAY N TRUSTEE OF K R EVENSEN TRUST 5885 SEAMANS DR WAUWATOSA, WI 53213 -2430 17683 BALLANTRAE CIR SHOREWOOD , MN 55331 -8989 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 -3435 THOMAS W & JOANNE C CHAN JODY L ROGERS STATE OF MINNESOTA - DOT 110 LAKEVIEW RD E 106 LAKEVIEW RD E METRO RIGHT OF WAY CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7625 1500 W CO RD B2 ROSEVILLE . MN 55113.3174 NORTH BAY HOMEOWNERS ASSN INC DOROTHY GILK JASON R EIDE 2681 LONG LAKE RD 8765 NORTH BAY DR 8761 NORTH BAY DR ROSEVILLE , MN 55113 -1128 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CAROLYN V MORIMITSU TINA A PENN GARY R DEVAAN 8769 NORTH BAY DR 8759 NORTH BAY DR 8773 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7624 SUSAN M LETNER LESLIE M BERGSTROM MARK W LINDNER PO BOX 220 8781 NORTH BAY DR 8785 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -0220 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 RACHEL WIDMER JOYCE A BENNETT MATTHEW J THILL 8791 NORTH BAY DR 8789 NORTH BAY DR 8790 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 MITCHELL S & CINDY L VENESS ROBERT J & RENAE B VAULES MARY J BACHEL 8794 NORTH BAY DR 6035 CEZANNE CT 8739 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 ROANOKE , VA 24018 -5317 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317.7624 STEVEN L HAAGENSON JONATHAN D MUSBERGER WAYNE E ANDERSON 8736 NORTH BAY DR 8735 NORTH BAY DR 181 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7625 TOAN T NGUYEN & CAROLE K BASTASZ ANDREW & SARAH PUNCH LOAN KIM DAI H 8728 NORTH 179 LAKEVIEW RD E 8724 NORTH BAY DR BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 BARBARA BERTRAM NATHAN & HILARY TREGUBOFF TERRI LYNN BAUMBERGER 177 LAKEVIEW RD E 8720 NORTH BAY DR 8719 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 JUDD C & SHIRLEY R MORGAN ANTHONY C BELL CATHI M LEE 161 LAKEVIEW RD E 8716 NORTH BAY DR 8715 NORTH BAY DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7624 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7624 KAREN L BRIGGS BEVERLY ANN SPORRE DAVID C MAJOR 157 LAKEVIEW RD E 166 LAKEVIEW RD E 158 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7625 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7625 TARY JANE ADAMS 154 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7625 DONALD L & ESTHER EGGEBRECHT TRUSTEES OF TRUST 136 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-7625 MARY BETH MAKI 150 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 ALBERT S & DOROTHY I KOCH 134 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 JANET L NYDAHL 146 LAKEVIEW RD E CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 JEFFREY M & MINDEEN E DOLAN 130 LAKEVIEW RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 JOHN D & MELANIE L RINGSTROM LAKEVIEW HILLS LLC LAKEVIEW HILLS LLC 126 LAKEVIEW RD E 12400 WHITEWATER DR 12400 WHITEWATER DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7625 SUITE 2040 SUITE 2040 HOPKINS . MN 55343 -4161 HOPKINS . MN 65343 -4161 SCOTT & HEIDI FREDERIKSEN MICHAEL S MCVAY RODNEY S WALLACE 18626 BEARPATH TR 18650 BEARPATH TR 18662 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 DAVID H & SUSAN E ROBERTS 18671 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 MID & WARREN BIELKE 18719 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 RECINC 7500 78TH ST W EDINA MN 55439 MARY JO & BRUCE E CARLSON 8988 ENGLISH TURN EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 ROBERT & NANCY A COHEN 18683 BEARPARTH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 MARK T WAGNER/JANE E WAGNER 18743 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 JULIE MARIE TOLLEFSON 8964 ENGLISH TURN EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 JOHN A BUSHEY 9000 LAKE RILEY RD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 DANIEL L & DARCI D MONSON 18707 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 DONALD G & VIRGINIA A EAMES 18755 BEARPATH TR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 KENNETH M ROSS 8976 ENGLISH TURN EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 RONALD E & VIRGINIA A LUND 9002 RILEY LAKE RD EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 BEARPATH HOMEOWNERS ASCN INC BEARPATH LTD PTNRSHP MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION C/O COMMUNITY DLVPT INC C/O SIENNA CORP DIRECTOR - RIGHT OF WAY 7100 MADISON AVE W 4940 VIKING DR #608 ST PAUL MN 55155 GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55427 EDINA MN 55435 Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) Lakeside 125 Lakeview Road East Planning Case No. 06-26 Rice Marsh Lake i <C s m i d U ! W O O V i<U prof°$ec, H 212 Y" °fes, Subject Property e Rile B/ v 18) I Lake Riley Po w. John Ringstrom — Resident at 126 Lakeview Road East in Chanhassen Member of North Bay Homeowners Association Re: Sienna Lakeside Development - Planning Commission Report #06-26 Speaking in opposition to the storm drainage planning. Specifically the following: • Preliminary Site and Utility Plans 5 of 9 and 6 of 9 for Lakeside by Sienna Corp. • Planning Commission Report pages 35 of 101 and 36 of 101 Findings of Fact 4.e. regarding the adequacy of existing public services and 5.d. regarding adequate provision for storm drainage by the subdivision. The Sienna Corp on June 8, 2006 assured the North Bay homeowners that the Lakeside storm water drainage system "will be maintained at the highest level of water quality". What was not mentioned is all of the storm drainage ends up in the North Bay drainage pond, with a portion entering untreated. (See area plan and questions regarding legality as shown on Exhibit A). The North Bay homeowners on Lakeview paid significant lot premiums to have their patios overlooking the North Bay drainage pond. I am concerned the appearance of the PRIVATELY OWNED North Bay drainage pond would deteriorate (See Exhibit B). Inquiries to the city provided assurances that the North Bay pond has design capacity to meet pond standards set forth by the City and the MPCA. Also, the City's engineering consultant has reviewed the design and verified that it meets these design standards. However, the City also stated there is no guarantee that the North Bay pond will not end up looking like the nearby Summerfield pond at Lyman and Lake Riley Road (See Exhibit Q. From my perspective, the North Bay drainage pond should not have a problem with the added water volume load. However I do have a concern for the added BOD and nutrient loading. There is no method of determining how much fertilizer and nutrient will be delivered from Lakeside to North Bay. I do want the Sienna proposal to be successful for all parties. After reviewing other drainage ponds in the area, a couple of suggestions come to mind. First, ALL Lakeside Development drainage must go through the Lakeside drainage pond. Secondly, possible considerations for outfall disposal from the Lakeside pond might be: 1. If the Lakeside "pond will be maintained at the highest level of water quality", perhaps it can be discharged directly into Lake Riley at the Lakeside beach. 2. Alternately, the city could re-route the Lyman Boulevard storm drain to a new community collection pond to the west of the North Bay property. 3. Possibly North Bay could accept the all -treated drainage, if provisions were made for a spray fountain or other acceptable aeration system in the North Bay pond, with installation cost and operating cost paid for by either Sienna Development or the City. This would prevent any excessive algae growth. Perhaps there are automatic controls that turn the spray fountain off at high water levels to prevent suspended particles from overflowing into the wetlands. Page 1 of Exhibit A: Location North Bay Drainage Pond 01 i PRWAiJ�T1d < exrvwipiroWNED z MON. - fate Ryer Location map of North Bay drainage pond. This privately owned pond serves the North Bay community of homeowners including the city streets of Lakeview Road East and portions of Lyman Boulevard. In addition, it is assumed some drainage capacity was added for the service drive, which runs downhill from the pre-existing Apartment complex on the east. All inlets and discharges from the drainage pond are to or from property owned by North Bay in all directions. Questions to City regarding the legal status of the Lakeside Storm Drainage Plan 1. Confirm why it is legal to bypass the Sienna drainage pond and pipe untreated storm water onto the property of others. 2. Confirm the ownership, maintenance and easements of the entire drainage piping system from the Sienna pond to the North Bay pond. 3. Confirm the ownership, maintenance and easements of the North Bay pond. 4. Confirm the ownership, maintenance and easements of the wetlands receiving discharge from the North Bay pond. Page 2 of 4 '441 Exhibit C: Photo of Summerfield Drainage Pond Summerfield Drainage Pond at Lyman & Lake Riley Road PRIVATELY OWNED & MAINTAINED 11�- W11110 Assumed to be designed to standards of the City and MPCA with review by City's engineering consultant. Page 4 of 4 Page 1 of 1 007 Aanenson, Kate From: Lundquist, Brian (Snack Foods) (Brian. Lundquist@ conagrafoods.com] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 4:39 PM To: Gerhardt, Todd; Aanenson, Kate Subject: FW: Lakeside Development From: Dick Lloyd [mailto:dlloyd@chestnutpartners.com] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 7:25 AM To: City Council Subject: Lakeside Development Good morning, The Staff Report on subject does not mention the history of "Outlot B - North Bay", which is now part of the Lakeside Development. I find this interesting. Oudot B was approved by City Council as part of the North Bay development in April 1996 along with Outlot F and C. Outlot F became the North Bay Beachlot (1999), Outlot C will be developed by the City of Chanhassen. I've been told that through a process of adverse possession, Lakeview Hills LLC, actually gained possession of Outlot B. I just find it interesting that an outlot platted for the North Bay PUD (and TIF funds associated with the development) would ultimately become the property of an adjacent development (Lakeview Hills LLC). Lakeview Hills LLC sold the land to Sienna Corporation on 2/20/96 per County Records (on line GIS)...The sale price shown on the document was $960,000, "unqualified sale". Just some notes to share with you. Respectfully, Debbie 7/24/2006 7305 Laredo Dr. Chanhassen MN July 24, 2006 Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Chanhassen MN Subject: Lakeside development Kate: Your July 17, 2006 response to a question was: Does Total Lot Area exclude area below the OHW line for Lake Riley and the wetland(s)? YES Then for calculating Impervious Surface percentage: 26.29ac Total Boundary Area - 1.74ac exclude ROW - 0.76ac exclude Wetland = 23.79ac Area ?ac exclude land below OHW. Total Impervious Surface 11.20ac + ?ac Add Gazebo and Hardscape. 11.20/23.79 = 47.1% Impervious Surface. Fill in the blanks for excluding land below OHW and add the Gazebo and Hardscape. We are closing in on the 50% maximum. What about the pool area? Cordially, Jerry Paulsen 934-7032 Copy: Mayor and City Council Generous, Bob From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:12 PM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Lakeside development -----Original Message ----- From: Lundquist, Brian (Snack Foods) [mailto:Brian.Lundquist@conagrafoods.com) Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:15 PM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: Fw: Lakeside development Pyi This message was sent using a ConAgra Foods wireless email device ----- Original Message ----- From: paulseng@juno.com <paulseng@juno.com> To: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: mayor@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <mayor@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; slabatt@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <slabatt@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; blundquist@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <blundquist@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; cpeterson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <cpeterson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Sent: Mon Jul 17 13:20:57 2006 Subject: Lakeside development Could you or one of your staff respond to the following questions regarding the Staff Report for Lakeside (Preliminary Plat, Site Data)? 1. Does the Total Boundary Area include ROW of Lyman and L. Riley Rd. East? 2. Does Total Lot Area include/exclude the Private Street (Outlot A)? 3. Does Total Lot Area exclude area below the OHW line for Lake Riley and the wetland(s)? 4. Why is the Private Street identified as an Outlot? The definition of an outlot (Chap. 1, Sec. 1-2) is •a platted lot to be developed for a use which will not involve a building or which is reserved for future replatting before development,. While a Private Street is not a building it is a structure. Are there any other Private Streets in Chanhassen defined as outlots? 5. Why are acreage figures given as plus/minus, and why is this data not given in square feet? Cordially, Janet D. Paulsen 7305 Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month! Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage. Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today! 1 Page 1 of 2 Aanenson, Kate From: Aanenson, Kate Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 4:22 PM To: 'paulseng@juno.com' Cc: Gerhardt, Todd; City Council Could you or one of your staff respond to the following questions regarding the Staff Report for Lakeside (Preliminary Plat, Site Data)? 1. Does the Total Boundary Area include ROW of Lyman and L. Riley Rd. East? The Right of Way for Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riely Road East is 1.74 acres. This acreage has been removed from the net density. 2. Does Total Lot Area include/exclude the Private Street (Outlot A)? Density calculations includes private street as permitted by City Code for Multifamily Developments 3. Does Total Lot Area exclude area below the OHW line for Lake Riley and the wetland(s)? YES 4. Why is the Private Street identified as an Outlot? The definition of an Outlot (Chap. 1, Sec. 1-2) is "a platted lot to be developed for a use which will not involve a building or which is reserved for future replatting before development". While a Private Street is not a building it is a structure. Are there any other Private Streets in Chanhassen defined as outlots? A private street is unbuildable as a lot, as defined. Outlots may include: association recreational lots, storm water ponds, wetlands etc. Examples of other private streets as outlots include Arboretum Village and Walnut Grove. There are also numerous developments that only record cross access agreements and there is not a Outlot or right of way shown on the plat. 5. Why are acreage figures given as plus/minus, and why is this data not given in square feet? Because the site is 1,145,192 square feet in size it seemed appropriate to use acres. The surveyor rounded the numbers to the 100th therefore he used a +/-. 7/18/2006 Page 2 of 2 Cordially, Janet D. Paulsen 7305 F Kathryn R. Aanenson, AICP Community Development Director City of Chanhassen 952-227-1139 "Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow" 7/18/2006 Revised site plan - lakeside Generous, Bob From: John Vogelbacherjjvogelbacher@siennacorp.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:29 PM To: Generous, Bob Cc: Aanenson, Kate; John Hankinson; rdenman@charlescudd.com; John Harriss; stevenmangold@msn.com; Steve Obermueller Subject: Revised site plan - lakeside Attachments: Lakeside-0717.tif Page I of 1—y Bob, attached is the revised site plan for the Lakeside application with a minimum 50' setback for the townhomes and a setback for the condominiums no less that the height of the building. I would note that this is not the preferred layout as you can see the effect of the 50' setback has on the street layout for the most easterly townhomes and how it effects the interior center park of the development. This is what we are trying to avoid as you can see the homes and street are in a straight line which I believe detracts for the view from a street scape perspective as well as from the view from the golf course and those homes within Bearpath. From 350 to 400 feet away I do not believe the setback makes any difference but the alignment of the homes will have a far greater visual impact. We are currently working on the view perspective from the east side of golf hole 15 and from Lake Riley. We should have those to you on Wednesday. Please give me a call if you have any questions. «Lakeside-0717.tif>> John Vogelbacher Sienna Corp 4940 Viking Drive Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Direct 952-885-2320 Mobil 952-994-2646 Office 952-835-2808 Fax 952-835-7008 8/1/2006 Revised site plan - lakeside Generous, Bob From: John Vogelbacher [jvogelbacher@siennacorp.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 3:51 PM To: Generous, Bob Cc: John Harriss; stevenmangold@msn.com Subject: RE: Revised site plan - lakeside Attachments: Bldg -A -Flat copy.jpg Page 1 of 2 Bob, attached is the Heritage building (A) which with 10' ceilings on each level would set the building at a height of 37'. As we have discussed we can achieve 35' but that would require reducing the interior ceiling clearance down to 9' on the first and second floors. I have not been informed by the condominium builder if that would be acceptable but you can see what happens to the building when the roof is removed. Thanks please give me a call if you have any questions. From: Generous, Bob [mailto:bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 3:09 PM To: John Vogelbacher Subject: RE: Revised site plan - lakeside John You have to determine which variance is more important? You need to show that you are willing to revise the plans, compromise, to make the development work. Have you been able to determine the height of the Heritage Building if you were to revise it to a flat roof? I From: John Vogelbacher[mailto:jvogelbacher@siennacorp.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 2:29 PM To: Generous, Bob Cc: Aanenson, Kate; John Hankinson; rdenman@charlescudd.com; John Harriss; stevenmangold@msn.com; Steve Obermueller Subject: Revised site plan - lakeside Bob, attached is the revised site plan for the Lakeside application with a minimum 50' setback for the townhomes and a setback for the condominiums no less that the height of the building. I would note that this is not the preferred layout as you can see the effect of the 50' setback has on the street layout for the most easterly townhomes and how it effects the interior center park of the development. This is what we are trying to avoid as you can see the homes and street are in a straight line which I believe detracts for the view from a street scape perspective as well as from the view from the golf course and those homes within Bearpath. From 350 to 400 feet away I do not believe the setback makes any difference but the alignment of the homes will have a far greater visual impact. We are currently working on the view perspective from the east side of golf hole 15 and from Lake Riley. We should have those to you on Wednesday. Please give me a call if you have any questions. «Lakeside-0717.tif>> John Vogelbacher 8/1/2006 Revised site plan - lakeside Sienna Corp 4940 Viking Drive Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Direct 952-885-2320 Mobil 952-994-2646 Office 952-835-2808 Fax 952-835-7008 8/1/2006 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Markel Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation •Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Bouleard Phone: 952227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Pads Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us • 6 ("_ a!o July 11, 2006 Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, #608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Re: Lakeside Planning Case #06-26 Dear Mr. Vogelbacher: This letter is to notify you that the City will be unable to complete the review of your project within the 60 -day review period that ends July 18, 2006 due to City Council tabling the item. Therefore, I am notifying you that the City is extending its review period for up to an additional 60 days, through September 16, 2006. We have tentatively scheduled this item for City Council on July 24, 2006. You need to provide the following information by July 17, 2006 to facilitate the review of the project: • A preliminary plat showing the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation contour for Lake Riley (865.3) with a calculation of the area for proposed Outlot B above the OHW. • Revised plans showing the proposed relocation (side yard setback) and any other proposed revision for Condominium Building A (Heritage). • A perspective of the buildings looking up from Lake Riley. • Verification of the building height of Condominium Building B (Isle). Building height is defined as "the vertical distance between the highest adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet above the lowest ground level, whichever is lower, and the highest point of a flat roof or average height of the highest of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof." Ground level or grade is defined as "the average level of he finished surface of the ground adjacent to the exterior walls of the building or structure." Provide a cross section showing the closest house in Bearpath in relation to the Heritage Building. • Determination whether the townhouse units could be relocated to meet the 50 -foot setback from the eastern property line. SCANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautilul parks. A gieat place to live, work, and play. Mr. John Vogelbacher July 11, 2006 Page 2 If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-1131 or bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Sinc Robert Generous, AICP Senior Planner Lakeview Hills, LLC ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Todd Gerhardt, City Manager • • 0 oIe -a(�c City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Resolution #2006-48: Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded that the City Council approve a resolution vacating eight (8) feet of alley right-of-way located along the north property line of Lot 3, Block 2, St. Hubertus. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. THE PROPERTY FROM R12 HIGH DENSITY -RESIDENTIAL TO PUD -R. PLANNED Public Present: Name Address Lee Wear T.J. Adams Thomas J. Bastasz John Bowlsky David & Clara Adinolfo Heidi & Scott Frederiksen Stephanie & Tom Drees Dan Brattland Steven Schwieters Carter Nichols Tom & Sue Knight Ron Case Wallace Anderson Gail Thorpe Pat Shepard John Jeffries Bruce Carlson Valerie & Ken Ross Ken Brooks Melissa Shockley Chris Honaas & Craig Wildfang Steven Tighe Andy Birrell 17836 Bearpath Trail 154 Lakeview Road E. 179 Lakeview Road E. 18482 Bearpath Trail 18779 Bearpath Trail 18626 Bearpath Trail 14727 Boulder Point Road 18355 Nicklaus Way 10072 Gristmill 18808 Bearpath Trail 9154 Bearpath Trail 9237 LaRivier Court, Eden Prairie 8067 Timber Lake Drive, Eden Prairie 9014 Lake Riley Road 17543 Bearpath Trail 17615 Bearpath Trail 18767 Bearpath Trail 8988 English Tum, Eden Prairie 8976 English Turn, Eden Prairie 17894 Bearpath Trail 18775 Melrose Chase 18397 Nicklaus Way 17846 Bearpath Trail 17934 Bearpath Trail 1j City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Sue Phillips 17950 Bearpath Trail Nancy Ness 17704 Bearpath Trail Marlene McEwan 17627 Bearpath Trail Nick Stockwell 17627 Bearpath Trail Ginny Gospard 17615 Bearpath Trail Warren & Mia Bielke 18719 Bearpath Trail Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the council. The subject site is located off of Lyman Boulevard and currently has apartments on the site. The Lakeview Hills apartments. To the south of there in the City of Chanhassen is a Rottlund project called North Bay. That property was also guided for medium to high density, and then on the Eden Prairie side the Bearpath property. The applicant is requesting a zoning change. It is zoned R-12, and I want to take a few minutes to talk about the zoning change any why we ended up, the staff recommending that, and then there are some variances requested with that. I'll take some time to talk about that. In addition they'll be asking for a site plan approval, and besides the variance a conditional use for a beachlot. The project itself again is requesting a PUD. I want to make some corrections on some of the, or clarifications on some of the variance requests. But first I'd like to talk about the entitlement on this property. It's currently zoned R-12, and my tenure with the city we only had one other piece of property that actually had a zoning in place and that was a PUD project, the Lake Susan Hills which was done and that actually had a R-12 and actually took almost 15-20 years to build out. This is also a piece of property that because it had apartments on it, was zoned R-12 and has for a long, long time, so when it has a R-12 zoning on it, there's certain rights that go with it. Obviously the 12 units an acre being one. In the last few years, working with the property owner Mr. Liefschultz, we met with specifically the last 2 years, met with numerous developers looking at what type of project would be coming in on this piece of property, and looking at what also the city has, their housing goals. What's also coming into the city and there was at least 3 specific property owners, or developers that we did meet with the City. I believe that there's 3 specific ones that I'd like to talk about. Ryland Homes, Centex and ... and kind of some of their visions for the property and why staff supported this one over the others that they were proposing in relation to some of our goals. The most recent projects that we've approved have had a significant, in the 2005, a significant amount of townhouses and certainly one of the goals that we look at, in looking at projects is diversity in housing type, and then working with the underlying property owner, that was one of the things. While they met the intent if they didn't change it, they're obligated to approve it. They met all the requirements. We were certainly guiding them towards looking at different products. One thing that we've always told you that we try to strive for looking at the larger piece is bringing in 2 or 3 different products, so we always had that as a goal. But everything that we were seeing on some of the developments were a typical townhouse type project, which you've a lot, specifically 35 feet high with the large walls in the back which one of the issues that we just dealt recently with the Town and Country project. Again when we looked at this one, now we do have this in the city, but we always try to encourage a different type of product. This is one that was being proposed for it again. This has underground parking. We do have this product moving forward in the city now but at the time that we met with the developer, that was one of the products that they were advancing. Again it's common entry with an elevator and then underground parking. And then the character, urban row which actually now we also had just recently approved in the last 6 months. Some of this product too. So reviewing that with the applicants and the property 5 OdkKA*8 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 owners that we were talking to, we already felt that that was a pretty strong housing type we already had in the market, and we wanted to encourage something different. So when we met with the Sienna Corporation came in with again we always want to see the different products. They came in with 3 different products, which we were excited about. The one being the condominium. The two's and the three's, and we felt strongly that that met first off our goals. Then we got into the land use and they certainly wanted to go forward with the entitlement of the R-12 zoning. But for us to make it work, there's some trade off s that we wanted. One was a lot of green, open space and actually look at, they hadn't identified some of these products. They certainly wanted to go with a more vertical product, but as they worked through and they went out and sought partners to come in on the project, we wanted some green space. Some trails. There's the trail on the Eden Prairie side. Opening this up. Varying the heights as we talked about with some of our projects that we looked at most recently. Different roof lines. Different openings. And looked at that. And the current zoning on the property allows this property line, ...to Eden Prairie, right now the R-12 zoning allows you to be within 10 feet of that property line. So we thought it was a trade off to that to do the PUD would allow greater setback. What the staff report recommended was a variance from this line. So one of the first setbacks that we're looking at is the setback of the 50 feet. So you can, which the overall PUD requires for, as we got clarification and I wanted to, I did put out for you a revised setback from the applicant because they had most recently moved this building back. This is what the PUD ordinance says in Section 20-50... For the single family, the clustered single family low density, you have to be the 50 foot back, so that notification to them is right because some of these slightly move into that line from the 50 foot. What it says for the multi family attached, it needs to be as high as the building. I did get clarification from this interpretation from the city attorney and that Section 20-505. So what they've agreed to do is, submitted this model. Revised drawing. Moved the building back. Now one of the condominium buildings actually has a flat roof and that was a point of discussion too when they met with us early on is that we could make all the buildings flat roofed, and that's something that we've always encouraged in the city is actually a pitched roof. If you look in the core of downtown, that's one of our stronger themes is the pitched roof for the residential look. So and the staff weighing, why do we support this design? The height of the building. This is also in the shoreland district, the 35 feet. The height variance. We would end up with a flatter roof, so the staff supported the height variance to get that look on this corner. The Building B the condominium project that actually has the flatter roof and then Building C would again have the pitched roof, and that would be up against the wall for the new 212. I'm not going to go through a lot of the products. I'm going to let the applicant just take a few minutes to go through some of the products but I want to talk about the rationale. Does the council have any questions on the rationale for the PUD? The setbacks. I think there was a concern that they asked what to get some relief. We wanted that because we felt like looking at the other products, to get the density, the entitlement that was there, we would have ended up with maximized height of ... is out there today and we wanted different looks out there and that was our goal is to get some open space. In order to get the PUD ordinance... 50% as opposed to the 35%. They're only at 42 so they didn't maximize that. But we would have had to combine products and gone to a different type of building in order to maximize that, or gone with a different developer. Again staff supports this because you know 6 parties that we talked to, we felt this was the strongest as far as design. And trying to balance that price point between North Bay and Bearpath. So with that, that's kind of the rationale so we talked about this building being moved back 40 feet. So that would meet the setback requirements. Still needs the height City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 variance ... shoreland regulations. These buildings along here would need to maintain the 50. There still is an encroachment on some of those, probably 10 feet. Not to the 30. And again this one would still need a height variance as would this building. Otherwise everything else would need a height variance. Mayor Furlong: Just to clarify, Building A you're saying they've already modified to move that back. They were at 30. Now they're at. Kate Aanenson: 42. Mayor Furlong: 42, and Building C would also be 42? It's height back from both the north and east property line? Kate Aanenson: Yeah, there's just a small triangular piece and we'll work through that through the design to make that work. Again the height of that... Mayor Furlong: Alright. Councilman Peterson: So that means the variance is no longer. Kate Aanenson: But the setback on that site. Well the condominium project, it still would apply to the lower density on that and be smaller, and I think we want to make sure we get that clarified correct in the ordinance. This all, was late this afternoon that we got clarification on the height issues. That staff actually interpreted incorrectly. Mayor Furlong: I guess to clarify that. Would, if Building A is moved back to 42, which is it's current proposed height, if the height variance is granted, then at 42 they would meet the setback. There would be no setback variance for A? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: And staff is recommending that all the twin homes on, or townhomes on the east property line be pushed back to at least 50? Kate Aanenson: No. We would still support the variance on those, yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. I thought those were already at 50. They're not? Kate Aanenson: No, there's a few that encroach in a line and that was part of, specifically on Lot 11. On Lot 11. You need to zoom in on that Nann. The line runs through the lot. There's a small portion of probably 10 feet that would encroach in. Again the compromise is you can make it work but you're, what you're doing is reducing some of the green space. There's some other, what we believe was some rationale basis for some of this. We have no condominium or apartment building in the city that has 2 underground apartments. Two underground parking spaces per unit. It's a very unique building. Having said that, there also is typically when you have one underneath and one guest parking, you can share that opportunity for that guest parking 7 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 when someone's gone for the day, so we felt strongly we can make sure, that because they have a beachlot and a common pool, that there was adequate parking for those uses too. So build up some of the parking. Could we go with less parking and make it meet the impervious? Yes, I guess. I think that would make it less inferior and... Another reason that the staff supported the variances, all the projects that we looked at, and meeting with the developers, this certainly far exceeded all the design standards as far as material and looks to anything we have in the city so again that was another rational basis that we felt like. And again, looking at the proximity, there is a beachlot across the street, so for this view shed here, and the distance between this and the homes we felt was adequate too for that, and looking at that... variance. I'll let the developer again go through the units itself. I'll just talk a little bit about the beachlot itself. There was some concern, actually the beachlot meanders quite a ways and borders the Eden Prairie side, kind of on the north, or southeast there. And some of the residents over there were concerned about having two beachlots. Two sand areas. The developer did agree, while it is permitted on the code, did agree to eliminate the one and just have the sand beachlot on the property here. It does, based on the area, and the, of the property itself and the shoreline regs, does meet the requirements to allow for 2 boats and up to 6 docks. So that's common. I'm sorry, 6. Mayor Furlong: Two docks. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Two docks, 6 slips. Thank you. So that is common with some of the other beachlot associations that we have when we've approved that standard. Not just leaving a little... and adequate size to make that work, and we believe that's a nice enhancement. The way it is being used right now is that, there is, it's a non -conforming beachlot so by bringing this project forward, you're actually bringing the beachlot into conformance. It's non- conforming because there is an unmonitored boat launch there right now. So that would go away. All launching would have to be done at the, at a controlled situation on the Eden Prairie side. So we feel strongly that that's a good thing that happens. Get that cleaned up. And more control. The association itself would manage that beachlot as opposed to right now it's a little bit of a free for all out there, although we do try to regulate it... So any questions on the conditional use itself? Mayor Furlong: Questions? I guess for clarification. They're still asking for the variance from the 1,000 foot? Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Do you want to address that? Kate Aanenson: Yes, thank you. The beachlot itself is all association members of the association have to be within 1,000 feet. Not all associations meet that requirement. We think it makes sense to have everybody that belongs in this subdivision, belong to that association so we are recommending a variance on that. Mayor Furlong: And if I understood from the Planning Commission minutes, one of the reasons is by re, the requirement is 80% of the units have to be within that 1,000 feet, is that correct? M City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: So by re -platting or moving the boxes around, they could meet that requirement. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Correct. And that also brings up another point. Actually Building C doesn't fall within the shoreline district either. So it would fall into that height requirement, and I did include in your packet, in the update, we did include, we do have other apartment buildings. For example when we did Villages on the Pond, the PUD, the Lake Susan apartments which are in a shoreland district, that PUD was given an overall 50 feet in height and those apartments out there are 48.5 feet in height. So, and I also gave you a table with the other apartment buildings in town. The only one that we've approved recently at 35 feet was the most recent one we did at Gateway North. At the new intersection of 101 and 212. Otherwise everything else is 40 feet or above. So again I just want to reiterate the rationale for going with the PUD. The setbacks were actually less under the current zoning so. Mayor Furlong: And a point of clarification on the height. There's a difference in terms of the height to the peak versus to the average. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: 42 to the average? Kate Aanenson: Or 41. 41.5. We just went to 42. I recommended they go to 42 just to be. Mayor Furlong: Okay, but that's to the average. And that's the same standard used for the other apartment buildings in the staff report? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Is to the average? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: So then we have actual. Kate Aanenson: And that's the same as we'd measure a residential home. The same methodology. To the average peak. Mid point of the pitch of the roof. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: And again, we didn't feel like a flat roof was appropriate for this design so. So with that, I just want to point out on the conditions of approval. I know there's a couple questions that came up. Building C was left out of the design. The condos in Building A, the more luxury, larger ones. In Building B, a little bit smaller. Building C, the architecture has to remain. We're approving the PUD standards as the buildings are represented and as the 0 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 developer will show you tonight with the materials. Those are all set out in the staff report on the conditions. On page 25 of your staff report. A. So it says they must comply with the development standards. If you wanted to add Building C, that those would be the design standards. Approving, you're approving the site plan but it is correct that Building C is not shown in the architectural detail but it's, it would be our recommendation that it mirrors the other 3 materials. Councilwoman Tjomhom: Would that come through for final approval? Building C, that would come before us? Kate Aanenson: Yes, for site plan, correct. And you will see all of these back for final. Mayor Furlong: But would they have C completed by the final plat? Was that your question Councilwoman Tjomhom? Kate Aanenson: But what I'm saying is. Mayor Furlong: We can put the condition in there. Kate Aanenson: We had a, right. We have a footprint for C. No matter how it's subdivided internally, it has to match externally, so it would look exactly like the other two buildings in material. The brick. The stone. The 80% brick and stone and that, and they've agreed to that. just want to make sure that you feel comfortable and that it's in the condition that way. Mayor Furlong: Which condition was that? Kate Aanenson: That's on page 25. Condition A. Where we say, incorporating the development design standards and the staff report, we have design standards for all 3 products. The townhouses, the club house, and then the condominium building. I think we want to say buildings. And then we reference the two different, the site plan and then the building material which they'll be going through here in just a minute. So this would be. Mayor Furlong: So you're saying that would be in the A, the rezoning motion? If I'm following you correctly. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. This is building, this is how they're represented. There isn't a sheet for Building C so we're saying it's implied that these buildings look similar in style. That that Building C would be of similar materials. So I just want to clarify there are four motions then too. So one would be approving the rezoning. B would be the plat itself. Creating the lots. C would be the site plan approval, with the variances. And then again you need to modify the variances in the staff report. Including the different standards, the height of the condominium buildings. And then D would be the conditional use for the beachlot, with the variance which would include the entire project have access to the beachlot. Councilman Peterson: Kate do you want to talk to, or can you talk or would you rather have the applicant talk about the setbacks and the sight lines for the townhouses on the east property line? 10 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 I'm trying to get a sense of what the sight lines are going to be with the elevations of those townhouses over there. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, I think they can go through that while they're going through the materials and ... through their book. Otherwise if, when they're done if you still have questions, I'd be happy to answer those. Mayor Furlong: We'll probably have some more questions. Kate Aanenson: Okay. Mayor Furlong: Unless there's any right now. Did you want to address to staff? Go ahead. Councilwoman Tjomhom: No, did you want to address the question with the trees? Kate Aanenson: Sure, and they'll address that too but you know I didn't point out that it did go to the Planning Commission on June 20'" by a 5 to 1 vote. Majority of the Planning Commission believed that by granting the variances they got a superior project, except for there was one that was concerned about the height variance. The developer will talk about the trees. They're working to try to save the trees. I know there's one issue too and that was the trail on the Eden Prairie side. We want to make sure, I want to make sure we get that in the conditions and work through the language on that. That it's our understanding that the trail still goes through, and that's the one that goes out towards 212. Goes through... the Eden Prairie side, because they'll be putting sidewalk and trails connecting to that too. Mayor Furlong: Okay, very good. Why don't I invite the applicant up at this time and address the council. John Vogelbacher: Good evening. My name's John Vogelbacher. I'm with Sienna Corporation and we're the developer of the Lakeside community. I also brought a number of our plan books, if any of the council members or members of the audience would like to grab one of these books. It's basically our, primarily our application, excluding the engineering sheets, but it does represent pretty much the whole scope of the project. If any of the audience members would like to come up and grab one of these, they're more than welcome. Councilman Lundquist: Mr. Vogelbacher, is that the same one that we got emailed to us? John Vogelbacher: Yes sir. I'll try to be brief in my description of the project. I know that the council has had an opportunity to review this in a workshop and there have been some changes that we've made through the process over the last 6 weeks or so in terms of changes made to the project. Primarily one of the changes, when we first made our application and came to the council in the workshop was the trail that's located on the eastern boundary of the Lakeside project. When we first came to the council we proposed that trail on the western boundary of the site. After review and application over at the City of Eden Prairie, they denied the application for us, or the plan for us to move that public trail you know in through our project, and so it's located in Eden Prairie right on the eastern boundary of Lakeside. And so different than the 11 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 concept plan that we had shown you at that meeting, the trail is located on the east and there's a landscape plan that is proposed for the trail itself. There's also some re -grading of that area, and that is primarily for two purposes. One, to get the two sites to blend together so you have an attractive land feature on the western side of the golf club. And also to take the trail and drop it down so that it fits into the landform. It will eventually end up being over than what it currently would have been planned in the city of Eden Prairie. What the existing topography is out there now. Another modification was the condominium building A. That plan, if you recall, that was kind of more of a traditional double loaded building. Meaning a hallway down the middle and condominium units on both one side and either side of the hallway. Now this Building A, which is called the Heritage, is a single loaded corridor, meaning you have glass and an exterior fagade on one side of the hallway and then you have condominium units on the other. There's a total of right now the plan, this particular plan would indicate 39, although Mr. Harriss, the -architect can elaborate. I think we've dropped that down now to 36 units. Very good looking building. 80% brick or stone in it's fascia treatment. And one of the things we wanted to do there too was we wanted to put a roof on that building so that it fit more in terms of the residential setting that it was in. It is a 3 story building and again, as Kate had indicated, there's 2 parking spaces for every, or actually in this particular building right now it'd be in excess of 2 spaces for every condominium unit. Other components of the project is the beachfront lot and we would like to combine the dock feature there into one dock and I believe by ordinance we're allowed up to 6 boat slips. And what we'd have there is association owned and maintained boats for the use of the residents. A lot of nice features there down on the lake with landscaping, a gazebo, a lot of gardens and a beach, so that would be part of our amenity plan that's on the lake. Another important component of the project is the center park that runs between the town homes and that has a 14 foot waterfall at the north end that has a 8 to 10 foot wide stream that runs from the north back down to the south and recirculates, so there are some photographs in the book in regards to that particular feature. The same company that built the stream at Windsong, which is a golf course on the west side of town. That's Rabine Construction would be building that feature for our project. In our packet there's a number of both private and public trails. We'd be installing a public trail on Lyman Boulevard, and it would connect to the Eden Prairie system. Bearpath would be constructing the Eden Prairie trail this year as well as the continuation of the Lyman Boulevard trail, which is on the north side. The Chanhassen trail, but that will continue down to the east, all the way down to Riley Creek on the north side of what is Riley Lake Road and would do a connection and so we'd have a whole series of trails that would eventually run and go up underneath 312 and over to Rice Marsh Lake and would create quite a very nice feature there for both our residents as well as residents in the area. We have 3 different products on the site. We have the condominium buildings which we've talked about. Charles Cudd would be doing the townhomes that are fronting the golf course, and those are twin homes. In the sense of moving this along, when the Planning Commission we had our builders give an expression and describe their units. I think what we'd like to do tonight maybe is hold off on that, and then if you have some questions about the style of the unit, or the look of the unit, we can certainly have each one of the builders, Steve Schwieters from Wooddale is here. Rick Denman from Charles Cudd, and John Harriss who is the architect for the condominium buildings is here as well, so they'd be able to address any questions you have in regards to those units. I think one of the issues that we had when we were at the Planning Commission was our neighbors to the west. The North Bay residents that were there. We had some storm sewer issues that was a concern of the residents and their ponding that's on their property. We've 12 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 modified our storm sewer plan so that all of the storm water that comes off this site comes to our sedimentation and treatment pond which is on the south end of the site before it exits and goes through a series of pipes that runs over to a sedimentation pond that's in the North Bay project, and with that we believe we'll have a higher degree of water quality as it leaves the site. We'll also have a pump and a recirculating irrigation system that would use that pond as it's water source, which again I think will keep the water clarity of that pond at it's highest level, and of course again I think assist in the type of clarity of water that would leave the site. As you know Sienna is the developer of Bearpath Golf and Country Club and another issue at the Planning Commission was the tree loss and the setback and the height of the condominium buildings as they're related to residents that are in Bearpath. At Sienna we have met with the homeowners association and have met and talked with a number of residents on a number of occasions, and we have, believe that we have attempted as best we very can to address that. We've moved the building back and we've modified our emergency overflow grading plan which originally ran right behind Building A, and to describe it in engineering sense, we do have catch basins and storm pipe in the back yards of Cudd twin homes, but engineering requirements would provide that you must have an over surface emergency overflow for that any rain events that would let's say over come or over spill your storm sewer system, or if you have a blocked catch basin. Where would the water go? So that, our preliminary plat submittal, that particular, this is... land behind Building A and to the south down to Lyman Boulevard. We've since gone back and looked at the engineering on that and modified that to take it back out to the street, which would be run between Building A and the twin home there. The first twin home to the north of Building A, and that allows us to keep the existing grade behind Building A at it's existing condition. And so with that, what we have is the ability to save a number of different large significant trees that are behind that building. So in addition to the additional setback that we've provided for, that Kate had talked about, we're also able to save 3 large significant trees that are within that corridor between the condominium building and the golf course. One is a 33 inch burl oak which is a magnificent tree. It's a beautiful tree. It's two 33 inch stems that come out of the base and it's canopy is probably 150 feet of width and it's probably maybe 40 to 50 feet tall. Right next to it is a 13 inch hickory. And then to the north is a 28 inch ash which is probably 60 feet tall, and I think these, this representation there is pretty accurate relative to the canopy of these trees. They're significant. They're large and I think it does provide for a screening or a buffering and a softening of this large building. As we talked to the residents of Bearpath, there's no question that by building this building that the golfers, the residents, they're going to see it. We believe it's a very, very good looking building and it's well done. It's very high caliber building. We like the fact that there's a roof on there because it gives you a lot of variance in the depth of the roof line itself. There's probably as many as 12 to 15 valley's and gables just on the face that overlooks the golf course. And we do believe that the trees that we've been able to preserve will soften that building and even help it set itself into the golf course in a much more attractive situation. Other than that I believe that the plan itself is pretty consistent with what we talked about at the Planning Commission and the workshop that we were at. I won't necessarily go through all the different sheets in here. We do have a number of different illustrations in here and I guess what I'd like to do is maybe just answer any questions and sort of open that up. If any of our questions would be towards our builders, we can address that. I'm sure our Bearpath residents have quite a bit to say and we're certainly, we welcome them. And if I can mention to you and to them, we've done really the very best we can to put an excellent, high quality project on this site. We tried to address their concerns the very best that 13 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 we can. This particular site, it's made to have observation and views of the golf course. We think we've done it in a professional and high quality manner and we think that the landscaping that we provided will help mitigate some of the tree loss that occurs as we re -grade this area. We're actually planting as many trees as we take down, and I think it'd be a very attractive and a benefit for the Bearpath community in the sense that something was going to happen on this property and we're certainly as the golf course owners that we're involved in it so we can do something that's a very, very high quality. So I'll just step away from the podium and let the council, if you have any questions, I'll be glad to answer them. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for Mr. Vogelbacher. Councilman Peterson: John, going back to my earlier question. Can you paint us a picture of two things. I'd like to get some sense as to what the sight lines are going to be with the town houses on the east side, particularly the ones that are going into the setback area. You know there's a berm out there now and there's a fence on top of that. I guess I'm, I also want to get a sense of where the property line is. And then secondly, speak if you will about the trail on the Eden Prairie side and how many trees are going to have to be taken out because of that, if any. John Vogelbacher: The fence that's currently on the site is not the property line. The fence is generally somewhere between 40 to 50 feet east of the Chanhassen boundary and our property line. So that's a dimension relative to let's say a perspective from looking at the golf course or looking at from a housing perspective, it's really not the property line but it tends to kind of look that way when you see it. Our particular plan includes re -grading what would be the west side of that berm. Generally would not go any farther than the existing fence that's there. In some areas it might but it'd be very marginal. Maybe 10 or 15 feet, and the purpose there is to, is to shape and combine these two properties together so that right now if you looked at the existing contours between Chanhassen and Eden Prairie, you have steep slope. You have an irregular boundary that as the two sites come together and not very attractive. And this is a very high quality project. It's at the very top end of the market, and for us to build something like this, we need to go and we need to re -shape that so it looks like a golf course. And so that would be what we would do. As it relates to the fence, we would take the fence down. It's currently a chainlink fence and then we would install a new fence which would be an ornamental fence which is what you see on the Pioneer Trail. That's the type of fence that's a wrought iron looking fence. That fence would be set down below let's say the top of the berm so that from a golfing perspective in many areas you would not even see the fence. On both sides of that fence we landscape so it's attractive from the west side. From the Chanhassen side, and we also need to create kind of some separation between the public views, which is bound on the east by the fence, and of course we don't have a, we're not installing a fence on the west side or on the Chanhassen side, but we are installing trees and shrubbery to kind of define space so that there's a public area and then there's a private area which are the back yards of the townhomes and the rear side of Building A, the condominium. I hope I answered your question. Is that? Councilman Peterson: Well as a follow-up, just to give me a sense, as you walk out the rear of one of those townhomes, are you going to walk straight out and then kind of down to the fairway, just to give me a sight line view. 14 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 John Vogelbacher: Yeah, the berm stays just as it is today and so that, the top of that berm, let's say at it's highest point is around 916 and that would be about the elevation of our street. So the first floor elevation of the townhomes is at about the elevation of the top of the berm. And those are walkout units so the trail and the landscaping and the re -shaping of the golf course on it's western side would be pretty much at back yard grade. Or down lower. Might be a little higher in some areas, and what we're trying to do is we're just trying to keep with the existing grade the best that we can. Re -shape it and then in some areas again there's not a very large berm on the golf course. It's almost at grade, and so in some areas you won't see the ornamental fence from the golf course. Not much different than what you see today. But primarily most of the perspective from the housing and from the golf course, you would not see the fence at all from the golf course. I hope that answered your question. Councilman Peterson: Yeah it did. What about the trail on the Eden Prairie side and the number of trees that might have to be removed? John Vogelbacher: Generally to re -shape the property we would take out primarily most of the trees that are inbetween Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. Right now there's 4 significant trees and Eden Prairie has a different code relative to how they categorize tree loss and what they ask developers to do. So right now there are 4 trees within Eden Prairie that we would be required to inventory, and of those 4, 3 of them are the ones that I had shown on this plan that we'd be saving. And the fourth one is farther to the north and would be right in this drainage area that we have to create, and that's also another issue is to get the water out of that site you really have to re -grade that property in the back so that you have overflow storm water protection for the residents that are in Chanhassen. A lot of the trees that are in through there, they're box elder. Quaking aspen. Elm. You know there are some trees there, I'm not disputing that there are trees in there and they do provide foliage and a back drop for the residents as they look across from Eden Prairie or from Bearpath back to the west. In terms of the type of trees that they are, many of them are, are not very good trees. It's, and in fact we do have a complete inventory of all the trees that are through there. So the significant trees that we have, those 3 of the 4 we're saving and I'd also mention that none of the trees on the golf course come down. Anything that's on the east side of the fence, you know isn't graded. It's the golf course is what it is and there's probably 50 or 60 trees from tee to green on the golf course itself that are east of the fence. Councilman Peterson: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? Councilwoman Tjomhom: I have some questions regarding Building A and the public parking spot. How did you come to that calculation? I count what, 12, 13? Is that enough? I know there's underground parking for the residents but for visitors, was there some sort of equation you used to decide that was how many you needed? Or you needed. John Vogelbacher: Well it exceeds the code requirements for parking. Our plan does. And what we've done is we've, our particular project is total property is the condominium, so unless you're in a townhome where you have a driveway, all parking throughout the property is available for any resident from any building. And so there is additional parking on the street as 15 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 you come in, that is in front of Building B. And there's additional parking on the street as you go back up towards the townhomes, quite a bit. And so I mean is there enough guest parking for Building A? I think in some instances, no. There wouldn't be but there's certainly enough in the immediate area that people have a place to park and they'd have to walk maybe 100 or a couple hundred feet, but there's plenty of guest parking on that property and it certainly exceeds the code requirement. Councilwoman Tjomhom: Is there parking along the streets Kate? Kate Aanenson: Yes. That was one of the issues that we did spend quite a bit of time on because it meets the parking requirements as a whole, but we know because there's a pool amenity that some people may choose to drive down and park next to that. Also that if there was activities where people had guests that you wanted to have enough, so we looked at a couple different iterations of parking where it was kind of more located at one end of the project, but we felt it made more sense to equally distribute that so because they are private streets, there is parking in front. It's pretty much equally distributed. Certainly as you get down towards Building C, we also made sure that there was adequate visitor parking on there too so there is on street parking also. John Vogelbacher: And you might not be able to tell by the illustration but in front of all the townhome buildings, there is parallel parking and kind of curb bump outs. So the street was kept narrow and that I think is for the purpose of kind of creating some ambience and reducing traffic speed within the project, but there are bump outs pretty much for every building to provide additional on street parking. And Building C, B and A, they all have guest parking and there is a large bank of parking right behind Building B there right as you come into the project. Mayor Furlong: Other questions? Councilman Lundquist: John, sight lines for A, or A's going to be, Building A, those first four units would be at grade at the top of the berm as well, like the town? John Vogelbacher: Generally yes. Yes, that elevation, the first floor elevation there is 910. And then the grade there at the golf course is at about the same elevation. Councilman Lundquist: And C as well, along that same? The building in the back will be roughly where the level of the golf course is at that point too? John Vogelbacher: You know I'm not sure that I know that the plan grade is 917 for Building C, but Kate you might have to help me on that. I'm not sure what the grade is at the golf course at the far north end there. I think it falls off a little bit. The tee is a little higher but there's a pond back behind the tee and the grade kind of slopes back down to the north. Kate Aanenson: You're at 907 looks like for the. Councilman Peterson: Yeah, I think that where you enter into the garage. 16 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Finished floor 917. John Vogelbacher: Yeah, it looks to me like the golf course just directly east of the condominium C is at 910. So the building, first floor would be about 7 feet above that. Councilman Lundquist: As we look, and Kate we have a variance for, we're looking at a variance for height on Building B as well? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Lundquist: And that one has a flat roof? Kate Aanenson: Um yes. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And that variance over the 35 feet, so that's four story? John Vogelbacher: Yes. Yes, Building B is 48 feet in height. If we can get in closer to that right there but Building B is 48 feet at this point right here, at the main roof of the Building B. And again what we've done there is on the western boundary we've stepped that building down, because as you get closer to the North Bay residents, that we've addressed that. Those are actually garden floors there on that end of the building where we've got shrubbery and plantings on the roof itself, and so as you get to review an elevation of Building B as it relates to the North Bay residents, this particular illustration gives you an idea of what happens because of that step down in the building. So as you're in the front yard or driving down the street, as you look back towards that building, the landscaping and the step down of the building provides that the actual height of the building is very difficult to view from that western side of the project. Councilman Peterson: What about the eastern side? What are going to see from Bearpath as you look at that building, anything? John Vogelbacher: I don't believe you'll see Building B from Bearpath. I don't believe so. Mayor Furlong: I guess that was my question. It looks like on page 11 of the handout it shows A and B there, if I'm correct. Is it true because of the topography that B, even though it's 4 stories is lower than the 3 story building? John Vogelbacher: Well I just think if we drew an elevation of that, the home sites over in Bearpath are at around 900. The first floor elevations of the homes that are across the fairway, there's about 7 residence that look out back toward the east, or towards the west. That first floor is right at about 890. And so right now Building A actually, just by grade there is at that 910. And so if you kind of draw a line through there, you'd just be looking over the top of Building A or the townhomes. I don't believe you'll see, you might see a little bit of B but I don't think very much. We haven't done a profile of that but just by the grades there, it seems to be very difficult. 17 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Councilman Lundquist: The condos that are along, or the townhouses that are along the fifteenth fairway, what do we have opportunity there to push those back out of that setback as well? Will we give up green space between the two units or two types of homes if we squeeze them along the babbling brook? Kate Aanenson: Yep. Yes. Mayor Furlong: And I guess the question is, what's, how far in? What's the effect? Councilman Lundquist: Yeah we're what, 10 or 12 feet or so. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, just on 11 and 10. Councilman Lundquist: Two end ones. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Yeah, correct. Councilman Lundquist: Now are those at 41 foot setback or 50? Kate Aanenson: To get to the, they would be 50. They would need to be 50 because it's a low density according to the PUD, so I think it's, you could shorten up the driveway possibly on 10. It'd be building 11 would be really the one that'd probably need that 10 foot variance. Councilman Lundquist: And the, look at alternatives on A. Well I guess along all of that too. I mean obviously if you want to live along the golf course, you want to see the golf course but those people who live across the other side don't really want to see you looking at the golf course right. So do we have any opportunity to look at that grading so that those, the first four units wouldn't have a full view of the golf course. You drop that down a few feet to drop the level so the buildings and reduce that sight line from across the fairway. John Vogelbacher: Well no, and you could. I mean you very well could. You could ... so you might not see any of the project. We could. But then we don't have a project. I mean that's a very integral part of the design of the project and it's value that's there. You've got units there that are $800,000 to $900,000 for a half of a twin home. Part of that is you know they want to see the golf course. And so that's part of the whole component of what makes the project what it is, is the ability to attract Charles Cudd to build those units is directly related to having a view of the golf course. I would like to address that. You know the fence itself, which is let's say for purposes of identifying what's the golf course and what's on the other side of the fence. That dimension from the property line is 40 to 50 feet. And you add another 30 feet at a very minimum. In some cases 40 to 50 feet with the townhomes, really from a viewing perspective, that building is actually back from what is currently considered a golf course as much as 80 to 90 feet. And I would say from the center line of the golf hole, there probably isn't any property in Bearpath that is that far back from the center line of the golf hole. This is a very big, wide fairway. It's the biggest fairway and the biggest corridor we have on the golf course, and so I think from a perspective of let's say crowding the golf course or creating a tunnel, that won't happen and we didn't do that purposely. I mean we certainly designed it, and in fact two LE City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 condominium buildings really only make up about 30% of the frontage on the fairway. The rest of it is single story, walkout ramblers which will be as nice as anything you'll see in Bearpath. If not nicer. In terms of the attached product that's designed for this subdivision. So the Charles Cudd units are very, very good looking. They're first class. They're designed architecturally on all four sides. Very good looking buildings. I could have Rick give you a better description of it, which he could, but we're very pleased with that product and we think from the viewing perspective from across the fairway, it'd be very attractive and good looking. Councilman Lundquist: Right now, I mean right now there's nothing. So it will be a change looking at that 15, across the fifteenth obviously. John Vogelbacher: Yeah, there is 5 apartment buildings. Councilman Lundquist: Yeah. But you can't see them from the fairway. John Vogelbacher: Not very much. No you can't. Councilman Lundquist: And so now the view from the lake. If I, across, let's say across the lake. Looking at these, what's my, what's that going to look like from across the lake versus what's there now. Those frontages of buildings A and B primarily I'm assuming is what you're going to see. John Vogelbacher: Well I think you'll see, I think you'll see the buildings you know. They'll be certainly muted by the trees that are on the lake. I mean there's a lot of big hardwoods. Oaks and maples along the lake. And those would stay. We don't have any plans to take those down. We'd like to certainly clean up the lakeshore. Make it attractive. And so I think certainly you're going to see those buildings but for example Building B is probably as far back as 300 feet back from the lake. Considerable distance back from the lake. You know A is a little bit closer but still the amount of foliage that's on the lake I think will provide an ample amount of screening so that you know it's not as if we'll be able to see the whole building. In fact it will be very much muted. Councilman Lundquist: When you see the apartment, Kate can you see the apartment building from the lake now? I guess I've never. Kate Aanenson: They're set back a little bit further. John Vogelbacher: I don't think you can. I don't think you can see the apartments from the lake. I don't believe so. Councilman Lundquist: That's good. Mayor Furlong: Good for now? Councilman Lundquist: Yep. 10 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Building C. John. We don't have anything specific on that one. That's also a 3 story building, is that correct? John Vogelbacher: That'd be 4 story. Mayor Furlong: That's 4 story? John Vogelbacher: With a flat roof, yes. I think Kate had mentioned, it was going to have a pitched roof. Kate Aanenson: Oh I'm sorry, yep. Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry? John Vogelbacher: It will be a building very similar to Building B. Very similar in style... Mayor Furlong: Okay, I thought I saw in the Planning Commission it was similar to A. John Vogelbacher: ...with parapets and a flat roof. Mayor Furlong: Has that always been that case even when we talked about the concept? I thought in the Planning Commission minutes that it said it was more similar to A, so that's why I'm asking the question. John Vogelbacher: Yeah, no. It'd be more similar to B. And in fact I think in the past what we've always thought would be a reasonable, would be as we come back through with a site plan review would be to leave Building C open so that the council could review our plans. Look at what we're doing and again what we're representing is it would be very similar in terms of architectural and building materials to Building B. And in fact actually Building B and A are very similar. One just has a flat roof and the other one has a pitched roof on it. But in terms of the way the buildings will look, the materials will be very, very similar. Mayor Furlong: So that would, if we go forward with this, Building C would have to come back for a site plan? Kate Aanenson: Correct. If you wanted to do it that way. But what we're saying with approval of this document, even when it comes back for site plan, it's still be included in the design standard of this development. So it would still have to be materially on the outside, but you still may want to look, talk about ... later that you want to do a different type of roof. So things that you can look at. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist: Just one quick again. You currently own the property now, right? John Vogelbacher: Yes. 9C City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Councilman Lundquist: And timing or planned timing for what you're thinking about getting into the ground yet this year or wait until the spring or? John Vogelbacher: Well I'll give you an update on what we're doing with the tenants that are there. We didn't quite get into covering that but I'd like to express that it was important to us to manage that in the very best way possible so when we purchased the building there was just a little over 100 residents in the building and what they are currently on is a month to month lease. All of them. But the lease provides for a 60 day notice, which we've done so they all have the right to stay in the building for 60 days. To date we have probably about 45 residents in the building and those 55 that have left probably have on average received somewhere between $1,200 to $1,500 cash when they vacate their apartment. We provided a truck to help them move. We give them their security deposit back immediately. We give them, we had a nice little cookout for them. Hot dogs and ice cream and had a neighborhood meeting, and provided them with resources and lists of places that they can go look at. We've had interpreters on the property and people that we can contact to help, 80%, 90% of the residents are Hispanic. Many of them do not speak English, so that's gone very well, and we're pleased with them. We've got a ways to go yet but what our timing would be would be to obtain a vacant building within the next 2 to 3 weeks. And then what we'd like to do is apply for our demolition permit and start to tear the buildings down and start our project. We'd like to start our project with the buildings there. We have a townhome building we'd like to start. They would all be outside the realm of the apartment building itself. I believe that the property owner, if you were desiring to add onto the apartment building, which you could on that site because there's probably only 35% of that site's actually developed. I mean certainly an apartment would be able to add onto his building without actually having to vacate the building, so we realize there's some safety issues with that and we would provide and work with the staff a safety plan to do that, but that's what we'd like to do in terns of timing is to receive our preliminary plat approval and go through a developer's agreement. Submit a final plat and start our project is what we'd like to do. We would like to have our streets and our utilities and our amenities in by the end of the year. Councilman Lundquist: And then A, I'm assuming A goes in first? John Vogelbacher: We're not sure. We have some situations there where we've got some sales that we have to achieve in the building and so that may occur in the fall. Maybe next spring. The townhome buildings we would start you know right away. And so the condominium is really more market driven than the townhomes. Mayor Furlong: I guess follow up question. John you mentioned storm water and the changes you made. I guess for engineering staff. Who reviewed that and do we concur with the changes that they made in terms of redirecting the storm water to the pond on site and the emergency overflow or is that something that still needs to be reviewed? Paul Oehme: I think we're pretty close to that final design so we've looked at it from engineering standpoint and you know we were comfortable with where the water's going. We still need to get some additional modeling I think from the developer but all indications are that it should be adequate. 21 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Okay. And I think that addresses some of the issues raised at the Planning Commission meeting? PaulOehme: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Ahight. Any other questions at this time? Very good, thank you. I guess what I would like, and stay close John. We'll probably have some other things to say, and Kate too. Some people have requested the opportunity to address the council in public and I certainly want to honor those requests. The official public hearing occurred at the Planning Commission. I know many of you were there, but to the extent that there's a desire to speak to the council, I certainly want to do that. What I would ask from an efficiency standpoint is if there are issues of common concern, have an individual address those issues rather than having multiple people come up and re -state the same issue for expediency sake. But at this point I would open up the podium for some public comment, at least for a limited time here and invite interested parties to come forward. Please state your name and address. Depending on the nature of your discussion, we may have the applicant or staff address some of your concerns. Scott Frederiksen: Hello. My name is Scott Frederiksen. I'm a resident of Bearpath. I'm also part of the firm Welsh Companies. We're a large commercial real estate firm. I've been elected to speak on behalf of a number of the residents. Not maybe all of them but. I think it's fair to say that as a resident of Bearpath that we would be hard pressed to pick this development apart and say it's not a nice development. Clearly we're probably aligned with your goals, and that is to get rid of that apartment building and redevelop the site into something more palatable and more presentable in the city. We've got issues. Some of the issues came up at Planning Commission and some of them revolve around how it was handled. We were kept in the dark on this thing. Many of us heard about it for the first time when we got our notice from the Planning Commission and although we found out later that the, they were in workshops with City Council and staff and stuff for over a year. Nobody ever came and talked to us about it, and obviously that's disappointing. There's significant broken promises that exist with result of those trails. Craig you asked about how many of the trails, or the trees are being kept. There's between 50 and 100 trees. They're keeping 3 so you know they're, John used the term at planning committee, we're going to clear cut it basically so they're clearly going to come in there and level all the trees. When we built our homes along Bearpath, we were told by Sienna when that site ever gets developed, those trees will stay. That will be a natural buffer. We can add to those trees. We can do all kinds of things to protect your homes in Bearpath from being basically looked down upon from the other side. So now they secretly kind of come and under cloak and dagger propose this development that we hear about, but I'm not going to talk about the trees so much tonight because that really is outside of the realm of Chanhassen since a lot of it is sitting in Eden Prairie. I want to talk about the variances a little bit, and ironically I kind of feel like the residents of the apartment buildings are being treated a little better than the residents of Bearpath by Sienna. I don't, you talked about the green space a little bit and your desire to have green space but clearly rezoning this as a PUD in order to get better impervious surface coverage, so it would seem to me that if you were concerned about green space, you wouldn't go to a PUD. You would leave the existing zoning which wouldn't allow as much impervious surface coverage of this so, they needed the PUD in order to really cover it with more road, parking lot, 22 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 things like that. Streets, but they have the benefits of the existing zoning. They don't want to live with the setbacks of height, or setback from the property line. They don't want to live with the height setbacks. They want the benefits of the PUD, but they really don't want to live with the restrictions that it places on the property. I haven't heard anyone really talk about why the variances need to be granted. I came up with a short list while I was sitting there of 6 reasons why you wouldn't grant the variances. Number one, there's absolutely no public benefit to any of the variances they're requesting. Number two, there's really no undue hardship, and if you go to Minnesota State Statute, which many of you got an e-mail from us, there's a little phrase in there that says, economic considerations alone shall not constitute undue hardship. So clearly economics are driving the request of the variances. They want to put the building as close as they possibly can to the golf course. They want to build it as tall as they possibly can to maximize the density, but there's really no economic reasoning for the variance. Number three. It really doesn't meet any of the criteria that are outlined in your Chanhassen City Code. If you go to your code, Section 20-58.3 it says that variances can only be granted if the purpose of the variance is not based on a desire to increase the value or income potential of a parcel of land. And so just looking back at your own code you say in your code that you can't do it if the desire's to increase the value, and clearly that's what they're trying to do here. They're trying to maximize the profit. The fourth reason is that there's significant case law all over Minnesota that opposes granting these variances, and Ken Ross sent the City Council and staff a bunch of e- mails with a long list of case law that clearly states that you can't grant them. Number five, if you pass them, there was a recent ruling by the Minnesota Attorney General that said that that may in fact become defacto code in your city, and I'm not sure you want to do that, so all of a sudden you pass it tonight and rah rah. We get our development and Sienna gets to proceed, but then you've got serious repercussions going forward. Firms like mine or Ryan or Opus who are going to come in here and want that same treatment going forward, because we're going to want the same thing. We're going to want any time we have an opportunity to get more profit, to get the same variances that you're going to grant Sienna. And then number six, and I think this is significant. They're going to go forward with or without these variances. They did something almost unheard of. They closed on the property before they got the zoning or the approvals, and that's something that in my world, in the development community, almost never happens. We never close on land until we get all our approvals. Well they know darn well that with or without these variances they're going to go forward and build something over there because there's just a massive amount of profit that they stand to gamer here and so, if you just take simple math and you say 230 units, conservatively a half a million dollars a unit. And roughly 20% of that value's allocated toward land, that's $23 million dollars. They might have 10 or 11 into the apartment building and demolition and site work so, you know it's going to be 10 to 12 million dollars that they're going to make on this development so, whether or not they get 13 more units on the top of Building A, or whether or not that thing is 5 feet further back clearly isn't going to determine whether or not they go forward. They might make 9 instead of 13 million dollars but they're going to make a significant amount of money. So what would make sense to me is to just take off the top 13 units of Building A. Put it back where it's supposed to be per the PUD and make it a 2 story building and maintain the vaulted roofs and everything else and I think it would significantly change the whole appearance. You've got a building that starts at the highest point on the property and then goes up 50 feet from there, so you're going to be down on this golf course and you're going to look at this couple hundred foot wide building, 50 feet above the highest point in the area and it's going to be ridiculous looking. It's going to change the whole 23 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 character of the neighborhood, not only on our side, but from Lake Riley. From the other side of Lake Point. I mean it's going to look weird, and everybody's going to go after the fact. By gosh, I can't believe we really passed that thing. Look at that. You can see that from half the city so, I think you've got to look hard at that and really think twice about it before you pass it. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Ron Case: Mayor, council members. Chanhassen residents and particularly Eden Prairie residents. My name is Ron Case and I serve on the Eden Prairie City Council and I've been on for 12 years. I don't usually stand on this side. It's somewhat intimidating so I suppose some of you should try that sometime. I particularly want to greet tonight Councilmember Craig Peterson. He and I serve on the Southwest Metro Transit Commission and I just want to say to all the residents of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie, he does a really great and fair job as Chair of that commission so he represents all of us very well. I think probably a decade ago or so there was an issue that came before the Eden Prairie City Council regarding some land that was to the west of Highway 169 as it comes into 494 and a lot of people don't realize 169 makes a jog there, and actually creates a little pocket of Bloomington land on the west side of 169, and we had an issue up there where we were putting in a fairly large building on Anderson Lake and the Bloomington residents were really upset, and I did go out and meet with them and pretty much go door to door, and although they couldn't vote for me and they weren't officially my constituents, I did, I hope at least in their mind, I treated them like their opinions mattered, and it should be clear tonight to all of you that this issue certainly matters to Eden Prairie residents. And although I know that you can do whatever is legal, my request tonight of you would be that you would treat this project approval as if both Sienna projects were within your city limits. And I hope you feel that it's also ethically important, as I think I've heard you say and from your questions you've very well with this, ethically important to at least try to help the residents of Eden Prairie understand why you feel this it the best project and in their best interest as well as Chanhassen residents. And the only issue I'd like you to take really closer look at is to really demand transitional screening. The kind that you really would require if both projects were in Chanhassen and if you transition townhomes, even though they are $800,000 townhomes, onto a golf course or next to a golf course with multi million dollar homes so, I would really ask that you be very careful on that transitioning so, good luck. Thanks. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Bruce Carlson: Hi. My name's Bruce Carlson and I'm a resident of Bearpath as well. I really, other than support for what's already been said, wanted to raise the issue of whether or not you put for the requirement for any sort of bonding for completion of the project. I think that it would be in the interest of Chanhassen of having a viable project that generates tax revenue as the residents you anticipate supporting your merchants and adding to the ... of the community, that everything get done that you anticipate being done. And whereas the builders here, Wooddale and Charles Cudd have extended reputations, Lakeside LLC is, as far as I know, brand new. Unproven, and in many cases, as I'm sure you've seen before, you have entities created just to do a project. And largely that's done to insulate past successes from either the investors or the other organizations so that if there's any failure, that those assets are not used or required to complete a project. I think in light of the fact that the condominium and townhouse market, 24 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 the real estate markets are softening. How far that's going to go is unknown. There's a lot of concern about higher financing and whether or not we will see the demand that will be required to fill this project so I would urge the council, in their best interest as well as our's, I think the worst thing that could be happening is if they go ahead, clear cut everything. Start the project and are unable to finish it so I would advocate that you give great consideration to having a bond so that everybody can be assured that the projects get done in a manner that you're anticipating in any approval. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Anyone else. Ms. Lloyd you had said earlier you wanted to, oh. Sorry. Wally Anderson: Yeah, my name is Wally Anderson. I live at 9014 Lake Riley Road, and I welcome Sienna Corporation doing something, but my big concern with the 234 units, John mentioned there's 100 people living in apartments there now and we have an absolute Nastrack raceway coming down Lake Riley Road. And more than once people have come close to getting killed walking on that road. So I would urge that we didn't have that many units. I'd like to see them do something with it but I'm a bit worried about the bigness of the project. Okay. Mayor Furlong: Very good, thank you. Just stay close. We'll keep it moving. Tom Bastasz: Good evening. Mayor Furlong: Good evening. Tom Bastasz: My name is Tom Bastasz. I'm a resident of Chanhassen at 179 Lakeview Road. As you know that's in the North Bay Addition which is 76 individual homes immediately to the west of the planned Lakeside development. I currently serve as President of the North Bay Homeowners Association. When we first learned of this very large development we had some concerns, and I'm pleased to report that the concerns that we've had have been answered in our belief quite well. We believe that the setback that Sienna Corporation has provided on the eastern side of our property, along with the landscaping in their plan, would be very compatible with the homes on the eastern side of our property. We appreciate the setbacks that they have made on the condominium Building B so that there's not a massive appearance for our North Bay residents in that area. And finally there was a potentially serious problem, in our opinion, with stormwater runoff which Sienna Corporation has agreed to answer to the best of our satisfaction. So in sum, we believe that this development would be good neighbors and we recommend that the City Council approve the development as proposed. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. I really kind of reorganized my thoughts as I was sitting there tonight so, Miss Detail here. On the west elevation of the condominium building, it looks as though the elevation is 58 feet 6 inches. Mayor Furlong: What page number is that? Kate Aanenson: It's the average grade. 01i City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry? Kate Aanenson: We take it from average grade so. That's just one plan perspective so. Debbie Lloyd: So one perspective it's 58 feet 6 inches. Kate Aanenson: At one peak, correct. Debbie Lloyd: Well, and one side of the entire building. I just think that's important to know. Councilman Peterson: That's building, which building are you looking at? Debbie Lloyd: The west elevation of condominium B. Kate Aanenson: It's from average grade and that's a separated building. Debbie Lloyd: I think the average grades, the parapet discussion in the staff report isn't according to the way the code reads about the gable and I think that you thing you're approving 48 feet, and then you realize it's 58 feet on one side, that's a big difference. Okay. Another question I have is, what do, how do we know what the impervious surface coverage is if the OHW isn't on at the preliminary plat. The OHW is supposed to be on the preliminary plat. The OHW defines where the area is that you can measure for the land, and I think that is, I brought this up before about the preliminary plat not being complete. I don't think you should approve a preliminary plat without all the details on it. There are many changes on the plan tonight that are not officially recorded. I think you get into a dangerous area there when you proceed like that. The justification for rezoning to PUD. For our comprehensive plan it states it should provide a full range of housing opportunities. To rezone, a balanced housing supply... available for people of all income levels. Boy, I don't see the benefit of this PUD relating to those ... of our comprehensive plan. And in the staff report page 19, it does say that the project provides diversity in housing types to accommodate individual taste and expectations. Taste and expectations. That's not what our comprehensive plan reads. Someone else mentioned traffic. No mention of a traffic study with the increased units. Mayor Furlong: I'm sorry, just to clarify. Didn't we have that information in our staff report? Debbie Lloyd: You did? Kate Aanenson: Yes, it's in the staff report. Debbie Lloyd: Okay. I must have missed that one. I guess my first question tonight is, I was going to beg the question. Why so many variances? Why do we want to do this? What's in it for Chanhassen? In the findings of fact, point 7. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts. I'm not going to read point A. You know what it reads. Undue hardship. Then I read, 7(d). The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship, but is due to the city 26 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 expectations and requirements for the redevelopment of the site. I would say city, who? City staff? City Council? Who? I as a citizen would really like to know. It's a beautiful development. I'm not from Eden Prairie. I'm not, I have concerns about Bearpath neighborhood but that's not my main concern. It's all these variances we continue grant. You've heard me dub before one of our developments here Varianca. It's going to become the City of Varianca. Not just a development of Varianca. I guess I'm getting more emotional tonight than I planned to but I just really hope that you deliberate hard about this and think about what is the intent behind this. What about shoreland regulations and the 30 foot height? 35 foot height. What about the OHW? What about the high impact? We're going to higher density with this development. What is the City really gaining? I guess tax revenue. I guess higher class citizens because we don't see that diversity in housing. I just want to know really, what is the intent? What are we really trying to do? And who's driving it? Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Anybody else? I guess what I'd like to do, and thank you. Appreciate everyone's involvement. I'd also like to thank a number of individuals from both cities that sent e-mails and made phone calls to the council members. We appreciate you taking the time to do that. It helps us focus in on some issues for your interest so I do appreciate not only the comments here this evening, but also everyone that sent e-mails to the council and contacted us by other means. With that I guess I would like to follow up and I didn't keep, perhaps didn't keep a comprehensive list here. I tried to with some of the comments but I would like to get some feedback from the applicant and staff on some of the issues raised, and so I certainly welcome other councilors to ask questions as well. I guess there were a number of issues about ordinance and what constitutes a variance. I guess perhaps Mr. Knutson, if I could go to you first. Hardship, that seems to come up quite a bit in terms of what's required. Also issues on, there were some issues raised on case law and such like that. I guess the first question if you can give us some guidance with regard to hardship, other issues in granting a variance, and then also if there are any concerns under any of the case issues. Roger Knutson: Thank you Mayor. I'll just briefly read part of the statute, just telling to the point. Undue hardship is used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question can not be put to any reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the official controls. ...word strange enough is, not put to any reasonable use. That means you don't look to determine whether without the variance they have no reasonable use, or they have a reasonable use. It doesn't matter under the standard whether even without a variance would have a reasonable use. The question is, is the proposed use, is what they're asking to approve a reasonable use. That's been established in Minnesota case law for 20 years. I think that's clear. There's a lot of misunderstanding. A lot of people interpret that to mean, understand it to mean that if you have a reasonable use without the variance, you're not entitled to a variance. Not so. Again the question is, is the proposed use reasonable. And that is for the council to determine. And I've got a bunch of case law if you want to read it... Mayor Furlong: Okay, thanks fine. There were other issues raised and I guess the question is, and at this point with regard to the proposal that's being brought here and concerns at this point with regard to defacto changes and other ordinances. PVJ City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Roger Knutson: Under the courts and attorney general in 1991 and just bottom line is it's not relevant to what you're talking about here tonight. The question that the attorney general was asked to answer, may the City fail ... to enforce their comments with zoning ordinance by ignoring them. And the AG says, no. You shouldn't ignore your ordinances. Follow the law. Mayor Furlong: Alright. There were issues about assuring performance and the question... Kate Aanenson: And I have a couple I'd like to add to that one too. Yep. That was one of the reasons why we recommended the PUD because the PUD locks in the architectural standards, so if Charles Cudd walked away, someone else would come in and have to build that same product because that's what we approved. That product. That's what we're approving. That look. That style on the exterior, so that's what we're approving, and that was again one of the benefits that we wanted and we've learned through the history of time, a letter of credit was required by the public improvements and that would also include landscaping and the like. If I can just segway to the density issue. This project is coming in under the allotted density. It's 25 acres gross. It's allowed 12 units an acre. The point I was making at the very beginning, the residents may feel like we've been working with Sienna for a year. We haven't. It's been less than 6 months. We've been working with a lot of different developers hot and cold over the last few years. Actually probably going back 4 years ago, 5 years ago, the underlying property owner, Mr. Liefschultz actually was looking at redeveloping the site and leaving the existing buildings in place and try to retrofit and looking at doing a tax credit project, and that was one of the proposals. Again we've always tried to look at how do we balance between the two projects that we have in place, and looking at a different price point. This project comes under the allotted density. It's not maximizing it. While there's only 100 residents there now, and there's over 100, or closer to 200 units and trust me, there's more than that in the units. There's more than 100, while there's 167 units there, there's a lot more people than that living there, so that traffic is probably going to be equal to or less than probably what's going in place, so you have to kind of keep that in balance. Again the reason that we recommended the PUD to keep in place is underneath the density requirement, and we wanted to come in with a different look. We wanted to, again we said that the side yard setbacks right now are 10 foot. While this property, the buildings right now are set back quite a ways back, and the parking is close to that current property line. So we're trying to work within that framework of coming up with a project that kind of meets both sides needs. Both the project in North Bay and Sienna so we really were the ones, if we want to be the ones to holler at, we were the ones that steered the developer towards the PUD. They were ... as far as trying to get the, through the approval process but we felt that was a way to assure that we get the quality that we've been committed to. That the one gentleman spoke to. And that we get that assurance. We're getting the project that we expect. So we felt the trade offs for that, again looking at getting greater setbacks than we would have. Again as I indicated, we would have had a different type of product had we stick with the underlying zoning. We saw a lot of apartments. A lot of back to back to townhouses. Again we're trying to get something besides that product in this area. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilman Lundquist: Kate, what's the hard cover. 28 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Kate Aanenson: Under the current zoning? Councilman Lundquist: The R-12. Kate Aanenson: 35%. And this is coming in at 42, so they're slightly over. Mayor Furlong: But with the PUD, what's allowed under PUD? Kate Aanenson: 50. Mayor Furlong: 50. So, my issue was raised about calculating that without. Kate Aanenson: We'll double check on that. The OHW. I didn't look through the entire plans. I didn't catch that at the Planning Commission. That that was an issue, but we'll certainly check on that. They meet all the setbacks. I'm not sure it's going to be an issue as far as the impervious but we'll, and again as I said, we could take off some of that interior parking but we believe again that that's the thing that makes it an interesting project, and we spent a lot of time looking at those specific issues. The hard cover. What were the trade off s and you know what we want to represent, the staff, is bringing forward to you the best project that we can do, and we felt like compromising to say, well we're just going to say meet the standards and then compromise on that. We didn't think that was the best way to go so we, the staff recommended the deal for the variance. Had it not been the shoreline district, as we indicated before, we have PUD's and apartment buildings throughout the city that are in excess of 40 feet. The senior housing project, when we did that rezoning right next to the single family neighborhood overlooking the creek, similarly with it's... As well the apartments on Lake Susan. They sit up high. Those people love those views. They're very well received. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Let me see, we're talking about units. Traffic. Although we did have a traffic study, I guess just comment briefly on that. What's the expectation there? Paul Oehme: Minimal traffic increases from the trips. I think the projection was a little over 200 trips per day. Audience: Mayor? When was the traffic study done? ...in June. Believe me, I'm out there every day... Paul Oehme: The report's dated June 8'e. Mayor Furlong: June 80'? Okay. Kate Aanenson: To be clear too on that, on the safety issues, we've got sidewalks on all of our projects. There is no sidewalk on the Eden Prairie side, which we have discussed with them. City of Eden Prairie. Mayor Furlong: Alright. There's a question about ... and I guess maybe this is a question for the applicant in terms of trees again. I think that was raised by Councilman Peterson. Where the 29 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 current fence is. That basically defines the western portion of the golf course, is that correct? But not necessarily the property line. Property line's an additional 40 to the west of there, am I remembering correctly? John Vogelbacher: The fence would be anywhere from 40 to 50 feet east of our property line. Councilman Peterson: Okay, great. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And that fence, or a fence is staying in that same location. John Vogelbacher: Generally, yes. Yes. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And the trees on the east side of that fence, on the rough of 15, are those being removed at all? John Vogelbacher: No. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. The removal is in the additional 40 feet to the west of the fence and then in the, inside the property line as well? John Vogelbacher: Correct. Mayor Furlong: For purposes of putting in the trail and matching grades, okay. Alright, thank you. Any other, there may have been some other things. Again if I missed something it wasn't, it wasn't malicious trust me, but what else did I miss councilors or follow up questions that we had for staff or for the applicant based upon the public comment and other issues discussed? Were there any? Okay. It may come up in our discussion. Why don't we open up discussion then. At the council standpoint and just try to get a sense where we are. Maybe overall thoughts and then talk about some of the specific items. Who'd like to start? Councilman Peterson? Councilman Peterson: I certainly can. Clearly this is not an easy one. First of all, the project and the product itself, I think is ... if not one of the best we'll probably have in the city. Kate, I don't think we have any that are requesting 80% brick and stone. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Councilman Peterson: Anywhere in the city. You know it's, I've been the flag waver for architectural standards for years and this project, I don't think you heard me critique other than saying it's wonderful, you know so the project itself, from an architectural standpoint, from a fit perspective on the site, not taking anything else into consideration, I think it's a phenomenal project. Now the issues as it relates to the two surrounding neighborhoods is really what the crux of what we need to deal with tonight is. The fact that we went to a PUD I think is a prudent decision. You know it is zoned R-12, as we already discussed, and if going to a PUD it's about negotiating to get the best product we can for our community and our neighbors. I think that, the variances are two fold. One is the setback, which again if you go back to R-12, it could be 10 feet, which is dramatically different than what they're requesting. And again when you're in a 30 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 PUD you're about negotiating to get the best product. You may have to give and take and my concern is, the landowner rights in this case. We have to obviously be cognizant of those, and what, and Scott to your point of landowner. Will they do this if we push them harder? It all goes back to, it's a guess. Are they going to walk if we push harder? It's a gamble and I think what I want to hear tonight from the rest of my council members is, do we believe that we can push them harder to get a better product for the surrounding community? Or have we pushed them enough where they would walk and come back and put in a 10 foot setback and a R-12 product. And I would presume if you ask 50 people in this mom, you'd probably get 30 different answers related to how far we're going to push and what we can ask them to reasonably do. Whether it be the height variance or the setback variance. So that's my ultimate concern is, is are we going to push too hard or can we push harder? And that's what I want to probably discuss tonight. The height variance, you know if this was backed up to another housing development, i.e. townhouses or without a golf course inbetween, you know I'd certainly say we need to buffer it to, as Councilman Case said, we need to buffer transitions. We do that everywhere else, and we're not doing it here because of the golf course. How do I deal with that? I don't know how to deal with that effectively other than it's conducive. Because it goes back to landowner rights again. If it is the normal situation, we'd buffer it and make the transition smoother, but again there's a golf course there and houses are hundreds of feet away so there's a more natural buffer there than most of our transition zones so. hi summary, in general I'm in favor of the PUD. The project is edging on phenomenal. The question is can we make it better? Mr. Frederiksen's idea of lowering a whole floor, I hadn't thought about that before. You know I think that's something we maybe discuss tonight too. The setback I'm comfortable with. I think it's reasonable. Again partially because of where it is. And you know on record I'd like to certainly have the City of Eden Prairie look at the trail scenario and see if we can be creative and save more trees than there are, so I'd like to put that back on their shoulders and I think they've already accepted that responsibility. So anyway, I'd like to hear more conversation. Generally I'm in favor of what we talked about and can we get more is the question. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Councilwoman Tjomhom. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Okay, here we go. I am a City Councilwoman from Chanhassen and I'm going to tell you right now that, you know I'm going to do what I think is best for Chanhassen. I sat here and I saw many townhouse projects that I did not like because I did not think they were right for Chanhassen, and so I look at this and I finally see something that we don't have. I see architectural standards we don't have. I see amenities we don't have. With PUD's there are give and takes. With variances there are give and takes. I think for what I'm having to give, I get an exceptional development. I get a development, underground parking with 2 stalls. I get a park. A small totlot. I get a pool. I get a clubhouse. I get a well planned beach, and I take a beachlot that was not conforming and I turn it into a conforming beach front and that is something that we wrestle with all the time on the council. So for me these are things that, these are positive things for my city I think. We're getting a good development. We're getting a development that also entails life cycling which I really feel strongly about. We once had a survey saying that most of, or some of our empty nesters leave and they go somewhere else, and I think this is an opportunity to keep our residents in Chanhassen because they have an opportunity to buy something they couldn't buy here now. They won't be going to Eden Prairie. They won't be going to Edina. They'll be staying here where... stay. I think also it gives an 31 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 opportunity for young professionals to have a place to live in Chanhassen other than your typical townhouse developments, which I think is also a very positive thing. So there are different lifestyle cycles and there are opportunities for different people with different economic standings to be able to purchase a home and make this their home and make this community even better than it already is. I guess that's just where I am. This is my city and I'm proud of this development and I think it will be an asset to our town. When I do look at a development, I look by it and I think, is this something I can drive by in 10 years and point to my children and say I was a part of this and I'm proud of it and this is one of those properties ... I could say that. This is a place I'd like to live in our town and yes, absolutely once again, this is a great place. I would like to live here so I am in full support of this project. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Councilman Lundquist. f Councilman Lundquist: Craig I do, talking I had to laugh a little bit because it wasn't more than about a month or two ago where we were talking about 610 boxes of you know much less architectural quality and everything else here, and trying to make that one better so maybe we're just greedy or maybe we feel like we have to do something but I'm with you there. Overall, I can't argue that this is a monumental improvement from what's out there now so. Overall again if you look at it in a box, we're probably not going to find one as good or better in the city, so I'm very excited about the possibilities here. But I am concerned really with a couple of things. Mainly the height. I commend the developer, Sienna for looking at that setback. Pushing that back. I would like to see if there's something that we can do, you know again in the interest of just pushing a little more on that last unit along the golf course to see if we can't push that out and eliminate that setback variance all together. Makes it a little cleaner and easier. The height is I think the one, the beachlot variance I have no problem. I mean that makes sense. You don't want to have a line going through a condo complex that you know you can play on the beach and you can't. That doesn't make any sense at all so, that one I have no issue with. The really the height around, my main concern really is on a, I think you know to some point B. And not only from the Bearpath side, but from the lake side as well. Either when you, it's kind of funny. I was watching the Cheaper by the Dozen Two movie when they got the big thing across the lake and that's kind of what I envisioned as we were watching it this weekend, so you know obviously it won't be that dramatic and standing out but I want to make sure that all around Lake Riley, I guess with the exception of that apartment building that's there now, that we've got some large lots. We've got some very nicely done developments and I'm sensitive to putting a 50 foot or 48 or you know, I'll call it 50 foot for rounding there. A 50 foot building on top of that hill. hi it, you know it is going to be rather dramatic. I think if I'm living across the fairway on 15 and I'm Mr. and Mrs. Frederiksen are sitting out at the pool, I'm not sure that I want people on the third floor of Building A you know looking down across there so, you know it's always a challenge when we get into an existing neighborhood, which we've done a lot of in the last couple years. Trying to plop these developments in the middle of a neighborhood because everybody always likes it the way it was. That's what you're used to, and especially if you moved in when it was already there, so got to, you know I want to be sensitive to not only the Bearpath residents but also you know what's it going to look like from our residents in Chanhassen as they drive. We heard from the North Bay, and appreciate your viewpoints there to do that and to give that developer credit for making those concessions. That's something we don't often hear so we do appreciate hearing that as well. But I'd like to see if there isn't 01A City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 something that we can do, and I'm willing to settle, or you know compromise if we can look at Building A a little harder, or the variance on B and C as they're back in the site more. You know obviously I'd prefer to have the only variance be for the beachlot piece on that but as Craig and Bethany both said, it's about a compromise here and I don't want to lose sight of the fact that overall this is a very, very high quality development and I'm confident that we can find a way, with the combination of you know maybe pushing a unit back a little or taking some of the height out of one or two of those buildings and some addition of some screening along that, the golf course side and making sure that we watch the shoreline on the lake to guard some of that as well. That we can get something in there that has a minimal impact because it is Building A and Building B and well on C for that matter are, they're big buildings. You know we put apartment buildings up in this city but they're essentially downtown, and you know hotels and things like that. We don't, you know we haven't gone out and dropped a 50 foot tall building out away from kind of the core of downtown so, but that complex is there now. Obviously it's been there for a while but this is going to be a whole different, whole different look and a whole different feel out there so I want to be sensitive to that. And again stress overall that I think we're all fighting the same battle here. That I would absolutely agree that overall it's a much improved for the site and a fantastic development. The architecture is great and excited to see what our compromise is if we can get something in there a little bit better. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. There's been comments, all three of my fellow council members have commented about the quality of the overall development. The architecture. And I concur with that. This is a very nice development and even with some of the comments and e- mails that we received where people had concerns about some of the variances. Many of them also commented about the fact that this was a very nice development, and I think in terms of complimenting the developments, both to the east and the west, this does that. Are there some issues and preferences by some of the neighbors? ...this property affords and both to the south, to the lake, and to the east, to the golf course. So I think that yet they've tried to do it. In a way that also, also to the most part works. The issues, and we've talked a lot about variances and how we've been accused of giving out a lot of variances. I think part of the value of the process, the public process that I've come to appreciate is that it takes some time and some people can say government moves too slow. I think there are times when government should move slow, and I think in terms of making development approvals and moving onto development projects, slow is a little bit better than fast. Because it gives people time to get involved and to muddle it around and think about it and kick things around and get some feedback to the developer and they can move some things and that's happened here. There have been some from when this council first saw the concept, there's been movement. A lot of things have stayed the same, but there's been some movement and I think for the most part that movement has been good. We saw some of it just recently as I understand this afternoon. One of the variances that was being requested that the Planning Commission approved was the setback variance, and now I know we need to confirm here but it sounds like at least with Building A, that by moving that back from 30 to 42, or approximately 44, there will be no variance required for Building A. The issue of, are down with the tri -home, 10 feet or so. If we get down to one or two units with 10 feet, we've done a pretty good job, because of the process, moving things and kind of pushing things around. The beachlot I concur with Councilman Lundquist and my sense is with my other council members too. That's a make sense. That's a common sense type of request, and that's something that we want to do is apply common sense when we approve developments. That will be an 33 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 improvement for the beachlot, both in terms of taking a non -conforming situation, making it conforming. And I think add to the lakeshore without significant loss of trees around the lakeshore. That's a positive to anybody using the lake. Chanhassen, Eden Prairie or any other resident. So I think they've done some good things. You know when we look at a lot of development issues and we've had opportunities in this city and I know other cities do as well. The fact of the matter is there are lines on a map and there are borders and sometimes there are developments in one city that affect the residents in others. We've had a situation recently with a development in Chanhassen up along our Highway 7, along Shorewood, where some of the Shorewood residents had some concerns and those concerns were relayed back to the developer and I think that one is still in the process. We've not seen that because there were some concerns about storm water that needed to be addressed, and so that is something that we do. Whether or not the neighboring property owners are Chanhassen residents or not, and I think that's the right thing to do. Above all it's, as each of our cities seeks to grow and develop and have the best products in terms of housing created, that's when we all thrive and I think that's.a good thing. What it really gets down to from a variance standpoint, that I'm seeing right now. But for possibly a setback variance along the east property line, are the height issues and that's what it's coming down to. It was suggested tonight on Building A that by keeping the pitched roof we can take off the top floor and not come into a variance standpoint. There's another option there and that is making it flat roofed and keeping it 3 floors. I don't think, but that would also meet the requirements, I don't think that would give us the architectural goal that this development currently has, and I think we always get into that issue and that challenge. Councilman Peterson addressed it with regard to property rights of neighboring property owners wanting to direct the development, and sometimes we've got to be careful what we ask for. We might be able to avoid the height variance on A, but it might not be as good a looking building as what they're asking for here. And I look at it, you know is that height variance on A, because of the pitched roofs, is the proposed use a reasonable use? Yeah, I think it is. I mean to me that is. Is it going to be a different view for property owners to the east? Sure. Anything, any building, whether it's a flat roof or 2 or 3 stories is going to be different. I think to the extent that there is shielding from trees on the golf course side already, having been out there. Some of those trees are starting to take, get some height and as those continue to grow I think that will address some of the shielding issues and maybe there's some more that can be done and I would, you know I think it would be prudent for staff to talk to them about that. Maybe there's some, something that could be done even along the twin homes there. Along that property to help do that but, overall I think you know we could not go with the height variance on A, but it may not be as good a looking building, and so I think we lose something there and I think there's probably benefit to everybody for that. Some of the other comments Councilman Peterson made in terms of why a PUD. I think this is a make sense PUD. We could have had a number of apartment buildings. Square boxes. Beige. All the way along, 10 feet along the property line and I don't think anybody would like that but given the zoning that's currently in place, as I understand it, that would be a possible development scenario. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: That wouldn't require and obtain for the City some of the added features that we have here, so overall I guess, you know a little concerned about not seeing much on C. In terms of design, but my understanding was that was closer to an A versus a B, but I haven't 34 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 heard much concern about that either so, maybe we need to look at that and understand that. I think overall what I'm hearing and what I would concur with is, this is a very good development. A couple of tweaks perhaps and you know, can we do something on the setback for the property line, to Councilman Lundquist's request? Let's look at that. I think we should look at that. See what can be done. See what the effect is to bring that into compliance and then we can evaluate whether or not that's something that we should ask for. I think to the extent that we can obtain fewer variances. We should do that, but in this case the real issue from a variance standpoint is the height and overall I think that's a fair and reasonable request based upon the overall development and it's something I think, as I said, is reasonable. I guess there are, and I certainly don't want to close discussion. Be happy to you know keep that open. My sense is, given some immediate changes with the building setback that came in today, there were some questions on changing some of the conditions with regard to Building C. I know the trail, we also talked about some details on the plat. It may be prudent for us to, and my general sense here is, let's get the issues and maybe staff can work with the developer on. There's some clean-up issues that have been requested by the council with our comments. Let's get that done and make sure we've got something clean here. Also with regard to, my sense is we're moving towards agreement and I certainly you know, don't want to push too quickly but if that's the case, my suggestion for this evening, let's get everything on the table and then table and allow staff time to work through some of the details to make sure we have it clean both from the conditions, findings of fact, and the whole complete set, because there have been appropriate, some issues of perhaps submission or some clarification that need to be made and I think we want to make sure that this is clean. With that said, you've heard my comments and others. Councilman Peterson, any other thoughts or? Councilman Peterson: Mr. Mayor, or even my other council members. Speak to me, and my issue I've been struggling with is, is transition. You know I'm still debating with myself you know, do we need transition? If so, how much? From high density to low density residential. Again the golf course is the trump card there but should, is that enough to prevent buffering that we would normally request in projects? Mayor Furlong: Well buffering is usually what, setbacks? It could be different product styles. Councilman Peterson: That and berming and landscaping often times. So I'm still struggling with that. Councilman Lundquist: I think Craig if you get on that 15`s hole and look up at the hill's pretty steep and then imagine a 50 foot building on top of that, it will be daunting. No doubt about it. That doesn't mean it's bad. It's different obviously because all there is is trees there now. So different doesn't mean it's good or bad but I don't think you can go from wide open fairway with some, you know scattered trees along there to a, that much wall space and then they've broken it up nicely with you know a jog back and forth, some things like that but you know it's 100 or 150,200 foot long, 40 some feet high. You can't miss it. And you know when you walk up the, or across the street from the 14'h green, you see that, I mean you'll see it. Most definitely so, and that can be worked out I think with some different things. You know maybe some steps on a building on A, like we looked at, like we did on B. Going towards North Bay or some things like that that can potentially break that up and not make it look like a big building. 35 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Councilman Peterson: Brian, I understand what you're. Councilwoman Tjomhom: But then would that be blocking the views from Building A onto the golf course, because that is why Building A is there. To have that view. Councilman Lundquist: Sure it is. Councilwoman Tjomhom: And so then you're back to, why? You know why are we building, that's why it's there... Councilman Lundquist: Or back to the you know Carver Beach argument. You're not planting a tree in front of the house because you want to see the whole lake or do you have to have it. Councilwoman Tjornhom: Well that was a different. Councilman Lundquist: Look around a tree. Councilman Peterson: Very similar. It's identity. Councilwoman Tjomhom: Well, was it originally supposed to be that way or did nature, proposing 100 feet of open space or was that kind of over the years cultivated so, that's a different issue as opposed to this. Councilman Lundquist: But do you want a wide, open view of the golf course or do you want a, you know have something break it up. Councilwoman Tjomhom: Well I think we're arguing who gets the views. Mayor Furlong: Well, let me ask the question, and maybe this is a question for the applicant, or something for staff and the applicant to work on, and that is the landscaping plan along that eastern property line. Has that been discussed? Kate Aanenson: Yes, but I'll go back to, actually Councilman Peterson hit it right how our buffering ordinance works. Is that you create the buffer by, if it's a narrow buffer, very small buffer between transition uses, and this is how the code's set up, then you have to landscape more. If the setback is great, then it's minimal landscaping. In this circumstance, when you're standing on the 15th hole, we can't protect people even walking on the trail from seeing that building. What we're trying to buffer is the home, which is a couple hundred feet away, and that was the goal. To say someone out walking on the fairway, or even walking on the trail is going to see a tall building. So the way our ordinance is set up, it's been the houses, that transitional, yeah. Mayor Furlong: So you'd be looking then at the houses on the east side of the 15'h fairway? Kate Aanenson: Correct. 36 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 Mayor Furlong: Of the 15a' hole. Kate Aanenson: Correct, and that's what we looked at and the rational basis that we gave for supporting that variance is that there wasn't, yeah there's going to be people on the fairway, and then we're still on the trail, but the houses had the greatest setback. ...setback and that's what we looked at. Mayor Furlong: Well and again, distance is about 40 feet from a setback from the property line then additional 40 to the golf course than the 15`s hole. Kate Aanenson: Correct. And then the additional trees that are on the back side of the golf course so. Mayor Furlong: ...something to the point that we can review? Kate Aanenson: Absolutely. We'll look at that. Mayor Furlong: And see if there's things that can be done. You know, and I don't think that's an unreasonable request. I think that's something to look at. You're going to see the building. You're not not going to see the building. Absolutely. Absolutely. Are there some things that we can look at? To do there that, I think that's a reasonable request. Councilman Peterson: To further answer your question Mr. Mayor, I agree with the tabling perspective to give us some time to do some more detail work. I guess to that end, the only other request that I would like to do, Brian I think you brought it up a little bit is to look at Building A from the height perspective and can we potentially do some tiering on that, on the east side of it, or the northeast row of condos. Can we do 2 story there and do 3 stories towards the water? I don't know, but it's just thinking outside the box. Further mitigate my concerns about the abruptness of the height so. Unfortunately I will not be here in 2 weeks so. Mayor Furlong: Well how much time do we have on it? Kate Aanenson: Well we can ask for an additional 60 days so. Mayor Furlong: Automatically? Kate Aanenson: Correct. John Hankanson: Mayor, may I make a comment? Mayor Furlong: Regarding? John Hankanson: I'm John Hankanson from Sienna. Mayor Furlong: What's it about? M City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 John Hankanson: We are the owners of Bearpath. Mayor Furlong: Right. John Hankanson: I would like to talk to you about if you did delay this project, we think, and I'll get some laughter here, but we were the best thing that ever happened with this project from Bearpath standpoint. Anybody else could come in and build 312 units, all apartment with a 10 foot setback. If we were greedy developers, that's what we'll do... Mayor Furlong: Sir. And that's something that we've been talking about already and we're aware of that point so. John Hankanson: So, we worked with your staff very diligently to come up with a product that we think works. Mayor Furlong: And I think you heard from the council tonight that we appreciate the effort. John Hankanson: Now you're going to cost us another $80,000 because you're going to delay it for a month or whatever and come back. That is unacceptable to us. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you sir. When was the application submittal? What's our available time? Kate Aanenson: Yeah it's, the deadline date for the 60 days was July 18th but we have the right to ask for an additional 60 days... Mayor Furlong: And that's normal and that's what I guess from what you've heard tonight, do you think it's going to take the entire 60 days to accomplish that? Kate Aanenson: No. We can tum this around, like I said. Mayor Furlong: Within a reasonable time period Kate Aanenson: Exactly. And we could have it on in 2 weeks. I mean I'm not sure who's all going to be here but I think what we really need to do is go through and make sure the changes that they've made, or look at those different iterations and put everything in a format, right. Mayor Furlong: The different changes today. Kate Aanenson: Right. Put those in a format that you can approve conditions with those changes made... Mayor Furlong: And I certainly understand the comments, delays cost money and we appreciate that. At the same time it is a, it's a significant project. It's important to the city and to a lot of RF3 City Council Meeting — July 10, 2006 residents. Both to the east and the west, and I think it would still be my suggestion to make sure we get it right. Councilman Peterson: And I would think we should be able to tum it around in 2 weeks. Mayor Furlong: I mean we can. I mean there are issues here that need to be addressed and if we can do that, that'd be great. Let's turn it around as quickly as possible would be our recommendation. Other thoughts and comments at this point or issues to, I mean I don't want to start repeating and, repeating and being redundant. Councilman Lundquist: Given even the, ask the questions about the height of the other buildings with the other things that have been brought up and the changes of the conditions, I don't want to have one where we're you know, you know what she said. Mayor Furlong: Yeah, no. No, absolutely. Councilman Peterson: Motion to table. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Lundquist: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council table Planning Case 06-26 for Lakeside development. All voted in favor, except Councilwoman Tjornhom who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. Public Present: Name Address Eric V. Doremus 7371 Bent Bow Trail Paula & Thomas Schwartz 7376 Bent Bow Trail Michael Nelson 7357 Bent Bow Trail Kate Aanenson: Thank you. I just wanted to point out to the council, I did hand out conservation easement. I just wanted to explain that. There is a conservation easement that's associated to this application and that's some standard language for a conservation easement. So I'll go through that in a minute after we go through the staff report. The variance request before you tonight is, the Schwartz case on 7376 Bent Bow Trail, located here in the Longacres subdivision. This is the lot itself. While the lot is very large, it's actually encumbered by a couple different types of easements and I guess that's one of the reasons why I pulled out the 9M June 27, 2006 CITY OF CIIANIIASSEN Sienna Corporation ATTN: Bruce G. Nimmer, President 7700MarkelBoulevard 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 PO Box 147 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Eagle Crest Capital Bank Phone: 952.227.111)) ATTN: Kevin McShane, President Fax. 952.227.1110 5201 Eden Avenue, Suite 170 Building Inspections Edina, Minnesota 55436 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1190 First American Title Insurance Company Engineering ATTN: Cris Kallas, Escrow Officer Phone: 952.227.1160 1900 Midwest Plaza West Fax: 952.227.1170 801 Nicollet Mall Finance Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Re: Real Property & Improvements commonly known as the Lakeside Project Park & Recreation See Exhibit A attached hereto for legal description Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Ladies and Gentlemen: Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.221.1400 The undersigned hereby certifies with respect to the property identified above and Fax: 952.227.1404 legally described on the attached Exhibit A ("Premises") as follows: Planning & Natural Resources 1. The zoning code affecting the Premises is currently zoned R12, High Phone: 952.227.1130 Density Residential. The property is being reviewed by the City of Chanhassen Fax:952227.1110 for a rezoning to PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The development including request for a Planned Unit Development rezoning the property Public Works 1591 Park Road from R 12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, Phone: 952227.1300 with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project and a 13 -foot Fax:952.227.1310 height variance on the 3 condominium buildings; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential Senior Center development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings with Variances Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax:952.227.t1t0 for building height, community g poo 1; ght, and a communi building and 1; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances. The Planning Commission held a hearing on June Web Site 20, 2006. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 1 to recommend approval of the www.ci.dianhassen.mn.us development. This item is scheduled for City Council review on July 10, 2006. 2. The Premises and its intended use as condominiums , townhouses and community building complies with all city ordinances and building, environmental and energy codes, ordinances and regulations: []Yes -1- SCANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a chaffing downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. W Comments: The proposed development includes approval for variances to permit building heights of up to 48 feet and an east perimeter setback of 30 feet. 3. There are no variances, conditional use permits or special use permits required for the construction of the improvements on the Premises or its uses. If there are, specify the same and the relevant terms or otherwise check here: ❑None Comments: As part of the development review, there are variances to permit building heights of up to 48 feet and an east perimeter setback of 30 feet. The development review also proposes the rezoning of the property to Planned Unit Development- Residential. A conditional use permit for a recreational beachlot with a variance for less than 80 percent of the units being within 1,000 feet of the beachlot is also being reviewed in conjunction with the development. Finally, a site plan approval for 233 residential units and a community building is being reviewed concurrent with the development review. 4. The Premises comply with the subdivision ordinances affecting it and can be conveyed without the filing of a plat or replat of the Premises: ❑Yes ®No Comments: The property as a whole could be conveyed without the filling of a plat for the property. However, the development review being performed by the City includes the subdivision of the property into 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets. 5. The Premises comply with all setback and parking laws and regulations: ®Yes ❑No Comments: Subject to approval of the setback variance included in the development review. 6. The Premises are located within a federally designated flood plain: ❑Yes ®No If yes, specify the nature of the zone: Community Panel Number 270051 0010 B, effective July 2, 1979. -2- a There are no proposals for widening, closing (including temporary closings) or realignment of access or abutting roads. If there are, specify the same and its terms or otherwise check here: ❑None Comments: Highway 312 is being constructed to the north of the proposed development. There are no contemplated pending special assessments affecting the Premises: ❑Yes I �M If there are, please specify the known or estimated amounts and computation of interest, if any: Existing assessments payable as part of the 2006 taxes are $20,494.96 with an unpaid balance of $17,821.70 at a rate of 7.5 percent. Deferred assessments of $99,915.00 at 7.5 percent interest are scheduled to be certified in 2007. All appropriate and required city permits, licenses and approvals have been provided for the present use of the Premises: ►/ ❑No Comments: The existing apartments are licensed pursuant to city code. 10. In the event all or a portion of the Premises is destroyed by fire or other casualty, the Premises may be restored to its present condition and density: ®Yes ❑No Comments: If additional space is required for any of the above, please use the reverse side. If there are any additional facts regarding the Premises and its proposed use which would be material consideration, please include that information: Signature of Authorized Typed or Printed Name of Signatory: Title of Signatory: Senior Planner City or Other Governmental Agency: Robert Generous City of Chanhassen, Minnesota -3- Date: June 27, 2006 ar :nc Legal Description of Property Parcel 1: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEPTING therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. Parcel 2: Oudot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property oto -ab Park and Rec Meeting — June 27, 2006 Stolar: Alright, we'll leave that as an open item but not necessarily related to this. So related to the baseball recommendation that that is a specific area where we do want to enter into joint discussions with the district, do we have any changes to the recommendation or amendment? Seeing none, do I have a motion to approve the recommendation that the Park and Rec Commission recommend that the City Council initiate a joint effort with School District 112 and other interested parties to explore future construction of a baseball stadium within the City of Chanhassen. Motion to approve? Scharfenberg: So moved. Stolar: Moved by Commissioner Scharfenberg. Spizale: Second. Stolar: Seconded by Commissioner Spizale. Any other points? Scharfenberg moved, Spizale seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council initiate a joint effort with School District 112 and other interested parties to explore future construction of a baseball stadium within the City of Chanhassen. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Stolar: And then we'll set up some other meeting, or working session for us to talk about some other opportunities and prioritize. Hoffman: Working session with the commission? Stolar: Right. Just the commission, yeah. DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, LAKESIDE. Hoffman: Thank you Chair Stolar, members of the commission. The Lakeside development is currently the Lake Riley apartments. The apartments are planned to be demolished over the next summer months and then the redevelopment of apartment units and townhouses be built on the property. The applicant, Sienna Corporation is the same company that has developed and manages Bearpath. It's 26.34 acres. They're looking at building 234 residential developments. 2, 3, and 4 unit condominiums. They've acquired the property and they plan on initiating construction again later this fall. Comprehensive park plan and trail plan, after we reviewed the proposal, comprehensive park plan talks about developing a park to go within one half mile of every residence in the city. This property lies at the eastern border of Chanhassen, right up against Eden Prairie. Developing a park at this location is not recommended because you have, essentially if you put a park at this property you'd have a service area which is half of Eden Prairie and half in Chanhassen. If you refer to the map, the overview map in here that shows the Lake Riley North neighborhood park service area, the area photo, the proposed neighborhood park site is actually quite a bit to the east on property currently owned by John Klingelhutz and so you would take these neighborhood and centrally locate a 5 or 7 acre park site to Park and Rec Meeting — June 27, 2006 accommodate all the new residents in that particular location. And then in addition to the other future public amenities that are planned, this development will also be incorporating a beachlot with a variety of amenities on the property, including a boat access, gazebo, a grill, picnic area, fire pit. They'll have a dock with 6 slips that will mostly likely just have association type recreational boats and then they would be reserved on a per time basis. There would not be any private facilities or private boats at that location. Trails in the area. The Lakeside committed to complete a very important section of the trail. It's located directly north of Lyman Boulevard, and then it will connect on the north side of Lyman. It will connect to Eden Prairie along the 15`h green or fairway of the Bearpath golf course and it will travel north underneath Highway 212 at a future underpass, or an underpass which is currently being constructed. So this will allow residents who want to be a few underpass opportunities in the eastern sections of Chanhassen to get underneath Highway 212. The trails north of there are yet to be constructed but if you've ever been in the Marsh Glen trail, that currently dead ends. That's where this trail would connect at some time in the future. So it's a very important connection. The Sienna Corporation per their development contract with the City of Chanhassen is required to construct that trail along the 15th green and fairway and that also requires to construct a trail from the corporate boundaries of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen east into Eden Prairie to connect up to their trail system. So by the end of next summer, people in this area will be able to travel both on Lyman Boulevard, east and west, in and out of Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to Lake Riley Park or other destinations via the LRT trail. And then they'll also be able to travel north under Highway 212, which will be quite a relief because if you have to cross at the bridge, you can go all the way back to Highway 101 at that location. You probably all saw Commissioner Daniel's comments. He has a desire to see us put some public park in this location... talk to him in person. I didn't really understand all of his thoughts completely but I did respond in an e-mail that I copied all of you on... Our recommendation, staffs recommendation, they have three items. It's recommended that you recommend that City Council require 3 conditions of approval concerning parks and trails for the Lakeside PUD. Number one, the payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat in lieu of parkland dedication. Two, the applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction, and testing services required of the Lyman Boulevard trail. They will construct that trail. The trail shall be 10 feet in width and then we will reimburse the applicant for that construction of that section of our comprehensive trail plan, and that is consistent with how we have developed the remainder of our comp trail plan within the city. And then number three. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future 212 trail underpass, as depicted construon the applicant's plans be completed. So you want to make that a condition so we make sure that that does occur at some point in the future. Stolar: Okay. Hoffman: They are having neighborhood meetings down here. I know they're working on relocation. That's one of the concerns of our community is that this is impacting a great number of people, and the elementary school here in Chanhassen is being affected by it because of their relocations with folks, so they are meeting as a neighborhood. Meeting with the developer and working on relocation assistance for these people, along with Carver County and the City of Chanhassen. 1 Park and Rec Meeting — June 27, 2006 Stolar: Ann, any questions? Murphy: I guess with Chanhassen Elementary, I didn't understand that. Hoffman: They'll be affected because of the loss of many of the kids that currently reside here will not be able to, may not be able to find other places in town to live and so if they, I'm not sure how many students they had but let's say 30. Some of those kids might not be coming back to school here in Chanhassen next year. Stolar: Jack. Spizale: This trail is on, one thing I didn't quite understand is this trail goes on their property around the lake? Hoffman: That's their private trail. Let's see, if you go to Plan Sheet 5 of 9. They have it labeled as a 8 foot bituminous. It will actually be a 10 foot bituminous trail. 8 foot is their old standard. 10 foot in their new standard. You see it there Jack on the north side. Sheet 5 of 9. It's on the north side of Lyman Boulevard. They've got a trail construction called out. And then they'll have a private trail on the small section on their side of, when I say their side, on the lake side, there'll be a trail, a walking path as it's called out for their beachlot association. Spizale: Okay. Hoffman: They also have many private trails, pathways within their development itself. Stolar: Steve. Scharfenberg: So I'm trying to envision that, there'll be, on that area on the north side of that road, is that still called Lyman Boulevard back there? Okay. And there'll be a path on that north side going all the way into Eden Prairie, all the way up to Lake Riley? Hoffman: Correct. The trail stops, Bearpath built an urban section of road and then it stops. There's a trail on that road. I'm not sure if it's on the north or south of that location at Eden Prairie. But they will build this trail on the north side, all the way down into Eden Prairie. Currently the trail in Chanhassen terminates at Lake Riley Road East. It's on the south side. It stops at the road and then it has a pedestrian crosswalk over to the Rottlund development. And so that's where they'll pick it up from that location and continue on east. Stolar: Paula. Atkins: No questions. Stolar: Just one quick question. How far is the Lake Riley Park from this development area in Eden Prairie? Scharfenberg: I'd say at the most three quarters of a mile. 10 A Park and Rec Meeting — June 27, 2006 Stolar: So it's not very far. Scharfenberg: No. Stolar: So they still have, with the trails and all these, they still have access to quite within the half mile discussion but a half mile, but three quarter mile access to a park facility until we get this acquisition and this other development. Hoffman: And Lake Riley's a nice park. It might even be a little bit a closer to the north side of the park there at that location. Half mile, three quarters of a mile. Stolar: I mean the question of what are they going to do to get to this. Well they do have the opportunity in Eden Prairie for a park, so it's not like they're left out in the cold. Hoffman: It's nearby. Stolar: Yeah. Okay. Can I have a motion to approve staff recommendation? I'm not going to re -read it... Murphy: Motion to approve staff's recommendation. Stolar: Moved by Commissioner Murphy. Can I have a second? Scharfenberg: Second. Stolar: Seconded by Commissioner Scharfenberg. Murphy moved, Scharfenberg seconded that the Park & Recreation Commission recommend the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning parks and trails for the Lakeside PUD. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 11 Park and Rec Meeting — June 27, 2006 3. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND PARK AND TRAIL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP). Hoffman: Thanks Chair Stolar, members of the commission. We reviewed this this evening as a part of our tour. This is a recommendation to modify the 2006 park and trail CIP to accomplish construction of two trails. One at Lake Ann and one at Curry Farms Park. Staff is proposing to extend an existing internal trail at Lake Ann, inbetween Fields 1 and 6. South to West 78`s Street. It's a trail that we've been thinking about for a number of years. We started with the construction from the concession stand heading to the south. It's been a very popular trail and we've received many comments from the park users that have parked their vehicles in those lots between the frontage road and the ballfields, that it would be nice to have a pedestrian access point to those athletic fields at that location. It's 370 feet, or excuse me, 780 feet of new trail and then 370 feet of existing trail overlay. Or overlaying the existing trail. And there is a diagram in your packet. Curry Farms trail, we are proposing to reconstruct 250 feet of an existing internal park trail. We looked at that this evening as well. Overlay 470, the remaining 470 feet and then the brand new trail, 330 feet to connect to a new neighborhood, the Knob Hill Lane cul-de-sac at the top of the hill. We received quotes from two qualified contractors. Plehal and Midwest Asphalt. And the sub -total on the Lake Ann trail on the low bid is $23,000 from Plehal and then the Curry Farms sub -total, $23,000 for a grand total of $46,295 for the two projects, compared to $115,000 from Midwest Asphalt quote. Now the funding, these projects are currently not identified in the CEP and we are proposing that we delete two planned improvements from the 2006 CIP to free up the dollars to accomplish these projects. Those two, or excuse me, two trail projects and then the off leash dog area commitment. So review those deletions. We have $50,000 currently proposed for off leash dog areas. Our commitment to Carver County parks is $30,000 so that frees up 20, and then the other 30's coming from two park projects, trail projects. One at Rice Marsh Lake. $15,000 for that trail and then one at South Lotus Lake. Again we reviewed those this evening with the commission on our site tours for an additional $15,000. Total of those deletions would total $50,000 and would accomplish the projects at the other locations. This is not an unusual budget format. We do this from time to time when certain projects rise to the front and other projects tend to lose favor over time, throughout the year. Sometimes we don't complete projects and then they just don't happen and other times we modify the budget as we go through the year. So it's recommended by staff that the commission recommend the City Council modified the 2006 park and trail capital improvement program CIP by adding the Lake Ann Park and Curry Farms Park trail improvements in a not to exceed amount of $49,999 and deleting the Rice Marsh Lake Park trail, South Lotus Lake Park trail, and a portion of the funding designated for off leash dog area to over the cost of these new projects. I'll be happy to answer any questions. We also have Dale who is working this process with me here and he can answer questions as well. Spizale: What portions, how would this be divided up? How much from the Lotus Lake Park trail and how much from the off leash dog area? 12 (� -a i-oy CITY OF CHANHASSEN P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 06/21/2006 7:55 AM Receipt No. 0014517 CLERK: katie PAYEE: SIENNA CORPORATION PLANNING CASE 06-26 ------------------------------------------------------- GIS List 216.00 Total Cash Check 36202 Change 216.00 0.00 216.00 0.00 oyz)-ato SCANNED City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 CM OF (952) 227-1100 To: Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM June 8, 2006 upon receipt QUANTITY I DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 72 Property Owners List within 500' of 125 Lakeview Road East — $3.00 $216.00 LAKESIDE (72 labels) TOTAL DUE $216.00 NOTE: This invoice is in accordance with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attached) and must be paid prior to the public hearing scheduled for 6/20/06. Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #06-26. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. t.'II:I:i'[itril3i]'.i'L�111:a=11b91�1�y1 V CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION 10119 04�0-a(' Application of Sienna Corporation for Planned Unit Development rezoning the property from R 12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variance to the standard that 80% of the units be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. On June 20, 2006, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Sienna Corporation for Planned Unit Development rezoning property from High Density Residential District, R12, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed Planned Unit 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 High Density Residential District, R12. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential — High Density. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see attached Exhibit A) 4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. C. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance with the granting of the variances outlined in the staff report. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. SCANNED e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance, specifically the Planned Unit Development standards; 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 storm water 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 environmental damage; The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate storm water drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 6. Site Plan a. The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive land use designation for residential — high density residential with a net density of 9.9 units per acre; b. The proposed development complies with the city's site plan requirements; 2 C. The proposed development preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; d. The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; e. The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 1) An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; 2) The amount and location of open space and landscaping; 3) Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and 4) Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. L The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. M 1) The potential exclusion of 93 units from the association beach lot would be a hardship for the development since it would exclude neighborhood residents from enjoyment of common facilities. 2) The east perimeter setback variance would be a hardship due to nature of adjacent development. The PUD perimeter setback is usually necessary to separate a more intensive use from a less intensive use. However, the property to the east is a golf course with ample open space. 3) The height limitation would not permit the development of the site in conformance with the intent of the comprehensive plan, nor permit the high quality development as required by the PUD ordinance and envisioned by the project developer. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. The proposed variances are specific to the development design. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but to fulfill the expectations of the city and the developer for the redevelopment of this site. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship, but is due to the city expectations and requirements for the redevelopment of the site. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 8. Conditional Use Permits a. The proposed beach lot will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. b. The proposed beach lot will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. C. The proposed beach lot will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. El d. The proposed beach lot will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. e. The proposed beach lot will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. The proposed beach lot will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The proposed beach lot will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. h. The proposed beach lot will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. i. The proposed beach lot will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. j. The proposed beach lot will be aesthetically compatible with the area. k. The proposed beach lot will not depreciate surrounding property values. 1. The proposed beach lot will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in the conditional use permit standards with the granting of the distance variance. 9. The planning report #06-26 dated June 20, 2006, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Planned Unit Development: Rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 233 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four - and condominium -unit buildings with Variances for building height, and a community building; J and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances to the standard that 80% of the units be within 1,000 feet of the beach lot. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20t1i day of June, 2006. g.Xplan\2006 planning cas X06-26 lakaid6 findings of factdoc CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION IH 640 "ago CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 20, 2006 Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mark Undestad, Kurt Papke, Jerry McDonald, Debbie Larson, Kevin Dillon and Dan Keefe MEMBERS ABSENT: Deborah Zorn STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Josh Metzer, Planner I; Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer; and Don Asleson, Natural Resources Technician PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Jerry & Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive Craig Steesz South Lake Drive East PUBLIC HEARING: LAKESIDE: REOUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 26.34 ACRES REZONING THE PROPERTY FROM R12, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -RESIDENTIAL (PUD -R) WITH VARIANCES; PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 29 BUILDING LOTS, TWO OUTLOTS AND RIGHT-OF- WAY FOR PUBLID STREETS; SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 234 UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING TWO, THREE, FOUR AND CONDOMINIUM UNIT BUILDINGS, AND A COMMUNITY BUILDING; AND A Public Present: Name Address Thomas J. Bastasz 179 Lakeview Road E. John Ringstrom 126 Lakeview Road E. Bruce Carlson 8988 English Tum Scott Frederiksen 18626 Bearpath Trail Stephanie & Thomas Drees 14727 Boulder Point Road Ken Ross 8976 English Turn, Eden Prairie Timothy Bohlman Ron Clark Construction Rodney Walker 18992 Bearpath Trail Travis Beck 3702 22°d Avenue So, Minneapolis John Harriss 250 3'd Avenue, Suite 130, Minneapolis Todd Anderson 16338 County Road 30, Maple Grove Steven Mangold 4852 Woodhurst Lane, Minnetonka SCANNED Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 John Vogelbacher Paul Cheme John Bushey Steven Schwieter Rick & Linda Denman Laura Cooper Joan Ludwig David Florenzano 4940 Viking Drive #608, Edina 201 85'h Avenue NW, Coon Rapids 9000 Riley Lake Road, Eden Prairie 10072 Gristmill, Eden Prairie 6656 Pointe Lake Lucy 9015 Lake Riley Boulevard 9005 Lake Riley Boulevard 9470 Lakeland Terrace Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Any questions for staff? Kurt, want to start? Papke: Yeah, I'll start. I've got a couple of them here. Page 3 of staff report, background item (f). Planning Commission has not ruled pro or con as to number 11 on the applicant, yadda yadda yadda. I didn't quite get it. What? Generous: As part of their previous conditional use permits, they are non -conforming use permits. The question was the number of boats that could be moored at the site. It had been pointed out as part of the historical, they had 15 boats, which is beyond what our ordinance was and so they sort of left that open as part of the granting of the conditional use permit back in '93. Papke: Okay, so this is back to a. Generous: '93 approval. Which is going away with the new conditional use permit. Papke: Okay. That was kind of confusing. Page 4 under intent. Is this within the Bluff Creek Overlay District? I know Lake Riley, Riley Creek goes just. Generous: No, it's not within Bluff Creek. Papke: That was a little, so. Generous: It should have been stopped after clustering of development. Papke: Okay, so strike the Bluff Creek Overlay District? Generous: Yeah. Papke: Page 6. The hard surface coverage. I understand that we're exceeding the 50% site coverage for individual lots. I'm just a little concerned here on this. Normally, quite often as we all well know when we have variances come in for hard surface coverage, the first thing the applicant asks is well can't I average this out over all the lots in my neighborhood, okay. And we always say no. Okay? Generous: Unless you do a planned development. Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Papke: Unless you do a planned unit development. So that's. Generous: That's the distinction. Papke: That's the rationale here. Because it's a PUD, we can average everything together? Generous: Right, and the idea behind PUD's is also you might just have the lots around the unit and have more common open space. Papke: Okay. Okay. Page 12. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley East. Can you color this in a little bit? How bad? How long a time is this going to be? I'm just concerned with the hardship for the residents there. Generous: And I'll request that Alyson. Fauske: Commissioner Papke, staff just looked at the location of the sanitary sewer and watermain tap connections and we just wanted to point out that they would just have to provide access to the neighborhoods since they only have one current access Lyman Boulevard. We don't anticipate that it will be a long duration. We anticipate half a day to a day at each location. Papke: Okay. So quite brief then. That sounds pretty good. Okay. Next one here. Question on page 30 of the staff report. Condition 55. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass as depicted in the applicant's plan is completed. Can you explain that? Is this? Generous: This is one that Mr. Hoffman put in there. I believe it's that this connection be provided as part of this development because this trail will eventually connect to the underpass for 212/312. And so we're building this one and we want to make sure they get that one also. Papke: So what do we mean by "is completed"? Is the developer funding this or building it? Generous: Yes, the developer has to construct it. Papke: Okay. Okay, I got it. It was just the language was a little unclear what we were really installing. Okay. Page 4 of the findings of facts. Having to do with the potential exclusion of 93 units from the, this is one of the variances we're asking for here. A hardship for the developments, and this would exclude neighborhood residents from enjoyment of common facilities. I certainly concur with that. Could you explain how that turns into a hardship? Generous: Well as a part of, you're creating, segregating basically a neighborhood by saying anyone outside of this 1,000 feet is, can't enjoy the amenities that they're paying for as a part of this association. Again we were looking at, had they changed this design and put all the condominium buildings on the south end of the project, we wouldn't have an issue with this. Over 80% of the units. 3 Planning Commission Meeting —June 20, 2006 Papke: I don't disagree with the value and the conclusion. I'm just struggling with this being, you know because we're sticklers about this sometimes, as you well know, because we have three other variances on the agenda tonight. All of which are going to claim hardship issues, and I just want to make sure we're clear on this so. Generous: It's yes. It's how do you make this development work without allowing the entire association to participate in the association amenities. Papke: Okay. So it's more of an issue of fairness? Generous: Equity, yes. Papke: Okay. And I think that's all I have. McDonald: Debbie. Larson: The only one I've got is regarding, page 15 of the staff report. Talking about the tree requirements. Are we being, it'd be the proposed for the east property line. Are we not doing anything there because of the trees that are already currently there? Generous: No. Partially this analysis was superceded after Jill finished her report and left and then the applicant re -submitted a landscape plan which is the one that you're looking at, and it does have trees on that east property line. But we are going to require that they meet at least those, what's required on this. We'll do the review to make sure what they proposed. Larson: So there's something that I don't have that is. Generous: Well you have the plan but Jill didn't have the same. Larson: Oh, it's not on the report, but it's on the plans? Generous: Yes. Larson: Okay. Never mind. Alright, that's all I have. Thank you. McDonald: Kevin. Dillon: You're asking for a 48 for a building height rather than a 35 foot height. That's a pretty significant difference. Are there any things that's going to do to ruin the view or it would cause any other distractions or anything like that in that area? Generous: All the view would be within this development because to the east is the Bearpath golf course and to the west you have North Bay which is actually down from this site. So you're not changing that. It's just yes, it is. They're going up. The trade off is they could get the same number of units by adding another bigger building on that and we thought that it would be better Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 to vary upwards in this instance for those 3 buildings rather than oh 3 or 4. Or 4 or 5 shorter buildings. Dillon: And it's noted that the current uses that are there are going to get demolished, and maybe it's not the concern of this commission but what's going to happen to the residents that will be displaced and you know is there enough lead time for them to find... Generous: I'll have the applicant address that one because we did discuss that with him so they can tell you what they're doing. Dillon: That's my questions. McDonald: Okay. Mark? Undestad: Just one. On the beachlot. What size, I mean how do you determine how big the beach can be? Generous: Those are based on DNR standards. Papke: I think brief discussions with Lori, the applicant will have to get a permit from the DNR for the beachlot, and that will be worked out with the DNR. Keefe: Going back to hardships and variances. Just some understanding of what the hardship is on each one of these variances. I think you talked a little bit about the 48 foot one, but on the east side, it's a reasonable use question or hardship? Generous: Partially, is it reasonable to require this 50 foot setback? If by changing it you can reduce the concrete. More open space within the development and do other design issues within the project. And then also, usually when we have a planned development, it's next to some other use that's right there. Well in this case we don't have that. Keefe: Right. Yeah, I mean I'm not, I just want to know what the hardship is. I don't necessarily disagree with granting the variance in this case but I'm just curious what the hardship might be. And then the 1,000 foot standard, do you know why that was, why it's 1,000 feet? Generous: I'm not sure on that one, no. Keefe: Okay. So, and the reason why we grant this is so that all residents would have the ability to use the beachlot, is that really, my hardship would be a use for all residents of this community? Generous: My assumption was that they were concerned when developing the ordinance that you know as a neighborhood might develop and then one next to it and they want to join the association to get the access to the lake and so they wanted to try to limit that. Keefe: Okay. Ahight Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Papke: Mr. Chair? McDonald: Yes. Papke: Just because the meeting here we had some material given to us with some concern expressed by the North Bay homeowners, with drainage into their retention pond. Could staff explain the drainage patterns here and what water is going where from where? Fauske: As you can see here is Lyman Boulevard. Here is Lake Riley Drive. The existing neighborhood right here. I'm hoping people, unfortunately the colors don't show up very well on this but I tried to, what I did was color in essentially the area that would be draining to this pond here, which is the pond of concern. This area all through here would drain through storm pipes and outlet into this pond. This pond here was designed to accommodate runoff from this site. We had our engineering consultant, one of our consulting firms verify that the existing pipe and the existing pond here can accommodate the runoff from that site. Currently the entire site drains to this pond. There's a small depression area through here with a pipe that shows it outletting to this wetland. And then the remainder of the site through here goes to this pond right here. Papke: And that's a new pond? Fauske: Correct. A new pond for the development. And then part of the question, part of the concern that Mr. Ringstrom had was regardiny ownership and how do we have a right to do that. I pulled up, this is the plat from North Bay 2° Addition and I outlined herein green and then highlighted that there is a drainage and utility easement over the pond area here. Again here's Lyman Boulevard here. Here's Lake Riley Road or to the North Bay development through here. So we do have a drainage and utility easement over that. The City is responsible for maintenance through there. Through our campaign of, through the MPS, MPCA ruling where we have to go in every, I think it says 10, every 5 years. Pardon me. Thank you. Every 5 years the City has to go and check and see if the pond has sedimented in and we'll take out sediment in the pond if it's removal capacity has been compromised because of sediment deposition in there. But it was designed to be a storm pond and the proposed runoff going to that pond meets the design requirements. Papke: Is there any overflow from the new pond to the pond in North Bay? Is there a cascading affect in herein essence? Fauske: Yes. The outlet to, going back to, and unfortunately you can't see it very well on this drawing but this pond does outlet over to the west. But again it meets the rate and quantity control set forth by this pond design. Papke: So it sounds like we've got all the quantity issues. It seemed like from the resident's letter and pictures that there was concern over quality as well. Phosphorous loading and so on. Perhaps when the developer gets up they can comment on plans for fertilizer and things of that nature to make sure that we address the quality issues. n Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Fauske: Certainly, and also inherent in the design requirements for a pond, there is that, what we call a dead pool storage requirement, which is basically the volume of the pond below the outlet and that volume is determined based on settling velocities of sediments that come through the pond. So there's a water quantity, pardon me. A water quality component inherent in the design of a pond. McDonald: I have a question for you concerning the pond. What's the purpose of the pond? Fauske: This pond is a storm water treatment pond. McDonald: And then where does it drain off to whenever it reaches capacity? Fauske: It outlets at this location and then this location to a pond, a wetland complex that's up here and a wetland mitigation area that's down here. McDonald: So it doesn't drain into Lake Riley or anything such as that? Fauske: No. Generous: Not directly. Fauske: Not directly. McDonald: Not directly, okay. Anyone else have any follow along questions? Okay. Then with that, if the applicant could come forward and address the commission. John Vogelbacher: Good evening. My name is John Vogelbacher. I'm with Sienna Corporation. I've got some illustrated books that I'd like to pass out to the Planning Commission, and this is just a little bit more detailed in regards to the project and building products that are proposed for the development. And I've got some other additional copies if anyone in the audience would like to see these. I'll set some of these around. Do we have enough for everyone that would like one? Well appreciate the opportunity to present the Lakeside development to the Planning Commission and we have, of course we've been to the Planning Commission in a workshop and reviewed a lot of the design parameters of what we have put into the project. It's evolved based on staff comments and also evolved architecturally. We feel we've got a real good plan and something that I think that will be a real fine addition to the housing opportunities within Chanhassen. And maybe before we get into actually the book here, if we could address possibly some of the questions that you had since they're fresh in your mind. We could do those. I guess first of all would be the Lakeview Apartment residents that are currently residing on the property. Sienna does not own the property. We'll be closing on the property next Wednesday. The leases that are currently in the complex, there's 170 units in the apartment complex right now. There's approximately about 100 of those occupied. The leases provide for a 60 day notice both from the landlord and from the tenant. We realize that relocation for some of the tenants is going to be difficult so we've put together through the Carver County HRA a program which we can assist them. Sunday, July 2°d we'll have a 7 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 neighborhood meeting on that site for all the residents which would be to deliver a set of options for them that the HRA is going to be providing for us so we've worked with Julie and Mary over at the Carver County HRA office to put together a package to you know, identify particular locations that they might be able to find. In addition to doing that, we've got a couple translators that will help for those that may have difficulty in temvs of, at the language barrier. What we'll be doing for them, which will be the assistance to help them relocate is we have a truck dedicated to help them move. We also would provide the deposit back to them immediately upon their vacation of the rental space, and we also have a program where, though there is a 60 day notice, we've allowed them to vacate their space as soon as they wanted to. In addition to that, if they vacated the 60 day time period, for every day that they would vacate prior to that we'd give them $20.00, so generally if a tenant had a place to go. Wanted to relocate on July 0 or June 30m, they would receive about $1,200 from us in cash, plus their deposit and I think that's, along with transportation if they need it, and enlist the help of the HRA, we think for a lot of those tenants that are there, that will provide a great deal of assistance and try to get them relocated so. We realize that there'll be some tenants that will need a little more tender loving care and we're certainly not going to put a family out on the street. We would not do that so that's our program through the HRA to help to assist existing tenants on the property. I think some of the other questions we had, the ponding issue, and Paul Cheme is here who's our civil engineer and I'm not an engineer but I did want to maybe clarify a little bit of the capacity that's in that pond. There's about 4 feet of bounce in that pond, so the outlet pipe or the pipe that takes it back into the North Bay project, there's actually 4 feet of holding capacity in that pond from it's normal water elevation and it's high water elevation so there's quite a bit of time period from which water that would... In addition to that component which currently isn't in place, and the water that does leave this site goes into that pond untreated, we would be treating it but in addition to that, what we would be doing is using that pond as a reservoir for that overall irrigation system for the whole project, and then there'll be a recharge well for the pond. So if certainly during time periods of July and August where it gets very warm and you do have more of an opportunity for algae growth within a pond, that's the worst time and so at that time period there's usually not a lot of rain so at that time period we're recharging on a daily basis with ground water which will again provide for a much greater degree of clarity in that water. So I know that's an issue and a lot of it is unknown based on not knowing what's going to happen. But I think really this particular project will actually support a great deal of degree of more water quality as that water's leaving the site. Paul, did you have anything else to add in regards to the ponding? Paul Cheyne: Yeah, I think that's kind of ... unless they've got a real specific question. John Vogelbacher: Some of the other items that were discussed was the distance from the recreational beachlot, and Bob correct me if I'm wrong but the ordinance provides that 80% of the occupants that are going to be using the beachlot live within 1,000 feet of the lot itself. And I know when we did, when we were here at the workshop meeting I know that the calculations in the staff report, I mean I guess my calculations, I'll have to check my math. Maybe I did it wrong or something but as I look at that and looked at the distance of 1,000 feet and then took 80% of that and then took the additional amount of residents that would be outside of that distance to come up with 100%, what happens to us is that Building C. If I can tum. How do we turn this map up? Oh thank you... Building C I believe, and I wish I would have brought that 0 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 with me but what happened to us is that just part of Building C would be qualified to use the recreational beachlot. And it just seemed, and I guess if you look at the hardship, in terms of administering the project, what we would have would be some sort of a portion of that building that would qualify to use the beachlot. The other portion of the building could not. And we believe that we have a contiguous site and the site is well laid out. We have a professional property manager to manage the facility which is a dramatic difference than what's currently occurring on the property. Real high quality amenities and a security system on the lake. You know we certainly understand the reasoning behind the ordinance but I guess the hardship would be how did you administer that when you have a portion of the building on I guess what we would have as maybe the first flood would maybe use the beachlot and the other two or three floors would not. And we think it just provides a very difficult administration. And there is some inequities relative to you know a person living on this property and certainly being part of the whole association, yet not being able to enjoy the whole benefits of what's provided for the far, far majority of the rest of the residents of the project. I'd like to just talk a little bit about the building height issue and again there was a question about the hardship and I, John Harriss who is the architect for the condominium buildings, he'll be pulling together, providing a lot more information in regards to the detailing and the design of the buildings, but it's probably not expressed so well in the staff report but Building A is a 3 story building. Building B is a modified 4 story building, which steps from the east to the west. And then Building C, we really haven't gone through a whole design parameter on Building C yet, but I guess what the concept was in Building A and we talked about this and that is, the roof on that building which is an attractive feature, also increases the height of the building, but it is a 3 story building. And could have done a flat roof. It would have dropped the height considerably. One of the objectives though was to make it have a more residential feel. As you look at all the properties that are on the other side of the fairway, or the other properties that are on the west side of the property line, the townhomes, they all have a pitched roof and so that was really more of the thinking there was to make that building have more of a residential feel to it. And certainly the height can be reduced if you went with a flat roof, but we just didn't feel that architecturally that would be the best look. I think what I'd like to do is just kind of continue through the book and maybe I've missed a couple items that were discussed but I hope I took well enough notes if there's any other particular comments that the Planning Commission had relative to the staff report I'd be glad to answer those but maybe I could just run through our book here and kind of describe the project a little bit better in terms of what we're proposing to the city. I think Bob had mentioned the development of the beaches on the property and that would actually be a permit that we would get from the Department of Natural Resources. Certainly that would be regulated by them. The actual beachlot is part of the city ordinances and relative to the amount of lineal feet of shoreline we have which is about 1,100 and we've got about 57,000 square feet of surface area, which would qualify for the recreational beachlot. Actually for two of them, and so what we'd like to do is propose for two 50 foot beaches on that property. They're separated quite a bit. Almost probably about 800 to 900 feet apart, and I'm not so sure that that's a variance or such. I mean we do qualify for two beachlots which would allow you to have a beach on each lot. We're combining the docks of the two beachlots into one, which is provided for in the ordinance, and that's just to consolidate and to provide one source of management for the boats on the recreational beachlot. 0 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Papke: Question on the beachlot, both for staff and the developer. One of the applications we've seen a lot of in the past couple years is the request by a homeowners associations or homeowner for an additional dock. Okay, one of their neighbors has a dock or they have an existing dock on a community lot and they want to add another dock. Now in this particular case you're giving up what is currently a dock. What, how final is this? My concern is obvious. I don't want to have you guys come back 5 years from now and say you know we really want that dock back in there again. We've got a bunch of residents that really want to dock their boats that way. How final is the legality of this? I know it's a very general question, but you see where I'm going. Generous: Well whatever you approve is what they get now. They can always come back. However they're not giving up the mooring spaces from their extra dock. They're just consolidating into one dock. Papke: Structure but we're giving up a launch, yes? For boats. Generous: Well they're removing a launch that is non -conforming. We don't permit that at any new ones. There is one on the east side of the lake for getting boats in but right now they can actually physically use that site to put, launch boats and we're eliminating that. Papke: And what would prevent one of the homeowners from backing their boat into the beach and launching it? Is there? John Vogelbacher: Well we have a fence. Papke: You have a fence? There's no. John Vogelbacher: Which there is no fence now. I think there's a... Papke: ...so you couldn't back a boat trailer in there? John Vogelbacher: Right. No, and they'd drive over a bunch of gardens and stuff. I'm not saying that someone couldn't do that but it would certainly be anyone that we would allow to do it, that's for sure. Papke: Okay. I just wanted to make sure that this is, this doesn't come back to haunt us 5 years from now. John Vogelbacher: No, and I think the plan that we have meets all the guidelines of the ordinance in terms I think we're just consolidating the docks so we have one, which I think in terms of meeting those requirements, we certainly do that. McDonald: I asked you a question concerning the docks. One of the things that's come up about these community docks is overnight docking of boats. Is that going to be allowed here or is this strictly going to be a daytime usage, first come first served? 10 Planning Commission Meeting—June 20, 2006 John Vogelbacher: Well what we have will be probably at a minimum 3 association owned boats. There would not be any privately owned boats in the docks. So they would only be owned by the association. The docks would be owned by the association and managed by the homeowners association. We're allowed up to 6. I don't really know if that's exactly how many we'll have. I don't think that will be the case. Part of that is you know you have association fees and somebody's got to pay for 6 boats and so it'd be somewhere between there. Probably a minimum of 3 and it could not be any more than 6. McDonald: Okay, because on the drawing you show slips for 6 boats. John Vogelbacher: Right, and we're certainly willing to provide, in our developer's agreement exactly that situation where they're not slips that you sell, rent. Whatever they are. They're solely just for this project, right. McDonald: Okay. John Vogelbacher: So the site amenities which we talked a little bit about, which is I guess in terms of subdivision development this is quite comprehensive in terms of the amount of landscaping and features that are built into this project, and of course the first one would be along the lake there and the park area that is designed to work as probably about 4 to 5 shade gardens. Gazebo. Some paving there. Some hardscape paving to come from the street down to the dock area. And generally the development that is east of, there's a flat area and that's where you see the garden area and the gazebo that's in the very west side of that property. There really is very little, if any development and the staff report indicates some concern about the trail construction from the, let's say the active area where the docks are through the park area which would be back towards the east. And what we propose to do in there is as minimal as we possibly can, which would be this trail might be as little as 2 feet of width in some areas, depending upon what the site gives us. Not intended to be a 4 foot or 5 foot or 6 foot trail, nor any paving or bituminous. It would probably be more liken to a hiking trail then a trail that you might see like in a park area. And because it is very rugged through there. The topography is very steep. Very heavily wooded and we'd like to just basically keep it that way and that's kind of part of the experience that we're trying to create here is really more of a hike through the woods there than more of a parkland trail that you would find certainly through the rest of our project. As we go across the street, and again we would have a fence, an ornamental fence that would control access into the park area on the lake. As you go across the street on Lyman, we have a community building which is approximately 5,000 square feet and that's kind of a party or gathering area for the whole project. In the lower level of that building is a fitness area with restrooms and also some other additional storage areas, so that's a very good looking building. There's an elevation of that. That would be used by everyone that's actually in the community. The other major feature that's in the project is the waterfall at the center of the project, which is more of a center park that is to be used by all the residents. There's a trail that runs along a stream bed that cuts through the center of the project. There's about 14 foot waterfall that starts at the far north end, and then that drops to kind of more of a flatter area and the pictures that you see there would be very representative of what that trail or what that stream and waterfall would look like. Both pictures are actually from Windsong. That's a golf course project over on the west side of town. The contractor that built that stream would be the same one. That's Ravine 11 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Construction that would be building this stream. So, and they also built that big stream complex over at Troy Byrne which is another golf course in Wisconsin, and they're both very, very well done and the method that they use to do that is kind of, they use a slurry or kind of a concrete mix that sits in the bottom of the creekbed so you avoid erosion and things that you might typically find in a stream bed. So very good construction techniques and very good looking and that's really part of the central part of our project is to create some gathering points and areas that would be used by the residents of the project. The only other, the other nice monument plan for the corner and that's a waterfall feature and that's on that northeast comer of our private drive coming off of Lyman Boulevard. I didn't mention the decorative street lights but that picture is actually from Maple Grove and we've used those lights in other projects. It's a real nice looking ornamental light. It has a fluted base and nice ornamental logo area at the top of that fixture and it really lets very little glare, so it's a nice light in terms of the subdivision. Good looking and lights the streets up but yet reduces the glare considerably. So those are our street lights that are operated and paid for and maintained by the association. The next page is our trail and sidewalk system. There's 3 different components to that. One of the public trails that we would be constructing, and the other trails are the private trails and there's very little bit in terms of size. Again we talked about glare on the park. That's more of a hiking trail. That trail that runs along the streambed would probably be about a 4 to 5 foot gravel trail. The other sidewalks, pretty much incorporate access throughout the whole project, and then we have the public trail that runs down the west side, or excuse me the east side of the site. That's actually in Eden Prairie. Papke: Question on that before you move on. Could you give us a picture overall, if you will, of the different types of surfaces you're using on the development. You mentioned that one of the trails is going to be gravel. I assume crushed limestone or something like that. Are there any use of pavers, textured concrete? Is this all blacktop? Is there, you know can you give me an idea of surface materials? John Vogelbacher: For the trails? Papke: Trail and streets. Are there any intersections where you incorporate use of pavers or, you know I'm just trying to get an idea of the texture of the surfaces. John Vogelbacher: I think generally the streets would all be bituminous, but certainly at the main entrance we'll have probably somewhere between 50 to 60 feet of a paving treatment. Whether it's pavers or stamped bituminous and colored. Or concrete. We're not quite sure yet. But at the entrance there would be certainly a feature in the paving there. We don't have any other plans for the sidewalks to be anything other than just typical... Keefe: Is it going to be a gated entrance? John Vogelbacher: Ah no. No. So that pretty much summarizes the overall development. I would, if we could I'd like to maybe just talk a little bit about the Eden Prairie trail. You may recall when we came to the workshop previously, the trail that we had proposed and the trail that's actually commented to in the staff report was located on the west side of the property. And that would have certainly have been our preference. That's why we put it on the plan. The trail that we see here is part of the required trail construction that is done in conjunction with 12 Planning Commission Meeting —June 20, 2006 Bearpath. Sienna was the developer of Bearpath and the partners of Sienna are the owners and operators of Bearpath Golf and Country Club. We would have proposed to do something different. The City of Eden Prairie said you're going to put that trail right there. The reason why we never built previous to this particular application or why it hasn't been built was because it would have gone nowhere and the City of Eden Prairie said well that doesn't make a lot of sense to have a trail that runs up to oh you know, 2,000 feet north of Lyman Boulevard and stops. And so now with the highway coming through and the Eden Prairie trail connection that will be farther to the east, that will take you up on the north side of the highway, the timing is right now to put the trail in. We would again would have proposed to put it on the other side of the site but this is what Eden Prairie wanted and it works. I mean it does work and so that's part of our plan here is to construct it. We do have some other trails that connect to that which gives some good connectivity, you know pedestrian wise for both our residents, and for the residents within that immediate area. Papke: A related question. At the workshop one of the things that was still undecided was beachlot access. Underpass. At grade crossing. Where have you settled on that? What's the design of the crossing? John Vogelbacher: Well right now what we show is a crossing just at the corner there of East Riley Lake, or Lake Riley Road East and Lyman Boulevard. If you can see here. It's just an on grade crossing. We did look at that. It's, it was just so difficult to do. The grades there to try and get down below that street. There's also a watermain that runs up Lyman Boulevard. It was, I mean I think it would have been good but just sight wise it was extremely difficult to do that and we actually think this is a good alternative. We had suggested to the city staff that we'd like to see a stop sign at that corner for safety purposes, and I think that's really more their call. If they feel like they'd like to have that, and I'm not sure what their criteria is but we think that makes some sense at that particular intersection, and again the crossing there, we'd like to see some sort of marcation, whether it's in stamping, coloring. Some sort of a crosswalk demarcation, but again we'd be certainly happy to pay for that and again it's really more of the city staff and their engineering and street maintenance department as to what they would like to do there. But we think it merits some additional work and what the staff would recommend, we're not really quite sure yet. Papke: A related question, and maybe the city staff. What, I know there's obviously some rolling hills in the area. Are there any issues with sight lines as you come over the crest of the hill there just to the east of the development? Are we going to have plenty of time to see people crossing there and stop or any issues or concerns there? Fauske: No. When we looked at this, actually at the access facing more of that proposed entrance onto Lyman Boulevard, we were taking into account the topography of the area. In order to maximize the spacing between the two access points, you're looking at a significant grade, basically where Building A is and so we just knew that wasn't a viable option and the necessity to get two access points so you know we can look at, we can look at where the spacing is as far as safety concerns but really it's pushed as far east as possible. 13 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Papke: Alright. Right now the trail on Lyman ends just east of the development here or, yeah. Just west of the development. Just west. Now I noticed the trail now goes on the north side of Lyman and extends at least to the Eden Prairie borders. Do we know is Eden Prairie going to extend this all the way to Riley Park? If so, I mean that's, this is one of my running routes so I'm near and dear to my own heart so. It's personal, yeah. So there's going to be a fair amount of, well if that trail does extend all the way into Eden Prairie, getting back to your issue of maybe putting a stop sign here. This could be higher traffic? Are we looking at that or is this something for Todd? Generous: Well I know Todd had them switch it over because Eden Prairie told them the trail would be on the north side. As to the stop sign. Fauske: Are you looking to stop traffic on Lyman? Papke: I don't know. I just, you know it sounds like we're not going to have the below grade crossing now. That's off the table, which is fine. I don't have an issue with that. But if we do indeed, if Eden Prairie extends the trail here all the way to Lake Riley Park, where currently the trail ends right when it hits Lyman Boulevard right now, so you have about maybe a half mile or so here where if you're walking or running or bicycling, you're on a fairly unimproved road. But so if that trail does go through, one would expect that there would be a fair amount of traffic through here so. John Vogelbacher: Well I can tell you that trail will be built this year. That trail that connects Chanhassen to Eden Prairie on Riley Lake Road because that trail we build. Papke: Okay. John Vogelbacher: So and again it was a situation where that was part of our developer's agreement was to build these two trails, the one to the north and then the one east and west, and we just never did it because we had always thought that they were going to improve that road and tum it into an urban street section which has never happened and so now with all the connecting trails showing up, it's time to put that in so. Papke: Right. So I guess I'd just ask city staff before this goes to the City Council, that we have some plan for what we're going to do there, if it's not a stop sign. That's fine as long as we have you know, we know what we're going to do. Keefe: Maybe you were going to get to it but let me ask a question about parking. Can you speak to parking? Is it 2 parking spaces per unit in the condos or is it 1? Below grade. John Vogelbacher. All of the condominium spaces, each one would have 2 spots below grade. Keefe: Okay. Underground. And then it looks like you've grouped some parking spaces on the streets here. John Vogelbacher: Yeah. 14 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Keefe: Is that intended for guest parking or is that kind of what your thought is there? John Vogelbacher: All the parking throughout the project can be used by any resident, whether they are in one building or another. So those are all guest parking, right. That would be located or kind of spread out across the project. I'd like to kind of continue on I guess if we could. Get to just the product types and we have 3 particular builders here this evening and I'd like to have them just express certainly in a summary what their product type is. The next sheet in our book here kind of puts it in summary in terms of the different types of units and some price points. Target price points. Also the total number of units. Right now we have 233, which is part of the staff report, and that consists of 3 different number of units into 3 different condominium buildings. I'd like to maybe have Steve Schwieter come up and describe his units. Steve, he's got an appointment he has to go to so Steve can describe the Wooddale units and Steve has been a builder over in Bearpath for years and certainly has been a very good one. We're sure pleased to have him in our project. Steve Schwieter: Good evening. I am Steve from Wooddale Builders. Like John had mentioned, we've been around a long time. I started the business in '74 and we started building townhomes around town as well as upper bracket single family for, well since then but we started building townhomes on the north side probably since 1984. We've done quite a few units throughout all of Eden Prairie. We have not done any project yet in Chanhassen but we look forward to this development. It entices us from the standpoint of all the amenities that they're putting in. Chairlift systems and things. The lake amenities. It is not a new product design for us. I mean it's a one level type product, walkout. Master bedroom first floor. First floor office. Kitchen. Dining room. Great room and a four season porch. We've done this style of unit before. We've changed the styling of the exterior to more of a cottage type look. It's a new look in today's request for styling. We do have both daylight units and walkouts. The daylights would be, back up to the water feature there, and we're planning on, we typically do, we're still working on the outside features regarding, I think we're looking at 3 different colors but we're trying to put, we are doing stone on the fronts. Quite a bit of stone and we're looking at doing a different type of stone on each building to give it some flare and probably 3 different colors. They're also using a, some of the new materials that are out today. Maintenance free type products but it isn't the old vinyl type lap siding. It's all shaker town look. Cedar looking textured. Board and batten type look and with a lot of the request today for this styling of unit. People are looking for maintenance free, so that's a huge scenario. We are building a, not a, well similar product up on the Eden Prairie river bluff right now where we are using like a shaker town style unit and we're well received back there. Other than that I guess I'm open for questions, if anybody has any. Papke: I just had one question on your preliminary landscape plan, and maybe I'll nitpick here but your current landscaping plans show identical plantings on the north and the south side of the buildings whereas most of the other plans do not. They more take into account sunny side, shady side so just, do you tweak these as you get closer to the end to just see you know, you'd think you'd want to put the hostas on the north side and the, you know the other stuff on the south side. 15 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Steve Schwieter: Quite honestly we haven't spent a lot of time on that, but I'm pretty demanding when it comes to landscaping and things so that will be upgraded. McDonald: Any other questions? Thank you very much. Steve Schwieter: Thank you. John Vogelbacher: So the next product I'd like to have us go over in summary is the Charles Cudd townhomes. Rick Denman is here to give you a little overview and answer your questions in regards to those units. Those are on the east and central portion of the project. Rick Denman: Thank you. My name is Rick Denman. I'm with the Charles Cudd Company. Our company's been around for about 35 years. We primarily target the luxury home buyer. A few months ago the Sienna Group and John gave us a call and told us that this neighborhood was becoming a possibility or dream of what they wanted to do and I often wondered what would happen. I drove by that piece a number of times and I thought you know it's just a primo piece of property. It's got Lake Riley on one side. Bearpath on the other side and it obviously needs to be rejuvenated in some way and brought to a higher value. Very few people are going to be able to do as good a job as Sienna has really done with this layout and this format so we're very grateful to be part of it. We've really taken the extra step from a design standpoint. On the plat the only correction is we actually made the buildings a little bit wider and we went to all duplex units rather than there were a couple of triples that show at the end there. Three unit buildings. We went to all two unit buildings on there and we did that primarily because the location we're in I guess is probably one of the prime locations on the site, and I think when you're talking about the positioning of the condominium buildings, our units are one level pretty much walkout units so we have the master bedrooms on the main floor and we're really targeting the empty nester buyer here. Luxury home empty nester buyer. We have 12 foot plate lines on the inside. These are definitely very exciting units. Very exciting floorplans. We're building a very similar unit over off of 394 and County Road 73, in an area called Bassett Creek Crossing, which is under construction right now. We've had a lot of success with people walking through those so. Our exteriors will be shake and stone. We've got copper gutters. Wood stained garage doors. It's four sided architecture. We spent a lot of time on the front, the sides and the back to make sure that from all different viewpoints and view corridors that these are exceptional and you know we're very excited about being a part of the neighborhood so, do you have any questions? I'd be happy to answer them for you. McDonald: No? Thank you very much. Rick Denman: Thank you. John Vogelbachen Thank you Rick. And last but not least, the condominiums. Steve Mangold is here. He's one of the partners in Lakeside Condominiums, LLC and John Harriss, and another member from his office, Travis who've done a lot of, building a lot of individuals have worked on these plans but I think John would like to, he's got a rather comprehensive overview and additional information on the condominiums. irl Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 John Harriss: Thank you John. I'm John Harriss with Harriss Architects and I'd like to just discuss briefly some of the features of the condominiums. We did talk about them quite extensively at the workshop. I wanted to start out chatting a little bit about why we designed these condominiums the way we did. Obviously the views from the site and spectacular and that was the prime motivator for the way we designed these buildings. Starting with Building A, and we will have a better name for that building someday soon. Right now we're calling it Building A. It sits up on the most prominent part of the site. Highest part of the site, with the most commanding views. These units are intended to be true luxury condominium units. Are really targeting it to be the finest condominium units in the suburbs. Anywhere in Minneapolis -St. Paul area. The V shape of the building really comes from wanting to take advantage of the views and to make sure that every unit in the building has a great view. We had previously designed it as more of a rectangular building, but that was leaving some of the units kind of looking out onto this area, and not really taking advantage of the views of the lake and the golf course. So what we've come up with is a design that's actually a single loaded corridor, which is much different than most condominiums out there. We have a corridor on one side, on the outside where the parking lot is. We have multiple entrances into that corridor so people don't feel like they're coming into a central lobby and then having to go 150 feet to a corridor. We're really trying to make this more like a home so we have actually, we'll have 2 to 3 elevators in the building that will go down to the underground parking. The units are ranging from 1,850 square feet to upwards of 2,500 square feet. Just under 3,000. Some of the units are intended on the top floor to be multi level units, but most of them are single level units. Will probably be 2 bedrooms with a den. 2 Sh bath would probably be a standard layout. All the units have extensive decks and outdoor spaces and very large windows. We'll get to the elevations after I chat about the design of Building B a little bit. Building B is also in that kind of crescent shaped. Does a couple different things. It sort of embraces the view of the lake with the pond in the foreground, and also acts as a turn to this long green space. And actually at this point one can walk through a two story lobby and connect up with the ponds so there really is a sense of a connection throughout the whole site, and that was really important to us. Not to make the building seem like it was a block to the site but really more of a filter and a way to respond to the different features of the site. This building would be a little bit more traditional. It']] be a double loaded corridor. The units ranging in size from 1,600 to 1,800 square feet. The intention is that the price point of these units would be lower. Not significantly lower but lower than Building A. So we do provide a mix of units on the site. One of the things that we wanted to do with this building to respect the neighborhood to the west, was to step it down. And you can see, it's a flat roof building. We've stepped it down in a couple different terraces. These are green terraces. The top one being a community terrace. Green terrace and the lower one being assigned to the units on the end. So at this point we get down to a two story building. I felt that that was the most appropriate thing to do for this neighborhood. And we have provided in a drawing some site sections to show the planting details and the scale related to the street. You guys can jump in anytime you want with questions. Papke: Is Building B the only one that has the roof top gardens? John Harriss: Yes. 17 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Papke: Okay. Is there a reason why you did not incorporate it into the other ones or you did put it in this one was makes this one stand out as the only one that has that feature? John Harriss: Well Building A is a pitched roof so that makes that difficult. But the rest of Building B we didn't bring in any access up to the roof because if we do that we're going to have to bring the stair towers up. We're going to have to bring the elevator up which is essentially going to make it a 5 story building. Even though we'd love to have a beautiful roof terrace up there, we felt we were pushing the envelope a little bit too much so we decided not to do that. Can you get a little bit, if you want to zoom in on this or not at all but. It was our intention of the design, this is Building A. This being the Bearpath, the elevation facing Bearpath. This being the elevation facing Lake Riley. The intention was to provide a highly articulated elevation and a skin of the building that was comprised of enduring natural interiors. 80% of the building is stone and brick. Two different colors of brick. The primary color being kind of a dark reddish, wood formed, kind of an old English style brick. That really is sort of the style genesis of this is sort of the English manor homes. We have some coined features and some cast on features. We've had stone base that is highly articulated. Very large decks. Very large windows. Papke: Question for you. The chimneys are quite prominent in the design here. Are these all functional chimneys or are they there for decoration? John Harriss: It's a combo. We'll probably be running some ... up there but their primarily decorative. Papke: Okay. All gas fireplaces in the units? No wood burning? John Harriss: Correct. So those can be side walled vented if we wanted them to but we don't really feel those are very attractive so. So you know our intention in terms of the scale of this, we do recognize the fact that we're facing other residences across the fairway at Bearpath and even though it's a very large building, we still attempted to create, break down scales of the building that would be similar in scale to the buildings across in Bearpath. If you look at a module where my hands are pointing here, a module here. Now as we march down they're articulated enough to really break down the scale. So that was our intention there. You can see we've also created some units that depict maybe some loft units within the roof line on some of the corner units as well. Lake Riley elevation really more the same thing. We're really trying to repeat some of the same elements and create some more detail. A building this size, it's really hard to show the level of detail that we're really intending but you know in terms of brick bonding and some of the details that we're going to have, it's going to be very highly detailed building. Very well crafted. The construction is going to be you know, if you can make a sound proof condominium building, this will be it and so we're really striving to do those kind of things. Building B takes some of those same elements and some of the same concepts but it's a flat roof building out of respect for the scale and out of respect for the idea of stepping the building down as well. These two gables being a little bit different in recalling some of the features on Building A. These are really kind of intended as a matched set, using some of the same materials and some of the same elements. This kind of portal here is the entrance from the north, coming down that long green space, so it really emphasizes the point of entry there in that two story space. That people can pass through from one end of the development to the other. 1V Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 We have a number of different trellis and sun control features. We recognize the fact that this building faces due south, and so we're using the trellises as decorative features so we hope that they'll be vines growing up all these buildings and really making it seem as part of the landscape and kind of give it some of that old kind of English manor type feel. Keefe: Are you going to have fireplaces in this one as well or, with flues and venting? John Harriss: Yes. Keefe: What sort of screening, is screening required do you think for this? I mean does Building A look down on it? John Harriss: Well there will be a parapet wall and there's really not going to be, there will be some mechanical equipment up on the roof but they'll be limited to the air conditioner condensers. Keefe: And so you're thinking if you parapet that would screen them? John Harass: Yes. Keefe: Is there any elevation or I mean is there anything from A that can kind of... John Harriss: Yeah, the next group of graphics I have are from a vignette, some perspective drawings. Can I move this out of the way a little bit? I'm not disrupting wires or anything? Generous: No. John Harriss: I don't know if we can zoom in, if you want to zoom in on this a little bit here. That kind of gives you a pretty good overall picture. This is if you were a bird flying over Lake Riley. Looking down. So don't have anything from the view of the windows on the third floor, let's say this unit looking down. So this view really makes it seem like the roof top's obviously are a lot more prominent but I think it does give you a sense of kind of how it fits into the landscape and the contours and the elevation shown on this drawing are taken directly from the grading plan, as are all the trees shown are directly from the landscape plan. So this is not a fantasy drawing. This is pretty accurate. There's also some vignettes. This is pretty much coming in the main entrance here and we don't show the waterfall feature because it is a little challenging graphically to put that together. But that's kind of the view you get when you're kind of coming into the complex. This shot here is the interior courtyard, and we are, the question was asked earlier about paving. We're planning on doing extensive stamped concrete and things on there. We have a water feature in the center of our parking island there. So it's really intended to be a very sense of luxury coming into this building. And then we can just see this elevation is the building facing Bearpath. And then I'll end with this. These are kind of the same thing, some vignettes and some perspectives. Maybe we could zoom in on this, get this over here a little bit. This would be looking from the southwest. You can see these are the terraces that we discussed. This being, belonging to this unit. This is being the common terrace. These will be green roofs essentially with planted modules capable of actually growing trees. U Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Small trees and bushes there so we're really trying to soften that edge the best we can. You see the pond with the drainage around and Building A in the background. Looking to the east with Lake Riley over here. This is a shot that's looking sort of northwest. The entrance, the parking entrance to Building B. Here's a close up the terraces. Some of the articulation that you find in the facades. And then we have Lake Riley as well showing the pond in the foreground and the building. So with that I guess I'll close and answer any questions that you might have. McDonald: Questions for Mr. Harriss? Thank you. John Harriss: Thank you. John Vogelbacher: Well I believe that concludes our presentation. I'm sure there'll be other conversation items or questions that you might have. We appreciate the opportunity to present the project to you. We're very pleased and excited about being part of the community and are anxious to get started. McDonald: I do have one question for you and I'm sorry I didn't ask you as the condo builder. What about Condo C? What kind of concepts do you have for that at this point? John Harriss: I think if we were to try, if I was going to say it would probably be most like Building B. That's you know, I think that those units will probably be a little bit smaller. Probably, and Steve correct me if I'm wrong but probably ranging from 1,200 to maybe 1,500 to 1,600 square feet. That's our thought now but we're kind of waiting to see how the community develops and what the most appropriate unit sizes would be for that building. But it will match the rest of the architecture. We'll use the same materials and the same overall concept. McDonald: Okay, thank you. Anything else that you want to address? Do any of the commissioners have any questions before he sits down? Okay. Well at this point we will open it up for our public meeting and I would invite anyone to come up that wants to make comments or ask questions, to step up to the podium. State your name and address and then address the commissioners. Sir, you're fust. John Ringstrom: Commissioners, I'm John Ringstrom at 126 Lakeview and I want to say that I'm really very excited about this project because it's in my front yard and I think it's going to be a beautiful project. I do have one concern and that is regarding the storm drainage, and I think you alluded to it a little bit before and the, let's see. If I get rid of these. What I have here is just a little drawing of the area and this is the city built pond that is entirely surrounded by the North Bay community. And I've been learning a whole lot about regional ponds and duck weed and algae and everything else since this came up but one of the things that happened is, I was surprised to learn that all the water from the Sienna property is going to drain into the North Bay pond but after the very nice presentation they gave, then to tell us that part of it's going to come into the Lakeview pond untreated. When all they have to do is add another 200 feet of pipe to get it to that side, down into their pond and treated first was a big surprise to me. And my concern is that the North Bay pond not become deteriorated. I just want to show you, I had a number of questions just regarding legality issues here and I think that maybe the city can respond to me on those. You've addressed some of them already and just in a little later respond 20 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 to those. If you look at the North Bay pond, you can see it's a nice clear pond. You see reflections of trees and everything else and I am concerned that it's going to deteriorate if it's designed to the conditions that meet MPCA and everything else because this is another pond that is in the area and it's designed to all the same conditions that would be the end result maybe in the North Bay pond. And I guess I have a concern that our pond not end up looking like that one. To that end, my real concern is how do we assure that that doesn't happen. How do we assure that we keep the North Bay pond in really good shape. I think there are two things that could be done. Number one would be to re-route this untreated waste into the Sienna pond before it comes to the North Bay pond. And the other thing is, I thought okay I don't know what's going to happen to the pond. This seems like to be like green magic but I did talk to a number of the different associations where I walked around and talked to other associations, what they've done when they've had problems with ponds and things like that and to get rid of algae a common thing is to like put in a fountain aerator or something like that. That may not be necessary in the North Bay pond. We don't know but I thought well okay, what if it does happen. Then how do we address that issue? So I tried to put down at least a little bit of what it might cost to install. Today, in fact this has happened today. I did have a fellow from Fountain Air out and I got a little further education. But it looks like from what we talked about, it would probably cost about $18,000 to put an aerator into the North Bay pond and it would probably cost in the range of $2,000 a year in operating costs for electrical and in and out and that kind of thing. And I guess I just want to address those issues before we get so far back and then if I, before the North Bay, before North Bay residents have a pond issue. I'd like to address it up front. And that's all. Again I want the Sienna development to be successful and I'm really excited about it. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up and make comment? Ken Ross: My name is Ken Ross. My family and I live on English Tum which is the street that, on the other side of the golf course from where the development is planned. I'd like to object to three aspects of the development. The first is the 48 foot height variance of the buildings. Second is the 30 foot setback and the third is the plan to clear cut all of the trees along the entire golf course, and I'll address those in order. First of all is the 48 foot height. We heard earlier on the presentation that the 48 foot building would be at the highest point and the most prominent point in the development. I think putting a 48 foot building in that area would really not be appropriate. When I purchased my house, which now looks on trees, it was done with the understanding that there would not be buildings at that height on the other side. And now the plan is in place to do that. Secondly, in terms of where the buildings are situated. There are things on the other side, if not just the golf course. There are buildings that look, you know that overlook, including my own house, and I again did not expect buildings to be built so close to the property line when I purchased the house. I feel that both of these things will have a significant detriment to the property value of my home by putting this building in overlooking an extremely large and very tall building on a very high point of that property. And lastly as far as the trees go. The plan which really wasn't discussed here tonight, is to remove all of the trees along the entire golf course. Now I believe there is an ordinance that requires X number of trees to be left. The way that's being address is all the trees are being left on the other side of I guess it's Lyman over there, along the lake. All of the trees that currently border Bearpath are being removed. It's being done of course so the golf course views are provided but I just think that isn't really in the GTil Planning Commission Meeting —June 20, 2006 spirit of an ordinance that says you can't essentially clear cut trees in an entire area. That other side there really isn't even part of a development that's on the other side of the street. It's not adjacent to any other property, and if you look at what the percentage would be, essentially with the exception of a small number of trees on the very comer, virtually every tree in that development is being removed in that area, and I really think that's something that this council or this commission ought to consider when you look at the plan. So basically again you know, I'd like to object to the two variances for the 48 foot and the 30 foot. 48 foot height. 30 foot setback on the east side. And also ask you to consider the plan for total removal of all the trees on the east side of the property, which is what it is currently proposed. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up and address the commission? Tom Bastasz: Good evening. My name is Tom Bastasz. I'm a resident of North Bay at 179 North Lakeview. Lakeview East I should say and I currently serve as President of North Bay Homeowners Association. I will say that in general I think the 76 individual homeowners at North Bay, a majority of them are certainly in favor of this Sienna plan. We think it's a fine plan and we look forward to hopefully your commission's approval of it. We do have a concern, as expressed by Mr. Ringstrom two speakers ago. If you look at the Sienna plan, you'll see that some of the storm water is treated by their pond before it flows into the North Bay pond. But you'll also see that some of the storm water is not treated in their pond and flows directly into the North Bay pond. We're concerned about that. And we're concerned about that because if you consider when the original plat was probably the original engineering was devised, what's there now is a parking lot, the apartments and the parking lot and most of the 26 acres is natural ground, and the water will run into natural ground shall we say naturally. But now that that 26 acres could be redeveloped, it will all be, other than the buildings, it will be lawns and it will be areas that require storm water drainage. So we would request, and we know that Sienna is planning to build a fine development and they're planning to be very good neighbors, but we would request that they please consider all of their storm water would be routed to their pond before going into the North Bay pond. And I'd add one other thing why we're concerned about that. If you look on page 4 of the very lovely brochure that Lakeside passed out tonight, in the aerial photo you will see the two ponds, the North Bay pond existing. It looks pristine. And you'll see the pond beyond North Bay which is all green. We at North Bay would like to prevent that and that's why we make this request to the commission and Sienna. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up? John Bushey: Hello, I'm John Bushey at 9000 Riley Lake Road in Eden Prairie. I'm the property owner to the east of the proposed development but to the south of Riley Lake Road. Our property is a remnant of an old church camp and they're kind of in that woodsy area. Can we take a look at this here? In this area it's all woods. Natural. Pretty much the way it was when it, since it's been a church camp and there's a proposal to put a second beach and a trail along this shoreline to a small beach and a trailhead right there and I'd like to explain that the property that we have is pretty much isolated and inaccessible and almost invisible from the road during the summer, and from our house, and we have some buildings. Some remnants of the old church camp that were there that will be kind of inviting to kind of an attractive place if people are allowed easy access. We maintained the buildings. Kept them painted and roofed, but we've 22 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Purposely kept our property very rugged and inaccessible and uninviting. Well, the addition of that trail along the shoreline has the potential of inviting people down there, and that's fine. I'd like to request that if that beach is allowed, or if the trail is allowed into this corner here, that some natural plantings, maybe native shrubbery or something like that, relatively densely placed around there kind of contain the access to that area to prevent access to our buildings and property there. And without putting up fences or anything like that. It's just really pretty nice the way it is and I can understand why they want access there. Regarding the trail along the lake, I appreciate that Sienna's interested in having a very narrow trail there. It's pretty steep bank that they'll be going, traversing along and to put a narrow trail, that's the only way to do it without having a major engineering exercise so I hope that they can maintain that. If the trail is allowed, that it be kept at relatively narrow and not a big cut and fill operation with retaining walls so if that could be considered, those points be considered, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Yes sir. Tom Drees: My name's Tom Drees. I live at 14727 Boulder Point Road in Eden Prairie and currently in the process of building on Bearpath Trail. I wanted to go or expound upon a couple things that Mr. Ross said about the trees and some of the other things that have gone on with Sienna down at Bearpath. As you all know Sienna was the builder of Bearpath. They marketed the Bearpath lots. They own the golf course. There's 8 houses which you can see, where's the picture here? These houses all along this road right here. A number of people I've talked to, it was marketed the same way by Sienna reps that there's a 40 foot corridor on the other side of this fence that is being saved for a trail, and that these trees can never be disrupted. Now while this drawing shows there's hardly any trees there. I don't know if they erased them or what but we did get a little better picture in case you haven't seen it of what the trees actually look like. So this is where we're talking about the Building A, 48 foot high complex in their development. They're going to clear cut this right here is the fence, so it looks like a hedge. It is a fence. Every tree you see from here to here is going to be clear cut. Some of them have 3 foot bases. Some have 6 foot bases. They're going to be clear cut, which gives the golf course views that they're trying to sell. The project is a nice project. The variances and the clear cutting are the issue. Sienna sold the properties on the other side to Bearpath, or to people who live in Bearpath and now they're turning around and breaking the sales pitch that those trees are going to be disrupted to provide golf course views on the other side to make money for themselves again. So I guess the question is, how do you know exactly what they're going to do because they've kind of turned the tables on all the people that live on that side in Bearpath by disrupting the views. You go from a nature view with big mature trees, and here's another picture. The only area, you go from the edge of this picture right here all the way to the back of the green. That entire tree canopy is gone. Done. And what they're doing, the other part of the sales pitch was, there's a 40 foot corridor that couldn't be touched and a 50 foot variance so in a worst case scenario you're looking about 90 feet at a two story building. Now you're looking at a top of a hill with all the trees clear cut. For what purpose? They said that they want to go up three stories because they have this green space they want to preserve. Otherwise it'd only be two stories. We want to put more units. Well if you look at this proposal, I can't see any green space on there that they're talking about. Where is the green space that they were going to add those extra units? So I guess what we're requesting, what I'm requesting of this committee is while the project overall is 23 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 fine. That Building A is a big issue for the people that live on the other side and were given a promise by Sienna years ago when they built the Bearpath project. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Scott Frederiksen: Hello. My name is Scott Frederiksen. I also live on Bearpath Trail. I work as a career for a large commercial real estate company in the Twin Cities called Welsh Company and our business is standing up here on a regular basis and appealing to planning commissions and trying to get variances. What we're repeatedly told when we come up here and apply for a variance is that you have to meet one of two conditions. Either there has to be a public benefit to granting that variance, or there has to be a hardship, and clearly there isn't either of those things here tonight. The only thing that you're doing by increasing the height variance is allowing them to get more units on the site. The only thing you're allowing them to do by increasing, or decreasing the setback is cram the building closer to the golf course to make it more marketable and raise their sale proceeds so other than increasing the bottom line profit to Sienna, there's no basis for granting either of these variances and I'd have a hard time telling you, you know you could support that so. And just expounding on what Tom said, even a week and a half ago they were telling us those trees would stay so this, we had to find out about this from the Chanhassen paper so it was kind of a disappointing way to hear about what's going on in your back yard from your developer. McDonald: Thank you. Anyone else? Bruce Carlson: Hi, I'm Bruce Carlson. I've lived on English Tum. The same street as the other individuals here. I'd like to echo their comments and also add that the comments were made relative to the variance for the setback that there's nothing on the other side. The fact that there's a public trail to be built there is something that's significant from a standpoint of what are the normal setbacks for a public trail? I'm sure public trails are being put in at various places. There are setback requirements to those, and that should be honored as well. The trees, especially given the maturity of them and the nature of them, the idea that they'll be clear cut is pretty reprehensible and irresponsible as far as I'm concerned. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come forward? Anne Florenzano: Hi. My name is Anne Florenzano and I'm your neighbor across Lake Riley in Eden Prairie, 9470 Lakeland Terrace and I just want to add my objection also to the 48 foot variance because looking across the lake, on one of the pages, you do have a view. Let's see if I can find it. I don't know if you can zoom in on the photos... That photo right there is the view from across the lake and for many, many of your neighbors who live on Lake Riley, both on the Eden Prairie side and the Chanhassen side, and...I think there would be a huge difference between a two story building and what you're proposing with a variance a three story building and how that's going to affect what it looks like from the lake. And people come to the lake to enjoy that. Now once again I have not a problem with a lot of the architectural details and some of the planned amenities, but the variance in height is a concern. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come forward? 24 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Joan Ludwig: Hi. I'm Joan Ludwig and I live at 9005 Lake Riley Boulevard. It's the first house at the comer of Lyman and Lake Riley, and I have to say that a three story building would be right out my view as well so I echo what's been said about this variance for a very tall building. I'm also very concerned about the trees because even though I was never promised the trees, they certainly are attractive in the neighborhood. Thank you. McDonald: Does anyone else wish to come forward? Janet Paulsen: My name is Janet Paulsen and I live at 7305 Laredo Drive. I would just like to address the variances because this is ... to increase the profit and it's self created ... report on page 5 it's supposed to supply a variance... for all people of all income levels. Now on page 17 of the report it says the intent of the project is for luxurious housing units at the upper end of housing prices. So they're missing the... individual taste and expectations as stated on page 19 and we think it's not meeting the requirements of the comprehensive plan ... all income levels. Also the setbacks should have to be maintained... It should maintain all the setbacks required. Another question is also, if the OHW now ... because it's pretty hard to measure how those gazebo's and so forth will fit on the property if the OHW is higher so I would just like to confirm that. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up and make comment? Okay, seeing no one else get up, I'll close the public meeting and I'll bring it back before the council for comments. Dan, we'll start with you. Keefe: Well overall I think it's actually one of the finer developments which has come before us in terms of how well thought out it is in terms of the quality or the architecture. In terms of the really the quality of the whole, and the architectural detailing on the buildings and the condominium units. The amenity levels. The landscaping that you brought in. The creek running down the middle. Really it's just high quality and first class. I commend you for bringing that in. However I too am troubled by the height. Particularly the height variance. I think in regards to the variance on the beachlot, I can buy into the notion of hardship related to having everybody in the development have access to the beach, so I think I'm alright with that but I'm troubled by the height variance and I'm not seeing really the hardship related to that variance. So that's my thought on that. McDonald: Okay. Mark. Undestad: I'm kind of with Dan on this too but again the height issues on there. That seems to kind of come into play all around Building A on there. We're not really privy to what's been said between the developers and homeowners as far as which trees stay and which trees go. I know when we create a planned unit development, that gives the developer the opportunities to do a few more opportunities to rearrange. I mean eliminate some more trees or cluster some homes and create more green space on there, and that's what they've elected to do is create the new beauty out there. It sounds like the ponding issues and some of the other issues we've had in here have been resolved and talked about, but I think it still kind of comes back as one that on the height of Building A. That's going to be kind of sitting up over the whole world over there R Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 so, but I think overall I think the design is excellent and the overall project, I like it. We just need to look at that height on Building A out there. McDonald: Thanks Mark. Kevin. Dillon: Yeah. A couple things. The question I had about programs for the people that are being dislocated, they seem to do a pretty good job with a pretty comprehensive plan of addressing that so I'm pleased with that. In terms of the beach, making sure that all the residents can have access, even though they're slightly outside the agreed ... I think that makes, that's common sense and I think that I would be fine with that. The other thing that kind of brought up is you know I don't know about hydraulics and hydronomy about the runoff and all that but it would seem to me that, I can see where the people that have an issue with that, having their pond being exposed to water from the other development, if there'd be a way to kind of address that, I think that that would be prudent. Larson: Well everybody's kind of covered most of the things that I had. I guess one of the issues that I had from the beginning was the trees also. Other than that, maybe I'd like to understand you know what's going to be going up in place. I know they will be younger trees but like Mark said, you know because they're buying the property and because it's a PUD, they do have that right to readjust and rearrange things. I think it is an excellent plan. I'm certainly pretty much in favor of everything. The 48 foot height doesn't bother me because it's a nice building. It's not ugly. If it was a big, old ugly building I would have a huge problem with it but it's a beautiful building and I think from the standpoint of aesthetics, okay so they're adding more units in it to help cover the cost I suppose, or should I say maybe more profit but I think it will really be an asset as far as putting in something of the stature in Chanhassen so I'm leaning towards pretty much approving it all. McDonald: Thank you. Kurt. Papke: This development brings up some interesting issues here. If we look at what we're trying to do, the whole idea, as Bob pointed out at the beginning of this application this evening, is you know reading from the verbiage here is to relax most normal zoning district standards in order to permit density clustering, and so improve the quality. I think one of the things we've been struggling with here tonight is all these variances. You know other than the beachlot issue with the 1,000 foot distance, I think we'd all be hard pressed to say oh, there's a hardship here. Okay. I don't think hardship is really the issue. I think more the issue is the quality issue and I think that's what we're really getting to, and if we look at how this is guided for zoning. This is guided for 8 to 16 units per acre, and this development is coming in at 8.9 which is at the low end. I mean that's a good thing so we're at the low end of it and, but we're achieving that by going higher, okay and we're minimizing the runoff. And getting back to the water quality issues, which we're all conscience of and striving for, I think that's a good thing. If we made the buildings lower, we're going to have a bigger footprint. We're going to have more hard surface coverage. We're going to have more runoff and more runoff issues, sq I think at the end of the day that's a good thing. But I'm struggling with you, it was very interesting to hear the public commentary. Kind of my take away on all this is, we're going to get a more, little bit more green space within the development. Lower density and so the residents of Chanhassen benefit, but 26 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 there's some existing residents of Eden Prairie who lose some views. Chanhassen benefits. Eden Prairie loses a little bit in this deal. So interesting dilemma here. What's the right thing for everyone involved? If you look at the golf course, I drive down Pioneer two times every day. Right past the golf course and you see a solid wall of townhomes on, facing north from Pioneer Trail. And I appreciate the fact that some people are going to lose some views, but that's kind of what the views are in a lot of the areas, and unfortunately every time we go into one of these developments, we chop down some trees and we put some more trees up to compensate for them. That's kind of how it works so. It's an interesting dilemmas here with, I believe the fact that this is really good for Chanhassen. It's a phenomenal development for Chanhassen but there's some folks in Eden Prairie that kind of lose some stuff as a result of it so, that's rather unfortunate. McDonald: Thank you. I guess the only comments I have is, a lot of people have said things about profit. That we're doing things for profit. Profit isn't bad. That's what makes developers come in and develop property. I understand the dilemma that the people over in Eden Prairie are having. However I would say that Sienna you know should probably do something about that. If those promises were made, that's something you should address. I'm not sure why all the trees need to come down myself. I would think some of that being left behind might even be a good sales pitch for a person. I understand you're looking for golf course views and that's a decision you're going to have to make but just be aware you'll have to live with it. The beach front lots, I'm okay with treating this as a PUD because again at that point we get something. We give up something. I think we're gaining a lot. I've seen, you know we're doing a lot of these developments a little bit to the south of here. They're a little bit higher density and not nearly as nice. I understand this is all upper bracket. The vast majority of us will never live there but there are people, you can talk about diversity. I think that we would like to have people that are well off within the city of Chanhassen. So I do not look at this as missing our comprehensive plan. I think Commissioner Papke called it out just right. This is not a high packed development. It meets the requirements and meets it on the low end. This is going to be a real gem of a community. The water quality. That's something I think the city's got to look at and address, and you're doing that already. Before, you already got the surface water management plan. We've aheady been through it on the, I think the lake just to the, Lake Ann as a matter of fact. Or Susan. I always get the two mixed up but the city is going around on a lake and pond basis and we're evaluating all this and that's part of what we're trying to do is to maintain the water quality so I think a lot of those concerns will be addressed. So I don't see a lot of problems there. The 48 foot height variance. Again, because of the PUD and because of what we're getting, I think it's a good compromise to the developer. Yes, I don't see the big hardships either. You're absolutely right, but that's what a PUD allows you to do. We got something in return. We're willing to give something up. I think the 48 foot variance is a good trade off. And I think overall, except for the problem I believe that Sienna may have with some of their former customers, it looks like an excellent development and I'm sure you'll do right by everybody. So with that. Papke: One more comment Mr. Chair? As I sat on the Surface Water Management Task Force this winter, one of the things I got hammered into my brain by our illustrious surface water management person is that water quality and you know eliminating duck weed on our water retention ponds is not a goal of our surface water management plan. They are there to treat surface water. To protect Lake Riley, Lake Ann, Riley, and Lake Ann, Lake Susan, and all the 27 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 things that we're really trying to protect. I think it would be great is Sienna puts in an aerator to pretty up the existing retention pond. I think they do that out of the goodness of their hearts and for aesthetics because obviously they're going to have units that are going to have views of that pond, great. Okay, but from the perspective of our goal with managing the surface water in Chanhassen, that's not one of our objectives so anyway, just. McDonald: Well, thank you for clarify that. With that I'm willing to accept. John Vogelbacher: Mr. Chairman, may I say something? McDonald: Sure. Step right up. John Vogelbacher: I certainly appreciate the comments and concerns of the Bearpath residents because we certainly have a very vested interest with them. We're also the golf course owners. Developed that property and I certainly have taken your comments to heart. I can assure you that myself, or anyone at Sienna would not have made those promises and I don't know what anyone else said but I'll certainly look into that. There isn't any requirement or anything else that would have ever been written relative to the issue of the trees or what would have happened in Chanhassen or such. I'm not aware of that but I certainly will look into that. We have other people that do other companies that are affiliated that do sales for the project and I'll certainly look into that. I promised before I'll do that. Relative to some of the other comments, on the storm sewer issue, just after evaluating and talking to our civil engineer, I certainly think we can make the additional storm pipe connections so that all the surface runoff from the project goes into our treatment pond first before it leaves the site. We'll have to add a decent amount of storm pipe but we certainly feel that that's appropriate and we can do it. And I think that might not solve the problem totally but I think relative to that one comment, I think we can certainly do that. As it relates to the tree loss, there's some other issues and some people... just aren't aware of that you could maybe zoom in if you could please on the aerial photograph. Get even closer if you could. Is that? There's not a clear cutting process going on here. Certainly the amount of trees that are in Chanhassen, those are being removed and there's a couple reasons for that. One, the location of the buildings that we have on the property are in the proximity of the golf course to see it. When we start building there, there's, you can't have a tree there. The value of this property and the hardship of what we're doing here is very obvious. It's obvious to us. This is a very expensive piece of property that the existing apartment complex. There's probably almost close to a million dollars in demolition to take that out of there and the point being is that to do this project and to do it this quality, you know we need the height of those buildings to produce the revenue that substantiates the development. As you all know when you get up on the top floor of a building, that's the most premium unit that you have, and so the reason why our builders are interested in constructing those buildings is because of that premium, and without that I'm very afraid we don't have a project so relative to the height hardship, I can express to you in a financial sense that it is a hardship and without it, I don't know if we have a project. I know I don't have a contract with my builder. I guess that would be a call for him to make. Because we made representations on what we feel is appropriate and we're asking the Planning Commission to provide that opportunity to us. But the tree clearing is, if you look at the trees that are on the golf course, there are no trees on the golf course that are being removed. None. So the illustration of the gentleman looking at the horizon there, that's not accurate. There's F Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 numerous trees, if you look at the aerial, I don't know how many are up and down the golf course on that berm that drives up to the west of the golf course. Right here. Well—if I count, maybe about 50... Resident: That's an overhead view. This is the actual view. Right at the fence line is. McDonald: Okay, if I could. Well I would prefer is that, at this point we haven't really gotten into any of these issues that we're saying anything about the trees. We have made our comments. We have said we recognize the economic value of this. I think at this point there is no objection coming from the commission about the height. If there are issues concerning the trees and those things, I would prefer that you all deal with it as private parties because some of this is in the city of Eden Prairie. Some of it is in the city of Chanhassen. How it is dealt with, because you're the owner of both properties, I think that is something you've got to deal with. We are not attempting to deal with that tonight. What is before us is the PUD, and that is what we're going to vote on. And we're not voting on trees. Which ones come up or which ones come down because that is part of the plan. So anything that gets beyond this I think is getting out of the scope of what is before this commission and I would prefer that those be private conversations, which is where they belong at this point. So I appreciate you making comments but at this point I will close the public meeting again and we need to come back up here and I'm looking for some recommendations. Papke: Mr. Chairman, do you want one motion or four? McDonald: Why don't we just do all four. We'll vote on them. Papke: Mr. Chair, I make a motion that the Chanhassen Planning Commission approves rezoning of the property located within the Lakeside development from High Density Residential District, R-12 to PUD, incorporating the development design standards contained within the staff report with a variance for the eastern perimeter setback, subject to the final plat and approval for the Lakeside development. I also make a motion that we recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, subject to conditions 1 through 55. 1 further make a motion that we approve Site Plan for 233 housing units and a community building with a pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006 with a variance for building height for the condominium units, subject to conditions 1 through 16. And finally, I make a motion that we approve conditional use permit for a recreational beachlot, with a variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beachlot, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to conditions 1 through 9 as stated in the staff report. McDonald: Thank you. Do I have a second? Larson: Second. Papke moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Rezoning of the property located within the Lakeside development, from High Density ►L; Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 Residential District (R12) to Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report, with a Variance for the eastern perimeter setback, subject to the final plat approval for the Lakeside development. All voted in favor except Commissioner Keefe who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Papke moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat for Lakeside, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006 ,subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 2. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 3. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of additional hydrants and any to be relocated. 4. A minimum buffer of 16.5 to 20 feet shall be preserved around the perimeter of the wetland. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40 -foot setback from the wetland buffer. All trails and retaining walls shall be modified to remain outside the wetland buffer. The plans shall be revised to reflect the required wetland buffer and wetland buffer setback. 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 before construction begins and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 5. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fire pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 6. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot. 7. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 8. The location of the building on Lot 1, Block 1 shall be adjusted to respect all drainage and utility easements. 9. The applicant shall supply details about the water feature between the rear yards of the units in Block 3, specifically the source for the water in the water feature. As an alternative to the 30 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 current proposal, the applicant should consider revising the plans to utilize storm water as an amenity as part of a rain garden system in this area. 10. The applicant shall provide additional information detailing the proposed emergency overflow (EOF) route from Pond I to Lake Riley. 11. The grading and landscaping proposed around Pond 1 shall be revised to provide a flat, open area so maintenance equipment can access the flared end sections from Lake Riley Road East without damaging the retaining wall or the landscaping and without being below the NWL of the pond. 12. All storm water infrastructure, including catch basins, storm sewer pipes, manholes, flared - end sections, outlet structures, ponds and swales, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the developer and, eventually, the homeowners association. Prior to final plat recording, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City that outlines the parameters of operation, inspection and maintenance of the storm water infrastructure. This agreement shall be transferred to the homeowners association prior to the developer relinquishing responsibility for the development. 13. The SWPPP shall be provided to the City for review by the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District. 14. The plans shall be revised to show that erosion control blanket will be installed over all areas with 3:1 slopes or steeper. 15. A stable emergency overflow (EOF) for the pond shall be provided. The EOF could consist of riprap and geotextile fabric or a turf re -enforcement mat (a permanent erosion control blanket). A typical detail shall be included in the plan. 16. Energy dissipation shall be provided for all inlets and outlets within 24 hours of installation 17. Wimco-type or other comparable inlet controls shall be used and installed within 24 hours of installation of the inlets. Perimeter controls and inlet protection shall be in place and maintained as needed until 70% of the vegetation is established. 18. Typical building lot controls shall be shown on the plan in a typical detail. These controls 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 (CO). 19. The proposed storm water pond shall be used as a temporary sediment basin during mass grading. The pond shall be excavated prior to disturbing up -gradient areas. Plans shall show how the temporary basin will be constructed and how water will be diverted to the temporary basin. Berms and/or ditches may be needed to divert water to the pond, and temporary pond outlets are needed. 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. 31 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 20. The proposed silt fence along Wetland Basin B shall be Type 2 silt fence, as specified in Chanhassen Standard Detail Plate 5300. Type 1 silt fence may be used for the remainder of the site. The grading plan shall be revised to show the proposed silt fence following the grading limits for the site and shall be located outside of the required 16.5 -foot wetland buffer. Silt fence shall be placed at the proposed high water level elevation of the proposed storm water pond. 21. Street gutters and catch basins are considered "surface waters" and shall be protected from exposed soils with a positive slope within 200 linear feet. Following installation of curb and gutter, silt fence shall be installed curbside along all positive slopes to the street with exposed soils. 22. Plans shall be revised to show erosion and sediment control measures for the road ditch along Lyman Boulevard. All perimeter controls shall be inspected by the city and the SWCD prior to grading. 23. Details for concrete washout areas where drivers will wash out their trucks and how the water will be treated should be developed and included in the SWPPP. 24. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. 25. At this time, the estimated total SWAP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $195,293. 26. The owner/operator of the proposed development shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase H Construction Site Permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Department of Health) and comply with their conditions of approval. 27. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to construction around all areas designated for preservation and/or at the edge of proposed grading limits. 28. A walk-through inspection of the silt/tree preservation fence shall be required prior to construction. 29. No burning permits shall be issued for tree removal. All trees removed on site shall be chipped and used on site or hauled off. 30. The applicant shall increase landscape plantings along the east property line to minimum bufferyard requirements. 31. No trees shall be removed behind the northwestern comer of the silt fence as shown on grading plans dated 05/19/06. W Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 32. A total of 139 trees shall be planted in the development as required for canopy coverage. 33. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. 34. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. 35. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. 36. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. 37. The proposed grading in the northwest corner near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the first floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 are at least one foot above the emergency overflow elevation of the wetland. 38. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. 39. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. 40. Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. 41. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. 42. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 43. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 44. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. 46. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 47. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 48. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. 33 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 49. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 50. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 51. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 52. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. 53. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 54. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail." All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 55. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed." All voted in favor except Commissioner Keefe who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Papke moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan for 233 housing units and a community building with pool, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, with a Variance for building height for the condominium units, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. The pool, including the pool deck, shall be relocated outside the 50 -foot setback from Lyman Boulevard. 3. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 9 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 4. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 5. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 6. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. 7. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 8. Walls and projections within three feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire - resistive construction. 9. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 10. 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 that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 11. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of signs to be installed. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 16. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the 35 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code." All voted in favor except Commissioner Keefe who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Papke moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with a Variance from the requirement that 80 percent of the units within 1,000 feet of the recreational beach lot, plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering, dated May 19, 2006, revised June 7, 2006, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) shall be obtained from the City prior to the operation of a recreational beach lot 2. The plans shall be revised to depict the OHW of Lake Riley, which is 865.3. All structures shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW. The proposed fine pit shall be located a minimum of 75 feet from the OHW and shall be buffered from the lake by vegetation. No grading or intensive clearing of vegetation shall occur within the shore impact zone (all areas within 37.5 feet of the OHW). 3. The area of Outlot B shall be recalculated to include only the area within the outlot above the OHW. The amount of shoreline for Outlot B shall be calculated along the OHW. The number of docks and slips permitted by the conditional use permit for the beach lot shall not exceed the number of docks and slips allowable by City Code for the actual beach lot area and frontage. 4. All existing amenities and/or structures (including any docks, existing beach that is not proposed to remain and the boat launch) on Outlot B, North Bay shall be removed. A boat launch is not permitted. 5. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of and materials for proposed path from Lyman Boulevard to the dock to minimize the impacts of runoff from the path to the shoreline and Lake Riley. 6. The proposed walking path along the shoreline shall be made of a pervious surface such as mulch, crushed rock or turf grass and shall not be located below the OHW. Special attention shall be paid to ensure that the path materials are not prone to erosion. The plans shall be revised to show the woodland gardens above the OHW of Lake Riley. 36 Planning Commission Meeting — June 20, 2006 7. An individual permit shall be obtained from the DNR for any beach sand applications that do not meet the DNR standards for sand blanket applications without an individual permit. 8. One beach area shall be permitted to minimize impacts to the lake and to adjacent residents. 9. The applicant shall work with staff on the placement of the beach lot infrastructure to preserve as many of the existing trees in that area as possible. A survey of the area with the tree locations will be required and used to facilitate tree preservation. The applicant shall also work with staff on the location of the woodland path and woodland gardens along the path All voted in favor except Commissioner Keefe who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Papke: Dan, you want to clarify? Keefe: Yeah, my issue's with the height variance on number C. McDonald: The building? Keefe: Letter C. McDonald: Oh, okay. Did you take note of that Bob? Okay, thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: ABRA AUTO BODY & GLASS: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTOMOBILE BODY REPAIR SHOP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 14,430 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO A 4,074 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ON 1.89 ACRES LOCATED AT 60 LAKE DRIVE EAST, PROPERTY ZONED HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT. APPLICANT ABRA AUTO BODY, PLANNING CASE 06-24. Public Present: Name Address Henry Cornelius Maleah Alosta Carol Kahnke 6322 Timber Trail, Minneapolis, 55439 Alliant Engineering, 233 Park Ave, Mpls 154 Choctaw Circle Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Dan? Mark? Kevin? Dillon: How many outside parking spots for like cars that are like waiting to get repaired? How many, or how many on the spot, typically how many cars are there now and then how will that increase? 436 CITY OF CIIANgASSEN 7100 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.11 BO Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.d.chanhassen.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineera7 DATE: June 20, 2006 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review of Lakeside Planning Case No. 06-26 Upon review of the plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated May 19, 2006, I have the following comments and recommendations: GRADING AND DRAINAGE The 26 acre site is bordered by Highway 212 to the north, Bearpath Golf Course to the east, Lyman Boulevard to the south and North Bay detached townhomes to the west. There are five apartment buildings, bituminous driveways, a gravel path and a playground on the site; all of these must be removed before site grading commences. The high points of the property are on the north side and at the southeast comer. The north side of the site drains to the wetland on the northwest corner of the property. The remainder of the site drains to a culvert that extends under Lake Riley Drive East and to the pond located within the North Bay development. Runoff from the development will be conveyed to the proposed pond in the northeast corner of Lakeview Road East and Lyman Boulevard. The developer's engineer has submitted hydrology calculations for the site. The City's engineering consultant, Kimley-Hom & Associates has reviewed the calculations and has determined that the proposed design meets City and MPCA requirements. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. The survey submitted for the building permit indicates that the lowest floor elevation of this slab -on -grade home is 978.4', which is 2.9' above the proposed high water level of the pond. Based on field measurements, the high water level of the pond may need to be adjusted to maintain three-foot separation between the lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East. The proposed grading in the northwest corner near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the lowest floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 are The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. Lakeside Preliminary Plat Review June 20, 2006 Page 2 of 5 at least three feet above the high water elevation of the wetland. This high water elevation must be determined by the developer's engineer. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. Ground (i.e. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off-site grading. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. RETAINING WALLS The proposed retaining walls are as follows: Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. The developer proposes to extend lateral sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within the development. All utilities within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. Watermain will extend from the existing watermain Length Maximum Height Location (approximate) (a roximate) East of Lakeview Road East, between Building 550 feet 10 feet upper tier B, the pool house and the pond 8 feet lower tier East of the new access off of Lyman Boulevard, 190 feet 8 feet west of Building A North of Building B, next to the stairs 50 feet 10 feet East of the garden area between the proposed 800 feet 16 feet townhomes and twinhomes South of the wetland, between the proposed 330 feet 12 feet townhomes and North Ba Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. The developer proposes to extend lateral sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within the development. All utilities within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. Watermain will extend from the existing watermain Lakeside Preliminary Plat Review June 20, 2006 Page 3 of 5 within Lyman Boulevard and Lake Riley Road East. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. Sanitary sewer will extend from two locations within Lake Riley Road East: at the proposed intersection and just north of the intersection of Lake Riley Road East and Lyman Boulevard. Due to the alignment of the existing sanitary sewer, it appears that the sanitary sewer extension cannot take place under traffic. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. The developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, therefore the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The applicant is also 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. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will be required, including the MPCA, Dept. of Health, Carver County and Watershed District. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. STREETS Access to the site will be from Lakeview Road East and Lyman Boulevard. The access to Lyman Boulevard will be approximately 340 feet east of the Lake Riley Road intersection. Staff supports the proposed access spacing due to the severe Lakeside Preliminary Plat Review June 20, 2006 Page 4 of 5 grades to the east. A median will be installed at the street intersection with Lyman Boulevard and will provide 17 -foot wide ingress and egress lanes. All streets within the development will be privately owned and maintained. The streets will be 24 feet wide and will widen to 33 feet at several locations to provide dedicated on -street parallel parking spaces. Guest parking lots and drop off aisles will be constructed in front of Buildings A, B and C. This development is adjacent to Lyman Boulevard, and is therefore within the Collector Roadway Traffic Impact Zone and subject to the $2,400.00/developable acre fee. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All existing buildings, driveways and accessory structures must be removed before grading commences. 2. The lowest floor elevation of 106 Lakeview Road East must be field verified. 3. The high water level of the proposed pond must be minimum three feet lower than the lowest floor elevation of the adjacent homes along Lakeview Road East. 4. The high water level of the wetland must be determined. 5. The proposed grading in the northwest corner near the wetland needs to be adjusted so that the lowest floor elevation of the homes within Lot 13, Block 2 are at least three feet above the high water elevation of the wetland. 6. Pavement grades at the following locations must be adjusted so that the grade does not exceed 7%: West of Building A, and the northern street extending from the Lakeview Road East intersection. 7. Private driveway grades shall not exceed 10%. 8. Ground (ie. non -paved) surface grades shall not be less than 2%. 9. Emergency overflow locations and elevations must be shown on the plan. 10. High point elevations between the catch basins must be shown along the east side of Block 2. 11. An easement is required from the appropriate property owner for any off- site grading. 12. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. Lakeside Preliminary Plat Review June 20, 2006 Page 5 of 5 13. Building permits are required for all retaining walls four feet tall or higher and must be designed by a Structural Engineer registered in the State of Minnesota. 14. All sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer within this site shall be privately owned and maintained. 15. The watermain extension from Lyman Boulevard must be wet -tapped and must be done under traffic. 16. The developer must provide ingress/egress to the North Bay residents for the duration of the utility extension within Lake Riley Road East. 17. Each new lot is subject to the sanitary sewer and water hookup charges. The 2006 trunk hookup charge is $1,575 for sanitary sewer and $4,078 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units assigned by the Met Council and are due at the time of building permit issuance. 18. The 15 -foot wide sanitary sewer easement on the northwest side of the property must be vacated. 19. The proposed pool house must not lie within the drainage and utility easement. c: Paul Oehme, Director of Public Works/City Engineer gAeng\projectAlakeside (lakeview hills sire)\06-20-06 ppr.doc Fountain Aerator - North Bay Pond Cost Estimate June 2006 JDR Original Installation $11,500 Spray Fountain 3 hp Installed $3,500 Electrical Service 30A(o-)220V $15,000 Subtotal $3,000 Tax & Contingency 20% $18,000 TOTAL INSTALLATION Annual Operation $700 In -Out -Clean -Winter Store $1,000 Electric 6mo 16hr/da 4.16KW[a $1,700 Subtotal 340 Tax & Contingency 20% $2,040 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION o(;/s%6 J�4h, R,.vf ei" Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob From: Regina Herron [rherron@edenprairie.org] Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 9:39 AM To: Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Lakeside in Chanhassen Robert, Below are comments from the City of Eden Prairie Engineering Division. Regina Herron Planner 952-949-6490 From: Mary Krause Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:24 PM To: Regina Herron Subject: Lakeside in Chanhassen Regina, Here are our comments: 1. The existing intersection at Pioneer Trail and Riley Lake Road does not have optimum geometrics; increased traffic volumes at this intersection are a concern. This section of Pioneer Trail is not within Hennepin County's 5 year construction schedule. If the installation of a temporary signal system prior to the permanent Pioneer Trail improvements is needed in the future, Eden Prairie may request that the City of Chanhassen participate in up to 50% of the costs of a temporary signal system. 2. A portion of Riley Lake Road in Eden Prairie is weight restricted to 6 tons year round. We request that the Developer be required to provide all construction access from the west (Chanhassen). 3. Riley Lake is a significant water resource to both Eden Prairie and Chanhassen. The plans for the proposed project appear to address water quality through the use of ponding; incorporating infiltration within the project may be desirable. 4. Grading limits at the eastern (Eden Prairie) boundary of the project extend into Eden Prairie within the existing portion of Bearpath. This appears to conflict with the future location of a public trail that is to be constructed by Bearpath as part of the Developer's Agreement requirements with Eden Prairie. Mary 6/19/2006 Page 1 of i Generous, Bob From: Regina Herron [rherron@edenprairie.org] Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 9:39 AM To: Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Lakeside in Chanhassen Robert, Below are comments from the City of Eden Prairie Engineering Division. Regina Herron Planner 952-949-8490 From: Mary Krause Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 4:24 PM To: Regina Herron Subject: Lakeside in Chanhassen Regina, Here are our comments: 1. The existing intersection at Pioneer Trail and Riley Lake Road does not have optimum geometrics; increased traffic volumes at this intersection are a concern. This section of Pioneer Trail is not within Hennepin County's 5 year construction schedule. If the installation of a temporary signal system prior to the permanent Pioneer Trail improvements is needed in the future, Eden Prairie may request that the City of Chanhassen participate in up to 50% of the costs of a temporary signal system. 2. A portion of Riley Lake Road in Eden Prairie is weight restricted to 6 tons year round. We request that the Developer be required to provide all construction access from the west (Chanhassen). 3. Riley Lake is a significant water resource to both Eden Prairie and Chanhassen. The plans for the proposed project appear to address water quality through the use of ponding; incorporating infiltration within the project may be desirable. 4. Grading limits at the eastern (Eden Prairie) boundary of the project extend into Eden Prairie within the existing portion of Bearpath. This appears to conflict with the future location of a public trail that is to be constructed by Bearpath as part of the Developer's Agreement requirements with Eden Prairie. Mary 6/22/2006 o >� Minnesota Department of Transportation nCf+E91/ED Metropolitan District Waters Edge JUN 19 2006 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville MN 55113-3174 CITY OF CHANHASSEN June 16, 2006 Sharmeen Al-Jaff Senior Planner — City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Lakeside at Bearpath, Mn/DOT Review #P06-068 South side of New TH 212/312 and west of TH 101 Chanhassen, Carer County Control Section 1013 Dear Ms. Al-Jaff: Thank you for the opportuntiy to review the above referenced plat that our agency receive on May 23, 2006. Mn/DOT staff has reviewed the plans in accordance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subdivision 2, Plats. Before any further development, please address the following issues: Drainage: A drainage permit will be required. The following will need to be included with the drainage permit application: ➢ 10 and 100 -year calculations for the existing and proposed condition ➢ Grading plans for the existing and proposed conditions ➢ Drainage area maps for the existing and proposed conditions - include all storm sewer pipes and show direction of flow for pipes and overland flow The proposed development will need to maintain existing drainage rates (i.e., the rate at which storm water is discharged from the site must not increase). Please direct questions concerning these issues to Julie Whitcher, (651-634-2080), or at Julie. Whitcher(i�dot.state.mn.us of Mn/DOT's Water Resources section. Permits: Any use of or work impacting Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. As noted above, a Mn/DOT Drainage permit will be required. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at Nvww.dot.state.mn.us/tecsuo/utility. Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig (651-582-1447) of MnDOT's Metro Permits Section. Plat: Mn/DOT Surveys has reviewed the plat and it is satisfactory. Please send a copy of the approved final plat for Mn/DOT review to the following address: David Torfin Mn/DOT—Metro West Surveys 2055 N. Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 An equal opportunity employer v Noise: Mn/DOT's policy is to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways. Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards. Mn/DOT policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas. The project proposer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. If you have any questions regarding Mn/DOT's noise policy please contact Peter Wasko in our Design section at (651) 582-1293. Thank you again for this opporhmity to review these development plans. Please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Development Review Coordinator Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's 30 -day review and response process to development proposals. If you have the Property Id # available, please include that with the submitted materials. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions regarding this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 582-1378. Sincerely, Brigid Gombold Senior Planner Copy: Terrence Rothenbacher / Pioneer Engineering John Freemyer / Carver County Surveyor Roger. Gustafson / Carver County Engineer 1 11 240 -ate MEMORANDUM CITYOF TO: Park and Recreation Commission CHANHASSENFROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 DATE: June 9, 2006 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration SUBJ: Park & Trail Conditions of Approval Associated with the request for a Phone: 952.227.1100 Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres rezoning the property from Fax: 952.227.1110 R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Building inspections Residential, PUD -R; with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on Phone: 952.227.1180 the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two Fax: 952.2271190 outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a Planning 1k 234 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 condominium -unit buildings with variances for building height, and a Fax 952.227.1170 community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances — Planning Case 06-26. Applicant: Sienna Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Corporation — Lakeside Fax: 952.227 1110 Parks can be defined as public areas that provide active or passive -oriented P P Park 52.227.1120 Phone:: 952.227.1120 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — PARKS AND OPEN SPACE Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center The quality and number of recreational facilities in a community directly 2310 Coulter Boulevard contributes to the quality of life. For this reason, the City of Chanhassen places a Phone: strong emphasis on parks and open space. As the City of Chanhassen has .22 .14400 Fax: 952.221.1404 developed and increased in population, more pressure and attention has been given Planning 1k to providing recreational opportunities for our residents. Increased leisure time, Natural Resources health awareness, greater mobility and high disposable incomes have all Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax 952.2271110 contributed to the increased demand for recreational activities. The challenge of the next century will be to provide facilities for a growing and diverse population. Public Works 1591 Park 27.1Road Phone: 952227.1300 Parks can be defined as public areas that provide active or passive -oriented P P Fax: 952.2271310 recreational facilities. A significant characteristic of park land is its accessibility to users. Open space is any parcel that is not used for buildings or other structures Senior Cerner Phone: 952227.1125 and is left in a natural state. Parks and o n s perform three functions: meet open Fax: 952.227.1110 physical and psychological needs, enhance and protect the resource base and enhance real estate values and provide a positive impact on economic Web Site development. www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us PARKS & OPEN SPACE — ACQUISITION AND REGULATION The city obtains land for recreational purposes in one of the following manners: acquisition or regulation. Acquisition refers to obtaining land through easements, condemnation, donation, or purchase. The second means of obtaining land is through regulation or the zoning and subdivision ordinance. The subdivision ordinance states the developer shall 3 sciussseo The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A goat place to live, work, and play. Park & Recreation Commission Lakeside June 9, 2006 Page 2 dedicate land for parks, playgrounds, public open space and trails and/or shall make a cash contribution to the city's park and trail funds (Section 18-79). The planned unit development (PUD) ordinance also encourages the preservation of open space and sensitive land. The comprehensive plan establishes a guideline of acquiring 1 acre of parkland/open space for every 75 new residents. The proximity of these lands to the homes of new residents is also an important consideration. Neighborhood parks are guided with a "service area" of 1/anile, community parks 1 mile (see attached diagram). PROPOSED PARK AND OPEN SPACE ACQUISITIONS IN THE LAKE RILEY NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD Applying our guide of 1 acre of parkland for every 75 people, the developments planned or already constructed within the Lake Riley North Neighborhood will generate the need for a 5 to 7 -acre parklopen space site. This neighborhood is defined for park planning purposes as the area between Lake Riley Boulevard and new Highway 212, east of and including the Southwest Station housing and transit site and west of and including the proposed Lakeside development. To provide a centrally located park site, staff is recommending a future parklopen space acquisition as a condition of approval for the future development of the Klingelhutz property. A portion of the park dedication fees collected from Lakeside will be used to finance the acquisition and development of this future park site. PRIVATE PARK AMENITIES WITHIN LAKESIDE The applicant is proposing a variety of private recreational amenities within their development. These include a garden -like walkway at the center of their housing units and a private beach lot proposed to contain a patio and walkway, gazebo, picnic area, fire pit and tot lot. TRAILS The development of lakeside will permit the construction of a very important section of public trail. This new section of trail will be located on the north side of Lyman Boulevard traveling from the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and North Bay Drive east to the Chanhassen/Eden Prairie border. At this location, the trail will connect with trails proposed to be established in Eden Prairie. One of these trails will parallel the 15t6 fairway of the Bearpath Golf Course and allow pedestrians to travel north under the newly built Highway 212 and beyond. Another Eden Prairie trail will continue east along Lyman Boulevard connecting to Lake Riley Park and the south LRT trail. Gip"\th\Ukmide.dm Park & Recreation Commission Lakeside June 9, 2006 Page 3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REGARDING PARKS ANDTRAILS It is recommended that the Park & Recreation Commission recommend the City Council require the following conditions of approval concerning parks and trails for the Lakeside PUD. The payment of full park dedication fees at the rate in force upon final plat approval in lieu of parkland dedication. 2. The applicant shall provide all design, engineering, construction and testing services required of the "Lyman Boulevard Trail" All construction documents shall be delivered to the Park and Recreation Director and City Engineer for approval prior to the initiation of each phase of construction. The trail shall be 10 feet in width, surfaced with bituminous material, and constructed to meet all city specifications. The applicant shall be reimbursed for the actual cost of construction materials for the Lyman Boulevard Trail. This reimbursement payment shall be made upon completion and acceptance of the trail and receipt of an invoice documenting the actual costs for the construction materials utilized in its construction. 3. The trail connection at the northeast corner of the site connecting the Lakeside area to the future Highway 212 trail and underpass, as depicted in the applicant's plans, is completed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Map 2. Project Plans c: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director GAPLAM2006 Planning Cases\06-26 Iakeside\Park Direaw s Repon.dm Location Map Lakeside 125 Lakeview Road East Planning Case No. 06-26 Proposed 1.Hi Rice Marsh Lake Lake Riley t----------� Lake Riley North Neighborhood Park Service Area Proposed Neighborhood Park Site � v W a BAER^E` aSRsa_a;dg$$_ 4 2h tg R flog 3�3333�' iYYYYii' A E§A z H � '^ i \ CT lit I YE 6�E. it'll g Q W n H. i'WIj 131 iiStit §.' EBts_ x Egli yy { � 7 n ❑ I x 5 £ z YSS' Nr3iM$:${ — _• 6F; I + ' 1 - � _________� .I\�� 5�9i u�:bila :e sa Ed � r 1- 1 111 11 ' ; � }�/�✓�.� 9 ; p 1 , -a • I > is a I I i i `` �,/� ��1 Imo• - e i , _", I i i .n'! \I ea 1 — - Lj i N21 aai atA; W. a a i � "�✓ I g! � W�] ' el Z9 .✓ �"� I 19a i u•jt; ^` M ;w': �' a; a3: I a3 181 ey C i•� vT � 1 :i 3 g�3 • gi6C:C qi0 r s i �P •1 E•bt�9 B+%�9 1'4° III �s %E1lq I ;35iff PA Sg F >I �•- ! / /eta it \JI F ; g° •}$' VA, it IIID II 11 I�I rrmmc e.�am S s `s:S a :gc3 �•# � �� /q%fF�� i\ � 11111 1 .,,�' III 1\ (�� s }ski $ vsi •'s s cs l qtr/i`� 1 1111 I 1 II `__ w..Y�, -- g, -:iq � EseS s`q% RE I ' Tiffr F;• _ s.' �raca,F i x ,/r i i/i�J l F �si8� z374s a� ' �r� •\ R� a• iiiii/� � _ g4,1 $svv .et 1 i��O. i gqz 9i: F IIIg I�JI 1 $ y E'tijE Ly g as s3% a °_'E3EEE ;}°s aE• Ei 3�c�g ig�g �ggi i=Gi�i� I 1 q� 43 jE � e _ _ 9 ✓t �� % 181 ey C i•� vT � 1 :i 3 g�3 • gi6C:C qi0 r s i �P •1 E•bt�9 B+%�9 1'4° III �s %E1lq I ;35iff PA Sg F >I �•- ! / /eta it \JI F ; g° •}$' VA, it IIID II 11 I�I rrmmc e.�am S s `s:S a :gc3 �•# � �� /q%fF�� i\ � 11111 1 .,,�' III 1\ (�� s }ski $ vsi •'s s cs l qtr/i`� 1 1111 I 1 II `__ w..Y�, -- g, -:iq � EseS s`q% RE I ' Tiffr F;• _ s.' �raca,F i x ,/r i i/i�J l F �si8� z374s a� ' �r� •\ R� a• iiiii/� � _ g4,1 $svv ki i 8 .et 1 i��O. 14t4��0.8 gqz 9i: F IIIg I�JI 1 $ y E'tijE Ly g as s3% 8' °_'E3EEE ;}°s S•� ippT 3�c�g ig�g �ggi i=Gi�i� q� 43 jE � e _ _ 9 ✓t �� % 6� 39 ki i 8 Dnp if1 ny I :y,la — •30 aP a3- 9t+7 I _p: "" .a3p: r et "t act v I fi I aj� ar P \ > 1 1 1 � i vl � •`_ — �'a - l 1 1 F C i 1�� I` i', I i I I r L Y • i 411, L1 -1'.L: [✓'�' 1 �r � 1 I F i L ' i�' s � :]q 1 i Ati- \\ � ,i• � \ 1 I 11 Y 1 ' m ' 1 I Z s 1 I �• I gg rs�g3 ;�A?Yi i i EI �� 1 !\ii 69 7 � �PS]P�sf •j� �8 �sv 5 ' i'Y.l�1 1 q S jS I }} E F! 4 LYR8S83, $. 1 6EF j t$ II 3g y�:0 is B �EgP�,Y 9�C i I R I L._J i i 1 n \ ' a \ \ \ \ �------ \ a 9 u$. jig lid i all pp �m /r ' r Wt Z1 fi t dd';:;i PIE e�3 �Ey tW iroz h� I I 1 1 Fig----------- i I -----------------------------------=_----=------------ � - -1 I I stjEi t 1 _ ' C 1 i t 1 I X �•� 1 I. 1� I 9 I' II I • f` , 1' Typq w 1 II `f 1 O 2 S � � E a 5 ,o 'M IN ii,� r _ _ I Ir71 I �� 1E1 fir,rI AR! Hill ��L. , � --� � ►" ;iii il�r �� ' �'��'� El��.� r... Eir=E �IIIA � I E' SII �i� w!, N II!! irFj�ii Vii. i!�` aye: Ir � �i��1►1 � ��i;��.'��; LI,i, Wit r 4 �i irr � G ISE'. • �J�I tar ii SOF..; SF F!1 'IRV //'ti�,� IIIA' '"_ ■ �o f _ �l �fYfi6r7�� t �'� 1 r ��1 I� ■ B .7■ I: /l j.: e, fl�� 'I�1 Eli "7YMll1� �� rel :j i �!I1 Y �tlilll'1 t ISM ._,t.: ►�...;� ,,�, l. " ,.a I�I .I ,I l \ | � § ; £ . q. R ] % g3 .! l \ | � § ; £ . q. R ] \ | � § ; £ . q. > m m w g l••++ I I m rn w AI n o o O V n I eF+ O am j —� tC{j m Iii v c� n v r I O ➢ , S 1 I m rn N< --------- ---------- e � I I`■ p v D F V O V�if U 1 m � J � v m I m N N I m O n I I II o v F m m m I 1 n m U p � J m D m O � O I 1 V O n J m O U I v 1 A I I a tii w m v N > V L7 n F I S K w o Tri n A r D D pu m D m z m.g {�i , �t N �§a 3 imil i, [' 4 W n n N m nMNM I M 1 I I III I�11 m m I 4 I ¢ J m aNaa OO - Z ¢ QyW ¢L Kx Y lmi m Q Z 4 4 O I N Ko3. 153 Q Z Mnyl^O 1 �Ea�j al Lj� J FI i ______________•______ � ►iiia i��;�;��i��'ii!IEf� I lei I �j .O n U I I f i It m�m I S N Q > I I VIN LL Q (4'J m m Q J Q n r N m MnNn htp yy1 a as m m 34 m a Y LL 331%IWO Z Q O Y ¢ x-ax0.3r Om D - ¢ > m i'--__- •.'ice,.; I ��k tl t O¢ a n I pp !E a W Y z! MI ! y fa m m a J a Qii This neap is n�alhar a legally rerorded map nor a survey and is not intended to tie used as are. TI -as map is a conpilalion a raxrds, information aid data located in vanars city, county, state and federal of5oes mil other urc soes regadng the area drown, and is to t,e used for reference purposes only. The City does not wanam that the GeograpNc Infarretion System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does rwt represent that the GIS Data can oe used for nsvitmona, Irdclurq a MY other Purycse rewidrq -m W nea ,amrmt of dstance or diimclion or precision in Me depiction of geographic teanues. If mors or discrepancies are farad please contact 952-227.1107. The precedrg dsclamar is provided pursuant to Wrinesota Statutes §166.03, &Md. 21 (2000), ar d Ne user of Mus nip acknowledges that Me Gy, shall nal be aaNe for any damages, and eWesay waves al dans, all agrees to defend, indmniy, and hold h ess Me Cary from my and all darn b ught by Dsar. its mWoyees or agents, or wird Vel also ansa oW plye uga($ acq^ a Provided. 1 1 T 1 5� x u i L'J `;�,iHss f2 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 www.d.chanhassen.w.us li. POST aGEGS M =0.39 `- 1 __J a Z.;.J 1 8013768 . n RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2006 ru N CITY OF CHANHASSEN r0 o SEltroER NORTH BAY HOMEOWNERS ASSN INC 2681 LONG LAKE RD ROSEVILLE , MN 55113 -1128 III,Ilf1111a111111flitfllarflilllailtlrlilt1111,1I11ttIll llffl oro—as. Notice of Public Hearing SCANNED Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later In the avenin de endln on the order of theagenda. Location: Cit Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. LAKESIDE: Request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres Rezoning property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development— Residential, PUD -R, with Proposal: Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, 2 outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including 2-, 3-, 4- and condominium - unit buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances Applicant: Sienna Cor t)fetion Property 125 Lakeview Road East (Lakeview Hills Apartments site) Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inf rm you about the applicant's request and to obtain input front the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens Public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn,us/sery/plan/06-26.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Questions & Generous by email at buenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Welland Nteratims, Rezoninge, Combrehenave Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application In writing. Any Interested party is Invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent Informetlon and a recommendation. These reports are available by request At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will dose the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council, The City Council may reverse, affimn or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code arrendrrents take a simple majority, vote at the City Council except rezonings and tend use amendments from residential to commeroalAnduslriai. • 11,11mr a arta State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to W processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding Ib status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokeepersordrepresentative Is encouraged to protide a contact for the city. Oban developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review Ne project with any interested personis). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the pry Council does not. Minutes are taken and any conespondence regarding the application will W induced In the report to due City Council. M you wish to have sonadhing to be included In the report, lases contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. SCAN NIL D We ~ We LakeRiley This nap is neither a legally recordefl n4'1p nor a Survey and is not Intended to be used as One. The map is a compilation of records, Interrelation and data located in vadous city, county, state and federal oticea and other mumse regardng the area shown, and is io be used for reference WNeses only. The CM does not warrant that the Geographic Infer abon System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does net represent that the GIS Data can he used for navigational, tracking or any other W pose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features- M errors or cl saepanccies are found pease comad 952-227.1107 The preMding declaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, SuWd 21 (2000), and the user of this nap acknowledges that the City shall not he liable for any damages, and expressly wolves all dome, and agrees to defend, indermify, and hold harmless the City frau any and all dawns brought by User, is employees or agents, or third partiesd of data provided. `d7 rSqi are'16 ',sQ39 CITY OF CHANHAS 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 www.d.chanhassen. mn.us SCANNEO NIXIE SS3 1 OB 06/13/06 RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD BCI 533171014747 •'0170-11337-04-43 I1'1'il'1'111'11111'1111"�tllllll�}I11'I111'1�11'�I11�1��11� Notice of Public Hearing d (o -ab Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council _ Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. LAKESIDE: Request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres Rezoning property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development— Residential, PUD -R, with Proposal: Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, 2 outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, Including 2-, 3-, 4- and condominium - unit buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances Applicant: Sienna Corporation Property 125 Lakeview Road East (Lakeview Hills partments site) Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/06-26.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Questions & Generous by email at boenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Condillonal and Interim Uses, Wetland Aterations, Razonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feat of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is Invited to emend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent Inion nation and a recommendalion. These mpons are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal oveMew of the report and a recommendation. The Item will be opened for the pudic to speak about the proposal as a pan of the hearing process. The Commission will dose the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, at or modify wholly or patsy the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings. land use and code mandirents take a simple majority vole of the City Council except rezonings and land use amencirnents from reaidentlal to commrciaNndumiel. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days union the applicant waives this standard. Some applusaons due to their complakty may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check win the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokespersorurepresentative Is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Ohm developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff Is also available to review the project with any interested pereon(s). • Because the Planning Commsslon holds the public heeding, the CityCouncil does not Minutes ere taken and any conespondence regarding the appicabon will be included in the report to the City Council. 0 you wish to have som thing to be included In the report, lease contact the planning Staff person named on the notification. SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 06-26 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 20, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 Unit Development -Residential, PUD - R, with Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets: Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buddings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances on property located at 125 Lakeview Road East - LAKESIDE. Applicant: Sienna Corporation. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at er M1 /sary/ntan/ 0626.html or at Cityliallduring regular businesshours. ABinterestedpersons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions withrespect to this proposal. ` Robert Generous, Senior Planner Email: bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1131 (Pubhshedinthe Chanhassen Villager on Thursday, June 8, 2006; No. 4677) Affidavit of Publication Southwest Suburban Publishing State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. �� // (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. was published on the date or dazes and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and publication of the Notice: abcdefghbklmn/ooppgrstuvv,�//,ww yz /Q \$�y,�„ _ _ yz"� lel � 9 Laurie A. Hartmann Subscribed and sworn before me on this 6day of � 2006 Notary Public RATE INFORMATION GWEN M. RApUENZ WJTAAY PU&LC - WNWSOTA MY Commissim fx,.fv, im 31.2010 Lowest classified raze paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter.................... ........................... $11.51 per column inch SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 06-26 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres Rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with Variances; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances on property located at 125 Lakeview Road East — LAKESIDE. Applicant: Sienna Corporation. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/KnL/plan/06-26.htm] or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Robert Generous, Senior Planner Email: b_eenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1131 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on June 8, 2006) SCANNED P12NEERengineering CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS June 8, 2006 Ms. Kate Aanenson Community Development Director City of Chanhassen PO Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317-0147 RE: LAKESIDE - (Sienna Corporation) P.E. Project #205207 Dear Ms. Aanensen: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS <o -2-aL M ENDOTA HEIGHTS CORPORATE OFFICE 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 phone (651)681-1914 fax (651)681-9488 COON RAPIDS OFFICE 20185th Avenue N.W. Coon Rapids, MN 55433 phone (763)783-1880 fax (763)783-1883 www.pioneereng.com Attached is a revised submittal for the subject project. The following revisions have been made to the plans: 1. The project name has been changed to "LAKESIDE". 2. The trail on the west side of the project has been deleted. A trail will be constructed east of the project in Eden Prairie. 3. The landscape plans have been refined. 4. Building `B" and the related street has been lowered to reduce the height of the retaining wall around the pond. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me at 763-489-2274. Sincerely, Paul J. Cheme, P.E. PJC: crm Enclosures Cc: John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation I IBLSECTmjwx MainTmjec ughu (2000-2009)12005(205000-2059 )1205207 lakeside CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUN 0 8 2006 C""OSSEN PLANNING DEPT SCANNED --T—�, •°x_ i� �"�dr�kY9i �§'SSE ��';p¢ �s ��ga €yC ��G�. `u u�`u=ni=ni�'S^^ \� 'eeee@e� eeee@'ee��a ,•_.._.� tbs; z I \\•\ w�,., ,. '�a sits' dq d in 1 fig > _ X ! o iix I a- ' i .v 1. �°/q�J ¢ }78!! •II`)�_/,�)�y Q MIA �:O;i at85 dee; y W I N�I�( ;[fid •sssp a Z Y F/1 N d4 QI 1 V jig � YI � ' 4 1 • I I ` 'd} l I r -� 1 1 1 ,,,,,✓ 1 l r it i `` 1 y �iil l ' IIS Patt 1 I i S Pill X21 Jill I �/_ ,�/ I I ilra I I (11 11 I � � / � �'' fi"� bsd'a gi$g3_s•; $. o \ I;II1 ¢IIII I l 1+° __•s5. ;• '•§ad_ I _. :, _L sl 11 1 - �r�ij� `) .•e d _ ,fii s83 s I 1v I sunxre synr3 III � III v� II .� i �� : i a€s s� ° s 619 s! �'•a- � fig¢ � !� $iE¢ ie Ei j!; E ib / III sorra s.ava ) I ._i 6 i,1'1 I b.••� :i2 «. . _ _ _ 1 t 1� h' stl -1 a i•-1 :, {F +i Ei • sa � F s n ce •"- s_ I'E}}41$�•a ��g8n#e'6� «� X13 $s5 __— __—_. es lYs ii3�" 55 c33 f '•.�i�jfii:>>'.'# < �eY 3s L fisc 6•; SS SiSSSS SEES SIE}SSSSSo �' 1$1 311 'a fin ?rs ili� 1'1111 � ?:FaB; X21 Jill I �/_ ,�/ I I ilra I I (11 11 I � � / � �'' fi"� bsd'a gi$g3_s•; $. o \ I;II1 ¢IIII I l 1+° __•s5. ;• '•§ad_ I _. :, _L sl 11 1 - �r�ij� `) .•e d _ ,fii s83 s I 1v I sunxre synr3 III � III v� II .� i �� : i a€s s� ° s 619 s! �'•a- � fig¢ � !� $iE¢ ie Ei j!; E ib / III sorra s.ava ) I ._i 6 i,1'1 I b.••� :i2 «. . _ _ _ 1 t 1� h' stl -1 a i•-1 :, a 1 \ \ \ 1 �_� �g4a sa£RFW ' bSiss�esqe` all; 2l' 4 5 3 W4 i$6 8! a 8s39"' i a S $as �8�j4 45%Fx3 i a OQ$ � � yi , 5 a•9i�s U i Ztz u 1 � ----- L A411r,"'� --' It S u I [y ✓ a 1 --------------- I ' I i 1 I 1 LSl6 3S - s� LEI CO 0 ap O Z N 2j i w O°lu S 3 UU C = O¢ m Q f U U r-�� 5;v Fad els= 3 i Nit al tna $BaeFl e i=s;51 i61 tl� `a �?€^•5155.? el 11{i I ��W wti E•{ E 1�[i Fpn$4S yg U I 5 < B: oil - I 04 Pf I 1 e e•- '_ ' - ' 'i ' ' � fes: 1 d j FI 1 '1 'I ' •� I I ��+� 1 1 I 1 I OY I 1 1 1'+✓�� I _h 1 ' � ' I I '+✓ ` I x ' I f yw✓� 1 5 I I i i i� 1 1 y`-• 1 I t Set f ' E •ixl. 1 ` ' , t / i e f j�` llfi t )) R1:GRT .f MI ffi z a W N f0 p z Qo O o MU)N 2 2W or) Z Q¢ ` Us L 7 n U U 5 yC �• 9 � i z � ! ,¢ I -1-W- 111 11-•` /1 L -y f. I m CXS !•! c � 11 1;11 � I � I �'1� y�y �F _ �� l; yy o 141 ----- ------- ' ! F ! Wte Ai I Z a co 0 0 6Q O Z N zj � � t « a = 7 � � � t « a = 7 � \ } CITY Oc CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUN 0 8 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT M�MS TFEM �NMW �� NOM =d1ma CWMR � �NING �AIL �TAINER S44RUS �NTING �AL W.nMM A�E �'S .NACT. 1. .11y A.�TES .0. � To .1 �=, T. . T.I. AT A r �R 6 ML ES.AM PMV SH� �O.W . ... � � K .. ... F.WATM P�.05 �1& WAS TO K �EN� WTH CWPOSI&LANTN. . TO A �� M 8- SCANNED CDANWH ME PER BVumNc CON."m WRIF, wmmmn R= uULa tt TO BE CHOs BY 8.11MR H. . TO BE IHSTk.1 AT A CEPTH OF ]• OWN B WL & Par SHMNG VNOSCME WUOE BucX N., m. To BE u5m ..D fWNOAl. V.GS PBRMMN MEAS TO BE AMENDED WT1 CWPOST/P YNG ML TO N DEPTH OF B• fm RryW.INMv CITY Oc CHANHASSEN RECEIVED JUN 0 8 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT DEOWOUS 1 PLANING OETAIL LANDSCAPE NOTES w.�bM.. i...w .e.arv• w� •RR�LL�ics.'G'x7-'K'� rsa CONTAINER SHRUB PUNTNG DETAIL rJfl. N..fi YLTJLn� yEBS" »J..r SCANNED aPuxu ecus w ren 4 ii a �ia�oo�aa00000n�eo�oiiai��a�oo '` rg , ,7 �� t �► ,�4 gni ,; Vol I:�F • u w o 0 =p O Z z ZUJ m 4 UU O a O it Z = � 7 a O z 2 U a Z 0 =W N z Z> 00 C) U C a UQ Z � rn ~ � z U a U June, 7, 2006 CARVER cam` 219 East Frontage Road 1946 % Waconia, MN 55387 & WA+TER 0 Phone: 952-442-5101 °^h+ S`O Fax: 952-442-5497 YSERVATION DISTRICT htta://www.co.amer.mn.us/SWCD/SWCD main.html Robert Generous, Senior Planner City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Abra Auto Body and Glass Mr. Generous: The SWCD has taken the opportunity to review the Abra Auto Body and Glass plans.. Please review and consider the following comments and suggestions regarding erosion and sediment controls and NPDES compliance. Erosion Control - A temporary cover of mulch and temporary seed is needed within 14 days of rough and or final grade for any exposed soils or if any exposed soils are not actively worked within a 14 day time period. Sediment Control - Details should be shown on the plan for temporary inlet controls for all proposed catch basins. Additional existing CB's immediately adjacent to the project must be protected as well. - During installation of the proposed storm sewer infrastructure to the existing storm sewer, temporary caps or plugs may be needed until the installation of the pipes and inlets are complete this will eliminate any sediment from entering the sanitary sewer. - Any sediment tracked upon paved surfaces must be scraped and swept within 24 hours. - Plans should include a designated concrete washout area and or plans on how the development will handle the concrete wash water. Storm Water Pollution Preventive Plan SWPPP - A NPDES permit is required for this development as its just over an acre in size, and be applied for and received from the MPCA by the Owner and operator of the site. - A completed SWPPP meeting NPDES conditions is needed for the development prior to application of the NPDES permit. If there are any questions or if I can be of further assistance please contact the SWCD office. Sincerely, Chip Hentges Conservation Technician c. Lori Haak, Don Asleson, City of Chanhassen (email) AN EQUAL OPPORTUNrrY EMPLOYER Lakeside at Bearpath SVVW Fee Summary W Water Quality Water Quantity Credit Total Duplexes 8,604.00 21,032.00 29,636.00 Townhomes 18,321.00 26,004.00 44,325.00 Apartments 25,806.00 48,576.00 74,382.00 Other 19,406.00 27,544.00 46,950.00 TOTAL 195,293.00 Prepared by Lori Haak 6/6/2006 Page I SWW FEE WORKSHEET DATE June 6, 2006 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Duplexes Site Area is Acres Lots 2-10, Block 2 2.84 Lots 2-7. Block 3 1.94 Assessable area rlitl)U I�Cela71►:[.Y.Ytyia7:�l I M WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre 4.78 Medium Density Acres Total $ 1,800.00 4.78 $ 8,604.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 4.78 $ 21,032.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0 0.5 $ 1,600.00 $ Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ SWMP FEE $ 29,636.00 SWMP CREDITS $ - TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 29,636.00 SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE June 6, 2006 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Townhomes Site Area in Acres Storm water pond Lot 11, Block 2 0.45 Lots 13-16, Block 2 2.48 Lots 8-12, Block 3 2.98 Assessable area 5.91 ZONING CLASSIFICATION Medium Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 3,100.00 5.91 $ 18,321.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 4,400.00 5.91 $ 26,004.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0 0.5 $ 1,600.00 $ Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ SWMP FEE $ 44,325.00 SWMP CREDITS A TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 44,325.00 SWM" FEE WORKSHEET DATE June 6, 2006 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Apartments Site Area in Acres Storm water pond Lot 1, Block 2 2.46 Lot 12, Block 2 3.34 Lot 1, Block 3 1.79 Assessable area 7.59 ZONING CLASSIFICATION High Density WATER QUALITY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 3,400.00 7.59 $ 25,806.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total $ 6,400.00 7.59 $ 48,576.00 CREDITS ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0 0.5 $ 1,600.00 $ Outlet structure each 0 $ 2,500.00 $ SWMP FEE $ 74,382.00 SWMP CREDITS $ - TOTAL S Wb1P FEE $ 74,382.00 SWMP FEE WORKSHEET DATE June 6, 2006 PLANNING CASE 06-26 PROJECT Lakeside at Bearpath - Miscellaneous Site Area in Acres Lot 1, Block 1 (Pond and pool) 1.54 Outlot A (Private street) 3.22 Outlot B (Beachlot) 1.50 Assessable area ZONING CLASSIFICATION WATER QUAMY WATER QUANTITY FEES Rate per Acre 6.26 Medium Density Acres Total $ 3,100.00 6.26 $ 19,406.00 Rate per Acre Acres Total S 4,400.00 6.26 $ 27,544.00 s117g1JYl'.y ITEM UNIT QUANTITY 50% UNIT TOTAL PRICE Storm water pond acre 0.5 $ 3,100.00 $ - Outlet structure each $ 2,500.00 $ - SWMP FEE $ 46,950.00 SWMP CREDITS $ TOTAL SWMP FEE $ 46,950.00 CITY OF CIA NSEN MEMORANDUM 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner Administration FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Phone: 952.227.1100 Phone: 22Z 1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Fax: 952.227.1110 Marshal for exact location of additional h drants and an to be relocated. Y Y Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard DATE: June 2, 2006 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1400 Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227 1190 SUBJ: Lakeside at Bearpath. Engineering I have reviewed the above site plan. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227 1170 Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information Finance submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate Phone: Fax:9522.27.1110 code or policy items will be addressed. Fax: 952.227.1110 P Y Park 1: Recreation 1. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Please contact the Chanhassen Fire Phone: 22Z 1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Marshal for exact location of additional h drants and an to be relocated. Y Y Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard 2. A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, Phone: 952.227.1400 trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. Fax: 952.227.1404 This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by Planning A firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 3. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact Fax: 952,227.1110 Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and locations of Public Works signs to be installed. 1591 Park Road Phone: 52.227.13100 Fax: s52.z27.i3to 4. Fire apparatus access roads and water supply for fire protection is required to be PP PP Y P q installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and Senior center during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of Phone: 952.211 Protection are provided. Fax. 952.227.1110 Web site 5. Temporary street signs shall be installed at street intersections once construction www.cl.chanhassen.mus of the new roadway allows passage of vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota Fire code Section 501.4. 6. 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. The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A gnat place to live, work, and play. 4F Mr. Robert Generous June 2, 2006 Page 2 7. Submit proposed street names to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 8. No burning permits shall be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 9. Approved fire apparatus access roads (driveways) shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access roads shall comply with requirements of Section 503 and shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions: Fire Marshal is authorized to increase the dimension of 150 feet where the building is equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3. Pursuant to Section 503.1.1 2000 Minnesota Fire Code. gAsafetyMl\pImvlakmd=flw rpalh -;J,-(a�- Aanenson, Kate From: John Vogelbacher j]vogelbacher@siennacorp.com] Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 12:59 PM To: Aanenson, Kate Subject: Lakeside Happy Friday Kate, sorry it took me a while to get back to you regarding the exterior building materials on the site but I needed to make sure I spoke with each of the builders to confirm the specifications on of each of the buildings. Building: Condo Buildings A, B & C: Per the detailed building elevations, 80% or greater of the exterior will be a combination of brick and stone. Accent and trim areas in fiber -cement siding and shingles. Roofing material to be Timberline 30 year or better asphalt shingles. Cudd Townhomes: Exterior a combination of stone, fiber -cement lap siding and shingles. Roofing material to be Timberline 30 year or better asphalt shingles. Wooddale Townhomes: The exterior will be a combination of stone, Shakertown vinyl siding and maintenance free trim. Roofing material to be Timberline 30 year or better asphalt shingles. Community Clubhouse: Exterior a combination of stone and stucco with fiber -cement and or stone trim. Natural cedar shake roofing. Thank you. For our neighborhood meeting would you like a city representative to attend? John Vogelbacher Sienna Corp 4940 Viking Drive Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Direct 952-885-2320 Mobil 952-994-2646 Office 952-835-2808 Fax 952-835-7008 250 Third Avenue North, Suite 130 1 Minneapolis, MN 55401 1 P 612.339.2190 1 F 612.339.4783 TRANSMITTAL LETTER DATE: 5/26/2006 TO: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 ATTN: Ms. Kathry Aanenson ................................................................... FROM: Harriss Architects PROJECT: Lakeside @ Chanhassen JOB #: 2525 WE TRANSMIT HEREWITH. FOR YOUR USE THE FOLLOWING: COPIES REV. NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 16 5/26/06 30 x 42 Package: Partial Site plan, Bldg A Plans, Bldg A Elev, Bldg B plans, Bldg B Elev, & Site Sections 1 5/26/06 8 ''/x" x 11 Package (same contents as above) 1 5/26/06 CD, .TIF files of package above VIA Hand Delivery COMMENTS: Travis Beck, AIA Harriss Architects CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 2 6 2006 CK4NHASSEN PLANNING DEPT $CANNED SIENNA CORPORATION May 25, 2006 Ms. Kathryn Aanenson City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Suite 608 • 4940 Viking Drive • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 -952-835-2808 FAX:952-835-7008 By: Messenger RE: Lakeside building elevations/plans Dear Kate, CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 2 6 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Enclosed are the evaluations and general plans for community clubhouse, townhomes and condominium buildings A & B for the Lakeside development. As we have discussed, we would like to hold off on the elevations and schematic designs for building C. Building C is projected for construction in the summer of '08 and we would like to evaluate the market as well as consumer preferences prior to finalizing the plans for that building. As you can image some of these plans will likely go through some additional design revisions as the actual building construction plans are developed. However, in concept we do not see any substantial deviations to the concepts plans enclosed. We are also working on additional perspectives of the buildings and we will be putting a plan book together that will have colored illustrations and additions perspectives of the buildings. We will have those to you in time for you to review them prior to your delivery to the planning commission's review package. As always thanks you for your cooperation and please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or you feel additional information is needed. Sincerely, :ennat nation 01m Vogelbacher Vice President Enc. Planners ■ Developers • Contractors MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Jerritt Mohn, Building Official DATE: May 24, 2006 SUBJ: Review of Lakeside at Bearpath. Planning Case: 06-26 I have reviewed the plans for above project and offer the following comments, which should be included in the conditions of approval: 1. Accessibility must be provided to all portions of the development and a percentage of the units may also be required to be accessible or adaptable in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. Further information is needed to determine these requirements. 2. Buildings over 8500 square feet of floor area are required to be protected with an automatic sprinkler system. For the purposes of this requirement property lines do not constitute separate buildings and the areas of basements and garages are included in the floor area threshold. 3. The buildings will be required to be designed by an architect and engineer as determined by the Building Official. 4. The developer must submit a list of proposed street name(s) and an addressing plan for review and approval prior to final plat of the property. 5. Demolition permits must be obtained before demolishing any structures on the site. Application for such permits must include hazardous substances investigative and proposed mitigation reports. 6. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 7. Walls and projections within 3 feet of property lines are required to be of one- hour fire -resistive construction. 8. Retaining walls over four feet high require a permit and must be designed by a professional engineer. 9. Each lot must be provided with separate sewer and water services. 10. The developer and or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. G/plan/2006 Planning Cases/06-26LakesideBuilding Official Comments Date: May 22, 2006 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Robert Generous, Senior Planner Subject: LAKESIDE AT BEARPATH — Request for a Planned Unit Development on 26.34 acres rezoning the property from R12, High Density Residential, to Planned Unit Development — Residential, PUD -R, with a Variance for a 30 -foot perimeter setback on the east side of the project; Preliminary Plat for 29 building lots, two outlots and right-of-way for public streets; Site Plan Review for a 234 -unit residential development, including two-, three-, four- and condominium -unit buildings with variances for building height, and a community building; and a Conditional Use Permit for a recreational beach lot with Variances — Planning Case 06-26. Applicant: Sienna Corporation The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on May 19, 2006. The 60 -day review period ends July 18, 2006. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on June 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your continents by no later than June 9, 2006. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company west or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco 13. City of Eden Prairie 9CAneee Location Map Lakeside 125 Lakeview Road East Planning Case No. 06-26 Rice Marsh Lake a m Propo$ed j H 212 .Q Subject Property ke Rile an BNd (C.R. 18 M I i Lake Riley Su CITY OF CHANHASSEN P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 05/23/2006 8:47:58 AM Receipt No. 0011443 CLERK: katie PAYEE: SIENNA CORPORATION LAKESIDE PLANNING CASE 06-26 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 4,075.00 Sign Rent 200.00 Recording Fees 450.00 Total Cash Check 36131 Change 4,725.00 0.00 4,725.00 0.00 5-a3-cl(- SCANNED SIENNA CORPORATION 11110 nN 36131 CITY OF CHANHASSEN $4,725.00 IIYV VIVC VMIC IIYV VIVO MIYIV VIYI XMVVIVI fXIV VIJVV VIYI IXIYCIY 230-00 PRE PLAT 5/19/06 $4,725.00 120.00 APP FEE LAKESIDE CITY OF CHANHASSEN $4,725.00 LAKESIDE - PLANNING CASE 06-26 $1,035 Subdivision ($600+435) $1,665 Site Plan Review ($500+$1,165) $750 Planned Unit Development $425 Conditional Use Permit $200 Variance $200 Notification Sign $450 Recording Escrow $4,725 $4,725 Sienna Corporation Check #36131 6cu+Heo PIONEER ENGINEERING, P.A. PLEASE RESPOND TO: CITY OF CHANHASSEN CORRESPONDENCE SENT VIA: s - LETTER � F TRAN MITTAL DATE 05/22/06 2422 ENTERPRISE DRIVE MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN 55120 PHONE: 651481-1914 X 20185 AVE. N.W. COON RAPIDS, MN 55433 16 19 PRELIMINARY PLAT FAX: 651-681-9488 PHONE: 763-783-1880 8.5"x11" 1 1 FAX: 763-783-1883 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CORRESPONDENCE SENT VIA: s - LETTER � F TRAN MITTAL DATE 05/22/06 O. 205207 ATTENTION KATE RE: LAKESIDE AT BEARPATH 16 19 MAIL FAX PAGES INCLUDING TRANSMITTAL X OTHER ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 16 19 PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 19 8.5"x11" 1 1 ELECTRONIC COPY CD 1 STORM WATER CALCULATIONS THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW XI FOR APPROVAL I I ASREQUESTED I I FOR YOUR USE I I FORBIDS DUE I I REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED I CHRIS SHARP 763-489-2267 to mm ©AMERICAN � ENGINEERING a- TESTING, INC. CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED MAY 2 2 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT CONSULTANTS • GEOTECHNICAL • MATERIALS • ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OF ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHI*IICAL REVIEW PROJECT: PHASE 2 PROGRAM - REDEVELOPMENT LAKEVIEW HILL APARTMENT SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA REPORTED TO: SIENNA CORPORATION 4940 VIKING DRIVE, SUITE 608 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435 ATTN: JOHN VOGELBACHER DATE: JANUARY 20, 2006 AET JOB NO: 01-02624 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the additional subsurface exploration program and geotechnical review we conducted for the referenced project The scope of work is outlined in our December 7, 2006 proposal, which you accepted on that same day. The authorized scope includes the following: • Five additional standard penetration test borings at the site to depths of 21' to 81'. • Basic soil laboratory testing (water content and Atterberg Limits). • Review our previous geotechnical report #01-02624, dated November 11, 2005. • Geotechnical engineering analysis based on the above and preparation of this report. The scope of work reported herein is intended for geotechnical purposes only. Our previous work relating to environmental aspects was reported under separate cover. PROJECT INFORMATION Understood/assumed project information includes the following: This Occurrent shag not be reproduced. except in full, without written approval of American Engineering Testing, Inc. 550 Cleveland Avenue North . St. Paul, MN 55114. 651.659-9001 . Fax 651-659-1379 Duluth . Mankato . Marshall . Rochester . Wausau . Rapid City . Pierre . Sioux Falls AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EOUA OPPORTUNITY ENIKOYER SCANNeo AET #01-02624 - Page 2 of 15 • The central portion of the site previously served as an apartment complex, with five separate buildings. The locations of these existing buildings appear on attached Figure 1. These buildings will be demolished to accommodate the new construction. • The proposed building locations are provided on Figure 1. We understand the maximum sized structure would likely be a three-story (above grade) wood -framed building, which may include a below grade parking level. • We understand you are planning a parking level floor at 891' and amain floor at 901' for the building in the southwest comer of the site. Please contact us for further review if these elevations are changed. • For the purpose of this report, we assume column loads will not exceed 250 kips, and wall loads will not exceed 8 kips per lineal foot. • We assume a minimum factor of safety of 3 with respect to a shear failure of the spread footing foundations and a factor of safety of about 2 with respect to pile failure. • We assume total allowable foundation settlement may approach 1 ". • We assume that differential foundation settlement of up to 1/2" over a 30' length is tolerable. The presented project information represents our understanding of the proposed construction. This information is an integral part of our engineering review. It is important that you contact us if there are changes from that described so that we can evaluate whether modifications to our recommendations are appropriate. SITE CONDITIONS Soils Logs of the test borings are attached. The logs contain information concerning soil layering, soil classification, geologic description, and moisture. Relative density or consistency is also noted, which is based on the standard penetration resistance (N -value). The boring logs only indicate the subsurface conditions at the sampled locations and variations often occur between and beyond borings. • The site is underlain by glacially deposited till, mostly classified as sandy lean clay and clayey sand, containing a little gravel. Coarse alluvial sand with silt and fine alluvial silt are AET #01-02624 - Page 3 of 15 present below the till at Boring #8. The glacial till is often overlain by fill, which is a mixture of sandy lean clays, clayey sand lean clays with sand and silty sands. Tliroughout much of the site, the fill is no more than 2V2' (and is usually less). • The primary exception to the above is the low elevation area in the southwest portion of the site. This area is represented by Borings #1, 6, 7 and 8. At these test locations, the profile consists of up to 12' of fill overlying organic clay and boglime to a depth of 19'. Alluvial lean clays and sands with silt then appear beneath this. Boring #10 (located in a higher elevation area) encountered T of fibric peat swamp deposit at the surface. Water Level Measurements The boreholes were probed for the presence of ground water, and water level measurements were taken. The measurements are recorded on the boring logs. A discussion of the water level measurement method is presented on the sheet entitled 'Exploration/Classification Methods." • Water levels were measured at depths of about 4' to 14%i in three of the four borings located in the low elevation southwest comer of the site. These borings did penetrate a sand layer, allowing water to rise in the borehole. However, with the hollow stem auger in-place, it is possible water had not yet fully stabilized. Therefore, it may be a little more shallow than that shown. • A water level was present at 4' below grade at Boring #10 where a shallow swamp layer has developed at the ground surface. This level may represent perched water. • At the remaining test locations, water did not enter the boreholes. The soils at these locations are slow draining, and it would take extended water level monitoring to establish the true water level condition at these locations. Ground water levels usually fluctuate. Fluctuations occur due to varying seasonal and yearly rainfall and snow melt, as well as other factors. AET #01-02624 - Page 4 of 15 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS Review of Soil Properties • The fill soils have variable N -values, and include some darker colored soils. These soils were not placed with the intent of supporting structural load, and we consider them to be too weak and compressible for structural support. • The glacial till soils in the higher elevation portions of the site are mostly stiff to very stiff. These soils are considered suitable for footing and floor slab support. In a few cases, the upper zone of the till has been weathered to a soft condition (N -values of 4 bpo. These softened clays are weaker and more compressible, and should at least be removed from beneath footings. • The medium dense to very dense coarse alluvial and fine alluvial soils beneath the glacial till should be suitable for footing and floor slab support. • The organic clays and boglime at Borings 41, 6, 7 and 10 are considered compressible under increased load. Because they are organic, some secondary consolidation is likely occurring due to the weight of the overlying fill and decomposition of the organics, even if new load is not added. The upper portion of the inorganic clay beneath the organic deposit is soft. This soil is also somewhat compressible. • The layers of sand with silt and silty sand at Borings #1, 6, 7 and 8 are considered relatively fast draining. Otherwise, the site soils are clays, which are slow draining. Therefore, water at the site will tend to perch upon the clays rather than infiltrate. • The clay soils at the site are considered moderately frost susceptible. RECOMMENDATIONS Site Grading • Excavation - To prepare the building areas for structural support, we recommend the excavation of fill, organic soils (organic clay, boglime or other organic soils) and soft alluvial clays (N- AET #01-02624 - Page 5 of 15 values of 4 bpf or less). In addition, we recommend removal of glacial tills with an N - value of 6 bpf or less and alluvial clays with N -values of 8 bpf or less from below the local footing areas, if they are present within 3 vertical feet of final footing grade. - The above recommendations would then result in the following excavation depths/ elevations at the test boring locations: Boring Number Recommended Depth of Excavation - Approximate Elevation of Excavation 1 19 857%:' 2 '2'/z - 4' '904 - 902'/; 3 1' 896' 4 `Ys - T *908Yz - 907 5 YF 905`h' 6 19' 862'/2' 7 19' 859' 8 *6V2- 14' `870`/i - 863' 9 *1'-4' *905'/2'— 902Y2' 10 9' 894Yz' 'Required excavation depth depends on final footing grade. # softs within aeptn range snows is within 3 vertical feet of a footing, then the soils should be excavated. - Utilities and other below grade improvements likely exist at the site, associated with the past apartment development. These elements and all associated backfill should also be removed where present within a building footprint. - The deep excavation in the area of Borings #1, 6 and 7 will extend lower than the measured water level. We recommend the excavation be positively dewatered to allow observation and evaluation of the soils in the excavation bottom, and to facilitate filling operations. Excavating below water is associated with risk (see attached sheet "Excavation/Refilling Below Water"), and we recommend avoiding this approach - Excavation bottoms extending below foundation grades (where applicable) should be oversized at a 1:1 ratio from the outside edges of the foundations (i.e., 1:1 oversize). AET #01-02624 - Page 6 of 15 Because variations can occur between test locations, we recommend that the final excavation bottom be observed and evaluated by an AET geotechnical engineer/technician prior to filling. • Acceptable Fill Types It is preferable that granular soils be used as engineered fill below the buildings, such as sandy soils with less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve (sands or sands with silt). However, if this proves to be too costly, it is possible to use on-site soils with caution if properly prepared and compacted. If on-site soils are to be used for new engineered fill, it is very important that the new fill placed meet the minimum specified compaction level throughout the entire thickness of the fill profile. Since most of the soils are clayey in nature, it will be very important that the soils be placed and compacted at a water content near the "optimum water content" condition. For clayey fill placed below foundations, we recommend the fill have a water content within 2% (either wet or dry) of the "optimum water content" condition defined by the Standard Proctor. This would likely require moisture conditioning of at least a portion of the on-site soils. To control settlement, the thickness of clay fill placed below footings should not exceed 10'. Where the fill thickness below footing grade will exceed 10', we recommend the lower portion of the fill profile consist of sands (described above). If standing water/wet conditions are present in the excavation bottom, we recommend the lower lift(s) of fill be sands with less than 5% by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by weight passing the 940 sieve. Lift thicknesses should be thin enough such that the entire thickness of the lift attains the minimum specified compaction level. • Minimum Fill Compaction Levels (per the Standard Proctor maximum dry density defined in ASTM:D698). - Below 3000 psf Footings - 98% - Below Concrete Floor Slabs —95% - Below Bituminous Pavements —100% in upper T zone, 95% below the upper 3' zone. AET #01-02624 - Page 7 of 15 • Additional Grading Comments - See the attached sheet entitled "Excavation and Refilling for Structural Support." - Compaction and moisture control with clayey soils placed below foundations should be performed under full-time observation and testing. As noted earlier, clayey fill placed below foundation elements should maintain a water content within 2% of the `optimum water content" condition. Building Foundations • Type - Conventional spread foundations. • Depth - 42" minimum below grade for perimeter footings bordering heated building space. - 60" minimum below grade footings where the building is not heated. - Convenient depth below the slab for interior footings placed within heated building spaces. • Allowable Bearing Capacity - 3,000 psf - The recommended allowable bearing capacity is generally based on the assumption that clayey fill will be used beneath foundations. Higher bearing pressures should be possible for foundation elements extending into the stiff till deposits, or if sand fill is used. We are available to review increased allowable bearing pressures with you, as the project plans develop and foundation grades and loads are known. Alternate for Ground Improvement With Geopiers Due to the significant depth of correction needed in the southwest corner of the site (area of Boring #l, 6, 7 and 8), you may wish to consider an alternate means of ground improvement to support spread foundations. The building in this area could be supported upon the existing soil which is reinforced by rammed aggregate pier (Geopier) elements. The piers are constructed by angering 24" to 36" diameter holes to specified depths and backfilling the holes with thin lifts of compacted AET #01-02624 - Page 8 of 15 aggregate. Compaction densifies the aggregate and increases lateral stress in the soil matrix. The system serves to reduce settlement by replacing the poor quality soils with a stiffer composite soil matrix. Geopiers are a proprietary foundation installation. The actual design in this area would be performed by Geopier Foundation Company, Midwest (GFCM), based on the data provided in this report. The local contact for GFCM is Charles Allgood. Mr. Allgood may be contacted at (763) 416-2136. GFCM can take the available soils data and the proposed foundation plan and design the improvement system. The specific allowable bearing capacity for design would be determined by GFCM. If an aggregate pier -enhanced foundation system is selected, we recommend that the following issues be considered prior to construction. • Specifications for aggregate pier foundation systems should be prepared by GFCM. • One demonstration pier should be installed with the Contractor's standard procedures and then load -tested to determine the modulus. The load testing setup and procedures should be selected by the Geopier Contractor and submitted for review to the project geotechnical engineers. The demonstration pier should be installed at the foundation grade level. • All the Geopier element installation operations should be conducted under the observation of the geotechnical engineer's representative. This observation is conducted to reduce the potential for short Geopier element installations and excessive aggregate lift thicknesses. Alternate For a Pile -Supported Building Due to the significant depth of correction needed in the southwest comer of the site (area of Borings #1, 6, 7 and 8), you may wish to consider supporting the proposed building and lower floor slab on piles. We recommend a 12" O.D. heavy wall pipe pile. The pipe pile should have a minimum wall thickness of 0.250" and a minimum yield strength of 45 ksi. The piles should be equipped with a flat AET #01-02624 - Page 9 of 15 plate welded to the pile tip. After driving the pile, we recommend the pipe pile be filled with concrete having a minimum compressive strength of 3,000 psi at 28 days. Due to the significant grade increase in at least the western portion of the southwest building, and also the presence of compressible fill, swamp deposits, and softer alluvial/till soils, the piles will be subjected to negative load (down drag). Based on the available soil boring information, we recommend reserving 25 tons per pile for potential negative load. To attain a 75 -ton (50 ton building load plus 25 -ton negative load) working load capacity, the piles should be driven to the dense coarse alluvial soils. Based on the soils encountered at the only deep boring (Boring #8), we estimate pile tip elevations of about 820' to 825'. The piles will attain their capacity in a combination of skin friction and end bearing. To attain a 75 -ton per pile working load capacity, we recommend the piles be driven with a hammer having a manufacturer's rated energy in the range of 25,000 to 40,000 ft -lbs. The above pile recommendations are based on attaining a factor of safety of about 2 against pile failure. We judge that total and differential foundation settlement should not exceed''/i'. Floor Slabs See the attached sheet entitled "Floor Slab MoistureNapor Protection." If the proposed building is supported on a pile foundation, the floor slabs (including garage) should also be supported structurally on pile. Building Backfilling • For basement areas, seethe attached sheet entitled `Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control" and `Basement Wall Backfill Detail." Since most of the site soils are relatively slow draining material, the water control issues on this sheet are very important. AET #01-02624 - Page 10 of 15 • For non -basement areas, see the attached sheet entitled "Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction" Exterior Parking Lot/Driveways • We refer you to the attached standard sheets entitled "Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction" and `Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design" for definitions and general details. • Prior to subgrade preparation, we recommend stripping surficial organics and topsoil layers. We then recommend the excavation of unstable clayey soils or poorly compacted fill, as judged by test rolling. It should be possible to limit the subcut to no more than 3' below top of subgrade. • If the subgrade exposes the stiffer, competent tills, it is less likely that subcutting will be needed for stability purposes. If instability is present within the till, it would likely be associated with spotty zones due to trapped water. Unstable zones should be subcut and replaced, or scarified, dried and recompacted until stability is gained. • New fill placed in paved areas should be compacted according to the Specified Density Method outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1. This requires a minimum compaction level of 100% of the Standard Proctor density (ASTM:D698). Water content range requirements are also specified, which generally maintains the water content at or below the "optimum water content" condition. • In slow draining and frost susceptible soils, it is typically preferred to use a sand subbase as the upper zone of subgrade. This can improve pavement performance by providing increased drainage for the aggregate base layer and moderating frost heaves and spring thaw weakening. If you elect to place a sand subbase, thickness transitions should preferably be maintained at 10:1 (H:v). • The sand subbase material should at least meet the requirements of Select Granular Borrow (per Mn/DOT Specification 3149.2B2). • The final subgrade prior to aggregate base placement (or prior to subbase placement if placed) should be test rolled to explore for potential unstable areas. Soils which excessively AET #01-02624 - Page 11 of 15 deflect under the test roll process should be scarified, dried, and recompacted, or subcut and replaced. • We estimate an R -value of 20 for the predominant sandy lean clays at this site. If a 1' thick sand subbase is included in the design, the composite subgrade (subbase over sandy lean clays) are judged to have an equivalent R -value of 35. • Note that fill placed for pavements over the organic soils will cause consolidation of the organic layer, and surface subsidence will result. This surface settlement will be differential in comparison to the building. We anticipate this differential movement may potentially approach 1' with time. A portion of the settlement will occur during construction, although noticeable post -construction settlement may still occur. If you are unwilling to accept this, please contact us for additional review. Note that correction of this issue would be costly or time consuming (surcharging and/or lightweight fill placement needed). Pavement Thickness Design • The pavement design depends on both the subgrade approach used and the type of traffic expected. Below, we are providing designs for the subgrade approach using no subbase, and the use of a 1' thick subbase over the native site soils. From a traffic standpoint, we are providing both light duty and heavy duty designs. The light duty design is intended for automobile/passenger track/van usage only, and not heavier truck traffic. The heavy duty design would be used for pavements which will experience truck traffic such as garbage trucks, moving vans, etc. Material Native Soil Subgrade =211 V Subbase Over Native Sub rade =3 Light Duty Davy Hea Light Duty Heavy uty Bituminous Wear1 %2" 2" 1 %Z' 2" Bituminous Non -Wear 1'/z" 2" 1`/:° 2" Class 5 Aggregate Base 7" 7" 5" 5" Select Granular Borrow - 12" 12" AET #01-02624 - Page 12 of 15 Utilities in Compressible Soil Areas • As noted before, where fill is placed over organic/compressible soils, the ground is expected to settle. Utilities placed over consolidating soils would then also settle. The utility design should take this into account. • If the utilities can not be designed to accommodate potential settlements, ground improvement or other alternate means of support would then be needed. We are available for additional review on this issue if needed. • If possible, utilities should be located away from the organic soil areas. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Excavation Oversizing and Sidesloping • Excavations should maintain minimum sidesloping unless they are retained or grouted. • Sideslopes should be maintained in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR), Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations" (found on www.osha.gov). Observation and Testing • On-site observation by a Geotechnical Engineeraechnician is highly recommended during grading and construction to evaluate potential changes in soil conditions. • Soil density testing should be performed on fill placed in order to document recommended compaction levels have been satisfied. • For fill placed below foundation areas, we recommend the compaction monitoring be performed on a full-time basis. Moisture control will be very important if on-site clayey soils are used. • If the proposed building is supported on pile, we recommend the Pile Driving Analyzerrm be utilized to establish the driving criteria for the piles. In addition, we recommend the installation of the piles be observed on a full-time basis by a representative of an independent testing laboratory. AET #01-02624 - Page 14 of 15 STANDARD OF CARE Our services for your project have been conducted to those standards considered normal for services of this type at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty, either express or implied, is intended. CLOSURE To protect you, AFT, and the public, we authorize use of opinions and recommendations in this report only by you and your project team for this specific project. Contact us if other uses are intended Even though this report is not intended to provide sufficient information to accurately determine quantities and locations of particular materials, we recommend that your potential contractors be advised of the report availability. If you have any questions regarding the work reported herein, or if we can be of further service to you, please do not hesitate to contact us. Report Prepared by: American Engineering Testing, Inc. �D teven D. Koenes, PE Principal Engineer MN Reg. #13180 (651) 659-1304 Report Reviewed by: American Engineering Testing, Inc. Jeffery K. Voyen, PE Vice President, Geotechnical Division MN Reg. #15928 (651)659-1305 Attachments: Excavation and Refilling for Structural Support Excavation/Refilling Below Water Floor Slab Moisture/Vapor Protection Basement/Retaining Wall Backfill and Water Control Basement Wall Backfill Detail Freezing Weather Effects on Building Construction Definitions Relating to Pavement Construction Bituminous Pavement Subgrade Preparation and Design Figure 1 - Boring Locations Logs of Previous Test Borings (#1-5) AET #01-02624 - Page 15 of 15 Logs of Additional Test Borings (#6-10) Exploration/Classification Methods Boring Log Notes Unified Soil Classification System EXCAVATION AND REFILLING FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT EXCAVATION Excavations for structural support at soil boring locations should be taken to depths recommended in the geotechnical report. Since conditions can vary, recommended excavation depths between and beyond the boring locations should be evaluated by geotechnical field personnel. If ground water is present, the excavation should be dewatered to avoid the risk of unobservable poor soils being left in-place. Excavation base soils may become disturbed due to construction traffic, ground water or other reasons. Such soils should be subcut to underlying undisturbed soils. Where the excavation base slopes steeper than 4:1, the excavation bottom should be benched across the slope parallel to the excavation contour. Soil stresses under footings spread out with depth. Therefore, the excavation bottom and subsequent fill system should be laterally oversized beyond footing edges to support the footing stresses. A lateral oversize equal to the depth of fill below the footing (i.e., 1:1 oversize) is usually recommended. The lateral oversize is usually increased to 1.5:1 where compressible organic soils are exposed on the excavation sides. Variations in oversize requirements may be recommended in the geotechnical report or can be evaluated by the geotechnical field personnel. Unless the excavation is retained, the backslopes should be maintained in accordance with OSHA Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR), Part 1926, Subpart P, "Excavations" (found on www.osha eov). Even with the required OSHA sloping, ground water can induce sideslope raveling or running which could require that flatter slopes or other approaches be used. Filling should proceed only after the excavation bottom has been approved by the geotechnical engineer/technician. Approved fill material should be uniformly compacted in thin lifts to the compaction levels specified in the geotechnical report. The lift thickness should be thin enough to achieve specified compaction through the full lift thickness with the compaction equipment utilized. Typical thicknesses are 6" w 9' for clays and 12" to 18" for sands. Fine grained soils are moisture sensitive and are often wet (water content exceeds the 'optimum moisture content' defined by a Proctor test). In this case, the soils should be scarified and dried to achieve a water content suitable for compaction. This drying process can be time consuming, labor intensive, and requires favorable weather. Select fill material may be needed where the excavation bottom is sensitive to disturbance or where standing water is present. Sands (SP) which are medium to coarse grained are preferred, and can be compacted in thicker lift thicknesses than finer grained soils. Filling operations for structural support should be closely monitored for fill type and compaction by a geotechnical technician. Monitoring should be on a full-time basis in cases where vertical fill placement is rapid; during freezing weather conditions; where ground water is present; or where sensitive bottom conditions are present. EXCAVATION/REFILLING DURING FREEZING TE"ERATURES Soils that freeze will heave and lose density. Upon thawing, these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave and density loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition; and is most pronounced in clays and silts. Foundations, slabs, and other improvements should be protected from frost intrusion during freezing weather. For earthwork during freezing weather, the areas to be filled should be stripped of frozen soil, snow and ice prior to new fill placement. In addition, new fill should not be allowed to freeze during or after placement. For this reason, it may be preferable to do earthwork operations in small plan areas so grade can be quickly attained instead of large areas where much frost stripping may be needed. O1REPO 11(2/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. EXCAVATION/REFILLING BELOW WATER GENERAL When excavation of poor soils below water is needed to allow placement of engineered fill for structural support, special considerations are needed. Excavation and refilling below water involves the risk of trapping compressible or otherwise unsuitable materials within or below the new fill system. Because the materials covered by the advancing fill soils cannot be seen, any dislodged materials or deeper localized pockets of compressible soils can be missed by the excavating equipment. To reduce the risk of trapping compressible soils within or below the fill, our primary recommendation is to dewamr below the excavation bottom to allow excavation and refilling in a non -standing water condition. A drawdown of the water table results in increased loadings on underlying soils. This may cause settlements of surrounding property located within the area of the drawdown. Excavation and refilling below water without dewatering can be done although is not preferred. If you elect to use this approach (likely for economic reasons), the owner should be made aware of the risks, and be willing to accept these risks. RLS% REDUCTION PROCEDURES While the risks associated with excavation and refilling below water cannot be eliminated, there are a number of procedures which can be used to reduce the risk of settlemenL These include the following: • A subsurface exploration program should be performed prior to any excavation. The program will provide information on required bottom of excavation depths, and provide information regarding the classification of acceptable soils anticipated in the excavation bottoms. • The excavation work should be performed with a backhoe or drag line, and the operator should be experienced with this type of excavation operation. 'Over excavation' into the competent natural soils and additional lateral oversizmg can aid in reducing the risks. • An experienced geotechnical engineer/technician should be retained to provide full-time observations during the excavate/refill operations. Although the engineer/technician may am be able to fully verify that all materials were removed (because the standing water precludes full observation), the engineer/technician can aid in judging when competent soils are being reached and penetrated. • Engineered fill placed below water, and to an elevation of at leasET above the water level, should consist of a clean, mostly medium grained sand (less than 5 % by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by weight passing the #40 sieve). • The fill should be pushed into the excavation such that the fill mass imparts a sideways and downward "scouring' action to advance the fill along the excavation bottom. The scouring action would tend to push remnant pieces of unsuitable material ahead of the filling process where a backhoe can periodically remove the unsuitable materials. • Once the fill has been placed, the resultant Wriantral soil profile can be explored by either test holes or borings (depending on the conditions). Increasing thenumber of test holes and/or borings can increase the confidence level that the procedure has been successful. O1REP012(2/O1) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. FLOOR SLAB MOISTUREIVAPOR PROTECTION Floor slab design relative to moisture/vapor protection should consider the type and location of two elements, a granular layer and a vapor membrane (vapor retarder, water resistant barrier or vapor barrier). In the following sections, the pros and cons of the possible options regarding these elements will be presented, such that you and your specifier can make an engineering decision based on the benefits and costs of the choices. GRANULAR LAYER In American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302.1-96, a "base material" is recommended, rather than the conventional cleaner "sand cushion" material. The mammal maintains that clean sand (common "cushion" sand) is difficult m compact and maintain until concrete placement is complete. ACI recommends a clean, fine graded material (with at least 10% to 30% of particles passing a #100 sieve) which is not contaminated with clay, sdt or organic material. We refer you m ACI 302.1- 96 for additional details regarding the r q u+rer+Pms for the base material. In cases where potential static water levels or significant perched water sources appear near or above the floor slab, an underfloor drainage system may be needed wherein a draintile system is placed within a thicker clean sand or gravel layer. Such a system should be properly engineered depending on subgrade soil types and rare/head of water inflow. VAPOR MEMBRANE The need for a vapor membrane depends on whether the floor slab will have a vapor sensitive covering, will have vapor sensitive items stored on the slab, or if the space above the slab will be a humidity controlled area. If the project does not have this vapor sensitivity or moisture control need, placement of a vapor membrane may not be necessary. Your decision will then relate to whether in use the ACI base material or a conventional sand cushion layer. However, if any of the above sensitivity issues apply, placement of a vapor membrane is recommended. Some floor covering systems (adhesives and flooring materials) require a vapor membrane to maintain a specified maximum slab moisture content as a condition of their warranty. VAPOR DiIIt:BRANE/GRANULAR LAYER PLACEMENT A number of issues should be considered when deciding whether to place the vapor membrane above or below the gramilar layer. The benefits of placing the slab on a granular layer, with the vapor membrane placed below the granular layer, include reduction of the following: • Slab curling daring the curing and drying process. • Time of bleeding, which allows for quicker finishing. Vapor membrane puncturing. • Surface blistering or delamination caused by an extended bleeding period. • Cracking caused by plastic or drying shrinkage. The benefits of placing the vapor membrane over the gramdar layer include the following: • The moisture emission rate is achieved faster. • Eliminates a potential water reservoir within the granular layer above the membrane. • Provides a "slip surface", thereby reducing slab restraint and the associated random cracking. If a membrane is to be used in conjunction with a granular. layer, the approach recommended depends on slab usage and the construction schedule. The vapor membrane should be placed above the granular layer when: Vapor sensitive floor covering systems are used or vapor sensitive items will be directly placed on the slab. • The area will be humidity, controlled, but the slab will be placed before the building is enclosed and sealed from rain. • Required by a floor covering manufacturer's system warranty. The vapor membrane should be placed below the granular layer when.- Used hen:Used in humidity controlledateas(withomvaporseadtivecoverings/storeditems),withtheroof membrane inplace, and the building enclosed to the point where precipitation will not intrude into the slab area. Consideration should be given to slight sloping of the membrane to edges where draintile or other disposal methods can alleviate potential water sources, such as pipe or roof leaks, foundation wall damp proofing failure, fire sprinkler system activation, etc. There may be cases where membrane placement may have a detrimental effect on the subgrade support system (e.g., expansive soils). In these cases, your decision will need to weigh the cost of subgrade options and the performance risks. O1REP013(2/01) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BASEMENT/RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND WATER CONTROL Below grade basements should include a perimeter backfill drainage system on the exterior side of the wall. The exception may be where basements lie within free draining sands where water will not perch in the backfill. Drainage systems should consist of perforated or slotted PVC drainage pipes located at the bottom of the backfill trench, lower than the interior floor grade. The drain pipe should be surrounded by properly graded filter rock. A filter fabric should then envelope the filter rock. The drain pipe should be connected to a suitable means of disposal, such as a sump basket or a gravity outfall. A storm sewer gravity outfall would be preferred over exterior dayllghting, as the latter may freeze during winner. For non -building, exterior retaining walls, weep holes at the base of the wall can be substituted for a drain pipe. BACKFILLING Prior to backfilling, damp/water proofing should be applied on perimeter basement walls. The backfill materials placed against basement walls will exert lateral loadings. To reduce this loading by allowing for drainage, we recommend using free draining sands for backfill. The zone of sand backfill should extend outward from the wall at least 2', and then upward and outward from the wall at a 300 or greater angle from vertical. As a minimum, the sands should contain no greater than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve, which would include (SP) and (SP -SM) soils. The sand backfill should be placed in lifts and compacted with portable compaction equipment. This compaction should be to the specified levels if slabs or pavements are placed above. Where slab/pavements are not above, we recommend capping the sand backfill with a layer of clayey soil to minimize surface water infiltration. Positive surface drainage away from the building should also be maintained. If surface capping or positive surface drainage cannot be maintained, then the trench should be filled with more permeable soils, such as the Fine Filter or Coarse Filter Aggregates defined in MnDOT Specification 3149. You should recognize that if the backfill soils are not properly compacted, settlements may occur which may affect surface drainage away from the building. Backfill Ong with silty or clayey soil is possible but not preferred. These soils can build-up water which increases lateral pressures and results in wet wall conditions and possible water infiltration into the basement. If you elect to place silty or clayey soils as backfill, we recommend you place a prefabricated drainage composite against the wall which is hydraulically connected to a drainage pipe at the base of the backfill trench. High plasticity clays should be avoided as backfill due to their swelling potential. LATERAL PRESSURES Lateral earth pressures on below grade walls vary, depending on backfill soil classification, backfill compaction and slope of the backfill surface. Static or dynamic surcharge loads near the wall will also increase lateral wall pressure. For design, we recommend the following ultimate lateral earth pressure values (given in equivalent fluid pressure values) for a drained soil compacted to 95 % of the Standard Proctor density and a level ground surface. Equivalent Fluid Density Soil Type Active (pcf) At -Rest (pcf) Sands (SP or SP -SM) 35 50 Silty Sands (SM) 45 65 Fine Grained Soils (SC, CL or ML) 70 90 Basement walls are normally restrained at the top which restricts movement. In this case, the design lateral pressures should be the "at -rest" pressure situation. Retaining walls which are free to rotate or deflect should be designed using the active case. Lateral earth pressures will be significantly higher than that shown if the backfill soils are not drained and become saturated. OIREP014(7101) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. Basement Wall Backfill Detail Slope to Drain other Drain Pipe ON 11- 2' Minimum Notes: (1) With clay cap or other equivalent water penetration barrier and with positive drainage, the sand should contain no greater than 12% by weight passing the 9200 sieve. Without the surface barrier or positive drainage, more permeable soils should be used, such as the Fine Filter Aggregate defined in Mn/DOT Specification 3149. (2) Coarse Filter Aggregate (MalDOT Specification 3149) wrapped with Type I Nonwoven geoteatile (MnfDOT Specification 3733) OMEP014A (IQMS) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC FREEZING WEATHER EFFECTS ON BUELDING CONSTRUCTION Because water expands upon freezing and soils contain water, soils which are allowed to freeze will heave and lose density. Upon thawing, these soils will not regain their original strength and density. The extent of heave and density/ strength loss depends on the soil type and moisture condition. Heave is greater in soils with higher percentages of fines (silts/clays). High silt content soils are most susceptible, due to their high capillary rise potential which can create ice lenses. Fine grained soils generally heave about 1/4" to 3/8" for each foot of frost penetration. This can translate to 1" to 2' of total frost heave. This total amount can be significantly greater if ice lensing occurs. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Clayey and silty soils can be used as perimeter backfill, although the effect of their poor drainage and frost properties should be considered. Basement areas will have special drainage and lateral load requirements which are not discussed here. Frost heave may be critical in doorway areas. Stoops or sidewalks adjacent to doorways could be designed as structural slabs supported on frost footings with void spaces below. With this design, movements may then occur between the structural slab and the adjacent on -grade slabs. Non -frost susceptible sands (with less than 12% passing a #200 sieve) can be used below such areas. Depending on the function of surrounding areas, the sand layer may need a thickness transition away from the area where movement is critical. With sand placement over slower draining soils, subsurface drainage would be needed for the sand layer. High density extruded insulation could be used within the sand to reduce frost penetration, thereby reducing the sand thickness needed. We caution that insulation placed near the surface can increase the potential for ice glazing of the surface. The possible effects of adfreezing should be considered if clayey or silty soils are used as backfill. Adfreezing occurs when backfill adheres to rough surfaced foundation walls and lifts the wall as it freezes and heaves. This occurrence is most common with masonry block walls, unheated or poorly heated building situations and clay backfill. The potential is also increased where backfill soils are poorly compacted and become saturated. The risk of adfreezing can be decreased by placing a low friction separating layer between the wall and backfill. Adfreezing can occur on exterior piers (such as deck, fence or other similar pier footings), even if a smooth surface is provided. This is more likely in poor drainage situations where soils become saturated. Additional footing embedment and/or widened footings below the frost zones (which includes tensile reinforcement) can be used to resist uplift forces. Specific designs would require individual analysis. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Foundations, slabs and other improvements which may be affected by frost movements should be insulated from frost penetration during freezing weather. If filling takes place during freezing weather, all frozen soils, snow and ice should be stripped from areas to be fined prior to new fill placement. The new fill should not be allowed to freeze during transit, placement or compaction. This should be considered in the project scheduling, budgeting and quantity estimating. It is usually beneficial to perform cold weather earthwork operations in small areas where grade can be attained quickly rather than working larger areas where a greater amount of frost stripping may be needed. If slab subgrade areas freeze, we recommend the subgrade be thawed prior to floor slab placement. The frost action may also require reworking and recompaction of the thawed subgrade. O1REP015(2101) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. DEFLNMONS RELATING TO PA :WMENT CONSTRUCTION TOP OF SUBGRADE Grade which contacts the bottom of the aggregate base layer SAND SUBBASE Uniform thickness sand layer placed as the top of subgrade which is intended to improve the frost and drainage characteristics of the pavement system by better draining excess water in the base/subbase, by reducing and "bridging" frost heaving and by reducing spring thaw weakening effects. CRITICAL SUBGRADE ZONE The subgrade portion beneath and within three vertical feet of the top of subgrade. A sand subbase, if placed, would be considered the tipper portion of the critical subgrade zone. SELECT GRANULAR BORROW Soils meeting Mo/DOT Specification 3149.282, which refers to granular soils containing less than 12% by weight passing the #200 sieve. MODIFIED SELECT GRANULAR BORROW Clean, medium grained sands which contain less than 5% by weight passing the #200 sieve and less than 40% by weight passing the #40 sieve. GEOTEXTTLE STABILIZATION FABRIC Geotextlle meeting Type V requirements defined in Mn/DOT Specification 3733. When using fabric, installation should also meet the requirements outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 3733. COMPACTION SUBCUT Construction of a uniform thickness subctn below a designated grade to provide uniformity and compaction within the subcut zone. Replacement fill can be the materials subcut, although the reused soils should be blended to a uniform soil condition and recompacted per the Specified Density Method (Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3FI). TEST ROLL A means of evaluating the near -surface stability of subgrade soils (usually non -granular). Suitability is determined by the depth of tutting or deflection caused by passage of heavy rubber -tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump truck, over the test area. Yielding of less than I" is considered acceptable, although engineering judgment may be applied depending on equipment used, soil conditions present and/or pavement performance expectations. UNSTABLESOIIS Those soils which excessively tot or deflect under a test roll. Unstable soils typically have a water content exceeding the "optimum water content" defined by the Standard Proctor (ASTM: D698). ORGANIC SOIIS Soils which have sufficient organic content such that engineering properties/stability are affected. These soils are usually black to dark brown in color. OIREP019 (01/05) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BMJM[NOUS PAVEMENT SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND DESIGN GENERAL Bituminous pavements are considered layered "flexible" systems. Dynamic wheel loads transmit high local stresses through the bitummous/base onto the subgrade. Because of this, the upper portion of the subgrade requires high strength/stability to reduce deflection and fatigue of the bhuminous/base system. The wheel load intensity dissipates through the subgrade such that the high level of soil stability is usually not needed below about 2' to 4' (depending on the anticipated traffic and underlying soil conditions). This is the primary reason for specifying a higher level of compaction within the upper subgrade zone versus the lower portion Moderate compaction is usually desired below the upper critical zone, primarily to avoid settlements/sags of the roadway. However, if the soils present below the upper 3' subgrade zone are unstable, attempts to properly compact the upper 3' zone to the 100% level may be difficult or not possible. Therefore, control of moisture just below the 3' level may be needed to provide a non - yielding base upon which to compact the upper subgrade soils. Long-term pavement performance is dependent on the soil subgrade drainage and frost characteristics. Poor to moderate draining soils tend to be susceptible to frost heave and subsequent weakening upon thaw. This condition can result in irregular frost movements and "popgun," as well as an accelerated softening of the subgrade. Frost problems become more pronounced when the subgrade is layered with soils of varying permeability. In this situation, the free - draining soils provide a pathway and reservoir for water infiltration which exaggerates the movements. The placement of a well drained sand subbase layer as the top of subgrade can minimize trapped water, smooth frost movements and significantly reduce subgrade softening. In wet, layered and/or poor drainage situations, the long-term performance gam should be significant. If a sand subbase is placed, we recommend it be a "Select Granular Borrow' which meets MWDOT Specification 3149.2B2. PREPARATION Subgrade preparation should include stripping smfrcial vegetation and organic soils. Where the exposed soils are within the upper 'critical" subgrade zone (generally 254' deep for "auto only" areas and 3' deep for 'heavy duty' areas), they should be evaluated for stability. Excavation equipment may make such areas obvious due to deflection and mining patterns. Final evaluation of soils within the critical subgrade zone should be done by test rolling with heavy rubber -tired construction equipment, such as a loaded dump tack. Soils which rut or deflect 1' or more under the test roll should be corrected by either subcturitg and replacement; or by scarification, drying, and recompaction. Reworked soils and new fill should. be compacted per the "Specified Density Method" outlined in Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3F1 (a minimum of 100% of Standard Proctor density in the upper 3' subgrade zone, and a minimum of 95% below this). Subgrade preparation scheduling can be an important consideration. Fall and Spring seasons ostially have unfavorable weather for soil drying. Stabilizing non -sand subgiades during these seasons may be difficult, and attempts often result in compromising the pavement quality. Where construction scheduling requires subgrade preparation during these times, the use of a sand subbase becomes even more beneficial for constructability reasons. SUBGRADE DRAINAGE If a sand subbase layer is used, it should be provided with a means of subsurface drainage to prevent water build-up. This can be in the form of draintile Imes which dispose into storm sewer systems, or outlets into ditches. Where sand subbase layers include sufficient sloping, and water can migrate to lower areas, draintile lines can be limited to finger drains at the catch basins. Even if a sand layer is not placed, strategically placed draintile limes can aid in improving pavement performance. This would be most important in areas where adjacent non -paved areas slope towards the pavement Perimeter edge drains can aid in intercepting water which may infiltrate below the pavement. O1REP016(021O1) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. SUBSURFACE BORING LOG AFP JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 1 (p. 1 Of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment' Chanhassen MN D M SURFACE ELEVATION: 876.7 GEOLOGY SAMPLE FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL .-�t20 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION NMC E 1 2 M SS 22 2- 3— FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel, FILL 8 M SS 22 a trace roots, light brown and gray 5 21 M SS 18 6- 7- 78 8— 18 M SS IS 9- 10— 9 M SS 18 38 tt ORGANIC CLAY, black, firm, laminations of ASH OR FINE tz sand (OL/OH) WALLUVTUM 1 13 8 M SS 22 37 14 29 IS 7 M SS 22 49 16 17 62 BOGLRAE, trace roots, light gray mottled, soft OL 18 2 M SS 22 40 LEAN CLAY soft CL 19 FINE 25 LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, trace shells, gray, soft to firm, laminations of sand (CL) ALLUVIUM zo 12 SS 18 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, medium to 21 fine grained, brownish gray, waterbearing, COARSE 22 medium dense, lenses and laminations of silty ALLUVIUM 23 sand(SP-SM) za LEAN CLAY, gray, stiff laminations of 25 waterbearing sand (CL) ALLUVIUM 26 Il SS 22 27 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-25' 3.25" HSA SAMPLED RE DEPTH EPICAVE-IN CASINGD FLULVL VIDEEEE V THE ATTACHED 10/24/05 3:20 27.0 24.5 24.0 12.5 SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 10/24/05 DR: GL LG: GD Rig: 3C 7FdS LOG 06104 AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 2 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DMRi SURFACE ELEVATION: 906.8 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD& LABORATORY TESTS N I MC I TYPE IN. FEET MATERIAL. DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL .-#201 I z FILL, mostly lean clay with sand, trace roots, dark brown and brown FILL 5 M IS 22 3 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light brown, 4 IS 18 26 4 soft, laminations of wet sand (CL) 5 LEAN CLAY WrTH SAND, a little gravel, light 14 M IS 18 26 6 brown mottled, stiff, laminations of silt (CL) SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light g grayish brown mottled, very stiff; laminations of (CL) 18 M IS 18 9 sand TILL 10 19 M IS 18 11 12 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light brownish gray mottled, very stiff (CL) . 13 18 M IS l8 14 IS 15 M X IS 18 16 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE-' REFER TO 0-I4/,' 3.25 HSA DATE TIME SD DEPTH DEPTH FLDRILLING UIRD �LLEVGEL LEVEL. TER THE ATTACHED 1024105 4:20 16.0 14.5 16.0 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERM NOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 1024/05 DR GL LG: GD Rig: 3C THIS LOG 06104 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 0I-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 (p. 1 Of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview HID Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 897.0 GEOLOGY N MC SAMPI-E REC FIELD& LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 420 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION TYPE IN. FILL, mixture of lean clay with sand and sandy FILL I lean clay, a little gravel, trace roots, dark brown 9 M SS 18 and li t brown 2 3 11 M SS 18 4 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light s brownish gray mottled, stiff (CL) 19 M SS 22 6- 7- 25 M SS 22 8 TILL 9 21 M SS 22 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light to brownish gray mottled, sdf& laminations of sand It (CL) 23 M SS 22 12 SANDY LEAN CLAY,ish brown, wn, stiff 13 (CL) 25 M SS 8 la SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light IS brownish gray mottled, very stiff, laminations of 22 M SS 22 sand CL 16 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-14V2' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING SAMPLED DEPTH DEPTH FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 10/24/05 11:45 16.0 14.0 15.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 10/24/05 DR: GL LG: GD Rig 3C THIS LOG 06/04 E AET JOB NO: 01-026124 LOG OF BORING NO.. 4 (p• 1 Of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 968.9 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD& LABORATORY TESTS N MC TYPE IN. FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION WC DEN LL PL w#20 I— SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace roots, grayish brown and brown mottled, soft, WEATEEREE4 TILL M SS 22 z laminations of sand CL 3 11 M SS 18 a SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace roots, grayish brown mottled, stiff (CL) 5 12 M X SS 18 6 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light TILL g brownish gray, very stiff, laminations of sand 16 M SS 18 9 (CL) to 20 M SS 18 11 12 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light brownish gray, very stiff, laminations of sand 13 (CL) 22 M SS 18 14 t5 18 M SS 18 16 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-14%' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING DEPTH DEPTH CAVE -TN DEPTH DRILLING WATER FLUID LEVEL LEVEL THE ATTACHED 1024105 1:55 16.0 14.5 16.0 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 11124/05 DR GL LG: GD Rig: 3C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 5 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 905.9 GEOLOGY REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL .42 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MCF IN. FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel, FILL I trace roots, brownish gray and light brownish 10 M SS 22 2- 15 MI SS 16 3- 3 4- 5- 20 M SS 18 6- 7 - 7SANDY SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light TILL 27 M SS 18 brownish gray mottled, stiff to very stiff, 9 laminations of sand (CL) 0 10- 12 12 17 M SS 18 13 la 15 19 M SS 18 16 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0.14'/i 3.25" RSA DATE SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH DRILLING FLUIDLEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 10/24/05 1:00 16.0 14.5 15.8 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMNVOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 10/24/05 THIS LOG DR ' GL LG: GD : X 10 a' AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 6 (p. 1 of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 881.6 �' REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION GEOLOGY N MC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL .k2 1 5 M SS 14 2- 3- FILL, mixture of sandy lean and [FILL 6 M SS 14 4 clay silty sand, a little gravel, trace roots, light brownish gray, 5 gray and dark brown 6 M SS 16 6- 7- 7g 8- 9 M X SS 18 9- 10- ORGANIC CLAY, trace roots, black, moist, 5 M X SS 16 27 11 � m(CL/OL) SWAMP DEPOSIT OR 12 FINE LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, and brown 13 gray mottled, firm (CL) ALLUVIUM g M SS 18 14 15 4 W SS 18 16 SILTY SAND, a little gravel, fon to medium greened, brown, wet, very loose (SM) COARSE ALLUVIUM 17 18 WH W Ss 18 LEAN CLAY, brownish 19 gray mottled, very sok ]eoses and in lamations of waterbearing sand 20 8 M SS 18 36 52 23 FAT CLAY, trace roots, light brownish 21 gray _ mottled, firm (CH) 22 FINE LEAN CLAY, brownish gray, stiff, laminations 23 of silty clay CL ALLUVIUM 13 WW X SS 18 SANDY SILT, brownish medium dense, 24 gray, laminations of wasand 25 14 SS IS 28 SILTY CLAY, gray, stiff laminations of wet sil sand CLIML 26 LEAN CLAY, brownish gray, stiff laminations 27 of wet silty sand (CL) 28 29 30 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, stiff, lenses and laminations of wet silty sand (SC/SM) TILL 15 M1W SS 18 31 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL. MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-29Y:' 3.25•' RSA DAA TIME SAMPLEDDTHPD�GEL DEPTH CAVE-IN DEPTH FLUID THE ATTACHEDDEPTH 12/29/05 2:30 16.0 14.5 15.1 14.7 SHEETS FOR AN 1229/05 3:05 31.0 295 30.1 26.7 EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 1229/05 TERMINOLOGY ON T3R: LB LG: GD Rig: 27C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 7 (p.1 Of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 878.0 GEOLOGY SAMPLE 1tEC FIELD& LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL.M2 FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC TYPE IN. 1 FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, trace roots, dark 4 M SS 18 brown and light grayish brown 2 3 10 M X SS 14 FILL, mostly sandy lean clay, a little gravel, light grayish brown 4 5 8 M SS is 6 FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy lean FILL clay, a little gravel, brownish gray and grayish brown 8 14 M X SS 11 9- 10- 4 M SS 14 FILL, mixture of lean clay and organic clay, 11 trace roots, gray and black T 12- _ 13 9 M SS 18 28 14 ORGANIC CLAY, black, stiff to firm,WEp0 M OR laminations of sihy sand (OIICL) FINE 15 ALLUVRJM 5 M X SS 18 33 16 17 4 M SS IB 43 LEAN CLAY, slightly organic, trace shells and FINE 18 roots, light gray mottled, laminations of boglime ALLUVIUM 19 CL/OL 26 SAND WITH SILT, medirim to fine grained, COARSE gray, waterbearing, laminations of wet silty sand ALLUVIUM 11 W SS 14 21 (SP -SM) 22 23 SILT, gray, wet, loose, laminations of silty sand FINE 24 (MI.) ALLUVIUM 25 7 W SS is LEAN CLAY, gray, frm, laminations of silt 26 CL 27- 28 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, very stiff TILL 29 laminations of waterbearing sand (SC/SM) 30 18 SS IS 31 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0-29Ys' 315" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH CASING CAVE-IN DEPTH DEPTH DRILLING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACHED 12/29/05 12:35 13.5 12.0 13.4 12,2 SHEETS FOR AN 12/29/05 1:20 31.0 29.5 30.5 24.6 EXPLANATION OF BORING TERMINOLOGY ON COMPLETED: 12/29/05 DR: LB LG: GD : 27C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AFT JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p. 1 of 3) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 577 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC TYPE IN. WC DEN LL PL 44204 FILL, mixture of sand with silt and clayey sand, 1 a little gravel, pieces of bituminous, trace roots, 9 M SS 18 2 brown and black FILL, mixture of clayey sand and sandy lean 3 clay, a little gravel, brown and fight brownish 8 M X SS 18 FILL 4- gray 5 FILL, mixture of lean clay with sand and clayey trace roots, light gray and brown 6 M SS 18 6sand, 7 CLAYEY SAND, trace roots, grayish brown 8 firm (SC) 7 M SS 18 WFATHERE 9 TILL to SANDY LEAN CLAY, light brown and light It gray mottled, firm (CL) 5 M SS 18 38 12 LEAN CLAY, lightFINE graY and light brown 17 mottled, firm (C) ALLUVIUM 7 M SS 18 33 14 15 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray and 7 M SS 18 16 brown mottled to brown and gray mottled, frm 17 to stiff (CL) 18 9 M SS 18 19 20 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brownish gray,TILL 11 M SS 18 21 stiff (SC/CL) 22 23 24 25 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray mottled, 12 M SS 18 26 stiff (SC) 27- 28 29 CLAYEY SAND, a littleve gta 1, gray, stiff to 30 very stiff (SC/CL) 15 M SS 18 31 DEPTH_ DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 0.29Yi 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SANIPLED DEPTH CASING DEPTH CAVE-IN DRILLING DH FLUID LEVEL WLEVEL THE ATTACHED 29Y, -79Y:' RD w/DM 12/30/05 10:25 31.0 29.5 31.0 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF COMPLETED: 12/30/05 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: LB LG: GD Rig: 27C THIS LOG 06/04 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p. 2 of 3) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH GEOLOGY SAtdPLEPRFECFIELD k LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL "2 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC TYPE 33 34- 35 19 M SS 18 36 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, stiff to TILL 37 very stiff (SC/CL) 38 39 40 26 M SS 18 41- ]4243 42- 43 44 45 20 M X SS 18 64748 46- 47- 48 49 50 SAND WITH SILT, fine to medium grained, brown, waterbearing, dense (SP -SM) 38 W SS 18 15253 51- 52- 53 54 55 SAND WITH SILT, a little gravel, medium to COARSE 37 W SS 18 56 fine grained, brown, waterbearing, dense ALLUVIUM 57 (SP -Slut) 58 59 60 36 W SS 16 61 62 63 64 SAND WITH SILT, fine to medium grained, 65 brown, waterbearing, dense (SP -SM) 42 W SS 18 66- 67 68 SAND WITH SILT, fine grained, light grayish 69 brown, waterbearing, very dense (SP -SM) 06/04 'AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 8 (p. 3 of 3) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEPTH IN GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DIN LL PL 4201 FEET MATERIAL DESCRUMON N MC TYPE IN. 66 W X SS 18 71 SAND WITH SILT, fine grained, light grayish 72 brown, waterbearing, very dense (SP -SM) 73 - COARSE 74_ ALLUVIUM 75 SAND WITH SILT, fine grained, gray, waterbearing, medium dense (SP -SM) 29 W SS 18 76- 6777879 77- 78- 71- SILT, brownish gray, wet, medium dense FINE so (MUCL-ML) ALLUVIUM 22 M SS 18 sl END OF BORING 06/04 'AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET JOB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 9 (p. I Of 1) PROJECT: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment; Chanhassen MN DEP SURFACE ELEVATION: 906.8 GEOLOGY SAMPLE REC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL o-#2 IN FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC TYPE IN. FILL, mostly lean clay with sand, trace roots, FILL 5 M SS 12 I dark brown and black 2 SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace roots, brownish mottl firm CL WEATHE 3 TILL 5 M SS 14 SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace roots, light brownish y mottled, firm (CL) a 5 SANDY LEAN CLAY, light gray and light brown mottled, stiff (CL) 14 M SS 18 6 7- 8— 16 M SS 18 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, light 9 brownish gray, very stiff (CL) 10 22 M SS 18 11 12 TILL 13 27 M SS 18 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, gray, very stiff I4 to hard, lenses and laminations of sand with silt 15 at about 15' (SC) 37 M SS 18 16 17- 18 19 20 19 M SS 18 21 END OF BORING DEPTJL DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS NOTE: REFER TO 3.25" HSA DATETIME SAMPLED DFP H DEPTH SING DEPTH ING FLUID LEVEL WATER LEVEL THE ATTACH ED0-19Y:' 12/29/05 10:00 21.0 19.5 21.0 None SHEETS FOR AN EXPLANATION OF BORING COMPLETED: 12/29/05 7F,RMINOLOGY ON DR LB LG: GD Rig: 27C THIS LOG 06104 AMERICAN ENGINEERING SUBSURFACE BORING LOG TESTING, INC. AET ]OB NO: 01-02624 LOG OF BORING NO. 10 (p. 1 Of 1) PROIECr: Lakeview Hill Redevelopment Chanhassen, MN DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: 903.7 GEOLOGY SAMPLE RFC FIELD & LABORATORY TESTS WC DEN LL PL 1o4201 FEET FEET MATERIAL DESCRIPTION N MC 1 FIBRIC PEAT, black (PT) SWAMP 1 M SS 3 DEPOSIT 2 WRAT HERE SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, trace 3 roots, light brownish gray mottled, very soft TL IL WH M SS 10 29 CL T a 5 6 M SS 12 28 5 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, brownish gray mottled, firm to very soft (CL) 7 S W11 M SS 24 25 9 10 CLAYEY SAND, a little gravel, brownish gray, TILL 9 M SS 18 stiff(SC) 11 12- SANDY LEAN CLAY, gray, firm (CL) 8 M SS 18 13 la 15 SANDY LEAN CLAY, a little gravel, gray, 9 M SS 18 16 stiff, lenses and laminations of sand (CL) 17- 18 19 CLAYEY SAND, gray, very stiff (SC) 20 17 M N SS 18 21 END OF BORING DEPTH: DRILLING METHOD WATER LEVEL MEASUREMIFP S NOTE: REFER TO 0-19V2' 3.25" HSA DATE TIME SAMPLED DEPTH DEPTH CAVE H FLUID LEVEL LEVEL DRILLING WATER THE ATTACHED 12/29/05 10:45 11.0 9.5 11.0 9.6 SHEETS FOR AN 12/29/05 11:10 21.0 - 4.2 4.0 EXPLANATION OF COMPLETED; 12/29/05 TERMINOLOGY ON DR: LB LG: GD : 27C THIS LOG 06/04 EXPLORATION/CLASSIFICATION METHODS SAMPLING METHODS SPlit-Spoon Samples (SS) - Calibrated to N. Values Standard penetration (split-spoon) samples were collected in general accordance with ASTM:D1586 with one primary modification. The ASTM test method consists of driving a 2" O.D. split-barrel sampler into the in-situ soil with a 140-pound hammer dropped from a height of 30". The sampler is driven a total of 18" into the soil. After an initial set of 6", the number of hammer blows to drive the sampler the final 12" is known as the standard penetration resistance or N-value. Our method uses a modified hammer weight, which is determined by measuring the system energy using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and an instrumented rod. In the past, standard penetration N-value tests were performed using a rope and cathead for the lift and drop system. The energy transferred to the split-spoon sampler was typically limited to about 60% of it's potential energy due to the friction inherent in this system. This converted energy then provides what is known as an N. blow count. Most of todays drill rigs incorporate an automatic hammer lift and drop system, which has higher energy efficiency and subsequently results in lower N-values than the traditional N. values. By using the PDA energy measurement equipment, we are able to determine actual energy generated by the drop hammer. With the various hammer systems available, we have found highly variable energies ranging from 55% to over 100%. Therefore, the intent of AET's hammer calibrations is to vary the hammer weight such that hammer energies lie within about 60% to 65% of the theoretical energy of a 140-pound weight falling 30". The current ASTM procedure acknowledges the wide variation in N-values, stating that N-values of 10D% or more have been observed. Although we have not yet determined the statistical measurement uncertainty of our calibrated method to date, we can state that the accuracy deviation of the N-values using this method are significantly better than the standard ASTM Method. Disturbed Samples (DS)/Spin-up Samples (SL) Sample types described as "DS' or "SU" on the boring logs are disturbed samples, which are taken from the flights of the auger. Because the auger disturbs the samples, possible soil layering and contact depths should be considered approximate. Sampling Limitations Unless actually observed in a sample, contacts between soil layers are estimated based on the spacing of samples and the action of drilling tools. Cobbles, boulders, and other large objects generally cannot be recovered from test borings, and they may be present in the ground even if they are not noted on the boring logs. CLASSIFICATION METHODS Soil classifications shown on the boring logs are based on the Unified Soil Classification (USC) system. The USC system is described in ASTM:D2487 and D2488. Where laboratory classification tests (sieve analysis or .Atterberg Limits) have been performed, accurate classifications per ASTM:D2487 are possible. Otherwise, soil classifications shown on the boring logs are visual-manual judgments. Charts are attached which provide information on the USC system, the descriptive terminology, and the symbols used on the boring logs. The boring logs include descriptions of apparent geology. The geologic depositional origin of each soil layer is interpreted primarily by observation of the soil samples, which can be limited. Observations of the surrounding topography, vegetation, and development can sometimes aid this judgment. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS The ground water levet measurements are shown at the bottom of the boring logs. The following information appears under "Water Level Measurements" on the logs: • Date and Time of measurement • Sampled Depth: lowest depth of soil sampling at the time of measurement • Casing Depth: depth to bottom of casing or hollow-stem auger at time of measurement Cave-in Depth: depth at which measuring tape stops in the borehole • WateI Level: depth in the borehole where free water is mwuntered Drilling Fluid Level: same as water Level, except that the liquid in the borehole is drilling fluid The true location of the water table at the boring locations may be different than the water levels measured in the boreholes. This is possible because there are several factors that can affect the water level measurements in the borehole. Some of these factors include: permeability of each soil layer in profile, presence of perched water, amount of time between water level readings, presence of drilling fluid, weather conditions, and use of borehole casing. SAMPLE STORAGE Unless notified to do otherwise, we routinely retain representative samples of the soils recovered from the borings for a period of 30 days. OIREP051C(9/03) A-MERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. BORING LOG NOTES DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS Symbol Definition RAN: Size of flush -joint casing CA: Crew Assistant (initials) CAS: Pipe casing, number indicates nominal diameter in inches CC: Crew Chief (initials) COT: Clean-out tube DC: Drive casing; number indicates diameter in inches DM: Drilling mud or bentonite slurry DR: Driller (initials) DS: Disturbed sample from auger flights FA: Flight auger; number indicates outside diameter in inches HA: Hand auger; number indicates outside diameter HSA: Hollow stem auger; number indicates inside diameter in inches LG: Field logger (initials) MC: Column used to describe moisture condition of samples and for the ground water level symbols N (BPF): Standard penetration resistance (1, value) in blows per foot (see notes) NQ: NQ wireline core barrel PQ: PQ wireline core barrel RD: Rotary drilling with fluid and roller or drag bit RFC: In split -spoon (see notes) and thin-walled tube sampling, the recovered length (in inches) of sample. In rock coring, the length of core recovered (expressed as percent of the total core run). Zero indicates no sample recovered. REV: Revert drilling fluid SS: Standard split -spoon sampler (steel; 13/e" is inside diameter; 2" outside diameter); unless indicated otherwise SU Spin -up sample from hollow stem auger TW: Thin-walled tube; number indicates inside diameter in inches WASH: Sample of material obtained by screening returning rotary drilling fluid or by which has collected inside the borehole after 'falling" through drilling fluid WH: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod and hammer WR: Sampler advanced by static weight of drill rod 94mm: 94 millimeter wireline core barrel V' Water level directly measured in boring 0: Estimated water level based solely on sample appearance TEST SYMBOLS Symbol Definition CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test DEN: Dry density, pcf DST: Direct shear test E: Pressuremeter Modulus, tsf HYD: Hydrometer analysis LL: Liquid Limit, 'R% LP: Pressuremeter Limit Pressure, tsf OC: Organic Content, PERM: Coefficient of permeability (Iq test; F - Field; L - Laboratory PL: Plastic Limit, % qp: Pocket Penetrometer strength, tsf (approximate) q,: Static cone bearing pressure, tsf q,,: Unconfined compressive strength, psf R: Electrical Resistivity, ohm-cros RQD: Rock Quality Designation of Rock Core, in percent (aggregate length of core pieces 4" or more in length as a percent of total core run) SA: Sieve analysis TRX: Triaxial compression test VSR: Vane shear strength, remoulded (field), psf VSU: Vane shear strength, undisturbed (field), psf WC: Water content, as percent of dry weight %-200: Percent of material finer than #200 sieve STANDARD PENETRATION TEST NOTES (Calibrated Hammer Weight) The standard penetration test consists of driving a split -spoon sampler with a drop hammer (calibrated weight varies to provide N. values) and counting the number of blows applied in each of three 6" increments of penetration. If the sampler is driven less than 18' (usually in highly resistant material), permitted in ASTM:131586, the blows for each complete 6" increment and for each partial increment is on the boring log. For partial increments, the number of blows is shown to the nearest 0. Y below the slash. The length of sample recovered, as shown on the "REC" column, may be greater than the distance indicated in the N column. The disparity is because the N -value is recorded below the initial 6" set (unless partial penetration defined in ASTM:D1586 is encountered) whereas the length of sample recovered is for the entire sampler drive (which may even extend more than 18"). 01REP052C(Ol/05) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ASTM Designations: D 2487, D2488 Criteria for Assigning Croup Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soils More than 5051. coarse less than 5% am 50% fraction retained finest rewind on on No. 4 sieve A Little Gnvd 3%-14% No. 200 sieve kat then 2 Gravels with Cobbbs 3' to 12' Fincs more Soft 2-4 than 12% does o Gravel Sands 509: or Clean Surds Firm mac of coarse Less than 5% Sad fraction passes fines" Stiff No. 4 sieve Dense 31 -50 Firies (sih & clay) Pas 9200 sieve Sands with 16-30 Very Dense Greeter than 50 Fines more s-- — --o Soils 50-1. or more passes the No. 200 sieve (see Plasticity Chart below) Liquid limit less than 50 es MLa as CL or as ML or rt» and plots on or above "A" lire' P14 or Qlots below 'A"-]= Liauid limh-oven dried n.75 Liquid fico¢ -cast (tried Liquid limit 50 Win= PI pian below "A" line organic Livid Ihdtwa dried <.73 Liquid limit- not dried Highly a�nic Primarily organic matter, d soil in color, and organic in odor PMIRF @ M r G•g.m,•ID e•�•�.L ADDMONAL TE s Organic sihsi''ao Organic sits' Q "r — — uacLYTIW •" — — _ plasticity Chart ITES USED BY AEF FOR SOIL ®EN`17MCA7ION AND AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. ABasd on the material passing the 3 -in J75 -mm) sieve If field sample cautioned cobbles or boulders, or both, uki -with cobbles or boulders, or both" in group name. cGravels with 5 in 129/6 tures require duel Symbols: GW -GM well -graded gavel with silt GW -GC well -graded gavel with clay GP -GM poorly graded gavel with sih GP -GC poorly graded gavel with clay "Sands with 5 to 129E fines require dual symbols: SW -SM well -graded sad with silt SW -SC well -graded sad with clay SP -SM poorly graded sand with silt SP -SC poorly graded sand with clay (D.)' sCu=D./D.a Cc- Dax Du Fffsod contains>I5%send, add"with sand" to group name c7f fines classiry as CL -MIS use dual rymbol GC -GK a SC -SM "if fines ore orgaor, add "with organic fin=" m group name. 'If Soil contains; >15%gravel, dd'wim Favel" to group name If Anrsberg limits plat is hatched area Soils is a CL -ML silty clay. sIf Sod contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200 add'With sad" or "with gavel", whirhver is predominm Lif Soil contains >30Ye plus No. 200, prdomuantly sane add 'sandy- to group mme- V soil contains >30% phis No. 200, prdomuantly gravel, add "gravelly" In group name. t'PD4 and plots on or above "A" line oP10 or plots below "A" line. Ppl plots on or above "A" luu. ON plots below "A" line. 'Fiber Content descnpum shown below. Term Particle Siu Tena Percent I= N -Value BPF Term N -Value. BPF Boulders Over 12' A Little Gnvd 3%-14% Very Soft kat then 2 Very Loose 0-4 Cobbbs 3' to 12' With Gravel I5A.29% Soft 2-4 iaas< 5-10 Gravel 94 sieve to 3' Gravelly 30%-50% Firm 5 - k Medium Dense 11 - 30 Sad iii/�� /��■■■■■■ Stiff 9-15 Dense 31 -50 Firies (sih & clay) Pas 9200 sieve "r — — uacLYTIW •" — — _ plasticity Chart ITES USED BY AEF FOR SOIL ®EN`17MCA7ION AND AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. ABasd on the material passing the 3 -in J75 -mm) sieve If field sample cautioned cobbles or boulders, or both, uki -with cobbles or boulders, or both" in group name. cGravels with 5 in 129/6 tures require duel Symbols: GW -GM well -graded gavel with silt GW -GC well -graded gavel with clay GP -GM poorly graded gavel with sih GP -GC poorly graded gavel with clay "Sands with 5 to 129E fines require dual symbols: SW -SM well -graded sad with silt SW -SC well -graded sad with clay SP -SM poorly graded sand with silt SP -SC poorly graded sand with clay (D.)' sCu=D./D.a Cc- Dax Du Fffsod contains>I5%send, add"with sand" to group name c7f fines classiry as CL -MIS use dual rymbol GC -GK a SC -SM "if fines ore orgaor, add "with organic fin=" m group name. 'If Soil contains; >15%gravel, dd'wim Favel" to group name If Anrsberg limits plat is hatched area Soils is a CL -ML silty clay. sIf Sod contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200 add'With sad" or "with gavel", whirhver is predominm Lif Soil contains >30Ye plus No. 200, prdomuantly sane add 'sandy- to group mme- V soil contains >30% phis No. 200, prdomuantly gravel, add "gravelly" In group name. t'PD4 and plots on or above "A" line oP10 or plots below "A" line. Ppl plots on or above "A" luu. ON plots below "A" line. 'Fiber Content descnpum shown below. Term Particle Siu Tena Percent I= N -Value BPF Term N -Value. BPF Boulders Over 12' A Little Gnvd 3%-14% Very Soft kat then 2 Very Loose 0-4 Cobbbs 3' to 12' With Gravel I5A.29% Soft 2-4 iaas< 5-10 Gravel 94 sieve to 3' Gravelly 30%-50% Firm 5 - k Medium Dense 11 - 30 Sad /200 to M sieve Stiff 9-15 Dense 31 -50 Firies (sih & clay) Pas 9200 sieve Very Stiff 16-30 Very Dense Greeter than 50 Hard Greater than 30 Ml Lawn-ine Noes Fiber Content of Peat OrrganicvRouts Description (if no lab tests) Soils aro descnbed as cryo nic. if Soda not peat (MCCalumn) Laminations: Iayets less than Fiber Content D (Dry): Abstruse of noise r dusty, dry w 'A' thick of Term (Visual Emirate) and is judged In have sufficient organic Cues touea. difering material commt m influence the Soil propemes Vightty M (Moist): Damp, although five watt not or color. Fibric Pmt Grater than 67% or rSo c used for borderline cases. vpible Sod tray still have a high Hamic Peat 33-67% water content (ova "optimum"). Lenses: Pockets or layers Satiric Peat Less than 33% With rocs: Judged to have suficiera quantity W(W-W Fra winter visible intended to greater than'h' of roots m inlluena the Soil Waiabeaing): describe non -plastic sods thick ofdifering pnperva. Wa¢rbmrmg usually ralate5 m malarial or coior. Trace toots: Small roots pr-smt but noijudgd Sandi and sand with silt. to be in iufnciat quantity to F (Frown): Soil frown significantly affect Soil properties. 01 CLS021(2/04) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. PI NEER engineering MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORPORATE OFFICE 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 1 phone (651)681-1914 CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS fax (651)681-9488 I COON RAPIDS OFFICE 201 85th Avenue N.W. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Coon Rapids, MN 55433 RECEIVED i phone (763)7834880 fax (763)783-1883 4 /J MAY 2 2 2006 www.pioneereng.com LAKESIDE AT BEARPATH CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT STORMWATER RUN—OFF SUMP ARY The site is part of a larger regional plan that contributes run-off to a pond and wetland complex located to the west of the site. This pond was previously designed by BRAA as part of the North Bay development. The Lakeside at Bearpath site was labeled as the apartment site in the study. The area of the site was in the model was 15 acres with a curve number of 78 and a peak run-off rate of 46.4 cfs. There are additional areas that contribute to the North Bay Pond. This includes a portion of North Bay, Lyman Boulevard and the town home development west of North Bay. The total area of this subcatchment is 28 acres; based on the BRAA study. The entire area was a modeled with the following results: Existing peak discharge rate 46.4 cfs Proposed peak discharge rate 20.2 cfs EXISTING NORTH BAY POND Existing peak discharge rate Proposed peak discharge rate Existing 100 year HWL Proposed 100 year HWL WATER QUALITY Run off volume 2.5" storm Pool Volume Pond 1 1\BUECweo)ms MunTnjea. ghn(2000-2o09)V 5(2050o0-2059 )1053071-InWde as B=Pmh 89.1 cfs 52.5 cfs .871.0 870.7 1.87 Ac ft 2.83 Ac ft SCANNED �2S/ � 1S) North ay Lakev' w at Bearpath 3P 4P pond 1 existing pond in North Bay S b t` Reach Pond Link! gage MaWarn for Lakeside at Bearpath Prepared by tenter your company name here} 5/19!2006 HydroCAD® 7.10 sin 001325 m 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Lakeside at Bearpath Type 1124 -hr 2.5 Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 2 HvdroCADO 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC _ 5/19/2006 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff Area=19.000 ac Runoff Depth=1.18" Tc=15.0 min CN=85 Runoff=28.68 cfs 1.866 of Subcatchment 2S: North Bay Runoff Area=28.000 ac Runoff Depth=1.18" Tc=20.0 min CN=85 Runoff --36.28 cfs 2.750 of Pond 3P: pond 1 Peak Elev=872.59' Storage=3.862 of Inflow=28.68 cfs 1.866 of 33.0" x 40.0' Culvert Outflow=2.18 cfs 1.224 of Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Peak Elev=867.03' Storage=2.345 of Inflow=36.28 cfs 3.974 of Outflow=3.48 cfs 1.649 of Lakeside at Bearpath Type // 24 -hr 2.5 Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 3 HydroCAM 7 10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff = 28.68 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.866 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2.5 Rainfall=2.50" Area (ac) CN Description 19.000 85 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, 15 Subcatchment 2S: North Bay Runoff = 36.28 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 2.750 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 2.5 Rainfall=2.50" Area (ac) CN Descriotion 16.000 85 North bay 2.000 92 Lyman Blvd 10.000 84 townhomes west of North Bav 28.000 85 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond 3P: pond 1 Inflow Area = 19.000 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.18" for 2.5 event Inflow = 28.68 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.866 of Outflow = 2.18 cfs @ 13.21 hrs, Volume= 1.224 af, Atten= 92%, Lag= 68.0 min Primary = 2.18 cfs @ 13.21 hrs, Volume= 1.224 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 0.600 ac Storage= 2.835 of Peak Elev= 872.59' @ 13.21 hrs Surf.Area= 0.692 ac Storage= 3.862 of (1.027 of above start) Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage excedes outflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 255.6 min ( 1,098.3 - 842.8 ) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 861.00' 6.560 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Lakeside at Bearpath Type 11 24 -hr 2.5 Rainfali=2.50" Prepared by (enter your company name here} Page 4 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 861.00 0.080 0.000 0.000 862.00 0.140 0.110 0.110 864.00 0.200 0.340 0.450 866.00 0.270 0.470 0.920 868.00 0.350 0.620 1.540 870.00 0.430 0.780 2.320 871.00 0.600 0.515 2.835 876.00 0.890 3.725 6.560 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 872.00' 33.0" x 40.0' long Culvert CPP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 871.00' S= 0.02507 Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends & connections Primary OutFlow Max=2.16 cfs @ 13.21 hrs HW=872.59' TW=872.09' (TW follows 0.50' below HW) L1 culvert (Outlet Controls 2.16 cfs @ 3.5 fps) Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Inflow Area = 47.000 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.01" for 2.5 event Inflow = 36.28 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3.974 of Outflow = 3.48 cfs @ 14.78 hrs, Volume= 1.649 af, Atten= 90%, Lag= 158.6 min Primary = 3.48 cfs @ 14.78 hrs, Volume= 1.649 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 867.03'@ 14.78 hrs Surf.Area= 0.692 ac Storage= 2.345 of Plug -Flow detention time= 442.0 min calculated for 1.649 of (41% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 246.0 min ( 1,170.7 - 924.7) Volume Invert Avail Storage Storage Description #1 860.00' 5.565 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 860.00 0.190 0.000 0.000 862.00 0.250 0.440 0.440 864.00 0.330 0.580 1.020 866.00 0.420 0.750 1.770 867.00 0.690 0.555 2.325 868.00 0.750 0.720 3.045 870.00 0.870 1.620 4.665 871.00 0.930 0.900 5.565 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 863.00' 30.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 862.75' S= 0.0050 'f Cc= 0.900 n=0.013 #2 Primary 870.50' 25.0' long x 4.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Lakeside at Bearpath Type// 24 -hr 2.5 Rainfall=2.50" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 5 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.38 2.54 2.69 2.68 2.67 2.67 2.65 2.66 2.66 2.68 2.72 2.73 2.76 2.79 2.88 3.07 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=4.05 cfs @ 14.78 hrs HW=867.03' TW=867.00' (Fixed TW Elev= 867.00') L1 --Culvert (Inlet Controls 4.05 cfs @ 0.8 fps) 2--Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Lakeside at Bearpath Type// 24 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 6 HvdroCAD® 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff Area=19.000 ac Runoff Depth=2.73" Tc=15.0 min CN=85 Runoff=66.07 cfs 4.319 of Subcatchment 2S: North Bay Runoff Area=28.000 ac Runoff Depth=2.73" Tc=20.0 min CN=85 Runoff=84.24 cfs 6.364 of Pond 3P: pond 1 Peak Elev=874.04' Storage=4.923 of Inflow=66.07 cfs 4.319 of 33.0" x 40.0' Culvert Outflow=14.32 cfs 3.675 of Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Peak Elev=868.56' Storage=3.471 of Inflow=93.64 cfs 10.039 of Outflow=29.48 cfs 7.714 of Lakeside at Bearpath Type// 24 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Prepared by {enter your company name here) Page 7 HydroCAD® 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff = 66.07 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 4.319 af, Depth= 2.73" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Area (ac) CN Description 19.000 85 Tc Length Slope 15.0 Runoff = Description Direct Entry, 15 Subcatchment 2S: North Bay 84.24 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 6.364 af, Depth= 2.73" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Area (ac) CN Descriotion 16.000 85 North bay 2.000 92 Lyman Blvd 10.000 84 townhomes west of North Bav 28.000 85 Weighted Average Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond 3P: pond 1 Inflow Area = 19.000 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.73" for 4.3 event Inflow = 66.07 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 4.319 of Outflow = 14.32 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 3.675 af, Atten= 78%, Lag= 20.9 min Primary = 14.32 cfs @ 12.42 hrs, Volume= 3.675 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 0.600 ac Storage= 2.835 of Peak Elev= 874.04' @ 12.42 hrs Surf.Area= 0.776 ac Storage= 4.923 of (2.088 of above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 710.1 min calculated for 0.840 of (19% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 142.5 min ( 961.3 - 818.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 861.00' 6.560 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Lakeside at Bearpath Type 1124 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 8 HydroCADO 7.10 s/n 001325 © 2005 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store #1 (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Elevation 861.00 0.080 0.000 0.000 Cum.Store 862.00 0.140 0.110 0.110 (acre-feet) 864.00 0.200 0.340 0.450 0.190 866.00 0.270 0.470 0.920 862.00 868.00 0.350 0.620 1.540 0.440 870.00 0.430 0.780 2.320 0.580 871.00 0.600 0.515 2.835 0.420 876.00 0.890 3.725 6.560 867.00 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 2.325 #1 Primary 872.00' 33.0" x 40.0' long Culvert 0.720 3.045 CPP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 0.870 1.620 Outlet Invert= 871.00' S= 0.0250T Cc= 0.900 871.00 0.930 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends & connections 5.565 Primary OutFlow Max=14.31 cis @ 12.42 hrs HW=874.03' TW=873.53' (TW follows 0.50' below HW) tl=Culvert (Outlet Controls 14.31 cfs @ 4.2 fps) Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Inflow Area = 47.000 ac, Inflow Depth > 2.56" for 4.3 event Inflow = 93.64 cfs @ 12.14 hrs, Volume= 10.039 of Outflow = 29.48 cfs @ 12.63 hrs, Volume= 7.714 af, Atten= 69%, Lag= 29.4 min Primary = 29.48 cfs @ 12.63 hrs, Volume= 7.714 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 868.56'@ 12.63 hrs Surf.Area= 0.783 ac Storage= 3.471 of Plug -Flow detention time= 172.6 min calculated for 7.706 of (77% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 68.0 min ( 941.9 - 873.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 860.00' 5.565 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 860.00 0.190 0.000 0.000 862.00 0.250 0.440 0.440 864.00 0.330 0.580 1.020 866.00 0.420 0.750 1.770 867.00 0.690 0.555 2.325 868.00 0.750 0.720 3.045 870.00 0.870 1.620 4.665 871.00 0.930 0.900 5.565 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 863.00' 30.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 862.75' S=0.00507 Cc= 0.900 n=0.013 #2 Primary 870.50' 25.0' long x 4.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Lakeside at Bearpath Prepared by (enter your company name here) Type// 24 -hr 4.3 Rainfall=4.30" Page 9 Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.38 2.54 2.69 2.68 2.67 2.67 2.65 2.66 2.66 2.68 2.72 2.73 2.76 2.79 2.88 3.07 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=29.47 cfs @ 12.63 hrs HW=868.55' TW=867.00' (Fixed TW Elev= 867.00') �lxuivert (Inlet Controls 29.47 cfs @ 6.0 fps) 2=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Lakeside at Bearpath Type 1124 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Page 10 HvdroCAD® 7.10 s/n 001325 02005 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/19/2006 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff Area= 19.000 ac Runoff Depth=4.30" Tc=15.0 min CN=85 Runoff=102.57 cfs 6.812 of Subcatchment 2S: North Bay Runoff Area=28.000 ac Runoff Depth=4.30" Tc=20.0 min CN=85 Runoff=131.16 cfs 10.039 of Pond 3P: pond 1 Peak Elev=875.53' Storage=6.146 of Inflow=102.57 cfs 6.812 of 33.0" x 40.0' Culvert Outflow=20.22 cfs 6.168 of Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Peak Elev=870.72' Storage=5.310 of Inflow=151.13 cfs 16.207 of Outflow=52.15 cfs 13.882 of Lakeside at Bearpath Prepared by (enter your company name HvdroCADO 7.10 s/n 001325 Ccs 2005 HvdrnC Type// 24 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Page 11 Subcatchment 1S: Lakeview at Bearpath Runoff = 102.57 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 6.812 af, Depth= 4.30" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 19.000 85 Tc Length Slope 15.0 Description Direct Entry, 15 Subcatchment 2S: North Bay Runoff = 131.16 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 10.039 af, Depth= 4.30" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Area (ac) CN Description 16.000 85 North bay 2.000 92 Lyman Blvd 10.000 84 townhomes west of North Bav 28.000 85 Weighted Average Tc Length Capacity Description 20.0 Direct Entry, Pond 313: pond 1 Inflow Area = 19.000 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.30" for 6.0 event Inflow = 102.57 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 6.812 of Outflow = 20.22 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 6.168 af, Atten= 80%, Lag= 5.1 min Primary = 20.22 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 6.168 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 871.00' Surf.Area= 0.600 ac Storage= 2.835 of Peak Elev= 875.53' @ 12.44 hrs Surf.Area= 0.863 ac Storage= 6.146 of (3.311 of above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 377.8 min calculated for 3.333 of (49% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 124.6 min ( 930.4 - 805.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 861.00' 6.560 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Lakeside at Bearpath Prepared by {enter your company name Elevation (feet) Surf.Area (acres) Inc.Store (acre-feet) Cum.Store (acre-feet) 861.00 0.080 0.000 0.000 862.00 0.140 0.110 0.110 864.00 0.200 0.340 0.450 866.00 0.270 0.470 0.920 868.00 0.350 0.620 1.540 870.00 0.430 0.780 2.320 871.00 0.600 0.515 2.835 876.00 0.890 3.725 6.560 Type 1124 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Page 12 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 872.00' 33.0" x 40.0' long Culvert CPP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 871.00' S= 0.0250T Cc= 0.900 n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends & connections Primary OutFlow Max=20.22 cfs @ 12.15 hrs HW=874.94' TW=874.44' (TW follows 0.50' below HW) tl=Culvert (Inlet Controls 20.22 cfs @ 3.4 fps) Pond 4P: existing pond in North Bay Inflow Area = 47.000 ac, Inflow Depth > 4.14" for 6.0 event Inflow = 151.13 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 16.207 of Outflow = 52.15 cfs @ 12.53 hrs, Volume= 13.882 af, Atten= 65%, Lag= 24.1 min Primary = 52.15 cfs @ 12.53 hrs, Volume= 13.882 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 870.72'@ 12.53 hrs Surf.Area= 0.913 ac Storage= 5.310 of Plug -Flow detention time= 133.1 min calculated for 13.868 of (86% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 60.1 min ( 916.2 - 856.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 860.00' 5.565 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 860.00 0.190 0.000 0.000 862.00 0.250 0.440 0.440 864.00 0.330 0.580 1.020 866.00 0.420 0.750 1.770 867.00 0.690 0.555 2.325 868.00 0.750 0.720 3.045 870.00 0.870 1.620 4.665 871.00 0.930 0.900 5.565 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 863.00' 30.0" x 50.0' long Culvert RCP, end -section conforming to fill, Ke= 0.500 Outlet Invert= 862.75' S= 0.0050 'P Cc= 0.900 n=0.013 #2 Primary 870.50' 25.0' long x 4.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Lakeside at Bearpath Prepared by {enter your company name Type 1124 -hr 6.0 Rainfall=6.00" Page 13 Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 Coef. (English) 2.38 2.54 2.69 2.68 2.67 2.67 2.65 2.66 2.66 2.68 2.72 2.73 2.76 2.79 2.88 3.07 3.32 Primary OutFlow Max=51.83 cfs @ 12.53 hrs HW=870.72' TW=867.00' (Fixed TW Elev= 867.00') t1 --Culvert (Inlet Controls 45.59 cfs @ 9.3 fps) 2--Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 6.24 cfs @ 1.1 fps) Data for North Hay da *I.A t (by laka Riley north) • Page 1 PFepazed by Bonestroo Roseme Anderlik 6, Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 ^0 000429 (c) 1986-1995 An 1' d M' IOC mmaer 34rHteme /O Of Wl/ 2 �0�0 Data for North Hay deval�t (by lake Riley north) + Page 1 TYPE II 24-HOUR NFALL- 6.0 IN Hrepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 - roChD 4 00 000429 (c) 1986-1995 A plied Microcomuter Sv t SUBCATCHNEW 1 Proposed toeahomm Project PEAR= 45.6 CFS ® 12.09 HRS, VOLUME- 3.50 AP ACRES CR SCS TR -20 METHOD 10.00 84 Sigh denNity TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 6.0 IN SPAN= 5-25 HRS, dt=.07 HRS Method Co:mnent T. (min) DIRNCr NNTRY Segment m: 20.0 SURCPTCHMENT I RUNOFF Propmced t.a hmme prnjept TIME (hour.) 12 Al TIME (hour.) Data for North Bay davelo]nt (by lake Riley north) Page 2 TYPE II 24-HOUR ALL. 6.0 IN Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 ASBOCiates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 HydroC 4 00 000429 ( 11986 1995 Applied M' =t 01-t... SUBCATCHNENT 2 Lyman Blvd. PEAK= 13.2 CFS ® 12.00 HRS, VOLUME= .84 AF ACRES CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 2.00 92 Road + right-Ot-way TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 6.0 IN SPAN= 5-25 HRS, dt=.07 HRS Method Coment To (min) DIRHCT ENTRY Segment ID: 12.0 SUBCRTCHMENT 2 RUNOFF Lyman Blvd TIME (hours) C. TIME (hours) Data for North Bay develo M t (by lake Riley north) Page 3 TYPE II 24-HOUR 0KNHALL- 6.0 IN 7 Feb 96 Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 Aasociates, Inc. B -roCAD 400 000122 (c) 1986-1995 Appli9d Microg MUter Systems EOECATCmgpxT 3 Rottl=d Project PEAK- 69.5 CPS • 12.09 HRS, VOLUME= 5.36 AF ACRES CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 14.60 86 High dendity t drain tile system TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL- 6.0 IN SPAN- 5-25 HRS, dt-.07 HRS Method C t Tc (min) DIRECT ENTRY Segment ID: 20.0 SUBCRTCHMENT 3 RUNOFF Rottlund Project TIME (bore) 4 TIME (bore) Data for Narth Bay develogat (by lake Riley north) • Page 4 TYPE II 24-HOUR REENFALL. 6.0 IN 7 Feb 96 Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. dr C D 4 DO 000429 (c) 1986-1995 1' d in comouter Systems SUBCATC@ffi7T 4 Apartment Site PEAR- 46.4 CFS B 12.21 HRS, VOLUME- 4.47 AF ACRS. CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 15.00 78 High density + minor ponding TYPEIT'24-HOUR IN SPAN= 5-25 HRS, dt=.07 MRS t To (min)_ method DINHCT ENTRY Segment ID: 30.0 SUBCATCHMENT 4 RUNOFF npo'tment Site TIME Chou,) 4 us TIME Chou,) • Data for North Bay -HOUR P . lake Riley north) • Page 5 TYPE II 24-HOUR RHSNPA Z 6.0 ffi Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 0009 9( ) 1986-1995 0l' d Microcomputer Systems POND 21 Pond east of DER wetland 0.0 1 TOTAL .1 Qin - 1 CFS ® 12.10 BRS, VOLUME= 14.17 AF .3 S .4 Qout= 8 CFS w 12.35 MRS, VOLUME= 14.16 AF, ATTEN- 45%, LAG- 15.3 MIN QPri- .4 S w 12.35 MRS, VOLUME- 13.55 AF 0.00 O.DO Qeec- .7 CFS ® 12.35 HIES, VOLUME= .61 AF 0.00 0.00 ELEVATION (FT)U.DU CUM.STOR 0.00 STOR-IND METHOD 864.0 863.0 0.00 p2xmaRYEVATSOw- PEAR PT 867.0 .01 0.00 FLOOD ELEVATION- Wj-Q-FT 868.0 .69 0.00 START ELEVATION- 863.0 FT 870.0 2.29 0.00 SPAN- 5-25 ERS, dt-.07 MRS 871.0 3.19 D.00 0.00 0.00 1 P 863.0' 0• CULVERT 0' 5=.005'/' Ke -.45 Cc -.9 Cd -.62 TW -866.7- 2 S 870.5' S' BROAD STED RECTANGULAR WEIR Q -C L B-1.5 C-3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 0, 0, 0 Primary Discharge L -1 -Culvert Secondary Discharge '2 -Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir FEET FUND 0.0 1 TOTAL .1 DISCHARGE .2 .3 S .4 va ELEVATI .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 863.0 0.00 .8.9.5 .8 0.00 O.DO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 865.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 866.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.18 12.98 867.0 15.90 0.00 18.36 20.52 0.00 22.48 0.00 24.28 25.96 27.53 29.02 30.44 31.79 868.0 33.09 20.52 34.34 35.55 36.71 25.96 37.84 38.94 40.01 41.04 42.D6 43.05 869.0 44.02 34.34 44.96 45.89 46.80 47.69 48.56 49.42 50.27 51.10 51.92 870.0 52.72 869.0 53.52 54.30 55.07 55.83 56.58 59.69 64.75 71.09 78.45 871.0 86.70 51.92 870.0 52.72 53.52 54.30 55.07 55.83 56.58 FEET0.0 FUND 21 PRIMARY .10.0.1.2.35.5 DISCHARGE (CPS) v .5 .6 .6 .7 .7 .8.9.5 .8 .9 863.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 O.OD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 865.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 866.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.18 12.98 867.0 15.90 18.36 20.52 22.48 24.28 25.96 27.53 29.02 30.44 31.79 868.0 33.09 34.34 35.55 36.71 37.84 38.94 40.01 41.04 42.06 43.05 869.0 44.02 44.96 45.89 46.80 47.69 48.56 49.42 50.27 51.10 51.92 870.0 52.72 53.52 54.30 55.07 55.83 56.58 57.32 58.05 58.77 59.48 871.0 60.18 Data for North Hay developpM�t (by lake Ailey north) TYPE II 24-HOUR RIEIPALL= 6.0 IN Prepared by Honeetroo Rosene Anderlik & A69oeiate9, HydroCD 4,00 000429 ( 1 1986 1995 1 d Mic co • Inc. ysteme ter SPOND e]a a Page 6 7 Feb 96 ew s r fqB 21 SECONDARY t� 9N 5 DISCHARGE =81 Vs ELEVATION Z e]s FEET 63.00.00 '8:4 0.0 1 2 0.00 3 4 0.00 0.00 5 0.00 6 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 865.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.DO 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00 866.0 O.DO 0.00 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 867.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 868.0 0.00 0.00 O.DO 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.DO 0.00 0.00 0.00 869.0 0.00 0.00 D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 870.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.37 6.71 12.32 18.97 871.0 26.52 POND 21 DISCHARGE Pond east of DNR wetland POND 21 INFLOW x OUTFLOW Pand east of DNR wetland TIME (hours) e]a a ew s r fqB t� 9N 5 �BfaB Z e]s Fa65 ansa w ms.s J B65B W BW S YM B eU 5 a DISCHARGE (cfe) POND 21 INFLOW x OUTFLOW Pand east of DNR wetland TIME (hours) Data for Horth DaY deval t (by lake RileY north) • TYPE II 24 -EEM RJEWAL - 6.0 M Prepared by ROneatr00 Rosen Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. 4-00 000429 (cl 1986 1995 AwliecL M'cr computer Syst 9 Page 7 7 Feb 96 HydroCAD -'7 21 INFLOW PF, 163.3 CFS 0 17.10 HOURS HOUR 0.00 07 14 21 8 3542 .2 4a .5Z .63 5.00 .1 .1 .1 .1 .4 .2 .4 •4 .s .s 5.70 6.40 .3 .5 .3 .5 .3 .6 .6 .6 .6 .7 1.0 .7 1.0 .7 1.1 •7 1.1 7.10 .8 .8 .8 1.2 .9 1.3 .9 1.3 .9 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 7.80 1.1 1.7 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 8.50 9.20 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 5.3 9.90 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.6 4.8 5.1 9.7 10.60 5.6 5.9 6.2 6.6 7.0 7.5 7.9 27.5 8.4 41.7 9.0 63.8 97.2 11.30 10.5 11.4 12.4 13.5 15.2 19.1 68.3 54.8 44.9 37.4 12.00 136.5 161.1 158.3 136.0 108.8 86.0 18.2 17.0 15.9 15.0 14.3 12.70 31.7 27.4 24.2 21.7 12.0 19.8 11.5 11.1 10.7 10.4 10.0 9.7 13.40 13.6 13.0 12.5 8.8 8.6 8.4 8.3 8.1 8.0 7.9 7.8 14.10 14.80 9.4 7.6 9.1 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.1 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.7 15.50 6.5 6.4 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 5.9 5.8 5.7 5.0 5.6 5.0 16.20 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.6 4.6 16.90 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.2 17.60 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.8 18.30 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 19.00 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.6 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.0 19.70 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.9 20.40 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 21.10 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 21.80 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 22.50 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 23.20 23.90 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.4 2.0 1.5 1.1 .7 .5 .3 24.60 .2 .1 .1 .1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Data Eor North Bay develolWt (by lake Riley north) • Page 1 TYPE II 24-HOUR RXENFALL= 4.8 IN Prepared by Sonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 ASBOCiates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 uvdr..rnn n n0 000429 () )986-1995 A.o 1' d Microcomouter Svstems _— SUBCATCBNENT 1 Proposed tornhome project PEAK- 33.9 CPS ® 12.09 HRS, VOLUME= 2.57 AF ACRES CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 10.00 84 High density TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.8 IN SPAN- 5-25 HRS, dt-.07 ERS Method C t To (.i.) DIRECT ENTRY Segment IDs 20.0 SUBCRTCHMENT I RUNOFF Proposed toenhoee project TIME (hows) Data for Worth Bay develojlfttt (by lake Riley north) • Page 2 TYFH II 24-HOUR g ALL. 4.8 IN Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 nydrQcAU 4,00 000429 (c) 1986-1995 Ao 1' d MicroC0e,1outer Sys[ SBBCATCHNINT 2 Lyman Blvd. PEAR= 10.3 CFS 0 12.00 FIRS, VOLUME= .65 AP ACRES CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 2.00 92 Road i right-of-way TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.8 IN SPAN= 5-25 MRS, dt=.07 MRS Method C t Tc (min) DIRECT RNTRY Segment ID: 12.0 SUBCRTCHMENT 2 RUNOFF Lymon Blvd. TIME (hours) Data for Horth Say de el t (by lake Riley north) • Page 3 TYPE II 24-NOUR NAMMILLm 4.8 IN Prepared by Bonestrco Rosen Anderlik 6 Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 HYdroCAD 4.00 000429 (c) 1986-1995 An 1' d M'c t r t9Ygtew SDBCATCBMRMT 3 Rottlmd Project PEAR- 52.2 CPS B 12.09 HRS, VOLUME- 3.99 AP ACRES CN SCS TR -20 MBTMOD 14.60 86 Nigh dendity + drain tile system TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.8 IN SPAN- 5-25 HRS, dt-07 HRS Method C nt T (Hin) DIRECT ZWMY Sagmaat ID: 20.0 SUBCRTCHMENT 3 RUNOFF Rottlund Project TIME (hours) Data,for Horth Bay dwelop&t (by lake Riley north) • Page 4 TYPH II 24-HOUR RA33rFALL= 4.8 IN Prepared by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 7 Feb 96 Hydro^*^ ' 000429 (c) 1986-1995 Applied M' t SV t ms SUBCATCBNENT 4 Apartment site PEAR. 32.9 CPS IN 12.21 HRS, VOLUME= 3.18 AP ACRES CN SCS TR -20 METHOD 15.00 78 High density + minor ponding TYPE II 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 4.8 IN SPAN= 5-25 RES, dt=.07 HRS Method CoInImant To (min) DIRECT RNTRY Segment ID: 30.0 SUBCRTCHMENT 4 RUNOFF Rportment site TIME (hour.] Is z 78 r_ Mt 4 8 IN u, TIME (hour.] ,,,,,&� (by lakes Ailey north) Data for North Say dHOUR • Page 5 TyB RSC II 24-HOUR ALL. 4.8 IN 7 Feb 96 Rosene Anderlik fi Associates, Inc. Prepared by Honeetroo ' d Microcomout 4 00 000429 (c) 1986 Pond seat of D= Wetland POND 21 Din - S 12.10 HAS, VOLUME10.39 AP ATTEN- 56} LAG= 18.9 MIN Qpu- S 0 ® 12.41 HRS. VOLUME- 10.38 AF, , Qpri- - 3 ® 12.41 HRS, VOLUME- 10.38 AP Qeec- �C'"O CFS a 0.00 SRS, VOLUME- 0.00 AP STOR-IND METHOD ELEVATION CUM.STOR PEAR STORAGE AP (FT) (AF) PEAK. ELEVATION- FT 863.0 0.00 FLOOD ELEVATION- 867.0 .01 START ELEVATION= PT 868.0 .69 SPAN- 5-25 HRS, dt-.07 HRS 870.0 2.29 871.0 3.19 RUTS T 1 P 8 30' CULVERT 63.0' 5-.005'/' Ke -.45 Cc -.9 Cd -.62 17i-866.7' n=.012 L-50' 870.5' 25' BROAD -CRESTED RECTANGULAR W8I8 2 S Q -C L H-1.5 C-3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 0, 0, 0 Primary Discharge L1 -Culvert Secondary Discharge �2-Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir TOTA.+ DI CA_ GE (CPS) 9 ELEVATION 3 4 5 6 .7 8 19 PEST 863.0 o 0 1 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0 00 0.00 D 00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.18 12.98 866.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.28 25.96 27.53 29.02 30.44 31.79 867.0 15.90 18.36 20.52 22.48 36.71 37.84 38.94 40.01 41.04 42.06 43.05 868.0 33.09 34.34 35.55 45.89 46.80 47.69 4S.S6 49.42 50.27 SI -10 51.92 44.02 44.96 55.07 55.83 56.58 59.69 64.75 71.09 78.45 869.0 700 52.72 53.52 54.30 871..0 86.70 R7A^J 21 PRAT�Y DISCBA. (CPS) SERVATION 4 5 6 .7 .8 .9 FEET 863.0 0 0 1 2 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0 00 0.00 0 00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 865.0866. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 24.28 25.96 27.53 29.02 30.44 31.79 867.0 15.90 18.36 20.52 22.48 37.84 38.94 40.01 41.04 42.06 43.05 868.0 33.09 34.34 35.55 36.71 46.80 47.69 48.56 49.42 50.27 51.10 51.92 869.0 44.02 44.96 45.89 55.83 56.58 57.32 58.05 58.77 59.48 870.0 52.72 53.52 54.30 55.07 871.0 60.18 a Data for North Bay develoo&t (by lake Riley north) • Page 6 TYPE II 24 -ROOK ALL- 4.8 IE 7 Feb 96 Prepared by Boneetrco Roeene Anderlik 6 AesociateB, Inc. HydroC.0 4.00 000429 1 1 1986 1995 Annl'ed M'c t i S eto POND 21 DISCHARGE Pond coat of DNR act land m.e POND 21 SECONDARY DISCHARGE 1 Fi MMTIOE r eras "sa• 0 - - eo FORT 863.0 0.0 0.00 1 0.00 2 0.00 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 864.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 865.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 866.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 867.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 868.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.37 6.71 12.32 18.97 870.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. 871.0 26.52 POND 21 DISCHARGE Pond coat of DNR act land m.e w - etre ,s en.e ae r eras "sa• 0 - - eo r sa.s -_ _- aero• w se s W. DISCHARGE (cf.) POND 21 INFLOD 8 OUTFLOW Pond east of DNR aetl.nd TIME (hoare) Data dor Borth Bey deval t (by lake Riley north) • Page 7 TYPE II 24-HOUR ALL. 4.8 IN 7 Feb 96 Prepared by Bonestroo Rosen Anderlik 6 ABaociates, Inc. CD 4.00 000429 1 1 1986 1995 Awl' d M'c nmuter Sva em p_ - p 21 ^_ " CM PW. 170.5 CFS ® 12.10 HOURS HOUR 5.00 0.0 07 0.0 14 0.0 21 0.0 28 0.0 3542 0.0 O.0 49 0.0 ..1 ..1 5.70 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 6.40 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .3 .3 7.10 .4 .4 .4 .4 .4 .5 .5 .5 7.80 .6 .6 .6 1.0 .6 1.0 .6 1.1 .7 1.1 .7 1.2 .7 1.3 1.3 1.4 8.50 9.20 .9 1.5 .9 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 9.90 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 6.4 10.60 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.3 4.6 4.9 5.2 5.5 5.9 45.7 70.6 11.30 7.0 7.6 8.4 9.2 10.4 13.2 19.2 29.5 40.8 33.5 28.0 12.00 100.2 118.8 117.0 100.5 80.4 63.6 50.7 12.9 12.1 11.4 10.9 12.70 23.8 20.6 18.2 16.4 15.0 13.8 8.5 8.2 7.9 7.7 7.4 13.40 10.4 9.9 9.5 9.1 8.8 6.5 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 5.9 14.10 7.2 7.0 6.8 5.7 6.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.2 5.1 14.80 5.9 5.8 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 15.50 16.20 5.0 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.8 16.90 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.3 3.5 3.2 17.60 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.9 18.30 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.0 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.6 19.00 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.3 19.70 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 20.40 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 21.10 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.1 21.80 22.50 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 23.20 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 23.90 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.2 .8 .6 .4 .2 24.60 .2 .1 .1 .1 0.0 0.0 0.0 PONDNET 2.0 Detention Pond Network Pedomance Analysis W. Walker October 1968 Press ALT -G for Graphs TITLE, PONDNETTESTCASE INPUT VARIABLES.... UNITS rase labels NURP PondA PoMB Pond watershed area acres 100 41.6. 8.3 0 runoff coefficient - 02 0.55 0.9 0 pond surface area acres 1 0.66 DAMS 0.1625 pond mean depth feet 4.86 7 7 upstream pond p bad Ibsyr 0 0 0 16.666 upstream pond outflow ac -f tyr 0 0 0 24.9 OUTPUT VARIABLES........ outflow p load Ibsyr 43.6463 45.8512 16.686 8.9063 out0owv01.me ac-ft/yr 66.6667 762667 24.9 24.9 outflow p cono plot, 240.873 221.191 246.55 131.598 pond removal % 629445 55.7642 620713 46.6242 total removal % 62.9426 55.7619 62.0693 79.7642 ASSUMED EXPORT FACTORS ............. period length yrs 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 period precipitation inches 20 20 20 20 runoff total p Ppb 650 500 650 650 runoff odho pnotal p - 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 relative decay We - 1 1 1 1 unit runoff inyr B 22 36 0 unit export Ibs/ac-y 1.17786 2.49163 5.30038 0 POND WATER BUDGETS.. .................... runoff ac-" 66.6697 762667 24.9 0 upstream pond ac-1Vyr 0 0 0 24.9 total inflow ac-tVyr 66.6667 762667 24.9 24.9 outflow ac-tVyr 66.6867 762667 24.9 24.9 POND PHOSPHORUS BUDGETS.._.......... runoff ms/yr 117.786 103.652 43.9932 0 upstream pond ba"YT 0 0 0 16.686 teal inflow Ibsyr 117.786 103.652 43.9982 16.696 W sedimenabon Ibsyr 74.14 57.8007 27.3071 7.77973 ouffbw Ibsyr 43.6463 45.8512 16.686 8.9063 HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS ............ pond volume acre -ft 4.16867 32078 1.1375 1.1375 vawmo pond volume acre -ft 4.16667 4.76667 1.55625 0 relative votume inches 2.5 1.68231 1.82731 ERR residence time years 0.0625 0.04206 0.04568 0.04588 residence time days 22.8125 15.3511 16.6742 16.6742 ovedbw, rate "r 66.6667 115.556 153.231 153231 inflow plus cont ppb 650.034 500.026 650.034 246.55 outflow phos conc Ppb 240.873 221.191 246.55 131.598 p reaction We - 4.58409 2.84976 4.31475 1.63653 1-rp - 0.37055 0.44236 0.37929 0.53376 ED „ I , •AD CE t&TIL NEW � TI IS MADE ocK n AlIRV ,j 9FI: � � % : �� •� � � � A.. ;, � %��/iii/� ;,� 1 Gam. �ej '�`�, ,•:� •• '" � > ,�/ ilii 91, HWL 868.8 AIR =0.54 Ac.—PROVIDED WETILAND BANKiNG 100 NWL 867.0 P �s "•. .• NEPAT WETLAND MITIGATION -1 VVEILAND EXCAVAIM—A.: s i1 0.05 AQ � \ •::MI;;::};;;;;;;;;;;;;;; �:;�;:;;s;......• ., ,..,. _ l � 0.13 c ._ Y cER` GRIJ ORIVEWA9'-' / PtR MULE 10 % /� _ -' •Y• 41 ExoseN &NMOL NOTES 1. ALL GRADING TO BE COMPLETED N/PHASE 1. / 0 N D 2 CONSTRUCT TEMP. SEDIMENT BASIN h INSTALL LEGEND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES PRIOR TO GRADING / OPERATIONS \ IA—` ----ATO---- OOSTING 10 CONTOUR 3. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL PROTECTION AT ALL _ - -- - 872– -- __ _ EXISTING 2' CONTOUR SEWER STORM ROS INLETS PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR 1572 PROPOSED 2' CONTOUR {. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED i. •°01 "L°'� "�`"' ^�•'^ uc ..................•••••• EROSION CONTROL FENCE (TYPE 1) THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.a a W,� EROSION CONTROL FENCE (TTPE 3) TYPICAL OVERFLOW SWALE iW SIII SFO . w M',. YEV 0.'M tW1aP, ry NO $LNE x K 20• oak 12" Cw {< 2 KO Rl {EM'f. p1AV.p1JENR IESI p, lO[I.IILNZ /Cp pWNAI MI1pLL XpR A 1[v Rl ,FML .+ PIOYVEER , °FNBi FF0 > .o• swua a saNL •c,iL GRMIOC 9CAId un9In9Nf I� * r• I �ui�%ri � I tM�Y IM;'I.0 OY Gal ♦. � �L_ 0. * # * V��"T—�my M� p•PM rw s u�0. mY Man. a � IM en a I •MIwM F,eIm4nO F^Ow,m atla , �V%N i SAM i N/nT Y A M In ia., e� Y , Nati p Y'v.,sl Rp w 191W pil. I�jLS`ANLS i,/I/Y , �N�Ai ^— T» IDDSTNG STORM SEVER PROPOSED STORM SELLER 95-20 T -GRADING, DEVELOPMENT & GINNER THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC. PROJECT 3881 IOKC LAKE ROAD NORTH BAY 2ND EROSION CONTROL PLAN .1TY,11F N LWE t.,,, CTT v 15 s �= I,mANDC P 0 N D LEGEND \ IA—` ----ATO---- OOSTING 10 CONTOUR _ - -- - 872– -- __ _ EXISTING 2' CONTOUR 870— PROPOSED 10' CONTOUR 1572 PROPOSED 2' CONTOUR ..................•••••• EROSION CONTROL FENCE (TYPE 1) ....... • • • • • EROSION CONTROL FENCE (TTPE 3) F. — — — — — — PHASE UNE x K 20• oak 12" Cw EXISTING TREE GRMIOC 9CAId 01 PH6I T» IDDSTNG STORM SEVER PROPOSED STORM SELLER 95-20 T -GRADING, DEVELOPMENT & GINNER THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC. PROJECT 3881 IOKC LAKE ROAD NORTH BAY 2ND EROSION CONTROL PLAN .1TY,11F N LWE t.,,, CTT v 15 s �= I,mANDC 6SIENNA CORPORATION May 19, 2006 Ms. Kathryn Aanenson City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 6 19 _ ose Suite 608 • 4940 Viking Drive - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 •952-835-2808 FAX: 952-835-7008 By: Messenger RE: Lakeside plat application form Dear Kate, CITY OF RECEIVED SSEN MAY 1 9 2006 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Enclosed is the completed application form for the Lakeside development proposal. I have enclosed a check for $4,725.00. In this amount I did not include an escrow for the county recording fee as I'm not sure what that would be. Please let me know what that amount would be or you could include that amount when we are billed for the property owner mailing list. Under separate cover you will be receiving the engineering plans and required preliminary plat application documents on Monday. The application form does not have the property owner's signature as Steve Liefschultz is out of town. I'll have his signed form to you on Monday. As we have discussed earlier, we will have building elevations along with building programming to you no later than Friday the 26th, if not sooner. I'll also have a detailed project overview which should be helpful your staffs drafting of the development staff report. Thanks for your assistance and cooperation. We are looking forward to working with you. Sincerely, nna orpo John Vogelbac Vice President Enc. L Planners ■ Developers ■ Contractors CITY OF CHANHASSEN . 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION r�CHac rnm I Applicant Name and Address: Phone: JX2-93.C-Lgot Fax:9SL-335-7009 Email: SVoGE/gAcr+ER®5%e.vrJat:aRP.CflA,, Planning Case No. Owner Name and Address: LaKFviE�Wttls Lt_ ^_` 17.4bo Ww^,rR JR • etof(Q Ar/KA lnr Contact: sTt0lt" l- f(SOL--r-Tl— 5s3`f Phone: 9SZ-933-o5a Fax:9.fZ-533-osz3 Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP)4i'}Zs� Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development' S 9 SD Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review I # Soo t lr 1L� Site Plan Review (SPR)" / i��X S :'l,dtr V subdivision' 1000 'f "435 -24 b /A ' Cors x/S• ydr Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) _V'_� Variance (VAR) *zoo Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" - $50 CUP/SPRIVACIVAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB 4 4 V An additional fee of $3.00 per/address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. "Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an BIA" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 ('.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME: LA�� LOCATION: I ZS Li+rcE View Rd EA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: $eF TOTALACREAGE: o. 3 4 WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENTZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: Ieirs,^V4/ — 14'J`H /J^ r, REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: IZEDEV140 elm WAT a4- C�cc4vt.4+V r L 4�yrEw i1 I (s JA�T4l.$NT S►T'6 /N� y/i�I/KED ICSF L�Wi,aR O �ri0�.✓�.QG C'[1%�� w�i1/f Cs+uen lii4F-c5'ID� This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. 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. This Is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. 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 have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Tide, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed 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. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Slgnature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Rev. 12/05 G:1pLAMfonn5iDeve1opm ent Review Application.DOC EXIIIBIT A Legal Description of Property Parcel 1: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and of Government Lot 1, of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 and its extensions. EXCEVMG therefrom the following described Tracts A and B: Tract A: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along said East line a distance of 305.23 feet; thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 36 seconds West a distance of 656.93 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds West parallel with said East line a distance of 394.67 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West from said point of beginning; thence North 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of 643.72 feet to said point of beginning. Tract B: All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23, together with that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota which lies East of a line drawn 641.67 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and its Northerly extension, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, thence South 0 degrees 20 minutes 00 seconds East along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 81.31 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 85 degrees 05 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of 643.72 feet to the West line of the East 641.67 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter said line there terminating. 5 SCANNED Parcel 2: Outlot B, North Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof. Carver County, Minnesota Abstract Property 6 SCANNED r 1 dw SIENNA CORPORATION rM CHARLES CUDD -17 BUILDINGS 36 RAMBLER TOWNHOMES LOXESADE CONCEPT PLAN Lakeside Condominiums, LLC, FYCkW MkIS �L641W4L OL51GY AYD CUNli0.l'QIOT M FMAI IN IN ARC: H gCr BEARPATH COUNTRY CLUB 15th Hole ------------------------------------ *0 00• WOODDALE BUILDERS - 8 BUILDINGS 28 RAMBLER TOWNHOMES , ' / MIWUNITY CLUBHOUSE & SALES CENTER 5000 square feet • 1 Upper Level - Lounge & Kitchen iLower Level - Spa & Fitness Center �i -- WOOI)DALE BUILUMS, INC. PI2NEERneering roy" -1i1 ON STREET PARKING PRIVATE PARK Urban recreational beach with 1,100 feet of lakeshore, 1.5 acres, six slips, fencing, tot -lot, trails, gazebo, garden areas, fire pit, grill area and seasonal rest rooms. BEARPATH COUNTRY CLUB ENTRANCE FEATURE SITE DATA: CURRENT ZONING.............................................R12 SITE AREA...............................................26.34 ACRES CONDOMINIUMS Building A ................. 39 UNITS Building B ........... 60-66 UNITS Building C ........... 70-80 UNITS TOTAL CONDOMINIUMS .............169-185 UNITS WOODDALE TOWNHOMES ..................28 UNITS CUDD TOWNHOMES...............................36 UNITS TOTAL HOUSING UNITS .......... 233-249 UNITS DENSITY RATIO ........... 8.9 - 9.5 UNITS PER ACRE TOTAL SURFACE PARKING................102 SPACES IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE .................. 43.3% —1 TRAIL NEW / CHANHASSEN PUBLIC TRAIL roy" -1i1 ON STREET PARKING PRIVATE PARK Urban recreational beach with 1,100 feet of lakeshore, 1.5 acres, six slips, fencing, tot -lot, trails, gazebo, garden areas, fire pit, grill area and seasonal rest rooms. BEARPATH COUNTRY CLUB ENTRANCE FEATURE SITE DATA: CURRENT ZONING.............................................R12 SITE AREA...............................................26.34 ACRES CONDOMINIUMS Building A ................. 39 UNITS Building B ........... 60-66 UNITS Building C ........... 70-80 UNITS TOTAL CONDOMINIUMS .............169-185 UNITS WOODDALE TOWNHOMES ..................28 UNITS CUDD TOWNHOMES...............................36 UNITS TOTAL HOUSING UNITS .......... 233-249 UNITS DENSITY RATIO ........... 8.9 - 9.5 UNITS PER ACRE TOTAL SURFACE PARKING................102 SPACES IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE .................. 43.3% iy1• x i sz3 a i i+ I Sj - z pdis x F i s 7 I f!] + s AO•o Hzx I as SF + a i ��I {�� i�� ,;i8a ``. �'O `�'�•� fib' o _+yY`�q j Inn 4 813 h -'Ldp,:•`"` zl ardx:,c� $"`" it ' U •OT•K. f � B JDYT r W �..i F f 3 o f f `• � i. < i} NEI '- I I I =• a•EFj AN { f j " ; F g E •g= . e°p`-'amu;' 4•/ =a 5i t? Fs7i ,i f g{ i :; Ea i�i iF a 1 a Fz , al .� nnrx M ��:A M• w i i, FFFi € su a FE'� leep _� W i Ts,' u• x.• z _ a3. x%za ➢ its ! i G9 G i 's ^ 00 3 ` FZs I n6 i • as.. �4aJ;' � w 1 c S71 1., c _ !t fj ^R E4a^Y4• vPp ..mva'a*, = �I g 53 g� Pa 4 f7 - •A 1 *n � I ; iaa-� _�44 8i 's•'s_.,?�y� ssa-o lei _i V I m ' 1� •gi •� I I 1 1 i�wvnnlu°-� J2 timu� a i�in SE S�ei W I I Y a• ti in r'E ia. n `E i5 d= °� m 1 Fa p , P C4.. 81 21� Yfi�s� la ye.'. r z' a. xxNr Na Jp m ]IR>e 11ala11L wl arw ( O•Ym . uW,•w mp,wn Iw •m.. a W N•vi'l Yws\Y AraY •IbNN \ W faYY Y C� i\•Iv Y YFnwY 1• NY N YY M •] W IYPeI W.I+N W WrMr\ WON N IM M Ygwmmml W \, N irYsl f1. )amM ilt FpN ]J. Gw Wmix 11MpRx�Nrp�tl pNYF W 4Y Y e W Ym NIq IwI Fl Y. er•w N.,y1 O,J• Li1'1 pr1•W41�m•d M xOWM Ov10 N M Magwl WIN. sY Ytl, Nw Iw•erli N M Mi,•rl mN Y W FrMwp YIIb Y M MrrY,uN YM.I Y,no 11,TM M Y W N•,Y•rl YNI., ]NN 1M Y M ]YNji Myfb,]l,�h. W W b b Iv4•• pmr imY T xqw 1) MWY M wIN'N1, i4i] MN b W YVY !• tl Crl NIJ) WI Wwi N rY W Y,w IMIe1)y. IJO YIIIr14 YYIN M], mYi Y W Iw1af W Yovt Xr s•,1 W v� Y Y r NwN r VRIQ r Nr MaI MY .N NNN• Y M pY•NpYaw Nvw Wq{a•NMYw NOmWib h•I,W Mr•wnMr vF•n n K W N IV Wp N •!1] purr ••h Y NW vx.Ml wtl Ynr Gq•IN.. NeMi YMi1W iY WM V,r• ArY Y M •Y/,N N iv PaW •IYr VN_ IN IWC rYMM1 mYVYAa Tia a urltwu rNlta a A• Y•1•Ly F•NSN .r Ylvlivl Nb• r M � Ny N ]OQ-- q r N Ael• GNwr. • 1•e,•vl• sM•Yn w iiYl a w a1r.RF. ]I ]I,v�1 my N 5•[I4n ivFl •1 bgMtp x«.I MRa dnY 1WI.N• uY fYMYm lair 4 LAKESIDE 1 MNr Wlb WI I xw vwraa m. pIW W I,MIr.NY w Na W m WLT4 WI IxY \ • errrl eprmlmm al W vwx MN m 41mer r• vw w) mm n W Y Irl nt N uY a ma..nmu x.,. lr ..nmur pWyN D W yw r Wm r Y WN u ,.yiN Fr x• p F •u.na •IJI Wlm. Wim WAb, 1. b pNe Ilj,w�p b M NYNIN •N b+IM� WR Lnmr C Fwrpmr. YY Wi+A IiumMv Ylmr M. ]mN mxa a R4Nwr+ ONLY a W N•Wi WYYOmI VN •NI•WiY b•nr gY�rrY ]i4�4/lmor•L bN.OWI•L lwl 6•rR. lNrl• Ika• IY ImiL Mb/ ry1N LSnIF YbrN. Yr Vr,]rYr, iMn WNIT F.Ri)OE <ra. Nlnlx YFvvW q•w,ml b ~. NS bn•M• Y•v 01111. W NN Fr F•m rpraC Wv _ N/ N 144_ •I JMC 1. 41•Y fwv111 MwP 8 E A R P A T H 3 R C b N ]lauvnl Wvb el w Hvxvnl I. N Le]In ]a, lo•nYy 114. Rmiv ]1 500�1600`E OUTWT C I I A v I T I G;: [ml My Y 4a'I IY a- 0 6 2 1 'U___. PIONEERengineering mwn NpRx. dN v.1x YrrN. I O.i1 rrYh YN Ys NNJv b _ N/ Nh „v. Nw bn pW a W NvM n qY pN YM WQn V•x]N•lu fYNrt RNE0. WN W4 INr•vl• I W,01 ar1Y/M N]IvI YLRI�<w•N YY�M`N 140_ isl Y. Mn,r I. Gw1Y Ilvc>N' W M W N IM.mi w gpwl M qW N W cfl CVYY Y M OyY Waxy IMtl• Y •,•i/m ImvYY 1l.rl MI W � Nl N ]O'L...Y Y . mlLmn YY Y• MwYlw N NeW. MW1n FSYw W)W iMAx.,1 N mOVNmY N N W r ,iwYi b W a/ YenN me •• N«N m uY pci •ruili u uW.uY hNN.i beYm FWm. SA•Itlm 1. •s u.P N a.n R I L E"' E 5 T1T E `+ •I Sv,11m-_Er11F, el 411.11 G ; OVWT R v ,4 - IW � Fc'•''+R j 1 r.Nrml lwl« w xuY \' i m ilwnwurW FNvm c•-u)nJ'Irx OUTIOT A \\ / ' NA] N•1 RN (vvL IMwIM • N0.)1 (x4q ]m4) ,� � 'AV DRAINAGE AND FEYp7S ARE SHOW THt1S / � 1 / SEE WSET Ix s F \`"/ �� J• 'fdJP �.__ F•]q 14 Yv1A VYH �WYM IN••ry m. 4•wb rr wl..b YF p•c 3 OUTWT D aR i i FOR DETAW OUTIDT H �gv (m MmT E OF a M78) 1 E N w.v,er,Y rmr yN..M. erWa a 7el 1 N,•W Mnn YYWacw WM•N vxMrpYNM,+b M•«pY yy .Y4�r Y M YvLW Mi•.Nm[Ni 1/�M4 1.MM4Y•1MNOI�]all 10, bx ]l$,I /per 1I �y �_ MNu xwbklN YP] N Nsr N!M•c H�20.'wv.A I.F1 n OUTIOT F �ylll ' NI OUTIAT 0 / Q GRAPHICq SCALE n rw,«�, s 1. IY°'wi°im ; Frr.1,m1 rwIN lrmv •O,J.r ]sue ' IrW NYY Nov •vd h•«Y• x.nuri�� rw�1.r,11,Wv]yow .I __- 1 bw _ ml imt Y1]r)1 a ] WEf1R 1 � 1 116RIND dY OUTIAT E II 10 B 11' T O 6 4 I6 2 1 R— — — — T — — � IZ — — — R iri•la'Y ' — RL11 �[ R )1 1010 LIR '••' x..,M.1Wma 4YN 1..1. . x..IFrn Wr1r .I w vl )aclb ]a. 1 1 I—= Ilk 1•nIYi4 114 Rm1• ]]. �; Jomau .m.mw1Y 1772116 low of olv n.oxY 60020'00 E , `+>-<w9.vun vealca N Rrck N Popaa )]4aM ' i / R LOLI Rwa6iw;r �.;1 W .r Ya r,-, ,;, ie•� 14.uavnml ul I N ]cYn elwcaCa m Ya 6 Ooc Ne. NJ]I. / / $a, IovW.i 114, Rnpa }). 1 NORTH aAY RG A �Txx: .pR:H BAY 2t9 N2TkXS ; ORTN BA rm A;ry _ � /Ir 1,ibJ�, I " PIONEERengineering mwn NpRx. dN v.1x YrrN. I O.i1 rrYh YN Ys NNJv b _ N/ Nh „v. Nw bn pW a W NvM n qY pN YM WQn V•x]N•lu fYNrt RNE0. WN W4 INr•vl• I W,01 ar1Y/M N]IvI YLRI�<w•N YY�M`N 140_ isl Y. Mn,r I. Gw1Y Ilvc>N' W M W N IM.mi w gpwl M qW N W cfl CVYY Y M OyY Waxy IMtl• Y •,•i/m ImvYY 1l.rl MI W � Nl N ]O'L...Y Y . mlLmn YY Y• MwYlw N NeW. MW1n FSYw W)W iMAx.,1 N mOVNmY N N W r ,iwYi b W a/ YenN me •• N«N m uY pci •ruili u uW.uY hNN.i beYm FWm. SA•Itlm 1. •s u.P N a.n R I L E"' E 5 T1T E `+ •I Sv,11m-_Er11F, el 411.11 G ; OVWT R v ,4 - IW � Fc'•''+R j 1 r.Nrml lwl« w xuY \' i m ilwnwurW FNvm « W W N Ix.m Mr.vi m. Ll \\ / ' NA] N•1 RN (vvL IMwIM • N0.)1 (x4q ]m4) ,� � 'AV DRAINAGE AND FEYp7S ARE SHOW THt1S / � 1 / s F \`"/ �� J• 'fdJP �.__ F•]q 14 Yv1A VYH �WYM IN••ry m. 4•wb rr wl..b YF p•c ��.� Y p +a'JdIYYP+Q � 41" �•eA,fo�•P `t m R ' N w.v,er,Y rmr yN..M. erWa ry Z N,•W Mnn YYWacw WM•N vxMrpYNM,+b M•«pY yy .Y4�r Y M YvLW Mi•.Nm[Ni 1/�M4 1.MM4Y•1MNOI�]all 10, bx ]l$,I /per _-YnI o z`` „pm x c ry b••nw1 I. nT)N �y �_ MNu xwbklN YP] N Nsr N!M•c H�20.'wv.A I.F1 n Y W YW NNYY �ylll ' NI • W.W Cs.. WIVRI, Yr•s�rR O GRAPHICq SCALE n rw,«�, s 1. IY°'wi°im Frr.1,m1 rwIN lrmv •O,J.r ]sue ' IrW NYY Nov •vd h•«Y• x.nuri�� rw�1.r,11,Wv]yow .I 1 bw _ ml imt Y1]r)1 a ] WEf1R ELI 65.73 2,269,325 sq. ft. 52.10 acres BOUNDARY AREA TO LAKE 2,282,535 sq. ft. f 52.40 acres f MI o T=13(� t I 1I jrt N 00i N ;n to 00z I� 23,929 sq.ft. T=27,830 sq.ft. Z J 0. o E` 0 m t 1 I+ \ � o, `N N \ - 3 16 -+ N u; �w \ CPo w rn - ` � o, !� P L A K E R I L E Y OHW 865.3 SHORELINELOCATED 8s 01 1. 1995 ELEVATION OUTLOT C\ \`t v 39.623 sq -ft. \ \ \ A- `?rn Ply A; �y T=45.968 sq.ft. t ,1�, AL AL — MO 101.62 64 t i QUIT CLAIM DEED corporation or Partnership to Corporation or Partnership No delinquent taxes and transfer entered; Certificate of Real Estate Value ( ) filed (9--Knot required Certificate of Real Estate Valueo. i"L .. 1�Ot by STATE DEED TAX DDE HEREON $ 1.65 Date: July 3�i, 19 96 Xr"t"t%jsj\rattund%rott[Lx,d.LWXP Document No:�� STATE OF MINNESOTA CARVER COUNTY RECORDER (Abstract DepaMTIert) ROng Foo: 6pli� Copy Few Cha k No: Cash FlIsd On / �7 at Cad W. Benson Jr-, County Recorder tta) By: FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, The Rottlund CONRanV. Inc. , a corporation under the laws of Minnesota , Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to Lakeview Hills Investment Group , a general partnership under the laws of Minnesota , Grantee, real property in Carver county, Minnesota, described as follows: Outlet B, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto. Seller certifies that Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. Total consideration for this transaction is less than $500.00. STATE OF MINNESOTA) The a M Company, Inc., orporation ) as. COUNTY OFRjQM5S/ ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this 3 day of July , 19 96 by and DRU O H Qom.(-Ee , the Fs•r,,,-f,u�(1�,of The Rottlund Company. Inc. , a corporation under the laws of Minnesota , on behalf of the corporation . .EAREvSJOHNS04 eouev nape-aeseatee HENNEPIPCOUNTY C THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Barna, Guzy & Steffen, Ltd. 400 Northtown Financial Plaza 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55433 (JSJ) tary c Tax Statements for the Real Property Described in this Instrument Should be sent to: Lakeview Hills Investment Group 1630 W 7P. .5%u_T -0enuTM Mij j Ye 4 7L_ r x oNaTa�r r - petdtm 4rya �; ,t, ._• cn Cuaer CK"Treasurer . Cerrsemtten Fae POW . m S U7 1 c r m Q Z A STATE OF MINNESOTA) The a M Company, Inc., orporation ) as. COUNTY OFRjQM5S/ ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this 3 day of July , 19 96 by and DRU O H Qom.(-Ee , the Fs•r,,,-f,u�(1�,of The Rottlund Company. Inc. , a corporation under the laws of Minnesota , on behalf of the corporation . .EAREvSJOHNS04 eouev nape-aeseatee HENNEPIPCOUNTY C THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Barna, Guzy & Steffen, Ltd. 400 Northtown Financial Plaza 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55433 (JSJ) tary c Tax Statements for the Real Property Described in this Instrument Should be sent to: Lakeview Hills Investment Group 1630 W 7P. .5%u_T -0enuTM Mij j LAKEVIEW GROUP: STATE OF MI ESOTA ) ss. COUNTY Lakeview Hills Investment Groun, a Minnesota general partnership U E �1_ The forego ngg� instrument was acknowledged before me this ;L ay of f1996, by �� V1�1.�•1�7�C_ , the ,oc' {of The Rottlund Ccmpany, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. JEFFREY S JONN90'+f L 140iMVPoKIE-11MI�!rt� HENNEWN00{NiTY otar lic rra.nm�evrrn,tr e STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknow dgged before me this 3) day of June, 1996, by S4e !3 LIP 6 aIt-Z the !L',v "221 pxv�w of Lakeview Hills Investment Group, a general partnership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the general partnership. +�-2 ANN S HOFl=MEYER "om"�-wra 'A Notary Public myco IMONE%MM ab /ANVA1131,1000 THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN, LTD. 400 Northtown Financial Plaza 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55433 (612) 780-8500 (JSJ) jsj\rottLund\Lkw-2.aer Document No: STATE OF MINNESOTA CARVER COUNTY RECORDER (Abstract Department) Filling Fee: /,I'`=G Copy Fee: _ Check No: 7"L7 ✓,,'''"� / `3 / Cash Filed On � L of /T T -r Carl W. Hanso0 Jr., County Recorder By: OFFICIAL PLAT C.R. DOC. NO. 191535 NORTH BAY g W q (,�—OLITLOT a 8 „ 8S 00'20'00' E ��V_i3303.72 P ODI59 °'0° 1 B 91.n5-� _ 521.66 . = — \ 850.99I ho �Oo , 89.81 25t Fig N00'M'00'W 216.x1 i 76'.' T! � TERTW aMTHE E/ST H1.7 rtEl 11, IE y�,M1q y��` x,6.2t/ die�p N. . he"`v N I I SURVEY LINE j I NaxlletS1 gxM1ER 6 SFCRN 91, lalCii tln. RMIZ ]J--- at I ah' �_ /,a a ; i�W L A K E elle I n i I I . � ✓ 1:4' � I tet � N to J � y (J O U T L O T E L - IR ". I �� Q I � I R I L E Y •')t IFI ~ . _ — Q . I !t!("( um o I -24: MT w vNur ElECe9C coo9. a •j§ rj / / v C j \\ I a o $ I ` 1 EA4bxT Ra aac Na nJs+ r 1 00'W \ tJ w W.14 rEEr 0w 1929) 0 U T L 0 T A Rlovoj,398tX1 \ W � x�Tr M%AA, amw¢s a6 1 •C $y " • �. hry h �8 0. U 'T L 0 T D \ wd 't I ^ `� I X l �lh / I I C/ \ 24t Mar N2.r 1, las - esem rtET (N6w 19x9) "4s�0 , A9 •1rP� � d q`1>+f'ry ' ^ `l P 0 N D III \ `✓'i. �Y yei ` r i i E J dOM1e P�n' Cthry I I I _CJ I �.. vx��', r I R C_ . • I \`I DNR NETLNID NO. 213W ` (1 \S� y ` ') oe ei'bhwry \ NH6i m9e \� \ ,1'Si1' 49 rear w vNu[r aEc,x maR. I I ! I\�� ` \ a I ^pM1 E6mur rtR 96e xa ,ura r 40 �o \ --SIL _ .na oo-}_ sL------------1^L{---- -----------------� ----- .,-------aZo.o9__--_— i �Ya = — -;f�i. _ �'i 1048.02 \ — J 11 L32 116f LdfID� — — — _ _ — — — — — —— — — — — — — — — — — '— 1 68.59`94.23 105.2] 7 ---.1 . OF ....AST .AST WMltx W THE NCRTHENST WMM OF SECTION 2., T( MW 116. LANCE x THE NIRTERY E)CNlexax W 6 u1E vM1llEL YM NO ,641A7 Fact WMnokr W TIE EtST u E or IME N IHIDt! I WMWI OF YCMN 24, 10109N 116. RM4E 0 1040.00 d F- t 25 .< S 00'20'00• E I 3303.72 ---j -� 821.66 ^ 0 U T L 0 JJ� 4-X T A W z c: y R I C E w a , 1-' `� MARSH �I�W °� 141j �-)—SURVEY UNE 3 G1 T v Eu V1 tt� 1 C . 111 .I I 7 a LAKE 40 ROT W WN rILCMC CN. 1za 1 CCCi .4 ��---YEST uE a ,HE saunE6sr W MIER ar IK 99u1I94AST ; � (_ \ \�.1g` \ , WMER or xcn6N 1x lOw9i na. RMZ v J , \I J, 1 1010.00 �� 213.29 4. r 1313.29 .. . �� _[ I.. A rs C N 00'03'52• W m n Iv v h 224740�\ ,- N 00'16'1" W %\ SCME IN FEET Ia o m Im xro 409 0 Denotes iron monument found • Denotes 1/2 inch by 14 inch iron monument set and marked with licensed number 14891 The west line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 116, Range 23 is assumed to have a bearing of N 00'1621" W BENCHMARK 8- Spike in power pole in the Southwest Quadrant of Lymon Blvd. and Lake Riley Blvd. Elevation = 870.15 (NGVD 1929) � # y x4zz a w NM°.Inu atm (612) eet-1914 F/Cteet-94410 e��RE ♦ ♦ * ** (e12) leJ-,mo vuc lv-reel SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS EASEKENT AGREEMENT THI SEMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into this �S� day of d, 1996, by and between The Rottlund Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Rottlund"), and Lakeview Hills Investment Group, a Minnesota general partnership ("Lakeview Group"), WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Lakeview Group is the fee owner of property legally described as Outlot B, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota ("Outlot B"); and WHEREAS, Rottlund is the fee owner of property legally described as Outlots C, D, E and F, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota (the "Rottlund Parcel"); and WHEREAS, Rottlund intends to develop a residential community on the Rottlund Parcel; and WHEREAS, Rottlund is desirous of obtaining an easement over Outlot B for the purpose of utilizing the existing gravel driveway and parking area for convenient access to Outlot F, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota ("Outlot F"), for the benefit of Rottlund, its successor and assigns, and the owners of residential properties within Outlots C, D and E, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the parties set forth herein, and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties have agreed as follows: 1. Agreement. A) Easement for Access Grant of Easement. Lakeview Group hereby grants to Rottlund, and to the successors and assigns of Rc,_tlund, as an easement appurtenant to the Rottlund Parcel, a non-exclusive easement on, over, upon and across the West 65 feet of Outlot B, measured perpendicular to the westerly line of said Outlot B (the "Easement Tract") for the purposes of ingress and egress on foot and with automobiles, for access to Outlot F. No vehicle parking shall be permitted upon the Easement Tract. 2. Miscellaneous. A) Running of Benefits and Burdens. All provisions of this instrument, including the benefits and burdens, shall be deemed to run with the land and shall be a binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, assigns, successors and legal representatives of the parties hereto. B) Termination of Covenant Liability. Whenever a transfer of ownership of any parcel or any part thereof takes place, the personal liability of the transferor for breach of any covenant thereafter occurring thereunder shall automatically terminate. C) Enforcement. Any property owner may enforce this instrument by appropriate action and should said property owner prevail in such action, that property owner shall recover any reasonable costs or attorney fees which may be incurred. D) Construction of Agreement. The rule of strict construction shall not apply to the easement granted in this Agreement, or to the covenants set forth herein. This Agreement shall be given a reasonable construction so that the intention of the parties, the benefits granted and obligations undertaken hereunder are reasonably realized and carried out. E) Consent of Mortgagee. Each of the parties hereto shall cause the consent to this Agreement to be executed, delivered and appended hereto by each of the holders of any mortgages, liens or encumbrances as to their respective lots subject hereto or benefitting hereby. F) Termination of Easement. This easement shall terminate if and when the City of Chanhassen shall construct upon Outlet C, North Bay, Carver County, Minnesota, a parking lot open for public use. Upon completion of such public parking lot by the City of Chanhassen, Rottlund, its successors or assigns, agrees to execute a document terminating this easement. IN WITNESS TO THIS AGREEMENT, the parties have caused this instrument to be executed as of the day and year first above written, subject to all of the terms and conditions herein set forth. ROTTLUND: The a Mi Lel I lund Company, Inc tea\corporation Location Map Lakeside 125 Lakeview Road East Planning Case No. 06-26 prof°sa Rice Marsh Lake Lake Riley SCANNED CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MAY 8, 2006 Mayor Furlong called the work session to order at 5:40 p.m.. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Lundquist, and Councilman Peterson. Councilman Labatt arrived at the end of the work session. COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilwoman Tjomhom STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Justin Miller, Kate Aanenson, Paul Oehme, and Todd Hoffman DISCUSSION OF PLANS FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LAKEVIEW HILLS PROPERTY. John Holdenbacher with Sienna Corporation introduced his team which included Steve Mangold, John Harriss with Harriss Architects, and Steve Obermueller with Wooddale Builders. Mr. Holdenbacher provided background information on the property, and introduced their proposal. He presented a color rendering showing the PUD with different type of housing units, park and trail system, and beachlot area. John Harriss explained the condominium concept being proposed for Buildings A, B and C. Councilman Lundquist asked how the proposed townhouses compare with the Twinhomes currently on Bearpath Golf Course. Councilman Peterson asked for an explanation of the price point for the condos. John Harriss stated they expect the condos in Building A to be approximately $300-$340.00 a square foot. Councilman Lundquist asked about the fencing around Bearpath and how the public and private trail systems will be connected. Kate Aanenson stated staff will work with the applicant to deal with the private/public connections to the trails, beach and grading. Councilman Lundquist asked for an explanation of the timeline associated with demolition and construction. John Harriss explained the scale of the 4 story apartment building B in relation to the North Bay development. Steve Obermueller outlined the layout, size and price point for the Wooddale Builders townhome units. John Holdenbacher presented the Charles Cudd townhomes and addressed the beachlot zoning requirements which would exclude 30-40 units in the development. They will be asking the City Council to consider requesting beachlot access to all units in the development. Kate Aanenson clarified the zoning on the site and in order to accommodate the mixed housing types versus a R- 12 vertical unit, staff would support the request for mixed use and access to the beachlot. Mayor Furlong asked for clarification of the private streets versus public street, traffic flow, drainage and response from the North Bay residents. John Holdenbacher stated they will be holding a neighborhood meeting with the North Bay residents prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Todd Gerhardt asked the applicant to look at connecting the trail system with the North Bay development, and to study the road improvements and traffic study regarding access into the site. Mayor Furlong thanked the applicants for their presentation and told them to keep up the good work. Kate Aanenson noted that staff and the applicant were looking at June 20, 2006 for Planning Commission review. scA:..-p Mayor Furlong adjourned the work session at 6:20 p.m.. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim /- /o- o(� Name and Address of Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Peterson Environmental (Cheryl Feigum), Sienna Corporation (John Vogelbacher) Project Name: Lakeview Hills Apartment property Application Number: Type of Application (check one): Date of Decision: 01/10/2006 ® Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision ❑ Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Check One: ® Approved- Basin "A" ❑ Approved with conditions (see note on page 2 regarding use of wetland banking credits) ® Denied- Basin `B" Summary of Project/Decision (indicate exemption number per MN Rule 8420.0122, if applicable): The Lakeview Hills Apartment Property is located at the E yx of the NE t/4 , Section 24, Township 116N, R23W. The property has two jurisdictional wetlands on site and the applicant has made an incidental request for wetland basins "A" (.03 acre Type 3 wetland) and `B"(.75 acre Type 3 wetland). Applicant has indicated that wetlands "A" and `B" were a result of the construction of the apartment buildings on the property and that both wetlands were a result of grading and additional storm water being directed to the areas. Applicant has provided the LGU with HIG photographs dating from 1937-2003. See attached Findings and Conclusions for details decision to Deny incidental request for Basin `B" and Approve the incidental request for Basin "A". List of Addressees: Landowner: John Volgelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Members of Technical Evaluation Panel: Greg Graczyk, Carver Soil and Water Conservation District Brad Wozney, Board of Water and Soil Resources Lakeviewlhlls NOD - Page 1 of 2 9/16/04 Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable): Bob Obermeyer, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District Department of Natural Resources Regional Office (select a ro nate office): NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: So Southern Region: Regional Director Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol. 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. NE Div. Ecol. Serv 'v. Ecol. Services 61 Hwy. 15 South New Ulm, MN 56073 ices Div. Ecol Services D� Bemidji, MN 56601 1201 E. Hwy. 2 1200 Warner Road 2 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 St. Paul, MN 55106 DNR TEP Representative (if different than above) Julie Ekman, DNR Hydrologist Corp of Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO -R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary only Cheryl Feigum 1355 Mendota Heights Road, Suite 100 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112 You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. NOTE: Approval of Wetland Replacement Plan Applications involving the use of wetland banking credits is conditional upon withdrawal of the appropriate credits from the state wetland bank. No wetland impacts may commence until the applicant receives a copy of the fully signed and executed "Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits," signed by the BWSR wetland bank administrator certifying that the wetland bank credits have been debited. THIS DECISION ONLYAPPLIES TO the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. 11014V10"MAa 1103VW`►Illl8001 �i ---� January 12, 2006 ignature lDate Don Asleson- Natural Resource Technician Name and Title - Page 2 of 2 Lakeviewl ills NOD 9/16/04 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard • P.O. Box 147 • Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Sienna Corporation, John Volaelbacher Project Location: Lakeview Hills Apartment property- E 1/a of the NE 1/4, Section 24, Township 116 N, Range 23W. Type of Application (check one): ❑ Delineation Decision ❑x Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision Date of Decision: January 12, 2006 Findings and Conclusions The City of Chanhassen, LGU, received the exemption request indicating basins "A" and "B" were believed to be incidental to the construction of the Lakeview Hills apartment complex on 12/22/2005. Included with the request, the applicant submitted historical HIG photographs with a current wetland boundary overlay. Applicant had also indicated that an inlet/outlet structure and a berm to the north were located just beyond the wetland boundary of basin `B" supplying the hydrology to the wetland basin. Chanhassen reviewed the as -built plans of record and determined that the structure near wetland `B" was an inlet and therefore was not contributing to the hydrology of the wetland. Review of the HIG photographs submitted and FSA photographs at the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District revealed that the wetland area existed prior to the construction of the apartment complex (1963 HHG Photo). The berm on the south side of the wetland allowed the City to rule out the possibility that storm water from the complex was being directed into wetland `B". The berm on the north side of the wetland appears to have formed in the early 1970's with the excavation of part of Wetland `B" to open water. In examining the photos it appears the ditch to the north of the property stopped functioning between 1951 and 1957, about the time the wetland signatures in the photos become visible. Wetland B has been in existence for more than 25 years and is therefore jurisdictional wetland that cannot be considered for incidental or drainage exemptions. The City of Chanhassen as LGU has come to the conclusion that Wetland B (approx .75 acre Type 3 basin) is not eligible for incidental or drainage exemptions. Wetland "A" due to its size made it difficult to extract any additional information from the air -photos. Additionally, all historic photos that were reviewed illustrated an access road directly to the west of the basin. The presence of a culvert under the access road to the west illustrated that the basin may have been created to maintain drainage through the culvert. Reviewing the wetland delineation report it appears that the A soil horizon appears to have been excavated suggesting that this basin is managed to convey storm water. No primary indicators of hydrology were listed in the Wetland delineation report and only one secondary indicator (FAC neutral) was listed. The City of Chanhassen as LGU has determined that Wetland "A" (03 acre Type 3) is an incidental wetland that was not created for the purpose of creating wetland. CITY OF CHANHASSEN By. Title: Natural Resource Technician Date: January 12, 2006 Name and address of local government unit: City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 The undersigned certifies on January 12, 2006 , Don Asleson he/she mailed copies of the attached Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Decision to the addressees listed thereon by depositing the same in the United States Mail in the City of Chanhassen , County of Carver and State of Minnesota, properly enveloped with prepaid first class postage. Signature Natural Resources Technician Title Page I of I Cert Mail Notice Decision 01/13/06 Date (April 2003) Peterson Environmental WFIt/ED Consulting, Inc. DEC 2 1 2005 LETTER OF TRANSMITTALC OFCHANHASSEN DATE: December 14, 2005 TO: Don Asleson City of Chanhassen 690 Center City Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317-0147 FROM: Cheryl Feigum 47 RE: Lake Riley -Chanhassen —Incidental Wetland Request PEC #: 2005-076 ITEM #: DESCRIPTION 1 Incidental Wetland Request — HIG photos REMARKS: Don, You have already conducted a wetland boundary review and sent a letter of concurrence to us. I am now requesting a decision on the incidental status of the two wetlands on the site. 1r,n�" Cheryl direct: 651-905-6126 cell: 612-819-4905 CC: John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation (pdf) 1355 Mendota Heights Road, Suite 100 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112 Tel 651-686-0151 Fax 651-686-0369 w .petersonenecom #_Pe1 erson Environmental Consulting, Inc. MEMORANDUM TO: Don Asleson, City of Chanhassen 690 Center City Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317-0147 FROM: Cheryl Feigum, PEC CC: John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation DATE: December 14, 2005 SUBJECT: Lake Riley — Chanhassen Property Chanhassen, Minnesota PEC Project No. 2005-076 The purpose of this memo is to request a decision on the incidental status of the two wetlands on the site. The Lake Riley property is located in the E %2 of the NE '/4, Section 24, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota (Figures la and lb). Sienna and PEC received a WCA Notice of the Wetland Conservation Act Decision from the City of Chanhassen (dated 11/02/05) which documented concurrence of the existing wetland boundaries. A review of historic aerial photographs was conducted to identify any "incidental wetlands" that have been created in native upland areas. Such wetlands are exempt from regulation under the WCA (see Minn. Rules 8420.0122 Subpart 5). An analysis of historic aerial photographs was conducted to assist in determining the presence and extent of jurisdictional wetlands. Aerial photographs were obtained for the project area from the Historical Information Gatherers, Inc. (HIG). Photographs were available for the years including 1937, 1940, 1951, 1957, 1963, 1970, 1979, 1991, 1997 and 2003 (Figures 2- 11). Photographs were scanned and georectified using ArcMap 8.0'x". The HIG photos show that prior to the appearance of the apartment complex in 1970, the two wetland areas (A and B) were consistently tilled for agriculture. At some time between 1963 and 1970, the area was no longer tilled and the apartment complex was constructed. Wetland B begins to appear conspicuously on the 1970 photograph, suggesting that either the area wasexcavated or storm water was diverted to the area. Currently, there is a bermed area on the north side of Wetland B which may have been created from fill (e,g., from excavation for a septic field) created during the construction of the apartment complex or the townhouse development around 1997. During the delineation on October 11, 2005, there was an outlet/inlet structure (it was not clear which one) located at the southwest comer of Wetland B near the townhouses. This indicates that Wetland B is currently utilized as a storm water pond. 1355 Mendota Heights Road, Suite 100 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112 Tel 651-686-0151 Fax 651-686-0369 w .petersonenvxotn Mr. Don Asleson December 14, 2005 Page 2 PEC Project No. 2005-076 Wetland A appears to be excavated with steep side slopes and a large grated concrete outlet culvert on the north side of the basin. There is no A -horizon for the wetland profile indicating the site was scrapped and therefore a created wetland. The HIG photos do not show a wetland in this area until the 2003 photo where the wetland is evident. It appears that Wetland A was created for the purpose of storm water storage. An additional historical data search was requested from Ms. Alyson Morris, City of Chanhassen Assistant Engineer, and Mr. Steve Liefschultz, current property owner. However, neither person was able to provide any additional relevant historical information. Based on the information provided, we are requesting a decision by the City of Chanhassen (as LGU) regarding the incidental status of Wetlands A and B under the WCA rules. Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. y,. r Site Location Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure la PEC Project No. 2005-063 Site Location Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure 1b Peterson PEC Project No. 2005-063 Environmental Consulting, Inc. a a 1$7w r Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. 1937 HIG Aerial Photograph Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, MN FIGURE 2 PEC Pmjmt No. 2005-076 N .� E c Legend . Pfq VA -,s_ — . _ N Legend Propenytlary •. 'gra } .- Wetland Bounailm Kjk 150 300 r>v.450 00'0 Fay Vol '+�• w[i. zi t�ii rJ. -W, f 1951 ' 4v 1951 S Legend Prcperty Boundary 0 75 150 300 450 600 Feel AMA t 1957 i c FF f 8 E t Legend ��' iii' Property Boundary 1 Wetland Boundary 0 75 150 300 450 600 Feet ofa 1963 1 Legend ?rocery 80c^cary 0 75 150 300 450 600 Feet Or 1963 Y Legend 0 775 150 -� 300 450 _. & y Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. 1970 HIG Aerial Photograph Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, MN FIGURE 7 PEC Project No. 2005-076 s 1979 HIG Aerial Photograph Lake Riley Property Peterson Environmental Chanhassen, MN Consulting, Inc. FIGURES PEC Project No. 2105-076 Vi 1991 HIG Aerial Photograph Lake Riley Property Peterson Environmental Chanhassen, MN Consulting, Inc. FIGURE PEC Pmjmt No. 2005-076 fA 4 J Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. 1997 HIG Aerial Photograph Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, MN FIGURE 10 PEC Project No. 2005-076 2003 N 1 �� t P Legend Propend 8ounc ary c _ 0 75 150 300 450 600 feet 2003; N 1 I W E eM Soundeiy 7� Llano 6oandary - -. _ • " 0 75 150 300 450 600 �� feet Name and Address of Local Government Unit: City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Boulevard, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Mr. John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation, 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608, Minneapolis, MN 55435 Project Name: Lake Riley. Sienna Corporation Application Number: Type of Application (check one): Date of Decision: 11/02/2005 ❑ Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision ®Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Check One: ® Approved ❑ Approved with conditions (see note on page 2 regarding use of wetland banking credits) ❑ Denied Summary of Project/Decision (indicate exemption number per MN Rule 8420.0122, if applicable): Applicant has requested that the LGU, City of Chanhassen, make a boundary and type determination based off of the wetland delineation report dated October 14, 2005. See attached findings and conclusions for details of decision. List of Addressees: Landowner: Lakeview Hills, LLC 12400 Whitewater Drive South, #140 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Members of Technical Evaluation Panel: Mr. Brad Wozney, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Mr. Chip Hentges, Carver Soil and Water Conservation District Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable): Mr. Bob Obermeyer, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District Department of Natural Resources Regional Office Ms. Julie Ekman, Area Hydrologist Lake Riley -Sienna Corp. - Page 1 of 2 9/16/04 DNR Wetlands Coordinator Ecological Services Station 500 Layfayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 Corp of Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO -R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary only Mr. John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corp. Ms. Cheryl Feigum, P.h.D., Peterson Environmental You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. NOTE: Approval of Wetland Replacement Plan Applications involving the use of wetland banking credits is conditional upon withdrawal of the appropriate credits from the state wetland bank. No wetland impacts may commence until the applicant receives a copy of the fully signed and executed "Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits," signed by the BWSR wetland bank administrator certifying that the wetland bank credits have been debited. THIS DECISION ONLYAPPLIES TO the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. • •I:hY 50 z 11/2/2005 Signature Date Don Asleson, Natural Resources Technician Name and Title - Page 2 of 2 Lake Riley -Sienna Corp. 9/16/04 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard • P.O. Box 147 • Chanhassen, MN 55317 Name of Applicant: Mr. John Volgelbacher, Sienna Corporation. Project Location: E 1h of the NE 1/4, Section 24, Township 116 N, Range 23 W Type of Application (check one): ❑x Delineation Decision ❑ Exemption Decision ❑ No Loss Decision ❑ Replacement Plan Decision ❑ Banking Plan Decision Daie of Decision: 11/02/2005 Findings and Conclusions The City of Chanhassen, LGIJ, at the request of the applicant has made a jurisdictional type and boundary decision for the wetland delineation report submitted by Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. dated October 19, 2005. The City of Chanhassen reviewed the delineation report prior to a site visit on October 24,2005. During the site visit on October 24,2005 City staff walked all wetland boundaries and verified their placement and extent. Staff also verified that existing conditions in the northeast corner of the property did not exhibit wetland characteristics within the project area. The wetland delineation report by Peterson Environmental dated October 14, 2005 depicts jurisdictional wetland boundaries within the project area. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Title: Natural Resource Technician Date: 11/02/2005 Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 17, 2005 TO: Lori Haak Water Resources Coordinator RrCEI,JED City of Chanhassen OCT 1 9 2005 690 Center City Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317-0147 CITY OF CHANHASSE'N FROM: Cheryl Feigum bij� RE: Lake Riley -Chanhassen -Wetland Delineation Report PEC #: 2005-076 ITEM #: DESCRIPTION 1 Wetland Delineation Report - 3 copies REMARKS: Lori, Enclosed are three copies of the Wetland Delineation report for a site in Chanhassen, MN. I am requesting a review of the wetland boundary and types as soon as possible. Thanks - Cheryl direct: 651-905-6126 cell: 612-819-4905 CC: Joe Yanta, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (w/one copy of the report) John Vogelbacher, Sienna Corporation (w/one copy of the report) I 1 1 WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT LAKE RILEY Chanhassen, Minnesota PREPARED FOR: MR. JOHN VOGELBACHER SIENNA CORPORATION 4940 VIKING DRIVE, SUITE 608 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 SUBMITTED BY: PETERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC. 1355 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD, SUITE 100 MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA 55120 PEC PROJECT No. 2005-076 OCTOBER 2005 Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. I 1 Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. October l4, 2005 Mr. John Vogelbacher Sienna Corporation 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 608 Minneapolis, MN 55435 Subject: Wetland Delineation Results Lake Riley Chanhassen, Minnesota PEC Project No. 2005-076 Dear John: Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. (PEC) jurisdictional wetlands found on the Lake Riley Section 24, Township 116 North, Range 23 ' Minnesota (Figures la and lb). METHODOLOGY 11 11 1 11 has completed the final delineation of the property located in the E 1/2 of the NE 1/4, West, City of Chanhassen, Carver County, The wetland boundaries on the subject property were delineated using the routine determination methodology set forth in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Wetlands Delineation Manual. Use of the 1987 manual is required under Corps rules and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). Wetland boundaries were determined through a routine analysis of the vegetation, soils and hydrology. The plant species within the parcel were catalogued and assigned a wetland indicator status according the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands; North Central Region 3 (USFWS Biological Report 88(26.3); May 1988). In the text of this report and on the enclosed data forms, the plant indicator status follows the plant's scientific name unless a status has not been assigned. The hydrophytic plant criteria are met when more than 50 percent of the dominant species within the vegetative strata were assigned an obligate (OBL)l, facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC) wetland indicator status. OBL = Obligate Wetland, has an estimated 99% probability of occurrence in wetlands. FACW = Facultative Wetland, has an estimated 67%99a/o probability of occurrence in wetlands. FAC = Facultative, is equally likely to occur in wetlands and non -wetlands (34%66% probability). FACU = Facultative Upland, occurs only occasionally in wetlands (1"/o-23% probability). UPL = Upland, almost never occurs in wetlands (<I% probability). NI = No Indicator, insufficient information available to determine an indicator status. Positive or negative signs indicate a frequency toward higher (+) or lower (-) frequency of occurrence within a category. 1355 Mendota Heights Road, Suite 100 Mendota Heights, MN 55120-1112 Tel 651-686-0151 Fax 651-686-0369 w .petersonenvxom I C Mr. John Vogelbacher October 14, 2005 Page 2 PEC Project No. 2005-076 Wetland classifications discussed in the text are set forth in Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS Publication 79/31; Cowardin et al. 1979) and Wetlands of the United States (USFWS Circular 39; Shaw and Fredine 1971). The break between hydric and non -hydric soils was determined by excavating soil pits along transects crossing the wetland/upland ecotone and evaluating the soil colors, texture, and presence or absence of redoximorphic indicators (i.e. mottles, gley, oxidized rhizospheres). The presence of current wetland hydrology was determined through direct observation of free water in the excavated soil pit, saturated soil conditions, and soil redoximorphic features. However, the effect of on- or off-site hydrologic alterations may not always fully be accounted for when routine delineation methods are used. Data sheets were prepared detailing the wetland vegetation, soil and hydrology for each wetland. The delineated wetland boundaries were marked with sequentially numbered pin flags for your survey crew to locate in the field. ' All wetland boundaries were recorded with a Leica GS5+ DGPS unit with a ToughbookTm. The GPS unit has submeter accuracy under all conditions. Using the GPS data, graphics were created for this report. ' RESULTS 1 I 1 1 Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. delineated two wetland areas within the project area on October 11, 2005 (Figure 2). The locations of the wetland and upland sampling points are shown on Figure 2. The data sheets for the upland and wetland sampling points are arranged alphabetically according to the letter ID (Attachment A). Representative site photographs are found in Attachment B. Wetland A Wetland A is located in the southwest area of the property and covers approximately 0.03 acres. It is classified as a palustrine seasonally flooded wedand that is partially drained or ditched (PEMCd; Circular 39 Type 3 shallow marsh). There is an outlet culvert on the north side of the wetland which controls the water level. The upland sample had a water table that was greater than 30 inches below the soil surface. The Carver County Soil Survey mapped the sample site as a hydric Hamel series (Figure 3). There were no primary indicators of hydrology. There was one secondary indicator of hydrology which included soil survey data. Dominant plant species included smooth brome (Bromus inermis, NI), Canada goldenrod (Solidago canadensis, FACU) and American elm (Ulmus americanus, FACW-). The wetland sampling site had a water table that was one inch above the soil surface at the time of the delineation. This area is mapped as a hydric Hamel soil (Figure 3). The sample site met the primary indicator of hydrology which included visual observation of inundation. There were 1 Mr. John Vogelbacher ' October 14, 2005 Page 3 PEC Project No. 2005-076 1 three secondary indicators of hydrology which included the Fac -neutral test, water stained leaves ' and soil survey data. Dominant vegetation included reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW+), narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia, OBL) and sandbar willow (Salix exigua, OBL). ' The wetland boundary is located at the toeslope where the vegetation grades from a mix of FACW and OBL plants to brome and Canada goldenrod. Wetland B Wetland B is located in the northwest corner of the site. The wetland on the site covers approximately 0.75 acres within the site. It is classified as a palustrine emergent seasonally flooded wetland that is partially drained or ditched (PEMCd; Circular 39 Type 3 shallow marsh). There is an outlet culvert on the southwest comer of the wetland which controls the water level. ' The wetland continues off-site to the west. The upland sample had a water table that was greater than 30 inches below the soil surface. The ' Carver County Soil Survey mapped the sample site as a hydric Hamel series (Figure 3). The sample site had no primary indicators of hydrology. There was one secondary indicator of hydrology which included soil survey data. Dominant plant species included Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FAC-), timothy (Phleum pratense, FACU), Canada goldenrod, red osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera, FACW) and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides, FAC). ' The wetland sampling site had a water table that was three inches above the soil surface at the time of the delineation. This area is mapped as a hydric Hamel series (Figure 3). There was one primary indicator of hydrology which included visual observation of inundation. There were two ' secondary indicators of hydrology which included the Fac -neutral test and soil survey data. Dominant vegetation included sedges (Carex spp.), reed canarygrass, Bebb willow (Salix bebbiana, FACW+), red osier dogwood, black willow (Salix nigra, OBL) and quaking aspen. ' The wetland boundary is located at the toeslope where the vegetation grades from buckthorn to predominantly reed canarygrass and sandbar willow. Additional Sample Sites Determined to be Non -wetland There were two additional sample sites located in hydric soil units (Figure 2). Sample site 1 was ' located just north of the northeast comer of the property in an area with hydric Hamel soil (Figure 3).The NWI identified a PEMC wetland in this location (Figure 4). The sample site was established in the lowest area which was downhill and just north of the property boundary. The ' lowest portion of the swale was determined to be non -wetland. The site had no primary indicators of hydrology. There was one secondary indicator of hydrology which included soil survey data. Dominant plant species included reed canarygrass, Canadian thistle (Cirsium ' arvense, FACU), beggarslice (Hackelia virginiana, FAC-), Canada goldenrod, red osier dogwood, common buckthorn and black willow. 1 1 Mr. John Vogelbacher ' October 14, 2005 Page 4 PEC Project No. 2005-076 Sample site 2 was located on the western edge of the property in a hydric Hamel soil unit (Figure 3). The sample site was established in the lowest area of the swale. The site had no primary indicators of hydrology. There was one secondary indicator of hydrology which included soil survey data. Dominant plant species included smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, ' Canada goldenrod, common buckthorn, staghom sumac (Rhus typhina, NI), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoids, FAC+) and black willow. Additional Map Products The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map indicates there is a PEMC/PEMF basin located in the northwestern area of the property which corresponds to the location of Wetland B (Figure 5). The NWI identifies a PEMC on the northeastern edge of the property which corresponds to Sample Site 2; however, there area was determined to be non -wetland. The NWI also identifies a PEMB on the western edge of the property; however, there is no longer any wetland in this area. The property is located on the north shoreline Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Protected as a DNR protected waters (10-2P) (Figure 6). Confirmation of Jurisdictional Status of Lake Riley which is identified by the Waters and Wetlands Inventory (PWI) map Upon your approval we will submit this report to the City of Chanhassen and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to request a wetland boundary and type determination. We recommend members of the Technical Evaluation Panel conduct a site visit to fully understand the delineation results. We will arrange this field review as soon as we receive your approval. We appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance on this project. If you have any questions, please contact our office. ' Sincerely, Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. Cheryl Feigum, Ph.D. Project Manager Professional Wetland Scientist 41364 Enclosures 1 Ca/ � 4/' t" Daniel DeJoode, Ph.D. Sr. Natural Resources Specialist F I I I Ll I [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Peterson Environmental 1 Consulting, Inc. Site Location Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure la PEC Project No. 2005-063 1 1 1 1 ' Site Location Lake Riley Property ' Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure lb Peterson PEC Project No. 2005-063 Environmental ' Consulting, Inc. Wetland B� , } SyJ f 1 rJ Wetland - ari... Transect 61 ♦Sample 91te2 x� ^y j i 4 t 1 Y i •b Transect Al • Sample Sita Legend Property Boundary Wetland Boundary • Non -wetland Upland Wetland 0 65 130 260 390 520 Feet ` R "A _1;1►ttL=l 1 t 1 1 1 Legend EX — Essexville sandy loam - hydric KC — Lester -Kilkenny loams, 6-12% slopes — nonhydric HM — Hamel loam — hydric KC2 — Lester -Kilkenny loams, 6-12% slopes, eroded — nonhydric KB — Kilkenny -Lester loams, 2-61/o slopes KD2 — Lester -Kilkenny loans, 12-18% slopes, eroded —nonhydric W — Water KF — Lester -Kilkenny loams, 25-40% slopes — nonhydric Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. Carver County Soil Survey Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure 3 PEC Projmt No. 2005-063 EMA F' P PCNL a• =e Legend P,�a��,.ne�, Nvh UUBH 0 100 200 600 600 600 \\ Feet N N�F S I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I MnDNR Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure 5 PEC Project No. 2005-063 Peterson Environmental ' Consulting, Inc. MnDNR Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) Lake Riley Property Chanhassen, Minnesota Figure 5 PEC Project No. 2005-063 Ll 1 ATTACHMENT 1 I 1 11 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 General Transect Information Routine Wetland Determination Wetland ID: Wetland A Delineation Team: CDF, DRD Project: 2005-076 Site: Lale Riley -Chanhassen Investigator: Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. Transect: 1 Date: 10/11/2005 County: Carver No. of Sites: 2 State: MN Legal Description: E1/2, NE1/4 S24 T116N R23W Current Conditions livardin Class Circular 39 Class NWI DNR PWIID PEMCd Type 3 U Normal Circumstances / Atypical Situation Problem Area 3 NRCS Class Farmed Wetland? Yes No No No _Qy/Watershed ID Watershed District Hydrologic Unit N/A RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF 33 Minnesota River (Shakopee) Wetland Determination Comments The wetland boundary was located at the toeslope where the vegetation changed from FACW and OBL plants to brome, Canada goldenrod and other upland plants. Disturbance Comments This wetland has a concrete outlet and appears to function as a stormwater pond.There is no A -horizon for the wetland soil profile indicating the site was scrapped. 1 Normal Circumstances are formally defined as the nil and hvdrolognal candrtiom that are normally proene without regard to wheiher the eryoannn has been ammed IHQUSACE REGAL 9 , 1967 Amry Cary a Engineers N etland Delineanmr Manual) 2 Atspical Shannon, are those sitaauons where ane ormane laramerers has'e bean perrvnenty or tonporard, remo.nd ..Iteral It, ruturel leg b®—,an. -hrou rye drought) wranthmpaaenia leg f ILny ditch we lile draioage xoom ehannelmmn-In' U.1 smrmwa¢r managernmL me.) disturbance l 1%7 A,in, Core of Encineeis Weiland Delineation Mamr.O 3 Problem Areasare thmelunacheiraal walands that lack hydrologyandravegennuen indicators dueto natural seanoalranations. opealh apphed to temporarily an s nally pandedsatuated wetlands that draw down to summer and fall. Sample Site Data Paget Wetland ID: Wetland A Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 1 Wetland Criteria Overall: Non -Wetland HvdrologV: No Soils: No Vegetation: No ' Hydrology Water in a s Surface Water Probe Hole Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators No >30 inches None FAC Neutral None Soil Type NRCS MUID Description Indicators Description HM HAMEL LOAM None None Inclusion Series Name e 7 ' Classification Drainage Class Hydric Criteria Yes KILKENNY FINE, SMECTITIC, MESIC OXYAOUIC MODERATELY WELL VERTIC HAPLUDALFS DRAINED ' Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature Dept: Horizon Matrix Color Texture Color Abundance 0-16 A 10YR 3/2 c 16-30 B 10YR 4/3 c Dominant Vegetation Scientific Name Common Name Stratum % Cover 8Indicator 9 Bromus inermis smooth brome H 75 NI SDhdago canadensis Canada goldenrod H 40 FACU Wmus americana American elm S 20 FACW- Cornus stolonifera red osier dogwood S 5 FACW Ju —gini mo eastern redcedar S 5 FACU Ulmus americana American elm T 10 FACW- I 4 Hydrology heli®tors P«19P)Cwps W'alaM Ddinadan Manta l[un«more smondary iMimars a«rsryi«d in absm«ofa primuy irMimwl Nme:Lo«Isoil svvey Mdrologv data for Mdric soils are mra valid smodary iMiutor of walaM hydmdogy' ifh sitebeingdelinmte Msbemsubjmtmsubsunualhv&olo callmuan S«G idelinmfm SubmiMng W'ulnndWinutiweic dies, Paul Duma Corps MErt asoasarM Loral Uiv dQw-anmmrinthe Staleofwisconsin USACE Public Nai« 9O1o711-SDE,MgM. 1996. Page 25-26. Alsosee Clarif«rimand inti mumdthe1987.anmLHQUSACEhkrnmasM March6.1992Page.WI466 5 US Drysnrnan of Agriculrure, Namsl Rmmuia Cmum-aim Sasi«. Field IM�«mrs 2OOJ3 hfip he soils in the Unhd Stalm IVa 5.011. a W Hun, P. M. Whned, aM RF Pringles (�-A 290; US Depwum[of AgnmlMe Natural Resource Comava[im Suri«,Fm WoM,TX .nP'%soilamb.gw/wil ieaM4rirlmsin.hm 6 Soil Swey SUF Soil Taammny, Seamd Fdhim US Deprm�m of Agnadrure, Narunl Raourcm Cmsavaum Srni«, Washing[on D.C. 1999.. 7 US 0.yutmm dAgnmltu«. Sal CommauonSmi«. Hydric SoJathe[1N1odS..Thlyd Edit Natimul TsMid Cmnminm fa Hydric Soils Lincda NE. 1991. 8 Parent amid plant ovm m immdagw %tetniry dsamyle site. ' 9 OBL=061 gal waWdocc mimatd 99°- aluMs FACw F Wtatire Worland halm murre[d6)-99y'a prababidiry doa:mrm«in waland. FAC Faculuuve.uryuall-Ikel ia occur in assiMdsarM nwmlards l3i-b64 p bsbilityl FACU-Famluuv Lplar�d hasmmnmatedl3J°�. prababiliry of msmrmce WVT=No1Mim[«.dm«m uuuRamr afomutiona Ibl t daamnre an indict utas. Positive a ngptis'e signs iMiate a fiegmrw; [awards highs (+) or Iowa I I frequency d«currmce in walard within a «[egmy Blanks in Ibis column are due ro gurus diel idanifi«um Is Soil Profile Redox Feature Sample Site Data Page 3 ' Wetland ID: Wetland A Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 2 0-13 Bg 10YR 411 G Wetland Criteria Common (2-20%) 13-24 C 2.5Y 513 gC Overall: Wetland Hvdrologv: Yes Soils: Yes Vegetation: Yes H Hydrology OBL Aster rtnoae- mgliae Water in q q 10 Surface Water Probe Hole Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators sandbar willow No +1 inch Visual Observation of Inundation Water Stained Leaves OBL FAC Neutral Soil Type NRCs 5 MUID Description Indicator Description ' HM HAMEL LOAM F3 Depleted Matrix Inclusion Series Name6 7 Classification Drainage Class Hydric Criteria ' Yes UDORTHENTS UDORTHENTS SOMEWHAT POOR/MODERATELY Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature Depth Horizon Matrix Color Texture Color Abundance 0-13 Bg 10YR 411 G 7.5YR 416 Common (2-20%) 13-24 C 2.5Y 513 gC 5GY 611 Common (2-20%) Dominant Vegetation Scientific Name Common Name Stratum % Cover 8Indicator 9 Phalaris arundinama reed canarygrass H 50 FACW+ pha angustifolia narrowleaf cattail H 50 OBL Scupus cyperinus woolgrass H 20 OBL Aster rtnoae- mgliae New England aster H 10 FACW Salix exigua sandbar willow S 20 OBL 4 Hydrologylndimmn Perl987Corps Wd]aiMDelinmtion Manml (twammama6ondarylndledorsamre irdinab mofaMn indiwm). Note: Lomisodeaveyhydmloyydataforhydnc soils esenmavalidsaondaryindimtorofwdly hydmloq if tlw lice being delinmtd hm bmn subject to subcarinal hydrologic Mcemton" Sm Guidelinm for Submiuin8 wdlend Oeli�aions ac the St Paul Dianna Carps of Engioeas and local Units of ammmt in the Stam of Wiswmin, USACE Pobh. Nmice 9601 07&SDE,May M.IM. Page 25-26. Alan sm Clarifcation and fntepeenthoo of the IW.Manual, HQUSACE Memondum, March 6,1992, page W-14.66 5 US nepenthe. of Agriculture, Natuml Rmources Co..,. Sarvim. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United Stake (v., 5 Oil. G W Hort P.m Whitt., and xF. Pringle. (eds.A 2003, US Depmrmmt of Agriculture, Natuml Rmmamm Comdvatm Sdvice. Fret Ww .TK 2003hap'.11soda.ucda.govlsoil_iue�hydrenvi n ham 6 Soil Survey Staff Soil Taxonomy, Second Edition, US Depanment of Agnculmre, Natuml Rmources Conxrvation Service. Washington. D C. 1999_ T US Depenmmt of A,e.lwoa, Soil Cmoemabon Service. Hydric Soil of the Unita Sates, ThiN Edition Natimml Teehniml Commince for Hydric Soils L..IM NE. 1991. 8 Peromt total plant cover in immdiam vwnrety dwnple site 9 OBL=Obligate WnWd occurs en mtimatd 99%in wdlends. FACW=Faculmtive Wdland. a .mtreatd67-9 .probabiliryd«cunenminwedan&, FAC=Faculutivelsryuallylikdyiooccur in wetlands and non wd1ands(34- h.loebabili FACU= Faculmtive Upland hasm mtimatd 1-33% probnbiliryofoecmence; ad M=Notr imtor,dreaminsu icieminfmtnationavailablemddamine anindicamrsmlus. Pmitive or negative signs indimmafrequemy towuda M1igM1er l*l or Iowa(-)fralumryofauvrrmcein wnlmd witltinamte8ory. ehnksindUSeltoolaweduetegenuslevel idmti nation only. General Transect Information Routine Wetland Determination Wetland ID: Wetland B Delineation Team: CDF, DRD Project: 2005-076 Site: Lale Riley -Chanhassen Investigator: Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. Transect: 1 Date: 10/11/2005 County: Carver No. of Sites: 2 State: MN Legal Description: E1/2. NE1/4 S24 T116N R23W Current Conditions Cowardin Class Circular 39 Class NWI DNR PWIID PEMC Type 3 PEMC/F Normal Circumstances I Atypical Situation 2 Problem Area J NRCS Class Farmed Wetland? Yes No No No C%tylWatershed ID Watershed District Hydrologic Unit N/A RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF 33 Minnesota River (Shakopee) Wetland Determination Comments The wetland boundary was located at the toeslope where the vegetation changed from FACW and OBL plants to buckthorn, Canada goldenrod and other upland plants. This wetland continues off-site to the west along the townhouse development. Disturbance Comments I Nomtal Circumstances we formally defined a the soil aid hydrological concio,om that was .11, praart without re8erd to wh [her the v,ormion has been removal (HQUSACE REGAL 91W7, 1987 Army Corp of Engineers Welland Delineation Marni l Atypical Snuadnm. Nose situations xhwe ane or more pammaers have hem pemwently or temporarily removal or altered W oamral le g beaver dams a ,wove drought) or aaJuopogenic (e.g. f Him ditch or rile drainage scram channelimim, culrivarioo. siormxater management, em.) dismrbanca ( 198] Amry Cory of Engineers We[land Delinmtim Manuall. 3 problem Arms arc Nosejwor ietional welands that lad hydrology w&or vegetation indicators due to rtahual stesoial variationstypically applied to temporarily or sasonallypmdeVsaturated wetlands that draw down in summa tad fell. Sample Site Data Page 2 ' Wetland ID: Wetland B Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 1 Wetland Criteria Overall: Non -Wetland Hvdrologv: No Soils: Yes Vegetation: No Hydrology Water in a a Surface Water Probe Hole Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators No >30 inches None Soil Survey Data None ' Soil Type NR CS s MUID Description IndicatorDescription HM HAMEL LOAM None None Inclusion Series Name e ' Classification Drainage Class Hydric Criteria Yes UNDIFFERENTIATED UNDIFFERENTIATED ENDOAOUOLLS POOR, VERY POOR ENDOAOUOLLS Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature _Depth Horizon Matrix Color Texture Color Abundance ' 0-10 Al 10YR 311 C 10-22 A2 10YR 312 C 7.5YR 5/6 Common (2-20%) 22-30 Bg 10YR 4/1 C 7.5YR 4/6 Common (2-20%) I Dominant Vegetation Scientific Name 8 9 Common Name Stratum %Cover Indicator Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass H 20 FAC- Phleum pratense timothy H 10 FACU Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod H 10 FACU Comus stolon era red osier dogwood S 55 FACW Rhamnus cathartics common buckthorn S 10 FACU Fraxinuspennsyloanim green ash S 1 FACW Vitis riparia riverbank grape S 1 FACW- I Populus tremulmdes quaking aspen T 75 FAC a Hydrology Indicators Per 1987 Corps W rdand Dalin®cion Nanvsl (two m more xcnndary indicats one requved in abun, of a primmy indiota). Nene'. Lacal soil survey hydmloyy data far hydnc the hilsarenot avalid sewndaf E., moils d Urns fGo, .ronne site b.Sooninmtedhasb, SACEnmhi, Nation 96-0mlo8icaheretior.- Sa Guidelin5-(, Sob.ClWnlaad Delinmtiaam therp Poul District Corps of Engineersand Local Unitsd.,%matent inthe Sum of.1466 nUSACE Public Nmiw 96-01WB-SOE.M.y23, 1996, Paye 25-26. Also see Claifi®tion and Imerpretan9n of the 1987 Manual, HOUSACE hlemonndum, hUrch 6, 1992, Page MI-Id.66 5 US Depmmmr of Agriculture. Newml Raowar Comwation Serviw. Field Indictment of Hydric Sol, in Ne United Stated ( Ver 5.01. G. W Hun, P.M. Whited.. and RF. Prin8le, eds.A 2003. US Depnnmmt of Agnwlave, Namml Resaurar Commetim Serviw. Fon Worth, T%. 2003. hap:/,'soils.mda.gov,soil usemydr elmain hen 6 Soil Survey Staff Soil Taxonomy, Secand Edition. US Dryenmert of Agvwlmm, Nawml Resourar Cmservatim Service. Wahington, D.C. 1999.. 7 L'S Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service. Hydne Soil of the UnitedSlates. Third Edition. Natim I Twbrlml Cammin for Hydric Soils. Gnwln, NE 1991. 8 Patent send plant cover ln,mmedlate vicinity orsample site. 9 OBL - Obligate Wdland occurs an emimated 999. N walands. FAC W =Facultative Waland ha m admated 6]-w .probability of wcurzemz in wesbnds, FAC = FacWutiva is alually likely m.1 in w elands and ran wetlands (34-66%probability); FACU = Facultative Upland lots an estimated 1-33%probability oforcurrenm, ab M = No Indimor. derma insufficient infomadon available in detonation m indiwtar stns. Positive or nep0.e dgm iedinm a fre uenry Onwards higher I") or Iowa U) ite amry 9f occ,rmw in waland within a camper, Blames to this column are dm m gmm lael identification only. Caret spp. Soil Type H 25 MM Description NRCS s IndicatorDescription Sample Site Data Page HM HAMEL LOAM Wetland ID: Wetland B Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 2 Drainage Class Hydric Criteria 7 Wetland Criteria 5 FACU ' Overall: Wetland Hydrology: Yes Soils: Yes Vegetation: Yes FACW+ Hydrology Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature 10 Water in s a 0-2 Oa 10YR 211 muck Surface Water Probe Hole Primal ty Indicators Secondary Indicators 7.5YR 5/6 Common (2-20%) No +3 inches Visual Observation of Inundation Soil Survey Data ' Dominant Vegetation T FAC Neutral Caret spp. Soil Type H 25 MM Description NRCS s IndicatorDescription reed canarygrass HM HAMEL LOAM F3 Depleted Matrix FACW+ Inclusion Series Name Classification 6 Drainage Class Hydric Criteria 7 H 5 FACU ' Yes UNDIFFERENTIATED UNDIFFERENTIATED ENDOAQUOLLS POOR, VERY POOR S ENDOAQUOLLS FACW+ Cornus stolon era Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature 10 Depth Horizon Matrix Color Texture Color Abundance green ash 0-2 Oa 10YR 211 muck 1 FACW 2-12 Bg1 5GY 6/1 c 7.5YR 5/6 Common (2-20%) S 12-24 Bg2 5Y 4/2 c 7.5YR 5/6 & 314 Common (2-20%) ' Dominant Vegetation T 75 Scientific Name 8 9 Common Name Stratum %Cover Indicator Caret spp. sedge spp. H 25 Phalaris m%mdinacea reed canarygrass H 25 FACW+ Rhamnus cathartics common buckthorn H 5 FACU Salix bebbiana Bebb willow S 25 FACW+ Cornus stolon era red osier dogwood S 10 FACW Fraxinus pennsylthaftica green ash S 1 FACW Vitis riparia riverbank grape S 1 FACW- Pc lits tremuloides quaking aspen T 75 FAC Salix n' res black willow T 20 OBL 4 Hydrology lndi®tors Per 1987 Corys Wedend Delia®tion Manual ltwo m more secondary incl®tors are re9uired in absence a. a nary indictor). Nag: Lad soil a., hydrology dau fim hydric sails are cola valid seroMary iMioaror of wmland M1ydrolo8y -.. ifll iWe ingdelinmtlhe subjmwsub malhy&oi BcWtemeon." S Gidelinmfm Submitting Wetlandmli�tiank the SL Paul District Corps of Engineus and Local Units of Gevcmment m We Sm. of WiswmiM1 USACE Public Nom.9 01078 -SDE, May 22. train, Page 25-Z6. Alao see Cluifi®tion and finpremtlm Mthe 1987 Manual, HQUSACE Memonndum. Mamh 6, 1992, Page MI -1466 5 LS Department of Agriculture, Natural Raodces Coiawation Service. Fi¢Id Indinrors of Hydric Soils m the United Sores (Ver 5.011. G. W Hun, P.M. Whited, and RF. Pringles (gds.). 2003, US Deparonent of Agriculture. Natural Resources Corssavetion Service, Fon Words 2003. this, ://soils. nabs .govlsnil_usalrydiic'mam.him 6 Soil survey Stan Sal Taxonomy. Second Edition. US Depamned of AVmlmm, Natural Resources Conservators Seryice, Wuhor non. D 1999. 7 US Oepar mars of ASricultme, Soil Comervation Sen tce Hvdnc Soil ofthe United Stores, Third Umoe National Technic Commince fon Hydnc Soi4 Uncolu NE. 1991. 8 Pa., .9 plant coverinimmediau vicinity of sample aim. 9 OBL=ObligateWe d,onsuanenlmmed99'.:inwla FACW=FnWativeWetad. saneatimated67-99•r:probabilinofmcmrenceinwa ,FAC=FacWunic,isemllvlikelvromann walm& and non walm& p4�: pmMbiliW), FACU = FacWwive UpWW has an ®ora W I-33%probability of occu ede. and NI = No Indicator. denote msuffiaem information available redetermine aniMiwmsmtusstands in this column are duet, genua level identification only. General Transect Information Routine Wetland Determination Wet/and ID: Sample Site 1 Transect : 1 No. of Sites: 1 Delineation Team: CDF, DRD Date: 10/11/2005 Project: 2005-076 Site: Lale Riley -Chanhassen Investigator: Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. County: Carver State: MN Legal Description: E1/2, NE1/4 S24 T116N R23W Current Conditions 'wards' Class Circular 39 Class NWI DNR PWIID Upland NIA PEMC Normal Circumstances I Atypical Situation a Problem Area 3 NRCS Class Farmed Wetland? Yes No No No City/Watershed ID Watershed District Hydrologic Unit N/A RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF 33 Minnesota River (Shakopee) Wetland Determination Comments This is a low area in the northeast corner of the site where the Carver County Soil Survey mapped a hydric soil series - Hamel loam. Disturbance Comments 1 Normal Cmumsanees are fornaliy defined as ilia seal and hvdroloyiml condition that are nouni noon), without regard to xTel,er We teg,twcw has been amo�d IHQUSACE IIEGAE 90-01. 1987 Armv Cap a Engineers Wetland ea Delintion Manual I 2 AtMeal Sri. Ita- are h—zwwtions where one or more panmeterz has a peen rermanenth or tanpaaniv removed w aItelM b natural Ie g heaver dame morewie druugh l or anWopagenic le g f IIor, ditch are rile drainage. scream channelimion cult mation. wonomwer management. etc) disturbance 1 1987.Armv Corp of Engin« Welland Delineation ]lanuzll 3 problem m Arare thosejwWietioiul .1wo6 that lack hrdrole}andor cegeation,ndicatoa due mnu ruzl s oral %wentona. "unilh applied m tanpaarily a sas'orelly ponded samatd wetlands tht daw down in summa mW 611. Sample Site Data Page 2 Wetland ID: Sample Site 1 Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 1 Phalansa ndulacea Wetland Criteria Texture Redox Feature Color Redox Feature Abundance Overall: Non -Wetland Hvdrologw No Soils: Yes Vegetation: No ' Hydrology Water in Hackelia vugimma 20-30 Bg 1 OYR 4/1 c 7.5YR 4/6 d a Dominant Vegetation Surface Water Probe Hole Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators ' No >30" None Soil Survey Data ' Comus stolon era red osier dogwood None 25 Soil Type Rhamnus catharfica common buckthom S 25 NRCs s green ash MUID Description IndicatorDescription ' HM HAMEL LOAM None None T Inclusion Series Name Classification 6 � Drainage Class Hydric Criteria I Yes KILKENNY FINE, SMECTITIC, MESIC OXYAOUIC MODERATELY WELL VERTIC HAPLUDALFS DRAINED Phalansa ndulacea Soil Profile Depth Horizon Matrix Color Texture Redox Feature Color Redox Feature Abundance C'irsium arvense 0-3 Al I OYR 3/2 3-20 A2 1OYR 3/2 c c 1 OYR 4/6 7.5YR 4/6 Few (0-2%) Common (2-20%) Hackelia vugimma 20-30 Bg 1 OYR 4/1 c 7.5YR 4/6 Few (0-2%) SDlidago canadensis Dominant Vegetation H 25 FACU ' Scientific Name Common Name Stratum % Covers v Indicator Phalansa ndulacea reed canarygrass H 50 FACW+ C'irsium arvense Canadian thistle H 25 FACU Hackelia vugimma beggamlice H 25 FAC- SDlidago canadensis Canada goldenrod H 25 FACU Urtica dioica stinging nettle H 10 FAC+ Comus stolon era red osier dogwood S 25 FACW Rhamnus catharfica common buckthom S 25 FACU Fraxmus penes lv=.ca green ash S 10 FACW Salix nigm black willow T 50 OBL 4 HYmology Indimwrs I% 1987 Crops Wa1aM Delinanm Manual (Mom more recondary irdinaors are ryuired in absence of a primary indiorn). Nov: Lon1 soil s., Wooloy. day for hydnc mikane rwra valid secoMery iMio�or ofwalaM hydmloq". sf rhe sire bang delirwvd has hero subjasm subsunnal hydrolagicalvvnan." Sm GtuMinesforSubmining Waland Delinarioan rhe Si Poul Dump Crops of Engineaa a lanl Univ of Goremmmr in rhe Sure of W ismaiv USACE public N' 1.969107&SDE, May 22. 1996, Pogo 25-26. Alm see Clanifniim and Imnpraerion of rhe 1987 Manual, HQUSACE ManovWum. March 6.1992, Page hR-li 66 5 US DaFvonml of Agnculmre, Neural Beaune C.arron Smvim Field IMimtws of Hydric Soils in rhe Unnd Sola IVB S.On. G W Hutt, RM Whhed., aM RF. Pringle, Inds.A 2001. CS Depavnma of Agimlmre. Nawnal Resource Cosavaaim Sen -ice. Fon WOM, TX. 2003. Imp:': soils uWs gw-mil usehydnr/num.h6n 6 Soil Sn , SVR Sail Tumomv, Semrd H.nm. US D�vena of A,noulnno, Na6nal R.. Canarvarim Savin, Wasfuo lon. O. C. 1999. 7 US Depanrmma of Agrrvh m Sml Cosenarwn Svvice. Nvdne Sal dahe Untied Svta. Third Edison Na 1 Tahninl C=nnaaw fn Hydric Soils. Lincoln NE. 1991. 3 Pamnemal plana rove in immalum viaiary ofample ane. 9 OBL = Obhgam W mIand. «curs an aalmstal 99•/, in aerlan& FACW = Faculoo— W'aland hu an anmaW 67-99e. probatn i, ofFAC = Facuhauve n egon)v Ad, 10 occur.n wnlands and non x alands (34- *, probabihn).FACU - Faculunre Upland has an annnaaed 1-33°. proWnhty of ncgrence. and N1=No ad.non avilableio dn..i n.nd..n. suras Positive or nuae.e signs rod,®vafrequem. aowaad hagha 1-1 or Iowa 1-1frequmry oFocammcem waland warhinaniegon Blanks in ahia column are due io sinuslael idmufiman. only. General Transect Information Routine Wetland Determination Wetland ID: Sample Site 2 Transect: 1 No. of Sites: 1 Delineation Team: CDF, DRD Date: 10/11/2005 Project: 2005-076 Site: Lale Riley -Chanhassen Investigator: Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. County: Carver State: MN Legal Description: E1/2, NE1/4 S24 T116N R23W Current Conditions Cowardin Class Circular 39 Class NWI DNR PW ID Upland N/A PEMC Normal Circumstances t Atypical Situation , Problem Area 3 NRCS Class Farmed Wetland? Yes No No No City/Watershed ID Watershed District Hydrologic Unit N/A RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF 33 Minnesota River (Shakopee) Wetland Determination Comments This is a low area in the central and western edge of the site where the Carver County Soil Survey mapped a hydric soil series - Hamel loam. Disturbance Comments 1 NwooM Cimotoos nee, are Formally defined w the wit atd hydrologiml mnditowr Jut we normally prams, wwhow regwd to whdhw the vegMtion has been removed (HQUSACE REGAL 90-07,1567 Amry Carp of Enginars Wetland Del .u. Manwl). I Atypial Situations ere Now sauatimn where one or more penmaaa have been pemunently or temposenly removd or allered by natural leg brava dams, owonsive draught) or waloopogenic to g. filling, dit lt w rile drairege, strum channeh.,on, euln, tion, management etc.) distarbnm ( 1987 Army Cum of Engineers Wdland Delo.o. Manu tt 3 1W lern Areas are No,wjwu4moeal wdlwols that lack hvdrology and/or vegdanon nod,.. due to.1.1..) variations. �Ieully applied to tanpaenlY a .111 lwlotiha—u -Wl ttbt draw down in sumo w u,d fell. Sample Site Data Page'_ Wetland ID: Sample Site 2 Transect Number: 1 Sample Site: 1 ' Wetland Criteria Overall: Non -Wetland Hydrology: No Soils: No Vegetation: No Hydrology Water in a a Surface Water Probe Hole Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators ' No >24 inches None Soil Survey Data None Soil Type NRCS MUID Description Indicators Description ' HM HAMEL LOAM None None Inclusion Series Name e 7 ' Classification Drainage Class Hydric Criteria Yes KILKENNY FINE, SMECTITIC, MESIC OXYAOUIC MODERATELY WELL VERTIC HAPLUDALFS DRAINED ' Soil Profile Redox Feature Redox Feature Depth Horizon Matrix Color Texture Color Abundance ' 0-2 A 10YR 3/2 c 2-24 B 10YR 5/4 c 7.5YR 5/6 Few (0-2%) Dominant Vegetation Scientific Name Common Name Stratum % Cover 8Indicator 9 Bromus inennis smooth brome H 50 NI Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass H 40 FAC- Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod H 40 FACU Phataris arundinacea read canarygrass H 10 FACW+ Rhamnus cathartica common buckthorn S 20 FACU Rhus typhina staghom sumac S 10 NI Juniperus uirginiana eastern redoedar S 5 FACU Popular deltoides eastern cottonwood T 75 FAC+ Salix nigra black willow T 20 OBL 4Hydrology Indicators Per 1987 Corps Waled Delineation h4mul love or mowsaconds, adwataz are requhM in absm« of al ones, nd,mor). Note: Lsil and sorvry hydrologvdata lir hydric soilsare rrote.alid secondary indi«tor of waland hydrology'._ifthe%are Wing deloseed hes bons subjeet to subsuntal hydrologic dtern ar." Sw Gtudelinmfm Submitting Welend Deliremiomtc 'het Paul Daswd Corps of Ee,,e m and Iasi Unit of Gova Snmml in the Sure of Wisconsin, USACE Public Nota« 9 010" SDE. May 1. 1996, Page 25-26. Also see Claahcauon and Interpreption of the 1987 Manuel, HQUSACE Memorandum. March 6, 1993. Page MI -1066 5 US Depamnent of Agmuhure, Nawral Resom«s Cansmmon Sava«. Fadd indi®tors aHydric Soab in tW Unatd States (Ver 5 01). G. W Nun, P.M Whitd., and RF. Pringle, (dz.k M3, US ' Deprtinmtof Agriwlnve, Natural Resources Comaveti«Servi«, Fat WoM.T%.2003.hnp:dwilewde.gw/wal_uwbydradmain.htm 6 Seal Survry Staff Soil Tummy, Se«d Edivan. US D�mti t of Agnwlwre, NaNral Resource Covervetim Servi«, Wns m Wm D.C. 1999. 7 US Depamnmt of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Swi«. Hydric Soil of the Unitd Sates, Third Edition Nauaral TcMiral Cammm« fa Hydric Salz Lincoln, NE. 1991. 9 Pans aerial plant cover an mmdiate victory ofsample saw. ' 9 OBL Obl Ppt Wdand,aa rs est ted99a.anwabndz. FACW Faculmtive Weland. hnswestimmd 6>99°.' p batilryM anus« -n sseWMs: FAC—Fundemon,asequzll fkehtuaccuran ,mit ands and o welads (3a-66� p Wti 1 ryy FACU Facultative Upland has an uematd 1-33%probati fry f urs a ad M No Idi«t ,denies imuffcian INametion ova bl t daamsne n andaator taros. Positive o neppuve satyrs indi®tic a freyueay coward higM1a (+1 ar Iowa () Flalumry of acdnrmce an waled within a ret grey. Blinks an this «lump art due to genus level adeenfi. tins only. PHOTOGRAPHS it IIJPIFIWtin a n r ; r' in Look 9 northwest r C 6 ` ¢ _` ' • ec' a