Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
73-01 - Hesse Farm SUB pt 1
-4� - . i _I - Regular I ,gular p].ann:ng Commission Meeting, June 26, 1974 4. AU manupe removed from stalls to be stored in containers which are to be sheltered from the elements to prevent leaching. 5. Stol- .ed Ira sus: e to be removed regularly and whenever necessary to prevent unreasonable accumulationG. G. operations to be conducted so as to reduce to a minlimum the danger of seepage Of liquid wastes and leaching of solid Wastes. 7. 111stallation Of a dam on Christmas Lake Creek to serve as a settling pond. A motion was made by Tim Stone and seconded by Mariana Shulstad that the Planning Co.rtmAssion recorcirtends to the Council that they instruct the City Staff to initiate negotiations between Mr. Loris and the City on the inte-riul con trolls and that the Council not take any J!oi-mal- action on the application for Conditional USG Permit until the final PCA report is completed. Motion unanimously approved. PROPOSISID HOIRSE 0RDn,,-IAW-CBI A motion was made by Jim I-Iie"Lko and secorlded by table action on the proposed gorse Ordinance u3xtil aiter we receive they :232111al PCA zGPOr On Tv"in R11 is Farm. The follaviing Votsd in favor. Tila Stone, Nick Waritz . Dan Herbst, Jim DUelke, and Tom Gabbert. Nariana Shulstad voted no. She does not see any advantages in the application of the PCTI report or how it app'ias to the Horse ordinance* motion carried. A motion waG Riede by Tim Stone and seconded by Tom Gabbert that the Planning Commisuion will submit a draft of the proposed Horse Ordinanco to the PCA for their review and response. MOtiOn unaaiAmo uslif approved. The Planning Comraission appreciates -ti-le fine -%,?ork our Horse Corivaittee has clone. wick Waritzr 1.=jana shulstado and Jim Mielke have done a fine iob also the prople from the Horse Association. Im-Rom HESSE: Mr. and Mrs. Harold Hesse, Frank Berg, and Hc--rb 5-S tj-� C—PI.-osant uritl% a prelimillary level o nt pies. Th plan was presented to the Park and Rec--cation ConzAssion for their Tice first stage of developp.ailt is 12 lots on tho cast side of Bluff Creek Drive. panning Co-mr,4ssion members discuz5ad whether or not these lots can be resub-dividad when sewer and water are available. Carl Dale suggezted the pianning co-mmission put; in their minutes vex-Y strong reasons for not allowing lot resubdivision. Bill Schooll suggested this could be done by private deed restriction. A motion was made by Tom Gabbert and seQoiided by Jis, Mielke to hold a public hearing on the proposed preliminary development plan of Hesse Farra' on July 24,, 1974, at 8-.00 p.m. Mr. Baldwin will re -meet with Don Berg and also have the preliminary plat ready by July Or 1974. motion unanimously approved. Jiro mielke ja-.,,t the meeting. BEIERSDORF EIRY-2TCH 'Pi. %N: Ken BeiersdorZ and Bruce Panklonin were preaerr.L. reques plan approval. The first phase consists of 23 acres with 224 tiro story garden apartments and 128 apartment units. some of the units have underground parking. Mr. Pankonin asked for a public hearing on July 24. Dan Herbst explained they are at sketch plan stage and have to come before the Planning EAMON V21i,LAGm 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 DATE: June 24, 1974 FROM: Zoning Administrator TO: Planning Commission Chairman and Members SUBJ: Request for Public Hearing on Proposed P-1 Preliminary Development Plan Submission of; Case of Harold Hesse REF: (a) City Zoning Ordinance #47 Section 14.05 Subsection 4 ENCL: (1) Mr. Harold Hesse's Proposed P-1 Preliminary Development Plan (2) Mr. Don Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist, report dated July 12, 1973 (3) Mr. Bill Schoell's, Consultant Engineer, report dated October 22, 1973, (4)_ Planning Commission minutes dated October 24, 1973 (5) Council minutes dated November 5, 1973 (6) Planning Commission minutes dated November 28, 1973 (7) Mr. Don Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist, up -dated report dated June 4, 1974 (8) Zoning Administrator's report dated June 10, 1974 (9) Park and Recreation Commission minutes dated June 18, 1974 (10) Mr. Carl Dale's, City Consultant Planner, report dated June 20, 1974 (11) Mr. Bill Schoell's, City Consultant Engineer, report dated June 22, 1974 1. In accordance with the instructions contained in reference (a), the subject proposed preliminary development plan is hereby submitted for your review and comments. Further, you are required to set a date for public hearing on the subject plan. 2. The City Staff, City Consultants and Mr. Don Berg, USDA Soil Conservationist, met with Mr. Harold Hesse and his Planner, Mr. Herb Baldwin,..May- 30, 1974, for the purpose of reviewing his proposed preliminary plan. Consequently, the following background information and up -graded reports are hereby submitted for your review: r1\ Page 2 F. a. Enclosure Cl) is Mr. Hesse's proposed P-1 preliminary' development plan. b. Enclosure (2) is Mr. Don Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist, report dated July 12, 1973. This report is a very extensive report which points out problem areas in this proposed development. C. Enclosure (3) is.Mr. Bill Schoell's, City Consultant Engineer's, report dated October 22, 1973. This report was submitted to you at the sketch plan level. d. Enclosure (4) is the Planning Commission minutes dated October 24, 1973, requesting the Council to approve the granting of a variance to Ordinance #45, Section 2.01 and 2.02 in regards to the lots adjoining non-public roads. e. Enclosure (5) are the Council minutes dated November 5, 1973, approving of the variance requested in enclosure (4) above. f. Enclosure (6) are the Planning Commission minutes dated November 28, 1973, granting sketch plan approval._ g. Enclosure (7) is Mr. Don Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist, report dated June 6, 1974. Mr. Berg's report reiterates his previous report of July 12, 1973, whereby he raises flags to problem areas in this proposed development plan. Mr. Berg has discussed this matter with Mr. Carl Dale. h. Enclosure (8) is the Zoning Administrator's report dated June 10, 1974. i. Enclosure (9) are the. Park and Recreation Commission minutes dated June 18, 1974. These minutes do not convey any comments regarding recreational land use within the proposed development. I was not present for that portion of the meeting when Herb Baldwin gave his report. Consequently, I will be requesting the Park and Recreation Commission to review this at their next meeting. j. Enclosure (10) is Mr. Carl Dale's, City Consultant Planner, report dated June 20, 1974. I think Mr. Dale has some very good recommendations which tie in to the message Mr. Don Berg is conveying in his report regarding this subject development plan. k. Enclosure (11) is Mr. Bill Schoell's, City Consultant Engineer, report dated June 22, 1974. 3. Zoning Administrator's Comments: It should be noted that the Soil Conservationist has raised flags on many problem areas within this proposed development. The City Planner has recommended ways in solving these problems which he has discussed with Mr. Berg, Soil Conservationist. Further, Mr. Bill Schoell, City Consultant Engineer, points out in his report further solutions to problem areas that have been raised by Mr. Berg. I do realize that the Planning Commission _\ Page 3 at their November 28, 1973, meeting basically discusssed with Mr. Herb Baldwin, Planner, what Mr. Dale is recommending in his present report.. However, at that time the Planning Commission indicated they had reservations to this type of planning. I do feel that Mr. Dale is taking a realistic approach to good planning of this proposed develop- ment after having reviewed the facts. We will have to provide adequate safeguard in the development contract. Further, I think that we do have to address ourselves to the fact that some day sewer will be available to the area. Consequently, we have to think of the economics of it when it becomes available in the future. Mr. Dale is doing this in his recommendation. S yd,-16. S`chnelle ing Administrator LGS:k Copies to: Harold Hesse (Herb Baldwin, Planner) Russ Larson, City Attorney Bill Schoell, City Consultant Engineer Carl Dale, City Planner Don Berg, USDA Soil Conservationist Files WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA SCHOELL & MAOSON, ip4c. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS 38-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 June 22, 1974 Mr. Lloyd Schnelle, Administrator P. 0. sox 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Subject: Second Review of Concept Plan, "The Hesse Farm" Dear Mr. Schnelle The drawings received on June 12th do not seem to differ from those we reviewed last October, although I do not have copies of the previous submission. Our review, dated October 22, 1973, is attached. We reiterate our comments: that the proposal is extremely meritorious, and does not seem to pose any serious problems for Chanhassen. We will be glad to work with the developer's engineer or designer when the time comes to further detail the subdivision. In the meantime, we recommend the approval of this concept plan by the Planning Commission and Council. Very truly yours, CITY ENGINEER WDSchoell:sd DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATES, INC. 4826 Chicago Avenue So. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 Phone: (612) 822-2106 Juen 20, 1974 PLANNING REPORT For: Planning Commission City of Chanhassen, Minnesota By: Carl R. Dale, AIP Planning Consultant Subject: Planning Analysis and Recommendations - Hesse Farm Subdivision Planninq Considerations 1. This subdivision proposal has been before the Planning Commission at several previous meetings; essentially, the plan is to develop very large (five acres or more) single family lots on terrain that is very rugged (large amount of area in steep slopes, tree cover, some low areas, etc.). 2. In order to plat large lots on this site in reasonable relation to proper streets, it has been necessary to "strain" the site by lot and street arrangements that will provide the necessary large lots (i.e. provide the necessary land area per lot). By providing such large lots, the question also arises as to the potential later for re -subdivision into smaller lots if and when public utilities are extended into the area. 3. It is our suggestion that the plat as submitted can be accommodated but that a "better" subdivision plan solution is possible; that solution is the technique of "cluster platting" with the use of smaller lots (net lot acreage) while leaving steep slopes and other problem areas in a natural state under either a home owner's association or dedicated to the public. 4. Neither a cluster plat plan nor a potential re -subdivision plan for smaller lots has been submitted; the applicant apparently believes that such a plan is not desired by the Planning Commission. It is our recommendation, however, that such plans are not only desir- able but essential to proper long-range planning. 5. Based upon the above, we suggest the following: a) Approval of the plat as submitted but with final approval of the final plat (for recording with the County) to be with vari- ous conditions as suggested by the City Engineer, the SCS, and others. A larger number of conditions would be included such as PLANNING REPORT City of Chanhassen, Mn. -2- June 20, 1974 open space dedication special conditions for preservation of plant approved, however, we tial re -subdivision pl lots (or a portion) co and when utilities bec vs. home owner's retention, drainage, prevention of silting and erosion, cover, and the like. If this plan is would strongly recommend that a poten- an be submitted indicating how the large uld be platted into smaller lots if ome available. b) Suggesting to the land owner that a "cluster" platting approach might be more satisfactory in the long run for both public and private interests. This would enable a more realistic view of future smaller lot needs (potential) and enable better planning to preserve open green space without "straining" to include such land in private (individual large lot) ownership. 6. We recommend approval of the proposed plat as submitted subject to drafting of detailed conditions but suggest that a better subdivision plan approach is possible from both the public and private viewpoints. r rr r^ J.�11�t�JS:C+ j'. iV f �Y�l... I�l•� •;i regular '} yy 3�:�rrk and Recreation ,'G1:�rt�xS> �U.% 111C�:��-fig �lickS C�,�,� 1 ea o 11 1..�J �I.LGI.f. .,, l t •+ ' "A�a Vivian ..Curl 1�C�UZ.A f J.. G f it'1 A:i n Ain C:i.tY '�tle ZE011-01vliTig ritc'St;]G' CS Wex'e Lit ua.�lltVivian .i. a L '.I-i d' •Lt L'i1..�..,1. a (� j 1-� ' c `I i11w Lell`t.L4Ciait iJe1�.4.n7 l�c��Cc�1.l,4iiy GZ}LLi 1`la-C•jc1=e�+ 4h IC:J� f ....x 1. i�Jr.A 9 `L iZOiii 3;1O21 y L,7.11 �I^rC�E'AYE' I: �Oit and Rich XoYT1ian Were TOVI Xlingcill. tz, ifarty Jensen, IUIen iwth, �1.2w r'��s c"3.1:'4E2i1R.i.n g t' `ti..'.. e : ' and Nayor Al XIirI9G1h_U'z- 1 'ttiTc-1..� s made b Chack ' R.-L t c"'i ad seon by Dwiv; ht hied ul3ar,, i Ai1fll...7_Qi3 'LG capj?�:Qire the JzAt7� 4, 1974 Park and, Rec-r a".."01" minutes cl%tC' ;:r::oZlowing add:�.�a.o�x. Under: Da.'.e Gregory -Lake Ann ��c"tL3C, aUi i1G7 �f Aa'i. Vfl1;C:e lafl :;cbtj3.ilg' eiZC�iI i1 ] iiC'%S �7G-':i Cil ° t :C1Zc7;;TAZ or alternate C:1c1i:fl 1xc�3aTk� rot cgtt ipme;l� ox maintenance. IA , 3.GiI2 caxr .�: d. VMS S :as.I•w5.A1[� 1^I i7i"Jut t.. v posaibi3i tiew oz an erraszi .oce �f. sa aejDe3:�l 7J_CXz1.0 fol: k rontie4r I7iDner ThCZtX\ a betw ee a 600 to 1000 Gltly la;; etas 29 1-974 froza and i:GraJ.a.:A.Uu i:0 A7t: I'L::.LU Clrli"tdG3.�Y , July� 3:OC p•.m, to Ca x3k:, to be he.t.d at '"fake Z}An Park. -•- rime CC?rLC111.:: ssioa eiq.)I .ained Parking CF OUld be '�'a P.-ebl e'rL arld a. him 11 base asIced ball u; � rloads ' a bu a ,ysteja Cc-ald be used. Thay also 4o�.c m a G:00 The COillntis a.Qii exp .u�.i1Cd 'Cite �-,._:0 scheduled aLfte p.:il.. c�yra zoo t be r ;servad 2or one group. Sc'hoebern said the picn:i.c colt'aa'ittee taculd rueet and majce a deci-- s ;r� a j.d let the City know i-JE tht�Y still wansc.cd to use t1_10 p1:::" BaI&,.Tin-Ra='OId Hesse Development Iitt. nt "" Lo lc�sSt' td�'.l.rl'. piEac��zt: to E:tpj ain the p?"Ow1Oi7G'Ci C1C".� :�.© JY�iEitt. tM . La ldwia stated 3.'i: Is O: rIlyd�. .1x--_0 1 F'Sti :h :;el acres e:+ ;yl x �O�'l s C:0 o `z`liel O would be, 11.8 fl , r c.C's'vS l7i' ° par:; a ad .1 3. 9 grontier acreage. 3�ysti;tlS3:i.C5aZ �.O'c. owed. ra,a:�.ss:, on reviewed the r3 Point chack z�.s�c and �.�' raa - .E. TiZe co provisi n 3 shou'ld c� �z OXCQ�t i;,:�e;� cc �. a ©�. o:r up vn Xd illade �. e a;� d •:�cs rei hborhood playgr oul 13. Art Beach � � p 'eseat to discuss the po r.. S.�r3.bq s ' �. Uw a rO:ai'.LS.tc"ii:o . Ylargax;'t^ t T['2Uiit�30n s`L`a t cd it WC3u' d cost i::p4:a;i 4.�. $ 5 0. 0 0. Be"X021radii said i � Siti13.� „: be TJ 3.L:v to h�IVO and �I1c� G1. °wa '1i:ii:1.{ e,;y�llte.l.y need Gird '�1T�.'►'.'tl�TY1,T.L]{r' iZra.;1L L"'S yeazz. Disc-assi-o followed. . 7610 LAREDO DRIVE a P. O. BOX 147 a CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 a (612) 474-8885 DATE: June 10, 1974 FROM: Zoning Administrator TO: Harold Hesse SUBJ: Proposed P-1 Preliminary Development`Plan; Case of Harold Hesse REF: (a) City Ordinance #47, Section 14.05 1. In accordance with reference (a), the following report is hereby submitted for your review on the subject named project. a. Site in Relation to Surrounding Area and Uses: This area is presently zoned R1-A. The present land uses of the adjacent land and subject land is for farming. However, there are some small residential parcels in the adjacent areas. b. Proposed Land Use: The requested use for this land is P-1 Zoning for single family dwellings. C. Population Density: Meets acceptable standards. d. Land. Use Intensities: The Zoning Administrator has reviewed the total land area contained in this project with the City Consultant Engineer. The land contained in this development is rugged and very scenic which makes it difficult for proper development. Consequently, I recommend that the Planning Commission adhere to the recommendation of our professional Staff (City Consultant Planner and Consultant Engineer) in their respective fields regarding this development plan. Further, I will be requesting Mr. Don Berg, Soil Conservationist, to be present to comment on this proposed development. In summation of the Land Use Intensity, it is felt that the following considerations should be considered in this development: (1), Water and Sewer 'Facilities: It is felt by this office that the City does have a responsioility to future home owners as to how they will be served by water and sewer. This could be a real problem in this area in future years. .1 Page 2 (2) Location of House on Building Site: It is felt that the development contract should contain language authroizing the City to hire a.landscape architect to advise the City on this subject matter. (3) Trees and Topography: There will have to be language in the development contract covering this area. (4) Drainage: There will have to be adequate provisions provided so that there is not any erosion of gullys. (5) Existing Topography and Tree Cover, Building, Streets and Other Site. Features: It is the opinion of this office that much care is going to have to be exercised as to not disturb the existing topography, tree cover in the construction of streets and homesites. Consequently, it is recommended that when a development contract is prepared that it be very comprehensive. The recommendations contained in item d will apply here. (6) Proposed Public and Private Streets: It is the opinion of this office that the comments contained in item d apply here. (:7)' Open Snace'Proposed: It is the opinion of this office that the open space provided is fine for a nature area, but definitely is not adequate for play,areas. It is the developer's thought that the lot sizes provide adequate play areas for each individual home owner. If the City is going to accept park land, then this park land should contain land suitable for a tennis court, ball fields and a skating rink. Consequently, if the land is not able to support the above type of recreational facilities, then a direct charge should be imposed for the park fund on the proposed development. ( 8) ' Architectural ' Style ' of ' Building : This is not applicable due to the fact that these will all be single family dwellings. How- ever, each building will have to be approved by the Building Inspector. Further, the development contract will dictate site location, etc. (9) Written statement is on file at the City Hall indicating the applicants interest in the property, expected time of development and description of required maps and drawings and are satisfactory. 2. Approval of Proposed Preliminary Development Plan: Approval of this subject named development plan is granted. However, this subject plan is subject to review by the City Engineer, City Consultant Planner, and USDA Soil Conservationist. It is further felt that great emphasis should be placed on the future when water and sewer will be available and needed in this area. Sin ce��ly chnelle nistrator :k HESSE FAP.1.1 PLAN REVISIO REVIEW 6-4-74 The i' esse F ri' prtli 0-n ry et-tch pla;; is into . , e locks. lec-, has 19 lots9 5 acres or 1.rF r; Dlock T. bLr 10 lots, 5 acres or lar, r; Mock Thr a has 21 1 tst 5 acres or iar er. i believe the prol,erty having. sloe s less than 127, and no wetness problem should be divid d into 5C lots, 2 acres a d 1 rger. The remaine. of the lane. includi:ar the slopes over 18%. should be set aside rotection open space and the pond areas should be used for parks and outaoor rec- reation. The steeper .iayde soils co_ored r d(12 to it'-,) blue (18 to W14). 'e re(l lined area on tLe ap outtin s the Allx via19 T rril nd Clencoe soil areas., esc• soils have a high seasonal - ter table, Tlierexore, site location sbo: '(: m::de very carefully to excessive landscape nit rats nt soil erosions .ne sedi ent damage, septic tun and grainfield failure,, i wet basements. It i very difficult to coistiuct a septic tank and level drainfield on slope over .2% and hil.lsi a se r .Ce of effluent is a common probl „ . 1. - site location and septic I— k drainfield locution are the ; ry problems on this .)lan. The plan sl:-uid s) the exact location of each of t , ses that -i11 be built, including• t 11, septic, tank and erziinfielde I-acl_ 1 t L!,ould rovide for a minimum home site of 112 ,acre to allow roorn f r a well, a house, and a standard septic tank anO t'.rainfi Id,,, The €seen and yello: coloxs on the ma-, in- dicate Raycen s it wit s :.,es ur 12%, Koi _ , me the b, ,*-•_n soils in these areas Cal : ert= slow tility rate, site, 5boulc Le r ccordin :lye "here are five ally 1,eads on the pro• . rty locat t' E. st si a of tlx ro :. I have nu 0 - in red: 1, 2, ', 4, 5. Th se be inv vie tee lox tability and care sl,oulc' by taken not to elivert acidition I rung_ ater into t_1. ee: .Metro Association of Soil :i ter Conse.vation District 'U-ri an L:rosion Con- trol LLn °ib_ kv, Standards and Specific tions for T t :.lisl:iuf i ermanent Long Term eEetation Tables i a,.-' lit ?a es 5-1C and t rds for Grade Stabilization Structures. :es 45-1 The followint- lots aa:parently do not have a 112 acre home site area to the house' we r., septic total; and ield9 They either have slopes ter th ._ or they are on soils witl. a ' sonal water table. Block ne - ,Test of Property- Lots 11, 12 and 13 y of have a large enouFh area for a buil able site. Lot 11 29 79 8, 9, 17 a. 1 need careful homesitin . lo. k Two - Gentrai mart roperty: Lots 3.. 49 5. 60 71 :nd 10 m not h vE a large enouCh area Cor ildable ite. Lot 2 ill ne cz ref uI Lomesitiaa� . lock Three - East _ . of ertyt Lots , 1C 9 12 and 17 , ay not have l r nough a for a wild i . Lot 2, 1.5, 14, V , 1. , 20 an' ^1 i' I n e careful 1 o sitinf-. Sitlil CONSERVAICN SERVICE Carver Soi► & .Water Conservation %isirlct CITY HALL CITY HALL WACONIA, MINNESOTA 55387 WACONIA, MINNESOTA 55387, 13 and in the Jortb Central part of Block One was desiSned y t)- Soil Conservatio. Servic in June of 1970.. ka, :- ' on a-.ricuftural hydrology' nd as constructed in 1971. 1 o not believ tre low density bousing propos d will affect the runoff characteristics of the site; however9 the emergency spillway lying 100 feet Northeast of the 1)rincipl pipe spillway should be mai..t fined and de part of tL read design tha crosses theprinci p - e pipe spillway. believe that slopes over 67 (blue on ap) should be mai-twined in tural cover of prass, shrubs, and trees, and these should b improved, 1..11 .:ted d mana ed as protection r omen space. The following con.servatio racti es contribute - good land us d better b sinF develo eats: Se Urban irosio . Control La dbook" 1. .aintai.. the natural -u face drain.a p tter : i prove and beautify it I. possible. (pages 33-35 and 39-41) 2. Steep slo e,, weeks, waterways, flood plain areas should be managed for omen space for n tural bea y Gins''/ : for urposes. (paC.e 1, 12 and 13) 3. Save existing trees od a lity au-3 . - int i , he rid shrubs on steep slopes. (pages 12 .nd 1_). �. Keep i d grading, landscape z:lter ti �n to a minimum. ( ages 2-4j 5. Save and stock: to, scil L. us during final £r ding. (paile 2) 6. Co- iete pradin- , restore topsoil -ad seed to crass as s :u -:s possible in the building process na seed all exposed areas witL<in 30 days after grading. (pages 1-17) 'ee origin l re ort of 7-12-:7_ for soils descriptions and other pertinent informa- tion. REGULAR PL2UINII7G C011MISSION MEETING NOVOZER 23, 1973 The meeting was called to order: by Chainaan John Neveaux. The following members were present: Tim Stone, Tom Gabbert, Nick ��..' v7aritz, John Neveaux, Dan Herbst, and Jim Ilielke. II11Ti.;T7,S : The second paragraph under "PARKING SURVEY" to read: The r-i -nary finding eras that ;host parking spaces in the downtown arez are used in the evening. There are parking problems during the day. It is reconuaended that the CBD Plan be revised. The parking survey recommendations will be completed in January. A motion was made by Dan Herbst and seconded by Nick Wari_z to ►piDrove the November 14, 1973, regular Planning Conunission minutes as amended. Motion unanimously approved. ROY TEICH VARIANC9 TO ORDINANCE 45, SECTION 2.01: This was deleted from the agenda. Mr. Teach -will appear before the Planning Commission at a later date. RESIGNATION: A letter of resignation dated November 22, 1973, from Ar i.e Ryba was read by the Chairman. His resignation is effective immediately. Zi motion was made by Jim Nielke and seconded by Dan Herbst to accept Arnie Ryba's resignation and direct the Achninistrator to write a letter of commendation to Arnie for his years with the Planning Cor►nnission and put an article in the newspaper. Motion unanimously approved. ?'AXE ANN INTERCEPTOR SEMR REPORT, PRASE 11 AND A. PORTION OF PIDISE, );IZ : ►J3mi Orr, Engineer, was present to di sEss ti-li.s report with the Planning Commission. The purpose of this report is to provide some justification to the Iletro Council Staff and Sewer Board to build Lake Ann Interceptor Phase 11 and: -a portion of Phase III to State Iiighway 41. IMIZOLD UESSE: A. motion was made by Dan Herbst and seconded by Tim Stone that the developer proceed •moo proposed preliminary development plan under P-1 District of Ordinance 47. !lotion unanimously approved. FLOOD P14UIT ZONING 01101112- TCE : This proposed ordinance will be completed January 15, .197_4,�ny the Village Attorney. A motion was made by Tom Gabbers and seconded by Dan lterbst to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Jean Ileuwissen Secretary CHANHASSEN ,VILLAGE COUNCIL MINUTES - November 5, 1973.-2- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: A motion was made by Councilman Kurvers and seconded by Councilman Bennyhoff that the Planning Commission minutes of October 24, 1973 be notedand read., The following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Bennyhoff, Kurvers, Neils and Wolf. No negative votes. Motion carried. PARK AND RECREATION MINUTES: A motion was made by Councilman Wolf and and seconded by Councilman Kurvers that the Park and Recreation Commission minutes of October 16, 1973 be noted and read. The following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Bennyhoff, Kurvers, Neils and Wolf. No negative votes. Motion carried. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES: `A motion was made by Councilman Wolf and seconded by Councilman Bennyhoff that the Human Rights Commission minutes of October 25, 1973 be noted and read. The following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Bennyhoff, Kurvers, Neils and Wolf. No negative votes. Motion carried. HAROLD HESSE PROPERTY: Mr. Harold Hesse and Mr. Herb Baldwin were present requesting a variance to Ordinance #45, Sections 2.01 and 2.02. Discussion followed. A motion was made by Councilman Bennyhoff and seconded by Councilman Wolf to approve a variance to Ordinance 45 Section 2.01. The following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Bennyhoff,-Kurvers, Neils and Wolf. No negative votes. Motion carried. A motion was made by Councilman Wolf and seconded by Councilman Kurvers j to approve.a variance to Ordinance 45 Section 2.02 for the Hesse Property. The following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen -- Bennyhoff, Kurvers, Neils and Wolf. No negative votes. Motion carried. The grant of these variances in no way constitutes acceptance of the preliminary plat. MINNETONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT 276 ASSESSMENTS: Mr. Huskins, Chairman of the Minnetonka School Board and Mr. McKay and Mr. Bergman were present repre- senting School District 276. Mr. Huskins gave a presentation in regards to adjusting the sewer and water assessment charges at West Jr. High school. Discussion followed. A decision will be made on November 19, 1973.in regards to this matter. BURDICK PARK ADDITION: Mr. Brenny and Mr. Burdick were present requesting Street Improvements in the Frontier Development Park. The Council told.them a written request from them would be necessary before any action can be taken. BUESGENS OFFICE PARK PROJECT 73-10: Bill Brezinsky,:,Village Engineer presented the bids on Water Main Project 73-10, Buesgens Office Park. The following is the tabulation of Bids that wero opened on October 29, 1973 at 2:00 p.m. at the Village Hall: !ZEGULAI, i'.i.,2-i NING COMUSSION METING OCTOBER 24, 1973 The ;r,ce tzng was callad to order by Chairman Sohn �ievea , I The followjAg members �w*%re present: Tim Stone, Arns_e Ryba, Nick � absent. Dan Herbst, Jira plielke, and John Neveaux. Tom Gabbert was absent. l�r..r� ' ,as; A mmotion was :Wade by Dan Herbst and seconded by Jim 1%L G12 e •� prove the Oc tober 10, 1973, regular Planning Co�unissi.on minute . jjotioxl unanimousiy approved. The second par�,.gr aph under NORDSKOV in the October 17 , 1973, special. Planning Co.amijsion minutes to read: The Chairman explained the h1st-ol y of La':e Ann Interceptor Phase 2. A letter was received frorc► the 1,10-t o Coi•.;ic:: l dated August 23, 1973, that the time table for cons•:ruc:tion of the interceptor has been moved up two years for ccriplecion :n 1977. At the OctLober ,5 Cou.ncil meeting the Counci.1 fell: that the availability of sewer is beyond the reach of i�-ui.r�ency. The Counci'. feels that the developer thereby may not proceed beyond the sketcl, plan stage and the Village will not give any approval beyond th,: sketch plan stage. The Chairman read the Oc;toi3er 15 Village council minutes. The third paragraph under YvORDSKOV in. the October 17, 1973, special Planninj Commission minutes to read: y`�sr. Aslanidis gave the presentation. 75 Loot set back from State Highway 5. The pre:po ,ed plan siiow� a The fi.:st 80 acres is divided into five phases. 1. Condominiums 2. Condominiums To%,mhouses " t. Tour °- 6-story apartment buil.dincJs Office and convenience center The crnc►oniniuin are co:1s 'dared medi= density of 14 Lunits per acre, toy,�ihouse:s 1dw density of 5 units per acre, and apartments high density of 20 units per acre. Each phase has separate recreational facilities. p Motion was made by Dan Herbst and seconded b)� Sim Mi.el.ke to approve -;he October 17, 1973, special Planning Commission mi: utes as amended. .o tion unani LLously approved. 71AIOL'D HESSE. Sierb Baldwin, Pl.arrAier, and Harold Hesse were present to requcsL yariaaices 'co sections 2.01 and 2.02 of ordinance 45. Tho july report and map from Doti Berg, Soil Conservationist, Were discussed. The Chairman stated that the Village Engineer indicated that the types of problems listed by Don Berg are not that bud The administrator explained that deed restrictions could be placed on the lots so they could not be subdivided until sewer and water are available also plans could be drawn showing where the house, septic tal-L:, well, and drainfield could be placed on each lot. Herb Baldwin suggested they could modify lots to give more building space also the developer could suggest possible building sites and pl.acament oil drainfields, septic tanks, and well. The pwoposed plat has five acre lots on 350 acres. Dan Herbst ". r just phases 1 and 2 a suggested the developer c©n3idet thin point. t`i r Planr,L:I-ng Co; mission .ipiinuti w October 24, A mot-io31 was made by uilu nielke and seconded by Arnie Ryba to recv1lulGid tiie Council grant a •variance to Har ' e `Hesse to Ord:�nance 45, Soct-on ,. 2.01 and also Section 2.02 -In-regard`'...o; the'.lots adoi;:i;�g non-pL:Ax�c roads. motion unanimously approved. mur- P VIEW ADDITION LAXOTA LA E ``RELJCATIUN : Tac J a"UUJr r 7, y714 , i lanizw;r.g Cor ilissz.on 'ininuZes ..were .xead. A buildz;zg pe;•-Au.t has been issued far Lot 4 of this plat..' A motion was made by Dar;' rlernst and seconded by Arnie Ryba that the Village Engineer and Village: Attorney meet with the adjoining Property oN•r.e;: s and *attempt to resolve t1•;is problem and came ,.bAck to the p;.anni;ag coz=ission With a solution. Motion una"i.io -approved. , A mo tao;. was made :. by Dan Herbst a;Zd seconded by Arnie �yba ico ad j our:;. Fleeting .aa�our,•iEd. a•� '' .Q:4© p.n1. - ': - Jean; Meuwisserl Secretary • I 40 _ .t ♦4; Y WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA Mr. Lloyd Schnelle, P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minn. SCHOELL & MADISON, INC. ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS I 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 October 22, 1973 Clerk -Administrator 55317 Subject: Concept Plan Review, Hesse's .Addition Dear Mr. Schnelle: This is to outline my thoughts with respect to Mr. Hesse's proposed land platting, gained primarily through the inspection trip this morning with you, Messrs. Hesse and Baldwin, the designer. I believe that the proposal is extremely meritorious. It proposes to de- velop a number of large lots, apparently five acres in extent, although I have not yet had the opportunity for inspecting the drawing in detail, along with the dedication of a pedestrian trail system, some outlots for ponding, ravines which will be left wild, steep slopes which will lie in the back yards of a number of lots, and a good road pattern giving interior access to all except two lots, which gain access to Bluff Creek Drive in the NW portion of the area. It appears that several lots will not have the minimum frontage required in Ordinance 33 (180' at the building line) and that several of the cul-de-sacs may exceed the 500' maximum length. However, neither of these factors should preclude your consideration of this plat, in our opinion. The area is unique and needs some special consideration to insure that the lots are good building sites, although they may not exactly conform with the ordinance requirements. With regard to sewage disposal, we believe that at some time prior to the submission of a preliminary plat, some soil absorption tests ought to be made in "typical" soil areas which might give some indication of soil absorption feasibility. We do not feel that steep slopes, per se, prohibit feasible soil absorption. The lines of tile forming the absorption field can be placed at right angles to the dip of the slope, that is, along a somewhat level line, so that each line can have a slope of approximately 6"/100', with the pipes leading to these lines running down the steep slopes, but of tight characteristics so that drainage from the pipes will be limited to the flat lengths. This is a type of construction noted in pamphlets published by both the state PCA and the FHA. There appear to be some details of design which may need slight revision, for instance, the "boulevard" type roads in some areas, the exact placement of the road with respect to the top of the bluffs, etc. but we feel that these items can well be crystallized during the -further planning process prior to submission_ of a preliminary plat. We recommend your acceptance of thi.-- "Con- cept Plan". Very truly yours, WDSchoell:sd VILLAGE ENGINEER �9 APPLICATION FOR VARYA.NCF. �v Da to F Fee Pai C� Hearing Set For Phone—`[=�`���/ Address Legal description of property_cj— `.,�__,-_T�� Variance requested from Ordinance #� .3 3 From which ~ ac�io—n of the 0 _ s inane do you seek a variance? Why? a i-natureAppl cant Application should be supplemented wi maps, plans or ct:hF r additional data whirr may a=:1 t`i,& l_ i� - in the analysis of r_iie t. ropo� d Uro r r 7610 LAREDO DRIVE * P. O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 August 21 1973 Herb Baldwin Rt . l' Jordon, MN SUBJECT: HAROLD HESSE PROPERTY Dear Mr. Baldwin: The Chanhassen Village Ordinance No. 45, Section 2:01 states as follows: 2.01 Future Plats & Subdivisions The platting and subdivision of land within area of the Village not served by the Village sanitary sewer system shall be pro- hibited until said sewer system is available to serve eabh such area proposed to be platted or subdivided. Since there is no sewer available on the Hesse property, you must apply for a variance from Ordinance 45, at the Village Hall before you can proceed any further. Sincerely your , Gerald W. Schlenk E� consulting engineers diversified hc p.o. box j. osseo, minnesota 55369 ❑ (612) 425-2181 civil municipal planning environmental land surveying geotechnics November 8, 1974 Mr. Lloyd G. Schnelle Zoning Administrator City of Chanhassen 7610 Laredo Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: The Hesse Farm Chanhassen Dear Lloyd: , .Y,.R '-U cN _ C L - -- c> c 'JG P1 r� I am enclosing copies of the material that was sent to the following people: Mr. Carl Dale Mr. William Schoell Mr. Russell Larson The enclosed data represents that information that was requested at our last joint meeting and consists of: Boundary Survey Legal Description on Phase I Revised Preliminary Plat If you have need of further data or clarification of submitted data, please call. Very truly yours, CONSULTING ENGINEERS DIVERSIFIED INC. Frank L. Burg, Jr. g i FB/mo Enclosure File: 4795 keith caswell jr. ❑ darrell schneider 0 richard sha ❑ eugene hakanson ❑ orion buan All that part of the Northeast 4 of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of the Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company and lying Westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Northeast 4; thence North 86 degrees, 31 minutes, 31 seconds West, assumed bearing along the North line of said Northeast 4 a distance of 645.83 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be herein described; thence South 28 degrees, 33 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 168.36 feet; thence South 12 degrees, 03 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 235.62 feet; thence South 34 degrees, 56 minutes, 32 seconds East a distance of 795.54 feet more or less to its inter- section with a line drawn parallel with and 330 feet West of the East line of said Northeast 4 as.measured at right angles to said East line; thence Southerly along said parallel line to the South line of said Northeast 4 of Section 35; also that part of the Northwest 4 of said Section 35 lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of said Chicago Northwestern Railway Company and lying Easterly of the centerline of Bluff Creek Drive, said centerline of Bluff Creek Drive described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Northwest 4; thence East along the North line thereof a distance of 1049.12 feet to the center- line of said Bluff Creek Drive, said point being the actual point of beginning of the centerline to be herein described; thence deflecting to the right 39 degrees, 47 minutes, 44 seconds a distance of 157:83 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right, the radius of which is 654.46 feet, the central angle of which is 14 degrees, 48 minutes, 00 seconds, a distance of 169.05 feet; thence South- easterly tangent to said curve a distance of 721.76 feet more or less to the Northeasterly or most Northerly corner of Hesse's Bluff Creek, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Register of Deeds, in and for said Carver County, Minnesota; thence continuing South- easterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course and along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 343.24 feet; thence deflecting to the left 4 degrees, 55 minutes along the Northeasterly boundary of Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 610.75 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right, along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek, the radius of which is 870.93 feet, the central angle of which is 13 degrees, 06 minutes, a distance of 199.13 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to said last described curve. and along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 267.10 feet more or less to the Southeasterly or most Easterly corner of said Hesse's Bluff Creek; thence continuing South- easterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course to the Northerly right of way line of said Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company and there terminating. CBANBASSBN VILLAGE 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. O. BOX 147 9 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 DATE: October 7, 1974 FROM: Zoning Administrator TO: Mr. Bill Schoell, City Engineer Mr. Russell Larson, City Attorney Mr. Carl Dale, City Planner Mr. Herb Baldwin Mr. Burg, Consulting Engineers, Diversified SUBJ: Soil Conservation report dated October 1, 1974; Case of the Hesse Farm Development. ENCL: (1) Mr. Don Berg's, Soil Conservationist, report dated October 1, 1974. 1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded for your review and comments. In view of the enclosure, it is requested that the questions raised be addressed in report form to this office not later than Friday, October 11, 1974. lo,d G. Schnelle fining Administrator LGS:k cc: Don Berg, Soil Conservationist UNITT. O S7 ATES DEFIAR T lViEN T OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE City Hall, Waconia, Minnesota 55387 Mr. Lloyd 5chnelle, 'Zoning Administrator Chanhassen City Hall Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Lloyd: October., 1, J974;- - -- - -- ... —...... Here is another summary of the "Hesse Farm Plan', see attached--large.-maps . Home site location on slopes less than 12% with 100 feet between wells and septic tank drainfields is still a problem on some of the lots in this de- velopment plan. I believe it is also.prudent to have an alternate drain - field location on each lot that is 100 feet away from the nearest well. This alternate drainfield area then can be used if the original ceases to function properly. The design of the drainfields would.be based on an ac- ceptable percolation test. On questionnable lots the planning commission should have the home site, well, septic tank drainfield, and alternate drainfield located on the plan or staked in the field to eliminate to the greatest degree possible future and/or continuing problems. Using the above criteria, the following lots are questionnable: The yellow color on the map indicates a probable site if the size and the percolation test meet the village requirements. Red lines indicate wet soils on some problem lots. Red solid color indicates steep slopes. Sheet 1 Lot 2; 5; 6, 8 and 9 Lot 2 is both wet and steep. Lots 5, 6, and 9 have an area that may be too small for the home site, well and drainfield, and alternate drainfields, if these are to be located between the building set back line and the steeper slopes. Lot 8 has no access road shown, it is disected by a gully and steep slopes. The road should be shown along with the home site. Sheet 2 - Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 are minimal size and the home site, well and septic tank drainfield, with the alternate drainfield, should be located in the plan so as not to pollute each others wells. Sheet 3 - Lots 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 17 and 4 Lots 8, 11, 12 and 13 are minimal size. Lot 7 is cut up by wet soils, steep slopes and a gully. home siting could be poorly done on this lot. Lot 17 may have a minimal home site slopes. Drainfield effluent seepage fully considered. n top of a ridge surrounded by steep could be a problem here if not care - Lot 4 is a lopd wet soil area and backs up water from the pond. Sheet 4 Road Plan and Profiles The roads have lx=:k steep grades 5% and greater, with no sod indicated for erosion control in these steeper road ditches. The roads also cross low areas with questionnable soils. The project engineer should show the road ditches that require sod to control erasion, as well as methods used to in- sure a good road bed in the lowuet soil areas. Where the road cuts across a steep slope, a cross section and bank stabilizatiorn.;methods that may be needed should be shown. Existim-, Gulli Heads Regarding the 5 gully heads referred to in an earlier report, engineer should provide the method of grade stabilization that to control these gullies. Sincerely, a�ld C. Berg District Conser 7tionist the project will be used �`.ui 2. L,'=��..S�Y3 ai , 4' 7 ?LLi� Xv' ' F G?u;i z Se-pi1.°-,r =.:c° '<, Alu. g}.;sst 2 19-74�, CO]-r-fissio-n aA^'t,.3.i:n 0-ri :x1Z.moL1S17T e.pp :. d" Hli" D R7,aSiS.)^n si�. j.9��y �?; 111,tt�i�' 7r4otJ.Cin 4cS 'i� �'/; "1P n s--c ' _ _ __ .T .. �3, j_.Z� a.c:�:. b�_ _1��: .�"L�..... and, ��.��,Cz by +}'rc.::'..:.�''i �T i �°''_:-1s vii't�ti�?c i Z3lrf .ti :f.LsZu i� P � ,� 971,,, n Pl ai2iaing G'tim-n-'L .ssic-, it' n'°v± w::i o t-he Harold Fesse Y'M..o..17?3-at A -as nitj intended e,_3ay the City -:C3e.ld b-a' Mblor`r`'ted bo p:i'>CiY;..L'•.e the r€ �3 c.'�' t1.�st cL's fa .-' ties i?p ?I .".'�^.'Taest of ar-aa 3vsidentso =) tiaxt un?.,3? r'_ous y a pp t ura d o L \ S?E'L'H GPEEIEO SES-, Bill was p.resa:stc, Card. Dale reviewed !-As repo_ t of ; d 5r�g747=Dae, stated he st' ,1 ra-yanaenus EppFovalof •�3e �.ond_;iil-a _ use Permit bat re uasys that the # Ce)ndi - oxl-al 'i3zse perti t be drawn Sip mid 5Wbmitted ba d to the mAAla Cia:"mA.9sion for �'�31a T bef-box-e going eCR the Coi' 3ncil, -LO. Data fe4ls the la:cati.an on the sou-Ui si.c?e of State fligh ay �1 should be inahudod In the pejadt because same of the s'Fin:.',Sitirns are to b2 moved to tha new .Ucgti'-n1 The pe-mrktt sh-ou?d the pus;ifi,tted and ragulated retail activiiii-a are �L;t?SL 1 j� 3 iii_'•s dP[�t3 tco t7v t pxinu,Ap p��iir: tt,^d ;.?se. It is � 9V--e!''�'f'eLZ�Se operation, Jim Ma3le •- Carl. Dale has spent a ionsidarabla amoiLnt of tir::e:� he has cone a special stllidy for tas sromaighat aa? a w'.d to this and I f2t3 }3as really applied his px-ofesoJ. a- 1 talent 'Go this �tpplicaticno Ch that bp --,is i Will go along with Carl is rac;)znendatti ohs'. Car; C-P-1 '[:SAte'. a Candi.ti rip-;3l use Permit that -OrAt :,,It ` r,-- Gi ty and 1y'i-ake sure this is 3�,y t a Ytnto"nti.Sr:513.n. ip��n =�'f:1P�ya3iu'.tn jT��jtySy :i.I t'fi3at �joc `J.,I or, UCv ars- gf •tJt ing. cn]-�na `:'h i�.ii'LJry' iz re ur-ra LIB F'ea7 eGi�L1 ngup "V�1."i' Mariciia &-ma .s .d - l s=.ill am opp=.used to puttasag cori re-rcial en tahata p�r1-tea ex�y even trough it -ts � a` i.ii-i,�'f?'s ti-je bz:.'ild1Y3g it is s -i3-2 a a erLi a:� building. it' i s lsar�y vi si't� � � f�°ter t the h=: 9 �� which -tiaa pmsexitJ si:lue :fit nato Thera vill be addi iora-1 Nick 4tk itz - l consider tub -is a fair tr=de off of the of thin grandfathext--rig :m of the operation ftom the sol th side of the h-i gb ay to the no r-th side where it is ar jmpknvemant both for then and the City, Tom. Cabbert - l have enecked wi t,h a �c��ple pe4p3e. in our neighborhood and I havenIt heard ons ob je,,. ti on `l-rm our n a3 ghboehoodo A viotiou was made by Tim Stone and seconded by Tom Cabba a to defer action on -,his until t�.e plw.ring Gorami.ssien studies the spevi UI� conditional use Permit, t,, be prepared by Carl Dale and Russel Larson and agreed by �.+th Greenhouses. iz: follgi4-ng voted in favGr: Stons2� Dan Herbste Jim 'Kielkej, i' ck :^T�+ritzo and Tom Gab%art. Iiiari.arra %ml.s•tad voted no. Her reasons are stated above. ibticn carried. CEaujjX SAIES A.ND SERVjCr,P The Ci vy Attorney e�%TlLairaed ti-.is is now a non -con -forming "s y r�ascn cue adCption of the Zoxsina Orrc?i nzrce, V.hat Went on under the Ud village procedure-9 befai:-- the adoption Of the 1972 ordinance is not ma'taria7 except tt, ari krv.%wledge that, apparently a special use pen-i.t was granted years ago by the towns'.P.:..po G-jo:rge Cexmak and Attorney Join C21r7rs WerO Pre seot,� They have made an application for :mzoningo Tole Adminkstra or Is ccricerned about; the bailding twat 3s partially colt?nlatedq that d:7es raot bade a. building PK rma t which is In violation of the Qlty Ccda� the r`~ wo,aden buildings arc ders? �c is T a:, d the retaiyan.g ualI tc protect the Ci*,y pjaznjog 0 Two sninn Mjyt� ng AQVzOnr 0: 390:- n a! and th! Go ZE a 16 ioh 0 a an >J2 L a - -10 To r V" --r e;f thy lv� 02n Wipja ZV K, 1 n n' C, i� �tbz - �v snif aid If 2j na zen-vol 0,01y. 10. Qz rzi subnWed a nnoyy NY! Anog -0 xny�rh' Uma an yn, Anylon hp: ty:?!, Wha Colons datnS Ezptswbav Un 2574.: d 11 r Ca�� --ns c� nhiz -,""C- synalf": ase, Russell Worn zakad ZT. Calras to Wtv bis npavnntE uldch were en-" argnmanit% V bAs letter of Kptamw�-r '111 J!'Y7;,?. b��fwxe NK QrEsi vaits on the opiniont, Y`:tip-K! 1M s - --s-nt, V Locysot a ernottlocal UOM invezang va- p�-'"e _772f�51-0girphy studio In vie brs2mant V by- home, The Maze 3hammasan Road jo5t scrth c2 Qlnnh-:�J- a vnitev- pwwtwgjspnez7- n--i--d v--"z-'id Me- to Pon a proopavy 's-.-ud3:-.o.. ;Siho dcazn �n 1.'-) have a Wign On Wat of her hols.- out! WT sunn W be es, racu pution and d0w not, --fJ ThR sign 1: Vs, Toretang won nold -:-n1jcanyn Vo vMaran to the vQ12i odinann, ard prepain a dinspWrod skebah of the siga W prassnt W thc- 20001y Campo wic. Gane Goujisr was piazeni and Mefly disnussed W Winpnce, roe Sign Qrsinanne comm ittoe OAS not present, NA1010 RASSE: A notion was made PhOnza ShuMS ;ad seconded by Nick WITI-0—re command approval of 1-z'sse 11 and direct the MUng p0apnos Unanigrusly app7w%& CARL CARRTCOS in h221974lanning MISInivlxteth� T"1nningte My, PMSmz td W Carxion a 90 day axteynicn in Ma develMent Plan% A mWAnn was mods by Naidana --S-halstn.d. and sauznded by To Rabbent to place, - ills an the agenda Wr the Ka,est Kr, Cax% GaMso be pinewn and bring bis plan if he has a desixe to d.7. o-c'.., sly a..pur-c'ved,, The Pl-aaaa no-v -vas aak-cd to submit a letter on imuenvandatlans for g I - v G.L:aa'hasse-n'. up a VanadtH "-' t.� I ioua I n- A Latina. was sc-zo-ded 'by Sysistad to adjanonc -�s; adjuurned at 11:15 P.M--, f 04*N 100) hvga.�V Planning avanjs5jua Haebing Aptenher V, TK Pah.us el0aland M cerEaks K A to unnPISK.:: six--d "M 1 0 for storage. OnA of the n"aden builklogu K's WeT! Min th!:; Anaw WE aW Ail! A remwed in ansyst V NI" pope's xwplrhz A bynA •.. VVIS T-!;--,. Slsn3 arl onsundod by Wo-t zily joyawn v- action 1 W! such time an A. Larsan has pinpared a zasparBe to date& Soptesbar 13, 15Q: �;,xicll use and z�zdag of the land. At= Ynonfrously ypploraw aussaij Larann zmad to, Cairns to wAte hAw nrnnsnts which were an Wargoment Q hAs latter of Aptamber 11D 1974, before W on Una, Gpjnioao Mrs. Qvetaag vas pzwsent to ivquest ,=�Ion6if-t onall uc-, pe=`-jt hr,:-ae,, The Ja c�fi abas just north of OnAnial Grawe, W, 17votang is a free2anwz! and mould like to q. studio. She does plan t), -�-u WAt of her =5, WK W. sasm ho be a naxpal ho2e occupation and Kis not 5 ?0S, fvvytang w03 paid tj uaka so n variance to the rig nndinanw,� .xd a SAW A the sign te Prosant to -thl'71 WAIT SIGN VDINANCE: Gene Oculter was present and We% discussed the oydinemse. sign oWnsoce !URDU: DUSSA k motion was made by VaRana ShAst nl- b�i 1A-k ra, Ebin-.-tend appr3val of the Harnid tlhiaz-z�g Airini5irator ts Easste pnepnos n t-n time 3Aeduls. Idtinn unamAnusly appzwrod, -!Ah.a L-y 22, 1974a j --te rrain,�-,,s th.-z- Planning dave0psent plons. -,-�SSLDn granted W Carninzi A was n,da by NhAaLa ShuWad and seconded by Tom WOO to plate isis on the agenda Ar the neyt Paeting and xaqpast Xr, Gail Ca_ ino be pzwsaQ his plan if he has a desits Q d3 !-,,atj.a-n unanimously appmed, -,�n—ner was as'<--e-d to snbmit a letter On W=Mmn 15OWNG ATUDZi The PLann zidativ j�3 for vpp a to shAY hOusing •A r Ghanhas"- We by Am Uabbaxt zu--r A auxned at Li,�15 W. AuKawan savrayayT 3 PREUID:.1?•tARR DEVELOPMENT P-�,-N AND PEG 01NIING RIA TO P AUGUST 3HESS' ` ABaA The Public lxar? ng ias called -to order bar Ch -1 r lan D.-tin Farb; Tha *W la-W ng ragabers were Pr0S 4,1,1,"o Tin Shane, i&:,21Stad.. Nick. 'W vi. ,' _, D,srn �''-- 1 q e^� s is Jim Hiellke., and Toz, Gabberto The fo11oj>.A-,g i33tieswsted persons pi-went*- P-MIXk Buxd� Jrp: 03SW 117 and Ya—. o B01) Ste es p Chaska �1`�Qr, and tyLrsp Pzrold 'Hasse., G:aska biro and Yzs it -a Su3a rcLcl_, 2512 Chicago A.1 e o � e . 11�41s Les Bridgar; Bouts #i s Ebx 80-3p Chas'_,a James pzi.dsrsen�, Route 11� Box 9 a=s ; (Ziaska lRon lRout> •• rT Bo__ 82% Cha5k_a Mr, a, d Y:rs. stc_ e Paul-yg Route #31r, mix 81D9 Chaska Gyre Vcgelp Route #,3,, Chaska 82Bq �hasc Anne vegel j, P-)ute Ws� Box 82B. Kaska M11 schcel q City Er-g'. mea co-ancilman John Neveaux G,-,_-1 Dale gave his report of Atig st 9� 1974. H3 r-commended appro-va.1 of the plat with certain conc1iiions. Thzt the dvvelopar and his persc=Le . sit down w3 t•h the staff i4han Ci.-zsw iko the legal doe ,nieY't, To sQ> up the cor-diti alias -for the l mmeo=.�'3?ers associat3..rja for the _q ii}tetction O:i the opan Spann (:s:4"pes =m,alk,.��aysA)a9� f�/� /} �o p,y p�� �1 ,,3 -n 0 p� .�y� .�#) The bottom m of the `V :ae� c at th,,.. :��aj�JC.S.rline be ded3c -� : •� h. AUiil..:� Ic �,•ad kepi, La reserve val ta? tht) city conll ,:� ; JS -Ule enures sn s em and colr2s up liith i , plan for the E';i:`�.�p�2 )t;SQti ` 1? s ixd h3rould no v 8)� op -an to U110 Pub �. UTI'�ia' � the entilru system is sob oainz dp . 2) The dave op er has agreed to sab,-� t a pyz-plat of th,Y area shaving ho=ar t• ese lots could be subdivided when se,Tvr a s al ilableo 3) The s trea isd pondso azd gre zygay s will be private under a hom;a0,,-:ne1 S 4) 3n. Lhe discrepancy betueen sore very na K ro 4 lot 2flues ars-1 soma vel j,ej.de lots e applZicant has agreed; if it is poss?b1e� to evfl-a these nut a little more i soil conditions warrant. .Bill Schoall r✓cap-umended soma of the Iota o-ug to a x orbIleasL side Of Bluff G reduced ak Dr2.ve be reded in s? za to have less iron-"a(Io s 4,, S ce b-, Block 2) Herb Baldwin stated the manager,tent of the siopes vrl-M '!�a i,-oared out Nita the City Jirrff,, i1Q -Ld1l present a pre?-Pla-ba 711t,, is not the F_�3sseQs 3.71tentlo:va to egcouraga pre-platti ng in the cheap" fs.^:w a" ave obliga`ued QiirS��t�Ti^. S Co <a site planning guide to the c vma r s p " The G.nAiTr-an. opvnAd the meeting for co eats > s om, hose present. S teva Pauly - L�,r com. ents a --re di'vec *d to the part: land riot -the plat;r 1 cannot see how t'ai s 1;1d .all be a0ce:ssi .."We An �t Pt0 Of b t4? cil"1�032@a Efsr,rar ?' cause erosion. lrhe biggest po:s�ltial aV�'K3s_u Q-A cause pa3�k i s f il r,o Thez-e is pro Way to got a piece of i..e fighting equipment into th.- pafk, except by %ra- LIc ag into I-,aio is go 1g to keep a: vona f rOm going i n char e arid: r_si.ng hell? Pa J.L ;d :c° 3e} $z_dger.. agree with resyt ii�g vb_l �U be a =ta£ �::Jua get-.9 out that s sapt,0Licpa ii �.0 g� 974 317:.1Ci �':Qc�is'�..iag t'i�YL�Lc�'.-'� t1'mv_sv Gi1K s ., 9— Ron Pwvml�ale M !";-hat could bo Vne problem of leavLng ,,he al -ley alone? I an Arne Vogel - I feel th,)t as a rsatw al. wildlife X�afug,,a it Will raally suffer -± f ' I s N_s a par, A m ti on was ,made by �,Iari ana. qh-ajStad ar±d siz:coyxied by ji_n mielks to close the public h-earIngo 'n_e h a.��?. adjourna at:3 o as jean se-C rotary ?'�gul.ar Pla.ming Coin-iissiou i-I-J -rites, Ali ist 28, 1974, HAkOID IESSE ?A.EL11xIDiAR PLAT: A motion, was rude by T3�n_ Stone and secanded by �. sear-ana a�aU'!approval of the p3:�3irainax r deve-1opmen1- plan Conceptually as presented for the er_tl i3 proposal, `she Com-r,i ss?on. furti�er recormuends appra-val of the prel.i,-inary dove opmpnt plan on the first. phase with the rsncorsr a.—ndati vans of the City Planner dated August 9, 1974;9 and August 21.E 1974P Soil Corsei-vaticni.st datsd Jz:1y ? 7. 1974,1 and City Eng�eQr dated Jt?iy 17, 1974,, and specii cal.ly- that -the parr as shoe by the applicant be dedicated at -Uhis time but be leZt strictly as a wildli.fo open space not for genera.'l public access until. such -time as the City- completes its total park syste!:a and comes up yr th a spec wfi c plan for the use of this particular piece of property and only after required public hearings, It w-111 s tat,- i a the homeowners association will provide the ._.and free o agency will provide the facilities for rrhatc:ver acts The restrictions., covenants j article:s of by -Laws of prepared and submitted prior to f i na]. devalop,,raent p>f prepared by the appi.icant and subrrd.tted for Counoil unwiiv,.ously approved. ve recraa.ti.on is neadeda th.a association -gill be an. A pre -plat v'i.11 be approval. Motion DEIERSDORaf PROPOSED PRELIMINARY DEVF'OPi-MIT P?' &N.- $nice Pankon.i.n ;vas present. ��, Ira; sonir� ryas rrW t yr? t'n the`:C ao�riers o the west to resolve the service road location. The proposed road location wJJ pxs-sent no problem, zor the developer,, A revised plan was presented of four 32 unIt garden apaetment. buildings and one 128 unit building or 11a8 ur-:1-ts per not acre in the first, area to be developcuo , Access to the firs phase (two 32 unit bui ldings) ��,z?d be from a euxb clat off State 13. 7=ay 5 unless the service road is constructed. The developer has agreed that there is no ecnsi.deration. of industrial usage on this proper�,y, Car'! Dale recommmnded approval. subject -to his conmaents in a report of July 17a 1974. A motion was made by Tim Stone and secorded by PJick 4uritz to hold a public hearing on the proposed pre-11�.rsary development plan of Gh�assan Vil-lage erg Octo`oer 9, 1974P at 7:30 p.m. The s© llo*Ang voted in favor: TAm Storey Nick :aTar3 tz., Lan Hla bs L, Ji.m A'IlolkeD and Tom Gabbert, Ils- are Shulstad abstained, ibtion ape -roved. CHAMUSSENI COUNTRY NAHOR SKEsC.H PLAN; Brad Schoech was present to discuss an apar-tent tit ixlg pxoposa ivr t 2 Chanhassen Estates. Gsne Rei lley was also present. The proposed three story building 3s 'rw be horseshoe shaped with a frontier decor. A topni.s court is proposed for Chanhassen Estates residents, Planning Gczmn-ission rreznbers dizvected their comments on cor,ur-e?cial vs mi lti.ple for this area, T7iru Stone - This end used for rn�lviple housing is a vas-b improvement, bxiiever I dcnet I-Fke the arx=gerien-t of the p-ropozed buildings, Tom Gabbert T would rather see apartments than a shopping centers i have trouble seeing a three story building theme. Jim Iftel_ke I thick -.It is a good looking plans It is an izipraveinent over the previous one,, I w-u b prefer apartments over a commercial area, dick 'Aaritz G Rasidenti.a.l is prefe-rable to conmercial. This horseshoe type building appeals to me. Mariana Shul.stad - I prefer residential development to commerce -a development. I uou? d resartte cormsents on this specific plan 'until latar. Dan Herbst G I concur with what everyone has said to prefer residential land use over commercialo CEANSESSEW 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. 0. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 DATE: August 23, 1974 FROM: Zoning Administrator TO: Planning Commission Chairman and Members SUBJ: Forwarding of Additional Information regarding the Harold Hesse Preliminary Development Plan. ENCL: (20) Public Hearing Minutes dated July 24, 1974 (21) Planning Commission minutes dated July 24, 1974 (22) Carl Dale's,'City Consultant Planner, report dated August 9, 1974 (23) Planning Commission minutes dated August 14, 1974 (24) Park and -Recreation Commission minutes dated August 20, 1974 1. The above enclosures are to be inserted in Exhibit #1, Harold Hesse PUD-1,.which was submitted to you in your agenda dated June 26, 1974. 2. The City Staff has reviewed the above subject development plan for the third time. Accordingly, the following background infor- mation and up -dated reports are hereby submitted for: your review in considering this preliminary development plan. a. Enclosure (20). and (21) contain the minutes for the public hearing and the regular Planning.Commission meeting. The problem areas stated in this meeting have been reviewed by the City staff. b. Enclosure (22) contains Carl Dale's, City Consultant Planner, report dated August 9, 1974, which addresses park, open spaces, and recreational needs. Further, the report sets forth methods that can be adopted to,provide the above. Page 2 c. Enclosure (23) contains the Planning Commission minutes. for August 14, 1974, which reviewed Mr. Dale's report regarding parks and recreation. Further, the citizens from the Hesse's property area stated they did not receive a notice of hearing by mail. This matter was checked out and one party did not receive a notice. However, this does not invalidate the hearing. d. Enclosures (24) contains the.Park and Recreation Commission minutes for August 20, 1974.. The Commission reviewed Mr. Dale's report and adopted a motion approving his recommendations. e. Enclosure (25) contains Carl Dale's, City Consultant Planner, report dated August 21, 1974. 3. Zoning Administrator's Comments/Recommendation:, I concur fully with Mr. Dale's report of August 9, 1974, regarding'park, open space, and recreation needs. I was surprised that Mr. Baldwin, planner for Harold Hesse, objected; to Mr. Dale's report. I would strongly recommend that we heed all the red flag warnings raised by our professional staff when granting the approval of Mr. Hesse's plan. cc: Mr. Russell H. Larson, City Attorney Mr. William D. Schoell,;City Engineer Mr. Herb Baldwin Mr. Harold Hesse f 4-1 . R'C. 7d•j: 3 y't�,;. may... _ t DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATES, INC. fi s" 4826 Chicago Avenue So. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 Phone: (612) 822-2106 August 9, 1974 PLANNING REPORT For: Planning Commission City of Chanhassen, Minnesota ' By: Carl R. Dale, AIP Planning Consultant Subject: Park,.Open Space,: Recreation Needs - Vicinity of Hesse' Farm At your request, I have examined the:needs for parks, open space,, and active recreation areas and facilities in the vicinity of the Hesse Farm (related to sub- division and PUD Requirements for development of the.Hesse ,Farm. :for residential use). My comments and suggestions are based. uponj ield inspection of the site, a general review of your Comprehensive City Plan, an analysis of the Brauer Park Study (1969 report), and a meeting with the Park and Recreation Commission. My findings, conclusions, and recommendations are as follows: GENERAL 1. For all practical purposes,:the Brauer Park Study and the open space plan portion of the Comprehensive City Plan are the same; both are quite general and in- dicate only a "skeleta.1 framework" consisting primarily of open space corridors foi lowing established 'drainageway;s and low -wet areas. While some rriention is made of Community Park needs., very little is mentioned about local, neighborhood "playground" or active 'recreation areas or taciltiies. 2. Existing plans are almost totally devoid of any standards or? policy guidelines for meeting future race -eat on,needs and/or evaluating private development proposals. 3. There is, in fact, very. Iittleiin the way of officially adopted policy planning and/or standards to utilize in properly'.evaivating the recreation needs of current private development proposals.. SPECIFIC 1. The only -public open space: or recreation plan existing and affecting the Hesse Farm development is the indication of a "primary natural resource" on the Brauer Park Concept Plan and a similar area designated for "?semi-public/public" on the Comprehensive Municipal Pfan. it can only be presumed that this area was intended for some type of public protection due to physical conditions (steep slopes, drainageway, tree cover, -etc.). No indication is given for active re- creation area needs such as bail fields, childrens play equi'pmant, and the like. �' ` I _2- August 9, 1974 PLANNING REPORT Z. in the apparent absence of any specific:or detailed long-range plans, standards, and policy, we would recommend the following: a) B1uff'Creek and adjacent" slopes should be dedicated tolthe"publas ic; said the "no ted .dedication should be up to, at, or near on the proposed subdivision plan. This would involve permitting subdivision ' of lots to be retained under, ,private ownership of less than five (5) acres but the net effect would be the same and in accordance with acceptable con- temporary zoning practice (cluster platting, density transfer, etc.). The exact line for designation of'publ,ic land dedication should be determined by negotiation with the land owner based upon specific development plans. b)' There may or may not beta need for an active play area (organized sports et m tivities such as hockey and baseball). Such needs, if present, might be met f the very large residential lots involved; if not, other privately by use o areas might be'providedby a home owner's association. ;Due to the nature of the proposed development, the'location'and site characteristics, and residential den$.ity - it is recommended; that no "public" land be requi red for active ! recreation needs. „' �� be accomplished 1 c) It is recommended that +he principle of cluster platting P as follows: The roads, ponds;,: and': a l l s and b iopes and tree cover below' the aI d line be set aside as common: property (undivided interest) and be 1 maintained, controlled and :regulated by a home owner':s association; include the re -arrangement of some; this may or may not lots on'the buildable land.: U, The City shoo I d require a .'lb I anket" easement over al ' I ,roads, trails' ponds, 4 L� ponds, and common open space with various conditionsset forth in the PUD Permit. d) New roads in the pCat:shouid be private and maintainedby the home owner's as but with PUD conditions included to reserve City rights to eventual take-over and the right to assume 'Is assnance rnfallito properly (with costs assessed)'should the home owner's association fail to properly nexercise its responsibilities. Similar.conditions shouid.be placed upon the ponds and other common open space. free of e) Among other things, the City should reserve the right to obtain, charge, public pedestrian.trail easements through the :common open space i In the future if :a ; need Is Indicated and/or the home ovrraers' association does not properly provide its own inter -connected trail system indicated as an intent on -the pro posed.subdivision plan. Also, City should reserve the right to utilize suitable areas of the common open space for active play areas if a need becomes°apparent; said public use Could be abandoned at . any time the neighborhood age structure or other changes In.conditions -' eliminate the public need. f) PUD conditions should include certain standards for proper maintenance of the "e d remedial action recourse.streets, ponds, and common open:space a>~ 11" PLANNING REPORT - - august 9, 1974 g) Land along Bluff Creek required for public dedication sioudd simply be held in a public "land bank", and not opened for public use until a morecomplete public open space "syst'-Pm" Is secured and a dataiied public policy and use plan, is formulated and approved;by the.City Council. Planning Commission Minutes, August 14, 1974 -8- A motion was made by Jim Mielke and seconded by Mariana Shislstad to delay the Corridor Study Report on Highway 7, Planning Commission member appointment, and discussion on Doimtovm rendering on the agenda to the next Planning Commission meeting�on august 28, 1974. Motion unanimously approved. HES5E FAruq PARK REEDS: Gars Dale discussed his report of August 9, U97 �' i�.s r�epirt attached. Herb Baldwin and Harold Besse here present. Mr. Daldtain will have a formal reply to this report at the continuation of the public hearing, August 28. Several persons were present who own land on the east side of this property. These people claim they did not receive a notice of the public hearing. The Administrator will check the records and send notifies for the continuation of the public hearing. A motion was made by Tom Gabbert and seconded by Mariana Shulstad to adjourn the meeting. Reeting adjourned at 12:15 a.m. Jean Meuwissen Secretary JA ,. �ti✓"e-L..' �:•t:zZGf..!��. — � ��•1.(i LG,/ , C{';c.'✓i�-r � 7 J d� L< S d t4 S CO DC LI, , /" wig SO NI MSC . S' Pips C HE--A:ING a i'Fi?L �.P13:�:7?' r,,�.�_ .P`; P_?T ATIO REZONING RIA TO 11ES eE .E:A.CLL'''J, JULY 24, 11.97 3, 8:00 P.m. The pub!ic hearing was called tc- order by Chairman Darn Herbst. The a-tlem hers were present: Dan Herbst. Nick .W-aritz, Mariana Shulsta.d, Tort Gabbert, a:id Jim Mie-t 1_e a ' Tim S'co e was absent n The foilou�in g interested parsons were presents Don Berg, Soil. Conservationist, Russell ;arson., City nt•tornev; Caxl Dale, City Planning Consultant: Ray Jackson, Scholl and Madson; Mr. and 14rs. Harold Hesse, Herb Daldwr.nd Frank Burg , Roil MU sda.3. e, Zjfames Pedersen, Claire Vogel, and Anne Vogel. The notice of public hearing as published in the official City newspaper was read by the Adnrtinistrator. a Herb Baldwin, representing Harold Hesse, gage the presentation, They props.>:se one unit on rive acres. initial development begin on ten lots on the east side of Bluff Creel-, Drive Don Berg, District So -Ill Conservationist, gave his report dated Maly 17, li74 o Ray Jackson., S- ahoe l and Pled:. on p gave the enginee- 's report o," July 17, 1974. The engineer would like additional information as reques- ted before making a rec:omame..nd td'..z tin , Curl Dale gave his report of- July 14, 1974. These repot -.s are attached. The Chairman opened the rieeti g for conments from those present. Jim g edersen, floute 17., Chaska o This is qu-ite a unique piece of Lando TArsa.t type of park is proposed? The neighbors want it to be kept a natural area. I am opposed to walk. ng trails or cross country skiing in :.he park -Ron 11,Wndaie, Route fti, Chaska � Young people seem to come :into the area and have parties. if it is opened up for public use there will, be a lot of pr oblents The Admin-.strat.or stated the Nark and Recreation ConuUssion would like to have the City Manner re -view the greenway system with them. A petition dated June 28, 1974, , signed by several area residents stating &-hey are in agreenen.t with the plat was .received by the Pl.ar.ming Cormission F rarxk Rurg, Consulting Engineer's Diversified, stated some of his thoughts on the proposed plan. if they put all their density on the good soil the septic tanks would be to close together. They want to naintain. the natural aspect in the park: area. If all the severe slopes user( put into the greenway system they would-be increasxxq the policing effort, Carl. Dale suggested the Planning Coma-nissi on take a careful look at Prlhat should be public dedication and what should be handled by a homeowners association. A motion was made by ! axiana Shui stad and, seconded by Torn tyabbert to continue the pub? is hearing until August 28, 1974, at 7 -3 0 p .m. , Motion unanimously approved. Jean Meaw-I ssen Secretary Regular Plannirig CumnisSion M i.:'U es, July 24, 1974 _2r ITIAROLD HESSE _ Planning Cc,=issi can members discussed whether they would zke to have a prep-lat can this proposed development. Mariana Shulstad -- 1an in favor of a preplat. Nick Wari tz -- 1:' its feasible on solne lots, although if one lot could subdivide it might spoil the whole area. Jim Mielke - I would "refer preplatting of certain .lots but no smaller than one acre in size. Tom Gabbert - I go along with preplatting of certain lots but limit prepia.ts to three per parcel where it is feasible. The planner will meet with P,W . Baldwin and explain the preplatting also discuss if streets, ponds, street lights, etc. are to be private or public. A motion was made by Tom Gabber t and seconded by Mariana Shulstad to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m Jean .Mieuwissen Secretary R err 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 DATE: July 19, 1974 FROM: Zoning Administrator TO: Planning Commission Chairman and Members SUBJ: Request for Preliminary Development Plan Approval; Case of Harold Hesse PUD-1 REF: (a) Zoning Ordinance #47, Section 14.05, Subsection 4a - d (b)Exhibit #1 to Planning Commission agenda dated June 26, 1974 ENCL: (12) Planning Commission Minutes dated June 26, 1974 (13) Affidavit of mailing notice of Public Hearing dated July 12, 1974 (14) Notice of Publication of Public Hearing; Case of Harold Hesse PUD-1 (15) Park and Recreation'Commission minutes dated July 16, 1974,. (16) Design Planning Associates letter dated July 17, 1974 (17) Schoell and Madson's letter dated July 17, 1974 (18) Don Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist, letter dated - July 17, 1974 (19) Harold Hesse Preliminary Plan dated July, 1974 1. In accordance with reference (a), the preliminary development plan is hereby submitted for your review and action. 2. The City Staff, City Consultants, and Mr. Don Berg, USDA Soil Conservationist, have reviewed the above subject preliminary development plan (PUD-1). Further, the Park and Recreation Commission has reviewed the subject development plan for a second time at the Zoning Administrator's request. Accordingly, the following back- ground information and up -graded reports are hereby submitted for your review in considering this preliminary development plan: a. Enclosure (12) to Exhibit #1 of reference (b) are the Planning Commission minutes dated June 26, 1974, which set the date for public hearing. IWM b. Enclosures (13 ) and (14 ) to Exhibit #1 of reference (b) contains the affidavit of notice of public hearing (notice to con- cerned property owners within.350 feet of the Hesse property) and published notice in the official newspaper. This is to certify that all legal requirements are satisfied for this public hearing. c. Enclosure (.15) to Exhibit #1 of reference (b) is the Park and Recreation Commission minutes of July 16, 1974. d. Enclosure (16) to Exhibit #1 of reference (b) is Mr. Carl Dale's report dated July 17, 1974. e. Enclosure (17) to Exhibit #1 of reference (b) is Mr. Bill Schoell's report dated July 17, 1974. f. Enclosure (18) is Mr. bon Berg's, USDA Soil Conservationist; report dated July 17, 1974. g. Enclosure (19) is Mr. Harold Hesse's preliminary develop- ment plan dated July, 1974. 3. Comments and Recommendations: The Planning Commission has received a tremendous amount of technical imput from our professional staff on this preliminary development plan. Accordingly, the City's professional staff have raised red flags on certain aspects of this development in their reports to the Commission. It is therefore recommended that we do riot take any action on this preliminary development plan other than conduct the public hearing until the following is conducted: a. Review thoroughly all problem areas in the preliminary development that are indicated by our staff. b. Make a field trip to the actual site and review these problem areas. After accomplishing the above, the Commission should have in mind what our professional staff is alluding to in their reports. Accordingly, you will be able to better judge Mr. Hesse's development plan and give the type of imput that would be needed in this development plan contract if you approve of it. This is a very scenic piece of land which by it's very nature will be difficult to develop. In view of this, I think we should exercise extreme care in granting preliminary plan approval. �'7Schnel le Administrator Russell H. Larson, City Attorney William D. Schoell, City Engineer Donald Berg, USDA Soil Conservationist Carl Dale, City Consultant Planner Harold Hesse z ile , Wi LLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VDSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. EIREZINSKY JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS D 938-7601 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS. MINNESOTA 55343 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Subject: Gentlemen: July 17, 1974 Review of Proposed Prelixiiinary Development Plan The Hesse Farm We have reviewed the three drawings showing topography and proposed lot arrangement in the 278 acre Hesse farm area. Ten lots are proposed in the area northeast of Bluff Creek Road in the First Addition; an additional ten lots and a park area are proposed east of the previous addition; 28 lots, one including the farm buildings, and one sump lot are proposed in the area west of Bluff Creek, for a total of 48 lots.. The following additional information is needed to complete our review for the preliminary plats profiles of proposed new roads, boundary survey,. drainage plan, location of drainage and utility easements, soil borings, and soil absorption tests. We also have the following general comments: 1. Suggest and recommend increasing the maximum allowable street grade from seven percent to ten percent, in order to reduce the depth of cuts and fills and more nearly conform with existing topography. 2. Save topsoil prior to road construction and place it on embankment and side slopes. 3. Make embankment and side slopes 4:1 or flatter, if feasible. 4. Maximum length of the cul-de-sac in the first and.second phase is about 2,000 feet, which is satisfactory but needs a waiver from the ordinance. SCHOELL & MAOSON.INC. Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 5. Pedestrian easements: July 17, 1974 A. Should consider an additional easement along the south side of Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, west of Bluff Creek Drive near the railroad. B. Consider making pedestrian easements 20 feet wide where they leave the public street right! -of --way and then widening out to 80 feet where they follow a steep -sided gully, in order to allow some leaway-in trail location. 6. Make lot boundaries conform substantially to thread of gully between the following lots: A. Lots 3 and.4, Block 2, Phase I. B. Lot 2, Block 1, Phase I, and Lots.10 and 9, Phase 11. 7. Combine Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Phase I, and create three new lots of about four acres each. This will reduce exces- sive frontage on the two proposed.lots. 8. Combine Lot 1, Block 2, Phase I, and Lot 10, Phase II, and create three new lots to reduce frontage. 9. We recommend obtaining additional right-of-way adjacent to Bluff Creek Drive to acco=odate a thoroughfare in the future. A 100 foot right--of-way should be sufficient. In conclusion, we recommend your approval of this submittal, subject to the review of the additional information necessary. Very truly yours, CITY ENGINEER WDSch.oell :be .5 DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATES, INC. 4826 Chicago Avenue 5o. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 Prone: (612) 822-2106 July 17, 1974 PLANNING REPORT For: Planning Commission City of Chanhassen, Minnesota By: Carl R. Dale, AIP Planning Consultant Subject: Planning Review and Recommendations - Harold Hesse Farm Subdivision Phase I development. Planning Considerations 1. Comments concerning the entire plan contained in a Planning Report dated June 20, 1974 are still considered valid. At that tinge, we suggested that a "cluster" planning approach may be more desirable and that a:.pre plat plan be submitted indicating how the lots could be re --subdivided in the future if and when sanitary sewer .service is provided. Apparently, the developer.has not responded to such suggestions nor has he been led to believe such is the desire of the City. 2. Under consideration now is a subdivision plan for the first phase of development based upon the more general overall subdivision plan sub- mitted and reviewed earlier. If development is to proceed based upon the current design plan and concept, we.recommend approval of the first stage preliminary plat subject to the following: a) Drafting of detailed conditions relying heavily upon the soils and engineering reports; there are many details which are -and -should be incorporated in these reports. The final draft should be quite similar to that developed for Minnewashta Woods. b) A determination should be made as to what land shall. -be -dedicated to the public and what lands should be retained under a home owners association. Related to this is the question of proper maintenance of ponding areas to be retained;.there is also the question of pedes.- Irian trail easements (width, location, improvements, public use, and the like). c) Soil tests and certain other requirements should be made prior to filing of a final plat with the County. d) As with the Minnewashta Woods development, a great variety of con- siderations are involved such as: Erosion controls Public land dedication and/or Preservation of tree cover cash in -lieu of Street surface Street lighting Storm drainage Location of structures on lots (special conditions) 3. Conditions for a final plat can be drafted based upon receipt of all staff reports, public comments, and resultant directions from the Planning Commission. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) and says that he is and was on , being first duly sworn, on oath deposes 19 the duly qualified and acting City Clerk -Administrator of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of hearing on a in the City to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said noticc in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mails 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 of Carver County, Minnesota, and by other .. ' . y V �v'rvX a is k Naritz '1 'Rt. 1271 Bluff Creek Drive Chaska, MN 55318 Mr. Vaughn Pike Rt. 1 Chaska, MN 55318 Mr. C.A. Pass Rt. 1,� Chaska, MN 55318 Chicago NW Railroad R.J. Slotka, Roadmaster• Mankato, MN 56001 Bluff Creek Golf Club Rt. 1 + Chaska, MN 55318 A Ann and Clara Vogel Rt. 1 Box 82-B Chaska, MN 55318 Math. Vogel Rt. 1 Box 82-1 Chaska, MN 55318 Paul A. Symanitz Rt. 1 Chaska, MN 55318 �•^ 1. FT' 1F 1 � Douglas Hutchinson, Rtl Chaska, MN 55318 i� Mr. Hubert Jeurissen.� c/o Art Jeurissen Rt. 1 Chaska, MN 55318 j John J. Shorba, Jr. Rt. 1 Chaska, MN 55318 Legal ON Of charibusseral mawtl r_4TY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNFPIN C0UMTiF_S,MiNNES0TA MOTICEOFMABLIC HEAR ING ON PROPO�iFp p ,E,ZolqINC�, PRELIMMARY vr.-vEi_oPmr,NT.PI_AN ANP PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THFHESSFARPA NoTme is HEREBY r4 6VEN That it)(. � City planning Cornm!WOVI of the City of (:hanhj4%%&'r?, Min - no ,50ta, will MI,,t on 'Wednesd0y, the 241h d8Y Of _1),r(y, 1974, M 8:00 p.m., at the city Hill if) said City for Ines Purpid- Of t1oloing a pvbi�c hearing on proposed rexonirig In the City as i0llow5c 1. -Thtt part of the NW CIA Of the NW /4 of section 35, Township 116, fq ange 23 ortilerly of the . rjqhj of Way of the ChlCaSIO North��vestem' Railw8Y Con)' pant, Carver CO-UntY, Min- ne,ota; 2. The Easterly 1400 Feet Of the Northerly 22()6 f(. .ej of the NEIA of section 34, Township 116, Rane)e 23, CarVer. County, m.inne"01a; 3. That part of the' SE !/A Of the SE 14 Of Se(_t(on 77, T0wnShIP 116, Rangy 23 lying SOvtherlOf Bluff CrePK Road, C8ryvor County, Mit)nesOta; and 4, PArl of the SW 'A" of the SWA of Section 26, TownslliP 116, Range 23 lying SOUI`11011Y Of the Bluff crpei4 Road, Carver Coor"'Y' Mintleota, (The fore, , Wing descriptions Are And sutslect to .x4jcj delineation by %U('V('y Noi1c.t. , is further given That the planning Commission will rncet at I(nje and plap ir the the SAM(! .o fL pkIrpose of holding A public hojArInq on a prelitninOrY cjevelopment Man tend preliminary plot Known F-'a r 171, "TheHer'so and involving the. Above descrit)ed IrAct.; of lon(j j;-jjd public hearin,�% shellt)e r,ansr o one t brat, in!4. plans sl)4)wlylq said Pytaposod pre(ImInOr y (levolopmflCtj pion and preliminary plat reroning are. ,3vallable for inspection at the City Hmi. All pprsons interested MAY appear and he heard kit said tin'le and place. tiY P' 0" T1,4E C11Y PLANNINGtayet M COMISSION �0.:hnelle C,lc,rk Adrill ,I, ,,jr0t,.,r ontod' July 5, 1974 y 11, 197A) kPob. ('.jia%kA Herald, Jot CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONING, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE HESSE FARM NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City Planning Commission of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, will meet on Wednesday, the 24th day of July, 1974, at 8:00 P. M. , at the City Hall in said City,: for the purpose of holding a public hearing on proposed rezoning in the City as follows: 1. That part of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23 lying northerly of the right of way of the Chicago Northwestern Railway Company, Carver County, Minnesota; 2. The Easterly 1400 feet of the Northerly 2200 feet of the NE 1/4 of Section 34, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota; 3. That part of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 116, Range 23 lying Southerly of Bluff Creek Road, Carver County, Minnesota; and 4. Part of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 26, Township 116, Range 23 lying Southerly of the Bluff Creek Road, Carver County, Minnesota. (The foregoing descriptions are approximate and subject to exact delineation by survey.) NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That the Planning Commission will meet at the same time and place for the purpose of holding a public hearing on a preliminary development plan and preliminary plat known as "The Hesse Farm" and involving the above described tracts of land. Said public hearings shall be consolidated as one hearing. Plans showing said proposed preliminary development plan and prelimi- nary plat rezoning are available for inspection at the City Hall. All persons interested may appear and be heard at said time and place. >MMISSION Dated: July 5, 1974. Publish July 11, 1974, in the Chaska Herald. Chaska, Ainn. June 28, 1974 TO: ALL PiOPE"HTY UdNEAS ADJACENT TO THE HAROLD HESSE FAM We, Harold and Patricia Hesse need your approval and compliance in platting our farm into 5 acre lots. If you are in agreement with this, please sign below. Map A 7f'AM ... IA WA-4. 1A, ''�) I" ) REGULAR PLANNING Cu.AHISSION MEETING JULY 12, i.;478 Roman Roos called.the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Dick Matthews, Les Bridger, Hud Hollenback, Walter Thompson, and Jerry Neher. Mal MacAlpine was absent. MINUTES: Jerry Neher moved to accept the June 28, 1978, Planning o ission minutes as written. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson. The following voted in favor: Roman Roos, Les Bridger, Jerry Neher, Walter Thompson, and Dick Matthews. Hud Hollenback abstained. Motion carried. Walter Thompson moved to note the June 19, 1978, Council minutes. Motion seconded by Les Bridger,and unanimously approved. PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 47 PERMITTED USE OF STORAGE SHEDS IN R-1 DISTRICT Roman Roos called the public hearing to following interested persons present: Leander Kerber., 1620 Arboretum Blvd. Mr. and Mrs'.. Dean.Wallentine, 507 Chan DeAnn Wallentine, 507 Chan View Marlene Roufs, 7615 Laredo Drive, John Kreger, 7606 Kiowa Raymond Peitz, 7607 Kiowa order.at 7:45 p.m. with the View The purpose of this hearing is to consider the use of storage sheds in the R-1 District. Currently a conditional -use permit is required to erect a storage shed. The hearing -was opened for comments from persons present. Leander Kerber - What happens when you buy a piece of property and there is a shed on it? Bob Waibel - It is considered, right now, non -conforming unless it was in there before February 14, 1972.. Marlene Roufs --Are you -saying -that -this -is when the. -ordinance went in was in 1972,so anybody who had a shed in before 1972 what_happens:then? Bob Waibel -- They become an amortized non -conforming use. A period of 15 years from that date, that has to be dismantled and ':removed from the property. Dean.Wallentine- Z would just as soon see my neighbors lawnmower in -a shed ag-sitting out in the back yard. If he has a decent shed, what's wrong with it? Roman Roos - The zoning ordinance is very explicit in -that if you are going to put up a storage shed you will get a conditional use permit. -.The conditional use permit.presents a fairly heavy administrative load to process it plus the cost to you as a homeowner. There are many of these sheds that have been erected illegally -and that's what we are trying to do is to take a look at this ordinance. The public - hearing -tonight is to get a feel of the audience as to what they think about this situation.- We have to look at it from the size of the shed possibly. Do we want to classify a "Sears" storage building as a storage shed? This is what we - 'are trying to weigh. We are trying to get some feelings as to how to handle this situation so that . rW--s,,not.:in direct. -conflict with the zoning ordinance. Whether that calls -for an amendment.to the zoning ordinance or if we try to put it -under some administrative control Planning Commission Teeting July 12, 1978 -2- where the city administrator might have a set of standards that he can judge a storage building. Marlene Roufs - Why:was the ordinance put in in the first place? I look out my back yard and I can see like eight or nine sheds and I see nothing wrong with it because they all look very nice and are set toward the back of the lots. Roman Roos - Let's take the extreme opposite, let's take the man who buys the back of a freezer truck. He puts it in the back yard and uses it as a tool shed. Let's take it a step further and let's say it's sitting on lake property and it's blocking your view of the lake. How can you fight that situation? That's what a zoning ordinance is all about. Marlene Roufs - In other words people with decent sheds are being penalized for people who take advantage of sheds. Roman Roos I would say a law is made for an express reason. The reason being that we have to have some kind of control. Some way of policing that segment-. LuAnn Wallentine - Fifteen years ago when we built our home. We have. a shed attached to our house. It is wood. We had a building permit. After the tornado came through of course another building permit was required. Are you telling me that we have to take it down. in 1987?. We have building permits. It is wood and it has a foundation. Hud Hollenback - It might have to be reviewed. Bob Waibel - Thd word' yard storage shed would mean that it would be detached. Roman Roos - If you had a building permit then actually it's a part of your dwelling. I don t think you have a problem. That ordinance is directed -toward the so-called detached storage shed. We are trying to figure out how to handle this situation so that we have some control but how much control -should we exert. Can we put it in a situation where that you can come to -city hall, pay a $35.00 charge .to'get a conditional use and handle it through that procedure. If that be so then it has to come before the Planning Commission and that's totally absurbed. How else can we handle it,'maybe we can set up a set of standards on these buildings and have it controlled by the city 4"administrator so that there is some effective control —so that neighbors or anybody else can have some kind of justice if there is something wrong. Dean Wallenti:ne---Can't there be a value set on what a shed has to be worth before it can be erected? Roman Roos - That's very possible. You can look at sizes, what it's made�out of, maybe that could be one of the standards. Jack Kreger , -'I happen 'to be the fire chief in town. I also have a . ,15 .x 10 foot shed. I feel if - I didn't have that shed I would have my junk sitting outside or in the garage. If T had it in the garage I.would also have a five gallon f,'can'of gas for the lawnmower and one for the snowmobile. 2 think it would be a fire hazard and I think most people that put up a shed put it out in the back. If they don't havea garage in the wintertime -they are carrying their lawnmower and stuff in the basement and along with it=goes the two gallons of gas. I -hope you see fit to permit some kind of shed. Planning Commissioi Ieeting July 12, 1978 -3- Jerry Neher I think the ordinance the way it is set up right now is ridiculous. The $35.00 in -my opinion is excessive. You are dealing with personal property. In 99% of the cases you are -not dealing with real estate. I agree we have to have some sort of control and the ordinance should be aimed at that and not a -catch-all;. It could get us in the same bind that we whoown recreational vehicles are in right now where somebody in the city all of a sudden wants to send out a blanket enforcement of the ordinance. When the thing was originally written as.a complaint type. of deal. - Bob Waibel - 1-would say that the three main reasons for dispute over the.existance-of these storage sheds seems to be either they become to large for the portion of land that they are on, they -obstruct visual distances or sites or they become unduly blemished. Maybe if we set criteria or standards those are the —things we should look at. Hud Hollenback moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Dick'Matthews a.nd unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 8:20 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING FRANK METZIG SUBDIVISION Roman Roos called the public hearing to order at 8:20' p.m. with the following; interested persons present: Mr. and Mrs. Frank Metzig,.6400 Chanhassen Road Art Kerber, 511 Chan View The Assistant City Planner -read the -official -notice as published -in the Carver County Herald. The purpose of this hearing is to consider. `subdividing a:_ 350. x 211 foot parcel into three residential lots. _The property_is-located at the southwest quadrant•of Chanhassen Road and Pleasant View Road.. The property is zoned R-1 and sanitary sewer and water are available. Jerry Neher moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and- unanimously-_' pprove.d. Hearing_'closed at- 8:30 p.m. FRANK METZIG SUBDIVISION Members noted that the Kartak property to the south could e landlocked for.future development. Access could be obtained through the Ecklund and-.Swedlund property. Hud Hollenback moved to recommend the Council approve the subdivision request for Mr. -Frank Metzig: Motion seconded by Walter Thompson and unanimously, approved. HAPPY CHEF -SYSTEMS, INC. This restaurant is proposed for the western portion of Lot 1, Block 2, Frontier Development Park. The HRA Concept Plan shows this area to -be open space. ---The Planning Commission has endorsed the HRA Concept Plan but has not received any further guidelines from the HRA. ERICKSON PETROLEUM CORPORATION - HOLIDAY SERVICE STATION:- Jerry Jensen was present seeking approval to construct a service station on the eastern portion of Lot 1, Block 2, Frontier Development Park. The HRA Concept Plan shows this area to be open space. The HRA has not defined_ the°.size of the open space. Planning Cotmnissiol'-Neeting July 12, 1978 -4- Jerry Neher-moved to table action on the Happy Chef and Erickson Petroleum and instruct -staff to set up a meeting.with the HRA, City Attorney, City Manager;+ -and Mayor Hobbs at the earliest possible time. Motion seconded by Les'Bridger and unanimously approved. Les Bridger-moved that,the-President of -the Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce receive'a_copy of the Planning Commission agenda. Motion seconded by Dick -Matthews and unanimously approved. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 'Commission members noted that no progress has been made toward completion of the city comprehensive plan since the City Planner resigned: Some of the -funding of this project may have to be forfeited if some progress is not shown. DISEASED TREE BURNING:-S.ITE.• .ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND CONDITIMAL USE PERMIT: Hud Hollenbackimoved to -hold a public hearing August 9, 1978, at p.m. to -consider an: -ordinance amendment and conditional use permit. Motion seconded by Walter Thompson and unanimously approved. .RESIGNATION: A letter of -resignation was -received from Les Bridger as he is moving out of the City. The Assistant_City Planner will advertise for a replacement and contact persons who had previously: applied. DEAN'DEGLER - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:. Mr. Degler is seeking a conditional use permit to erect a singe family -Tome -on -his -farm for.his son. This is a father/son farming operation. Les Bridger moved to hold a public hearing August 9, 1978, at 8:15 p.m. to consider a conditional -use permit.- Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved. AMENDMENT TO.ORDTNANCE.•47— 'STORAGE SHEDS -IN R-1 DISTRICT: Members discussed the following.criteria for sta f to:ju ge eac individual application so the•:applicant does not have to go through the conditional use process. Location - Back Yard. Rear of -rear house line from side lot line to' side .lot- line: .Size - :150 square feet` maximum. ,Maximum height 8 feet. Material - Prefabricated metal or wood. State of Repair — Consistent with Ordinance 22. -Visual= Consistent with Ordinance 22.- Any storage shed not meeting the above requirements would go through the conditional use process. Dick Matthews.moved to table action to.receive an opinion from the City Attorney as to what procedure is needed to implement these standards. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved. Les Bridger moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Dick Matthews and unanimously approved. Meeting.adjourned at-11:35 p.m. Don Ashworth City Manager- . - - , - -- �•• RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ OF COUNSEL HARVEY E.SKAAR MARK C. McCULLOUGH Chanhassen c/o Donald Box 147 Chanhassen, Gentlemen: LARSON & MERTZ ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 July 10, 1978 City Council W. Ashworth, City Manager MN 55317 Re: The Hesse Farm TELEPHONE (612) 335-9565 This office has been requested to render an opinion on the applica- bility of Ordinance 45 and Resolution 119721 to Phases 1z and TIT of The Hesse Farm Planned Residential District. We believe it will be helpful to the Council in resolving this question if we outline the following chronological events relating to this development proposal: Ordinance 45 was enacted March 29, 1971. This ordinance prohibits the platting and subdivision of land not served by the City sanitary sewer system. The ordinance has a variance section. b. Resolution 119721 was adopted on September 11, 1972, and provides that lands proposed to be developed as a Planned Development District not served by City sanitary sewer and water will not be considered beyond the Sketch Plan stage as set forth in the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. C. On November 5, 1973, the City Council, by unanimous action, granted Mr. Hesse variances to §S2.01 and 2.02 of Ordinance 45. The minutes of that meeting do not tell us specifically whether the variances related only to the Phase I preliminary plat (land east of Bluff Creek Drive) or whether they related to the entire 333 acre Hesse proposed development. However, we are of the opinion that the Council action related only to Phase 1., as the minutes stated, "The grant of these variances in no way constitutes acceptance of the preliminary plat," Our recollection is that the only plat under consideratiQn at that time was that of Phase 1, encompassing lands lying east of Bluff Creek Drive. Chanhassen City Council -2- 7/10/78 d. On November 28, 1973, the Planning Commission recommended that Mr. Hesse proceed to a proposed preliminary develop- ment plan under the P-1 section of Ordinance 45. The minutes are silent on whether a plan for the entire acreage was being authorized or whether the authorization was limited to the lands on the east side of Bluff Creek Drive. e. On May 5, 1975, the Council approved the preliminary plat of Hesse Farm Phase I and instructed the staff to draft a planned development district contract for Phase I. On May 19, 1975, this contract was approved by the Council and the Mayor and Clerk were authorized to sign it on behalf of the City. f. The Council, on June 2, 1975, rezoned the entire 333 acre Hesse property to a P-1 District. This ordinance became effective on its publication date of June 5, 1975. Based on our review of The Hesse Farm history as outlined above, it is our conclusion that the variance to Ordinance 45 granted on November 3, 1973 exempted only Phase I of the Hesse proposal from the prohibitions of Resolution 119721. We are of the further opinion that Phases II and III of the proposed development remain subject to Ordinance 45 and Resolution 119721. We do not feel that the rezoning of the entire 333 acre tract to a P-1 District creates any waiver or variance in favor of the developer. The rezoning was consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City and the zoning ordinance, but rezoning, standing alone, does not create an exemption from or waiver of the application of any other pertinent ordinances or resolutions. From this, we conclude that the City can rely on Ordinance 45 and the Resolution and limit Mr. Hesse to a Sketch Plan submission under the latter; or because of the unique topographical character of the area and the history of the Phase I development, the Council may act to grant an exemption to the Res on and allow Mr. Hesse to proceed to a proposed preliminary dev lopment plan. er t ly o r .RUSSELL H. LARSON Chanhassen City Attorney RHL:mep cc: All Council Members Bob Waibel Bill Brezinsky Harold Hesse REGULAR CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 10, 1978 Mayor Hobbs called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with the following ember-s =present: °Councilmen -Pearson, Geving,, and ,Waritz.. Councilman. Neveaux came at 9:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Pearson moved to approve the agenda with t e a ition of the following items: Status of Construction Projects. Flood Insurance. Meeting date. Official meeting place - City Council. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen.Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. MINUTES: Amend the motion under PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE PRESS, INC. in the June 19, 1978, Council minutes to read: Councilman Pearson moved to grant preliminary development plan approval contingent upon access from Highway 5 acceptable to the City and sewer and water availability. The City reserves the right to withdraw final approval following the public hearing on July 17, 1978. Motion seconded by Councilman Waritz. The following voted in favor: Acting Mayor Neveaux, Councilmen Pearson and Waritz. Councilman Geving voted no. Motion carried. Councilman Waritz moved to approve the June 19, 1978, Council minutes as amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Geving moved to note the June 14, 1978, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to note the June 28, 1978, Planning Commission minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Pearson moved to note the June 28, 1978, Community Facilities Study Committee minutes. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes.. Motion carried. LOTUS LAKE ESTATES:REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - ECKLUND AND SGJEDLUND: The .City Manager read e staff report noting three items -for consideration by the City Council. 1)Approval of the revised development plan and preliminary plat for the first phase and -rezoning. 2)Authorize public improvements for Phase I. 3)Reconsider lands abutting Lotus Lkae (proposed to be dedicated to the City -as full or partial payment under the Park'Dedication Ordinance rather than as a "conservation easement"). Rick Sathre, Len'Swedlund, Mark Swedlund, Jean Lovetang, Bob Hackett, Pat Boyle, Phyllis Pope, and Fran Callahan were present. Rick Sathre spoke on behalf of Mr. Swedlund on the proposed development. Councilman Neveaux came during this portion of the meeting. Council Meeting Ju. 10, 1978 -2- Councilman Pearson moved to rezone the tract of land known as Lotus Lake Estates from R-lA to P-1. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The foll-owing. voted .in. --favor_: � Mayor -Hobbs ._Councilmen. Pearson,_ Geving, and Waritz. Councilman Neveaux abstained. Motion carried. a Councilman Pearson moved to approve the.preliminary plat of Lotus ! Lake Estates Phase I to consist of Lots 1-14 inclusive, Block 1, Lots 1-29 inclusive of Block 2, and Lot 1, Block 7 as shown on the proposed preliminary plat of Lotus Lake Estates dated May 18, 1978, revised June 14, 1978, and June 19, 1978. Included within the preliminary plat of Phase I will be Outlots A and B. The -balance of the proposed preliminary plat shown to be Phases II and III to be platted as Outlot C. Preliminary plat approval is continent upon resolution of the issue presented by Outlot B whether it is to be in private ownership or public ownership and what, if any, credit the developers receive against the park charges of Ordinance 14A'. Motion seconded by Councilman Waritz. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. -Councilman Neveaux abstained. Motion carried. Jean Lovetang is negotiating with Mr. Swedlund to purchase a small portion of this property which may change the preliminary plat. Councilman Pearson moved to table action on the public improvements. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. Councilman Neveaux abstained. Motion carried. MODULAR HOME: Mr. Norman Monroe, 565 Lakota Lane, and several neighbors were present objecting to the modular home that is being moved onto the lot next door to Mr. Monroe. Residents were invited to meet with the Building Inspector and review the plans that were submitted to the Council. If they are not satisfied they can request to be placed on a future Council agenda. JACOBSON REPLAT - FOREST ROAD AND ELM ROAD: Mr. Michael Howdyshell was present requesting this item be place on the Council agenda this evening for consideration. This replat will be on the July 17, 1978, Council agenda. FRONT YARD VARIANCE, MICHAEL WALSH, 512 WEST 76th STREET: Mr. and Mrs. Walsh. were present requesting a 17 foot front yard variance to construct a 24 x 22 foot garage, 8 x 24 foot breezeway, and 10 x 30 foot porch onto their present home at 512 West 76th Street. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals held a public hearing and voted to recommend approval of the request. Staff recommended denial of such a large variance. Covenants for the property require a minimum 16 foot setback on corner''lots. As such, a variance of 14 feet is the maximum which could be considered. Councilman Geving moved to grant Mr. and Mrs. Walsh an eleven foot front yard variance. Motion seconded by Councilman Waritz. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Council Meeting, Jl ; 10, 1978 isle FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST., CHESTER LOBTTZ., 3637 SOUTH CEDAR: Mr. Lobitz was present requesting a 20 foot variance to construct a 227x 24-foot garage on his property located at 3637 South Cedar Drive. The' Board `of "Adjustments and Appeals recommended approval of a1419 - foot variance. Staff recommended denial of such a large variance. Councilman Neveaux moved to approve the variance as recommended by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson,.Neveaux, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. LYMAN LUMBER, PLAN AMENDMENT AND INDUSTRIAL REVENUE. BONDING REQUEST.: David Ohde, Peter Throdahl, Bill Ziemer, Tom Lowe, Warren Beck, and Roger Drewing were present. Lyman Lumber is seeking approval of a proposed plan amendment to their previously approved planned.industrial development and. requesting waiver of one of the fiscal criteria for application for industrial revenue bond financing. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the plan amendment and recommended the Council approve same. Lyman Lumber proposes to increase the size of the millwork plant from 40,000 square feet to 80,000 square feet. In addition the component plant will be increased from 33,000 square feet to 40,000 square feet. The area that was previously to be held in reserve for future expansion will now be included in the development because of their increased needs. The phasing plan is proposed as follows: Fall 1978 - Lumber distribution yard and component plant. 1980-1981 - Millwork Plant. 1985 approx. - Office Building. Councilman Geving moved to approve the plan amendment for Lyman Lumber as shown on plans dated April 18, 1978, contingent upon the.availability of municipal"services to the property. The Council will review the final grading and landscaping plans. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Neveaux moved to grant the request of Lyman Lumber Company to be waived from item #4.of Minimum Fiscal Criteria as shown on resolution adopted.May.l, 1978, and that this waiver of requirements in no way jeopardizes the City Council's right to disapprove the use of industrial revenue bond financing at a future date. Motion seconded by Councilman Waritz. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Geving moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Councilman Waritz. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Z-lotion carried. Meeting adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Don Ashworth City Manager tJ Ln e 26, 4. � � i?'�Y?;.:v .Lexio ed froza stalls to be- St-o ed 32 containers are to ba she- tered from th7S c37 e-me«ts to prevent leaching. ` . 5 c. Stored d b;3 removed r t-qul a `- y and whenever 71c':± e:a,sar to prc,.Mo nt-Un-reasonatb e accu-mulatio.izn,..• o 6. i� `?`�' .�.:12�'' to b`,::: %"oX:d%cz..ed so -28 to :red ce to a r?'S.i?.iTii'$.si the Alange- of seepage of liquid wastes and leachir of solid a dam on .C.ha s--bmas Lake Creek `s'.O carve as a settli,n"I Pond. A m ation was ma -de by Tim Stone and seconder by Mariana Shulstad ayy:A�.?ajt the yPlaa ,3`z�,iy"g [c�o.--.�3? f.5• s-41-C.n Jrecomie:c`.ands/�1 o ti3.}c� Council t-Ilat ��,SI(2- instz S.:V-r.L the City y St-af �. to L n-i i ialie P-Vg1JC.J.at onsJ bei.,`�.i ✓e l.�i 9 '� L. 4.is•3 a ud "he CI uy on the iiMere-m contrri is and that the Cou-no l not, t ke aray io x1ai a.` t3.a?3 on the arpp ica tioa for Cos_d:atiOn a.l. Use xsernAt t 3 ty� 5,e final pw'- report Is ci3mble�ted. Motion u afIl_:musly apDrovedo ?'y, ?�'if." , "` •r�S"^ �v,11�� '� T.� ly° , "i��.V� :.., $.:�::ti�J sr L9 S'�.i..:.a�. � • -4r JL io? was made T.:� M?Ul.-k.ean by T Tom. ¢ a �' � �. O tabs; act i -or. on the proposed Oorse C"., Y` 2 -n :ac until a e' a receive s °r a "3 .� `� w..-y� ar • 7 �:.���.3..as_�..e �a.,t:.l.... ��'.'_,��,�' N��. �._1.,.. �,.,�i..a,.� ��#� :,.Y.��e.t �« bn '�;s._.�s '°aRn. The X3�i2ei�i. �zg Du.i% . sh d�res,g.$ •�+.. ,:ate, _ i1u" c..;.c+,�a_., ���"a,,.-.s �s.S3 '7'k_'Tl,. aT_3p.,.q� 3....�J o.% 'i'a w� 3�J ! {3'Yy . b pl j;•:s mod. � the for as e�ifi,id�na'.'.mce o .:'3otioi93 c. arr:,: S� a c Sv'11..'?oln b- ay.':f t4 -tc !a and yes o?>ded by Tom Gabbert 'i.ha�. e Plann-ing vq I. sib«:..t a of the proposed Roane $ u v' ..,,jam„„ .?..' -p fay `w a7'•` " -r o"•J and .�.r9R ` i ai j7T1 T r qa 'dr..s_� �..a:;.t t Z---ha . ��'CA a. o a a....3 r i. e •i�. el tom.» d a..r SSPIOns o �dC'`� t �3'sl 3�i2 ,il� ,,� 'dz•.r" �i ?Aar d isee „ ck I -IA :-`�.tz, P'L..' i-ana huls ad, and Jim .ei'•` -e have doia t'gje re n - roia ¢ e P ssociatsD ?� MSSEo firu w�y� Yes. Harold Hess; Frar`d,- Barg, and Plan. .was Pres`: rated to aka Perez. and Recreation Commission for their eir T,,,Ie firs- slags oA.f dovelop-meat is 12 lots € i �e east side Off Bluff C-:eek Drive xpjal Y ing Con. mission members discussed whet e:e : or not obese lots a -an be rasubdavided c�`_lhen . sewer and water ara avaa`, abja. Carl Dale sLigges1ced the P la.-unirg CCmaission put in j:h.-air mi i'uI s 3+ex"1 .wrong reasot«s fo not "ally iing �Ot res371 3.v.�.S�i?I3s B4 i j Scbaell thiG could be gone by private de-ed res ,�ictione not sin vaau m ada- by Ton cabbart and seconded by J L-a, Mielka to hold a Public beaai3 g on :.he pxopoaed pre.jjnjry development. plan of Hesse Fam on 3W LY 24, 197 e at 3 :-VO p.m. brxb Ba3.c3.win will re -meat with Don Berg; and also have the ;�re� imirrax play a�acy b� �ul� � s a� 31-974. Motion -ananiTmously approved. Jim i"1.ielkes 1Z.-F . t ;-ter iis��sa`ix�2�o rZT3�. Be:uve an:ti.ord�d wex..,. ,?--r i ei ,pjagn approval. Ths first phase consists rl�-'•ze ' x't % t iv < a x ya3 : !ems >''�a.'�,° and 128 +'t' na-, aat "oil•.a.. <)-F the s J'�%a is 1i� `�'°C�3.oL.�:d parkiag, I-Lr. is3t'JA:s: �•.«il b r , �� o ,-uly 2A. Dan HaA. n-bat explained they '--ge ran'~ I3a71;? to Come,b?L-0 e l— Plinning CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 DATE: July 6, 1978 TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Sketch Plan Review, Hesse Farm, Bluff Creek Drive APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Petition The petition before the City Council at this time is to consider on behalf of Mr. Hesse, waiving the application of Council Resolution 911721 passed September 11, 1972, which prohibits the consideration of plans beyond the sketch plan phase until utilities are available or imminent. Background 1. As shown in the attached Planning Commission minutes of May 24, 1978, Mr. Hesse was requesting that the City of Chanhassen consider for action, Phases 2 and 3 of the proposed Hesse Farm Development. Phases 2 and 3 are lcoated on the west side of Bluff Creek Drive. (reference enclosure 1) Although the minutes include mention of issues such as Metropolitan Sig- nificance Regulations, the only issue of immediate pertinence for the Council is a decision on the application of resolution 911721. The Planning Commission on May 24, 1978, moved to recommend that the Council rescind Resolution 911721 in the occasion of the Hesse Farm proposal and recommend the Council order a public hearing. From a planning perspective, I do not feel that the ordering of a public hearing at this time would, be useful for the fact that I believe more preparation and review of the proposed phases should occur before the public hearing stage. The City Attorney will. directly mail, or have available on Monday evening, an opinion for this agenda item as to the legal parameters and rami- fications of s id r s,lution 911721. l 4� REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 24, 1978 Roman Roos called the meeting to Les Bridger, Mal MacAlpine, Jerry Hollenback was absent. order at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Neher, Walter Thompson, and Dick Matthews. Hud MINUTES: Les Bridger moved to accept the May 10, 1978, Planning Commission minutes as presented. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher. •The following voted in favor: Roman Roos, Les Bridger, Dick Matthews, Walter Thompson, and Jerry Neher. Mal MacAlpine abstained. Motion carried. Jerry Neher moved to note the May 15, 1978, Council Minutes. Motion.seconded by Dick Matthews and unanimously approved. HESSE FARM PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pat and Harold Hesse and Herb Baldwin were present requesting approval for Phases 2 and 3 of the Hesse Farm. This 140 acres is located on the west side of Bluff Creek Drive. The developer proposes 28-. residential building lots. Sewer and water are not available to the property. The property is zoned P-1. Bob Waibel - A proposition such as this is governed by City Ordinances 28, 33, 33A, 45, 47, Council Resolution 911721, and Metropolitan Significance Regulations. Planning Commission, at this time, should restrict their comments to the propiety of the request, rather than to the relative merits of the plans submitted. Section 19.13 of Zoning Ordinance 47 states that plans containing in excess of 25 single family zoning lots or in excess of 24 multiple dwelling units or in excess of 10 acres for proposed commercial/industrial use shall be submitted as proposed planned unit developments and shall be governed by the regulations thereof. Planned unit developments have been devised to promote flexible platting of land for various uses. Section 2.01 of Ordinance 45 states that platting and subdivision of land within areas of the City not served by the _City sanitary sewer system shall be prohibited until said sewer system,is available to serve each such area proposed to be platted or subdivided. Additionally, City Council resolution 911721 states that "land proposed to be developed as a planned development district not currently served by sanitary sewer and water will not be considered beyond the sketch plan stage as set forth in the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. The applicant may prepare a sketch plan with such supplementary documentation set forth under Section 14.05, paragraph 3 (a),.as the applicant desires for review and informal discussion by the Planning Commission. When the necessary utilities needed to serve the proposed development are available or are emminent, the applicant may then proceed to the preliminary development plan as specified in Section 14:05, paragraph 3 of Ordinance 47." Section MC. 2(a-8, A and B) of the Metropolitan Significance Regulations required that a Metropolitan Council review by initiated if the issuance of a land use permit in an outlying community for critical development which could reasonably be expected to lead to: a) the premature expansion, construction or extension of use in excess of capacity of a public sewer facility or metropolitan transportation facility or, b) the disruption of commercial agricultural use. The Planning Commission may order a public hearing on this proposal. Craig Mertz - The options are, 1) to'decide that you are not going to entertain this request at all and your authority for that would be existing Ordinance 45 and Council Resolution. The second alternative would be to go ahead and order a public hearing. The third alternative would be to request the City Council.to start a Metropolitan Council Planning Commission ML-Ling May 24, 1978 -2- Significance Review. The State Legislature gave the Metropolitan Council the authority to stop, for one year, any development that is found to be of metropolitan significance. The Metropolitan Council can issue that stop order on its own or a citizen group can being the matter to their attention and ask them to issue such an order or the City Council can ask the Metropolitan Council to investigate and determine whether something has metropolitan significance. Roman Roos - When I was reading through this and reviewing it, the first question that came to my mind was what really happened at that point in time? How was it phased out? Craig Mertz - The property owners had approximately 333 acres and they submitted a survey showing the whole 333 acres and it was divided up into three sections (phases 1, 2, and 3). Phase 1 was the part that was east Of Bluff Creek Drive. They submitted a plat for only one of the three phases and that plat was approved and phases 2 and 3 remained in city files until tonight. Roman Roos - What was the Council's and Commission's position on the'sewer, septic situation? This is really the crux of the issue. Craig Mertz - Ordinance 45 was in effect at that time. --Section 2.01 says that the platting of lands in areas not served by sewer shall be prohibited until sewer is available. The -plat approval that they got for phase 1 flies in the face of that provision so they got a variance to that provision. The Metro Council business was not in effect at that time. That did not come into being until December of 1977. Roman Roos - I am looking at the overall development in light if the variance was granted which I assume it was, the reasoning for the Council and the Planning Commission in granting a variance on this PUD. I would like to know what the justification was for the variance. I think we have -to 10ok at it in total context and I would like to know those positions. Bob Waibel - I have reviewed the minutes -and I really didn't detect any reason behind it. I could search further for the variance procedure. Roman Roos - On'a PUD, if it's a phased project and if one phase is permitted to go; what is the city's legal standpoint in respect to phase 2 and phase 3. Craig Mertz - In this case the city made no commitment to approve phases 2 and 3. This is' not unlike what we did with Hansen and Klingelhutz for Saratoga:and the same way for Santa Vera Apartments. Those were shown in their original development plan for the whole Western Hills area and when they came in finally with a proposal, you will recall that Saratoga was very much like their original proposal and Santa Vera was quite different from their original proposal but in both cases they were required in effect to start over and present it as a brand new preliminary plan. Dick Matthews - No legal obligation but in fact there may be some moral obligation. Herb Baldwin - I am the landscape architect that was involved in the plannin of g the parcel. I became involved after Mr. and Mrs. Hesse had been before the Planning Commission and the Council I believe or at least one of the groups, requesting to actually parcel off and sell a portion of their farm. At that time it was the request of the City that an overall comprehensive plan be presented to the Planning Commission and to the Council for and at least an idea as to the direction that this was taking. We put together a total presentation that°pertained to the whole parcel. The point I wanted to make in addition to the fact that it was the requirement of the city that an overall plan be presented that it was in light of that overall plan that acceptance of.the first addition was approved and passed. The second major point I would like to make is that we suffered a number of inconveniences with regard to the change of people at the helm. We Planning Commission Meeting May 24, 1978 -3- R found the consistency -of accurate reporting and efficient management of our project, particularly in trying to get through the general planning of the whole farm area and the specific acceptance of the first area as being rather laborious. I think we went through three different administrators at that time with interim administrators along the way. So be it. I think that the dilemma as you face right now and we face together is in part due to that tremendous confusion and unfortunately some very unhappy moments with a -few of the administrators. It's essential to us to have you bear in mind the comprehensive." nature of our presentation because if we are for example, disrupting the commercial agricultural use, admittedly that is the use that Harold's father made of the property, he is currently making of the property. Actually the parcels lying to the east which were under the first addition, if there is prime ag. ground, that was it-. Now we have ground on the west side of Bluff Creek Drive which is not as potentially farmable as was the east. Mal MacAlpine - I would like to go through the sketch plan what they presently have for developing phases 2 and 3 and then I personally feel we should consider going to the Metro Council for a review. I say,that primarily because the first stage was approved and at that particular time we approved it knowing that stages 2 and 3 were going to be forthcoming in the near future. If that's a fact, and they proceeded with the development of phase 1,I think there is a moral obligation to see that phases 2 and 3 would be fairly considered and it obviously would have to go before the Metro. Council for review. Les Bridger - In -fairness- thou �aVe complied with the requests that were issued.- Granted we -are not bound -legally at this point but I think we have ... to consider they acted in good faith based upon those decisions that were made by City Staff at that time. Jerry Neher - I say I think all the changes that have taken place such as the Metropolitan Council changing, the MUSA line, Metropolitan Sewer Boards various rules and regulations, I think they should all be taken into consideration. Dick Matthews - The point is, tffat1Jf.:ane of..those three conditions, they are the criteria to which would go to the Met Council, what we have got to decide is do they fit into any one of those three categories and if they don't then we don't have to go to the Met Council.. The only issue that I can see is that agricultural land? If they turn this over to development do they destroy prime agricultural land. That's an issue that we have to decide. I don't think they fit in the other two. Roman Roos - The previous commission really has answered that question. Dick Matthews - I don't think we need to involve the Met Council. I think we have got to bite the bullet and face it here. Les Bridger - This is the only piece of property under contention with these conditions anyway and I think any future propositions such as this is going to be looked at as we have in the past. Members were polled in respect to the Metropolitan Council review. Mal MacAlpine - I honestly thought if we were to approve this it had to go to the Metropolitan Council because as I understand it this section MC 2 (a-8, A and B) was not in effect at the time the original variance was issued. That presently reads, the Metro Significance'Regulations requires that Metropolitan Council review be initiated if the Planning Commission M. :ing May 24, 1978 Sa issuance of a land use permit in an outlying community for critical development which could reasonably be expected to lead to premature expansion, etc. If we determine that that does not exist in the development stages 2 and 3 then I think we can ignore the Metro Council. Dick Matthews - I think it should be fully understood that this is not sewered and it is not going to be and that we are not going to do it. Les Bridger - I would like to address this thing as a completion of a total project. I think we ought to disregard that particular part as far as the Metropolitan Council. Walter Thompson - My first reaction was that we were going to have to have the Met Council review. In view of the conversation we have had then obviously we don't. On top of that evidentally there was a phase 2 and a phase 3 of some sort in the original. I think we should proceed. Jerry Neher - I am in favor of going ahead with a public hearing. Roman Roos - I am looking at estate type development or let's call it five acre parcels, what the Council has directed the Planning Commission to do. I am looking at also what was previously_ attempted and sent through. I don't feel the Met Council should be brought into this picture at this particular point in time for this particular development. I do however feel that any future development in this area definitely will have to go through the steps as far as impact on sewer and water. I think we have an obligation to these people as the term good faith was used, of course that was prior to my time but I assume that was true. I am worried about the overall context of sewering. If we have such control on it that the septic systems are adequate then I would have.no hang ups with it at all and I would say -we should recommend a public hearing._ " Bob Waibel - Due to City Council resolution 911721 the only recourse we have at this point'if the public hearing was to be recommended would have to come in the form of a recommendation to the.Council to order the public hearing in light of that resdl.ution. Craig Mertz - In most cases you have the authority yourselves to order a public hearing. If you look at the landuage to this resolution you can. see that you are blocked from holding a public hearing on your own motion in this case. Les Bridger moved to recommend to the Council that they rescind Resolution 911721 as to this property and recommend the Council order a public hearing. Motion seconded by Dick Matthews and unanimously approved. LYMAN LUMBER PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN - AMENDMENT REVIEW: David Ohde, Peter Throdahl, and Bill Ziemer were present.- Lyman Lumber is requesting that the Planning Commission review a revised development plan. The property is located on the north side of Highway 5 in Hennepin County and is zoned P-3. A previous plan was approved by the Planning Commission and Council in April 1975. David Ohde explained the revisions. They propose to increase the size of the millwork plant from 40,000 square feet to 80,000 square feet. In addition the component plant will be increased from 33,000 square feet to 40,000 square feet. The area that was previously to be held in reserve for future expansion will now be included in the development because of their increased needs. The phasing plan is proposed as follows:. Fall 1978 - lumber distribution yard and component plant. 1980-1981 - millwork plant I. 1985 approx. - office building Total coverage of the property is 65%. Plantings and berms will be used for screening. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP 0. BOX 147+CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 19, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff.and Harold Hesse, 1425 Bluff Creek Drive, Chaska, MN 55318 FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Hesse Farm Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Harol,_'. Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Attached are the following enclosures for the purpose of your review in considering the subject request: Enclosures 1. Community Location Graphic. 2. Hesse Farm, Preliminary Plats 1 and 3. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP 0 BOX 147oCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: May 19, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff, and Harold Hesse, 1425 Bluff Creek Drive, Chaska, MN 55318 FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Hesse Farm Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Petition The petition before the Planning Commission is a request for review of the preliminary plat for phases 2 and 3 of the Hesse Farm. Background 1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject site is located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Bluff Creek Drive and the Chicago -Northwestern Railroad. 2. Existing Zoning: 3. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and municipal water are presently unavailable to the subject property. It is most likely that this area of the community will not receive any such services until or after the year 2000. Planner's Comments 1. As shown in the attached preliminary plats, 1, and 3, Mr. Hesse is proposing to create 28 residential building sites on approximately 140 acres of land. A proposition such as this is governed by city ordinances 28, 33, 33-A, 38, 45, 47, council resolution 911721, and Metropolitan Significance Regulations. Planning Commission at this time should restrict their comments to the propiety of the request, rather than to the relative merits of the plans submitted. Planning Commission -2- May 19, 1978 2. Section 19.13 of Zoning Ordinance 47 states that plans containing in excess of 25 single family zoning lots or in excess of 24 multiple dwelling units, or in excess of 10 acres for proposed commercial -industrial use shall be submitted as proposed planned unit developments and shall be governed by the regulations thereof. Planned unit developments have been devised to promote flexible platting of land for various uses. Section 2.01 of Ordinance 45 states the platting and subdivision of land within areas of the Village (City) not served by the Village (City) sanitary sewer system shall be prohibited until said sewer system is available to serve each such area proposed to be platted or subdivided. Additionally, City Council resolution 911721 states that "land proposed to be developed as a planned development district not currently served by sanitary sewer and water will not be considered beyond the sketch plan stage as set forth in the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. The applicant may prepare a sketch plan with such supplementary documentation set forth under section 14.05, paragraph 3 (a), as the applicant desires for review and informal discussion by the Planning Commission. When the necessary utilities needed to serve the proposed development are available or are emminent, the applicant may then proceed to the preliminary development plan as specified in section 14.05, paragraph 3, of ordinance 47." Section MC: 2(a-8, A and B) of the Metropolitan Significance Regulations requires that a Metropolitan Council review be initiated if the issuance of a land use permit in an outlying community for critical development which could reasonably be expected to lead to: a) the premature expansion, construction or extension of use in excess of capacity of a public sewer facility or metropolitan transportation facility or, b) the disruption of commercial agricultural use. Planner's Recommendation In light of the above stated governances, I recommend that the Planning Commission dismiss any further review of the subject proposal. Before any further consideration can be made on this matter, it will be necessary that the applicant allow the city staff to submit these plans to the Metropolitan Council for their review, pursuant to Metropolitan Significance Regulations. REGULAR PLANNING COMM ION MEETING JUNE 8, 1977 PUBLIC HEARING HESSE FARM RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 10, 11, AND 12, BLOCK 1 JUNE 8, 1977, AT 8:00 P.M. Dick Dutcher called the public hearing to order with the following members present: Les Bridger, Jerry Neher, Hud Hollenback, and Walter Thompson. Roman Roos and Mal MacAlpine were absent. The following interested persons were present- John A. Sagat, 100 No. First St., Mpls. Frank L. Burg, 38 - 103 Ave. NW, Coon Rapids The City Planner read the official notice as published in the Carver County Herald. The City Planner gave a report. The Hesse's have found that by juggling the lot lines they could create better buildable sites on these lots. The City Planner recommended approval the resubdivision but withhold forwarding a recommendation, to the City Council until the Hesse's complete the terms of their contract with the City: The roads have not been sealcoated. Frank Burg was present representing the Hesse's. They are aware of the City's position relative to the enforcement of the obligations the Hesse's-agreed to in'1975 regarding the sealcoating_of the road.- The-Hesse's would prefer to wait until more homes are built in the area.before sealcoating as -trucks will ruin the road. If the City requires the street be sealcoated before Council action, the Hesse.'s will have it completed. At the present time bids are being solicited from contractors-in;.the area. Jerry.Neher moved to.close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Les Bridger and unanimously approved.. Hearing closed at 8:15 p.m. REGULAR PLA:'dNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 8, 1977 HESSE FARM RESUBDIVISION: Jerry Neher moved that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the resubdivision of Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 1, Hesse Farm, under the conditions of -the Planner's recommendation that the streets be sealcoated as per the contract in 1975. jlotion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved. MINUTES:. Dick Dutcher read.a-letter.addressed to the Planning Commission and Russell Larson from Florence M. Lowe -regarding mother-in-law apartments. Members discussed the mother-in-law apartment issue but took no additional,action. Hud Hollenback moved to amend the -May 25, 1977, Planning Commission minutes under DNR SHORELAND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS by adding: The Planning Commission recommends the building inspector, when issuing a permit within the Shoreland Management area, review all the regulations as -promulgated by the Commissioner of Natural Resources. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved. - Les Bridger moved to approve the May 25, 1977, Planning Commission minutes as amended. 1,1otion seconded. by .Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved. - NEW PAULY OFFICE BUILDING AND SALOON RENOVATION: John Sagat, Architect, and -Harry Pauly were present with plans for a 44' x 80 foot office building to be located south of the Old Village Hall on Great Plains Blvd. The City Planner gave a report. The concept complies for the'most part with the CBD parking lot proposal. -The only area of'non-compliance with previously submitted plans is a service lane and cutb cut along the south edge of the existing bar and lounge. The Planner recommended the Planning Commission look with favor on the proposal and suggest Mr. Pauly City Council Meeting June 21, 1977 -3- VARIANCE REQUEST - WAYNE FRANSDAL: Mr. Fransdal wants to build a -home on a portion of Lots 27 and 28, Murray Hill Addition and is requesting a 15 foot front yard variance. -The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended the Council grant the variance and asked the Council to consider vacating 15 feet of right-of-way on each side of Murray Hill Road provided the paved portion of the roadway is centered in the easement Councilman Geving moved to grant a 15 foot front yard variance to Mr. Wayne Fransdal- Motion' seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. VARIANCE REQUEST - DR. LUMIR PROSHEK: Of- Proshek wants to build a home on an existing foundation on Lots 7 and 8, Red Cedar Point. This basement is seven feet from the street right-of-way. City Staff-. recommended that Dr. Proshek prepare building plans that comply with the City setback requirements. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals tabled action until specific building plans are received. Councilman Waritz moved to table action until specific building plans are brought forth for the Board of Adjustments and Appeals to review. Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes., Motion carried. VARIANCE REQUEST - KERMIT JOHNSON: Mr. Johnson is requesting a variance to build a home on a 12,000 square foot piece of property near the: intersection of Kiow' and Carver Beach Road. The property has been assessed for sewer and water. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals recommended the Council grant a variance if the owner meets the city setback requirements. Councilman Pearson moved to grant an area variance to Mr. Kermit Johnson. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor -Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Waritz, and Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Gail Stone was present -to ask if this property would fall under the new R-1B zoning. This zoning does not apply to this property. The City _Attorney wial render an opinion- iah' whether Mr. Johnson has to pay the new park --fee as he applied for a building permit in May. HESSE FARM REPLAT: Frank Burg was present. The Hesse's are requesting permission to replat Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 1, Hesse Farm into three more desirable building lots. Staff recommended approval conditioned upon completion of items in the development contract. Mr. Burg stated the owners have no objection and are presently trying to get bids for sealcoating the roads. Councilman Pearson moved that the replat of Lots 10, 11, and 12,'Block 1, Hesse Farm, be approved as per revision dated May 4, 1977, File No. 4795 conditioned that th6_streets be sealcoated as per the contract in 1975. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen -Pearson, Geving, and Waritz. No negative votes. Motion carried. 1 Planning Commissi Meeting May 11, 1977 -12- Tom Hannon - No. Russell Larson - You just got through saying.that. Tom Hannon - I wasn't aware that was a public road.- Russell'Larson -.You argued that Saratoga is a public road. We are connecting to -a public road with a.cul-de-sac.-.-You are saying we can't do that. Tom Hannon - You are admitting that is a public road then. Russell Larson - You admitted in your premise.. Tom Hannon - If you want to. make it. a complete -thoroughfare there fine. I am -saying don't alter that road until -it -is determined what it is. Russell Larson - I don't like the matter of..having. : injunction thrown at us verbally and be threatened with a--lawsuit-in a. public hearing. Tom Hannon - It.was my impression that construction was going to start immediately on this or am I wrong.. Dick Dutcher - As I stated at the outset of the public hearing, the Planning -Commission is not a body which can -grant such-powers.i. After this matter has been reviewed by the Planning Commission it will go to -the City.Council'and they would be the ones to officially approve or disapprove.' - Tom Hannon - I was under -the impression that.construction was going to start next week.. - Bob Navarro I live in Laredo Lane. I -think I'can speak for most of the people in'Laredo Lane and my question is on'the opposite end of the driveway. My concern.at-this point and I had a.meeting with Don Ashworth last week, is in regard to a potential traffic problem at the intersection.. We have one.existing-now and we always had one. The problem is when you.are coming west on Laredo Lane to enter Laredo Drive -you -are -just about completely blocked out.and it causes one heckt of a problem there.- It is -lucky nobody has.gotten hit at this point. I understand they are going to tear down a portion of the berm on the south'side of.Laredo Lane so -we get improved vision looking to the south. Bruce'Pankonin -The City Engineer and I went out.and both concluded the berm on the south side of the road has to be cut back, the pine tree hastobe-moved.and-some ash and maplehave tobemoved.also. I mentioned that to Tom (Klingelhutz) and we -really didn't come to any I onclusion about who would be paying for all.that. Roman Roos moved to close the public hearing'. .Motion seconded by Jerry .Neher. -Motion unanimously approved. -,:Hearing -closed at 10:50 p.m. SARATOGA LANE PRD: Les Bridger moved that the. Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that we have reviewed the material presented this evening and are in agreement.that Exhibit B presented at the public hearing•May 11, 1977, seems -to be -'agreeable to both the developer and the landowner and'we,.as,a Planning Commission tend to go along with their feelings and recommend that the City Council look favorably on Exhibit B subject to the resolution of the -issue presented by the alleged public road designated as Saratoga Drive. Motion seconded by-Jerry-Neher. Motioii.unanimously approved. . HESSE FARM - REPLAT OF LOTS 10, 11, AND 12,'-BLOCK 1: Frank Berg was present. In May 1975.the Council granted plan approval to Harold Hess to 'subdivide.his property on Bluff Creek Drive.subject to a number of conditions, they entered intoa. development -contract.- Since that date 'the Hesse's have found it to future buyers best interests to redesign Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 1. This would create two better buildable Planning Commission Meeting May 11, 1977 . -13- sites. The City Planner states he finds nothing wrong with the proposal. According to the development contract the streets in the subdivision were to be sealcoated. This has not been done. The Planner feels that until the agreed to improvements have been made the city withhold any action on this replat. Mr. Berg has sent a letter to the Hesse's stating that the plat is before the Planning Commission and that the Planner has recommended that no action be taken until the roads are sealcoated. The City Planner suggested the Planning Commission order a public hearing conditioned on assurances from the Hesse's that the roads will be sealcoated. Roman Roos moved to hold a public hearing on June 8, 1977, at .8:00 p.m. to consider the replat of Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 1. Motion seconded by Les Bridger. Motion unanimously approved. Jerry Neher moved to.table the following agenda items until the next regular Planning Commission meeting: Ecological Committee's Proposed Goals for Development of Lotus Lake. Estate Developments. Motion seconded by Roman Roos. Motion unanimously approved. A motion was made by Roman Roos and seconded by Jerry Neher to adjourn. Motion unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 1130 p.m. Don Ashworth City Manager Regular Planning Commission Meeting April 14, 1976 -2- A motion was made by.Walter Thonpson and seconded by Les Bridger that the eight points suggested in the City Planner's letter of April 6, 1976, be considered at - a later date as part of the consideration for approval of the project. Motion unanimously approved. MID-AMERICA BAPTIST SOCIAL SERVICE CENTER: Caen Wildermuth, Carver County Family Services, and Philip Frazier, Executive Director, were present. A notion was made by Mal MacAlpine and seconded by Jerry Neher to hold a public hearing on May 12, 1976, at 8:00 p.m. to consider amending Ordinance.47, Section 6.04 to consider if group homes can be allowed as a conditional use or a permitted use in an R-lA Use District. Motion unanimously approved. HESSE FARM SKETCH PLAN: A motion -was made. by Les Bridger and seconded by Mal. MacAlpine to table this item until such time as. someone representing the Hesse Farm should appear. Motion unanimously approved. IMPERIAL REFINERIES OF KENNESOTA: Mr. Russell Nolting was present requesting permission to remodel the station located on Highways 169-212 and install a canopy over the pump islands to convert the station to self service. The City Planner sees no problem with the upgrading of the building and recommended the Planning Commission find the face lifting appropriate and refer the issue of the canopy to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and they make a recommendation to the Council. A_ motion was made by Les Bridger and seconded by Mal. MacAlpine that the Planning Commission approve the face lifting portion of this proposal and make a recomnendatiorf as a Planning Ca udssion to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals that this body does recommend a variance be given to the Imperial Refineries of Minnesota so.as the remainder of the proposal can be affected, that being the canopy over the.gas pumps. The following voted in favor: Hud Hollenback, Les Bridger, Walter Thompson, and Mal MacAlpine. Jerry Neher abstained by reason of a possible conflict of interest. Notion carried.' PARK LAND DEDICATION:, Members should be thinking about regulations for industrial and conmercial park land dedication. PLANNING SEMINAR: Walter,Thorpson attended a Planning Seminar in Waconia and reported the results to the members. PAULY HOUSE, 461 WEST 78TH STREET: Planning Commission members discussed this house as far as the things that go on there that are adverse to the goals of the City. Les Bridger asked if there is something that the Planning Commission could do. The City Planner suggested that one avenue might be to start enforcing all nuisance codes of the City. A motion was made by Les Bridger and seconded by Mal MacAlpine requesting that the City enforce the City Laws as they pertain to this piece of property. Public nuisances have been observed and the Planning Commission feels all ordinances of the City should be enforced.. Notion unanimously approved. A motion was made by Mal MacAlpine and seconded by Jerry Neher to adjourn. Motion - un usly approved. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. �. Don AshworthaL Clerk-Administrator Special Council Meeting February 9, 1976 -10- trail. We can block it off when we finally decide no more vehicular traffic. They will just have to put posts at one end. A motion was made by Councilman Kurvers and.seconded by Councilman Neveaux that West 66th Street be blacktopped and Huron be blacktopped from 68th Street north at a width of 18 feet. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Neveaux and Kurvers. Councilman Hobbs voted no. Motion carried. Mike Niemeyer - I would like to see you hold on your vote until you have had a chance to explore some of the ramifications of it. Councilman Neveaux -.The motion is subject to.the Attorney's opinion. Bill Brezinsky - I would recommend that Elm be put .in as a one way road rLuming west to east. Henry Wrase - I would recommend that Ivy be a 14 foot wide one way road. Iroquois could be one way north to south connecting to 69th Street one way east to west. Councilman Neveaux - I guess Bill, you'd better redue the map and run it through Carver Beach again. Councilman Hobbs.- They are in agreement with the one down below. I don't think there is any problem there. . The City Engineer will prepare a revised map with the suggested changes along with cost estimates. SEWER RATE STUDY: Frank Laska was present. The Sewer Board has the flowage up to 155,000,000 gallons per year. Mr. Laska feels there is some infiltration of storm water into the sewer lines. The -sewer board cost is 47� per 1,000 gallong. A report from the City, Engineer will be forthcoming to the Council. HESSE'S BLUFF CREEK: The Hesse's total bill was $2,560.50. They have paid an escrow of $1,415.00. The Acting Administrator has discussed this bill with Herb Baldwin and he stated that the Hesse's slid not feel they should pay the bill and if the Council insisted on -it they would take it to court. Mr. Baldwin is questioning $1,354.87 of the bill which is mostly Carl Dale'.s planning. Councilman Hobbs asked to have the Planner and Acting Administrator look over the bills to see if they are valid or not. A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Kurvers to allow the Acting Administrator to negotiate with the Hesse's for not less than $572.50. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. RILEY-PURGATORY CREEK VVkTERSHED DISTRICT:. Councilman Neveaux reported on a meeting with the Watershed District Board of Managers. They approved the Carver Beach Sewer and Water Project and Greenwood Shores Sewer and Water Project. They also passed.a resolution supporting the Duck Lake Interceptor designation. A motion was made by Councilman Kurvers and seconded by Councilman Neveaux to adjourn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Jerry Schlenk Acting Clerk Administrator "1) 1 N%tri1.V'VC1E fSERt"ICES GENERAL-AF')MOBILE LIABILITY POLICY AID INSURANCE COMPANY (MUTUAL) • DES MOINES, IOWA 50304 Part Two. This Declarations page with "Policy Provisions -Part One" completes the below numbered Item DECLARATIONS POLICY NUMBER GA THE HESSE FAJ;ttl 1. NAMED INSURED 1425 Bluff Creek Drive ADDRESS Chaska, Minnesota 55318 (Number & Street, Town & State) Policy Period: OF THE NAMEDANDARD INSUREDIME AS STATED HEREISN. From: 5-23-76 to 5-23-77 Agent CHASKA AGENCY, INC. 2. Address Town and State �1inIIL'SIIta - The insurance afforded is only with respect to such of the following Parts designated by an "X" in p and Coverages therein as are indicated by 3. specific premium charge or charges. The limit of the company's liability against each such Coverage shall be as stated herein, subject to all the terms of this policy having reference thereto. Comprehensive General Liability Insurance .............. ❑ ADVANCE Owners', Landlords' and Tenants' Liability Insurance .... 0PREMIUM Manufacturers' and Contractors' Liability Insurance ...... ❑ LIMITS OF LIABILITY Contractual Liability Insurance ....................... ❑ EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE Bodily Injury Liability $ 300, 000. $ $ 210.88 Property Damage Liability $ $ $ EACH PERSON EACH ACCIDENT Premises Medical Payments Insurance ................ $ 11000- $ n $ AGGREGATE Personal Injury Liability Insurance .................... ❑ $ $ Comprehensive Personal Insurance ................... ❑ EACH EACH EACH PERSON OCCURRENCE ACCIDENT Personal Liability XXXXXX $ XXXXXX Personal Medical Payments $ XXXXXX $ $ Physical Damage to Property XXXXXX 250.00 XXXXXX Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance .......... ❑ EACH PERSON EACH OCCURRENCE Bodily Injury Liability $ $ $ Property Damage Liability XXXXXX $ $ EACH PERSON EACH ACCIDENT Automobile Medical Payments Insurance ............... ❑ $ $ xxxXxx Uninsured Motorists Insurance ....................... ❑ $ $ $ Garage Insurance ................................... ❑ See Coverage Part for Limits of Liability $ Automobile Physical Damage Insurance ................ ❑ See Coverage Part for Limits of Liability $ ADDITIONAL COVERAGE PARTS: $ (See coverage part for limits of liability) ENDORSEMENTS: G 111 $ tlf Policy Period more than one year and the premium is to be paid Total Advance Premium 1 $ in installments, premium is payable: On effective date of policy $ and on the first and second anniversaries thereof. Audit Period: Annual, unless otherwise stated.** 4. The named insured is: individual joint venture partnership other corporation 5. Business of the named insured: Land Developer 6. During the past three years no insurer has cancelled any similar insurance issued to the named insured, nor declined to issue such insurance, unless otherwise stated herein:** "ABSENCE OF AN ENTRY MEANS "NO EXCEPTION". f Not applicable in Texas Renewal or Replacement No. GA 187197 4-22-76 jg i-,, a it Countersigned by Authorized Re res� tative P GA 2 10-1-66 (1-73) AID 1` ?ANCE COMPANY (MUTUAL) • DES MOINES, Ir 50304 OWNERSI, LANDLORDS AND TENANTS' LIABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE PART SCHEDULE DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDS Premises — Operations Sec. 26, 27, 34, 35 T. 116, R. 23 City of Chanhassen, 2-tinnesota Real estate Development Property (100 Acres) Escalators (Number at Premises) 14ONE AT INCEPTION JlrUCinral Alterations, iVew L;onstruction, Demolition NONE AT INCEPTION Location of insured premises (ENTER "SAME" IF SAME AS ITEM 1.) For attachment to Policy No. GA 204227 GENERAL LIABILITY HAZARDS CODE N0. PREMIUM BASES (a) Area (sq. ft.) (b) Frontage 55001 FLAT Number Insured RATES BODILY PROPERP INJURY I DAMAGE (a) Per 100 sq. ft. of Area (b) Per linear ft. Per Landing (a) Remuneration (a) Per $100 of Remuneration (b) Co I (b) Per $100 of Cost , to complete said policy. ADVANCE PREMIUM 210.881 57.38 Total Advance B.I. and P.D. Premiums I 21O.S81 57 8 Total Advance Premium, $268.26 chedulP__ Interest of named insured in insured premises "OWNER", "GENERAL LESSEE" OR "TENanr Part occupied by named insured When used as a premium basis: "admissions" means the total number of persons, other than employees of the named insured, admitted to the event insured o; to events conducted on the premises whether on paid admission tickets, complimentary tickets or passes; "cost" means the 'caai cost to the named insured with respect to operations performed for the named insured during the policy period by independent contractors of 4wor . let or sub -let In connection with each specific oro)ect, including the cost of all labor, materials and equipment furnished, used or delivered for use in the execution of such work, whether furnished by the owner, contractor or subcontractor, including all fees, allowances, bonuses or commissions made, paid or due; "receiots" means the gross amount of money charged by the named insured for such operations by the named insured or by others during the policy period as are rated on a receipts basis other than receipts from telecasting, broadcasting or motion pictures, and includes taxes, othe, than taxes which the named insured collects as a separate item and remits directly to a governmental division; "remuneration" means the entire remuneration earned during the policy period by proprietors and by all employees of the named insured, other than chauffeurs (exrept operators of mobile equipment) and aircraft pilots and co-pilots, subject to any overtime earnings or limitation of remuneration rule applicable in accordance with the manuals in use by the company. (over) 10-1.66 (1-73) AID INc 'NCE COMPANY (MUTUAL) • DES MOINES, IOW 550304 PREMISES MLOICAL PAYMENTS INSURANCE CO�,RAGE PART SCHEDULE For attachment to Policy No. GA . d) 4 2 % to complete said policy. COVERAGE ADVANCE PREMIUM (a) Premises and operations 1 $ 42.19 (b) Escalators $ (c) Sports activities $ Total Advance Premium 1 $ 42.18 1. COVERAGE E—PREMISES MEDICAL PAYMENTS The company will pay to or for each person who sustains bodily injury caused by accident all reasonable medical expense incurred within one year from the date of the accident on account of such bodily injury, provided such bodily injury arises out of (a) a condition in the insured premises or (b) operations with respect to which the named insured is afforded coverage for bodily injury liability under this policy. Exclusions This insurance does not apply: (a) to bodily injury (1) arising out of the ownership, maintenance, operation, use, loading or unloading of (i) any automobile or aircraft owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any insured, or GO any other automobile or aircraft operated by any person in the course of his employment by any insured; but this exclusion does not apply to the parking of an automobile on the insured premises, if such automobile is not owned by or rented or loaned to any insured; (2) arising out of (i) the ownership, maintenance, operation, use, loading or unloading of any mobile equipment while being used in any prearranged or organized racing, speed or demolition contest or in any stunting activity or in practice or preparation for any such contest or activity or (ii) the operation or use of any snowmobile or trailer designed for use therewith; (3) arising out of the ownership, maintenance, operation, use, loading or unloading of (i) any watercraft owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any insured, or (ii) any other watercraft operated by any person in the course of his employment by any insured; but this exclusion does not apply to watercraft while ashore on the insured premises; or (4) arising out of and in the course of the transportation of mobile equipment by an automobile owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any insured; (b) to bodily injury (1) included within the completed operations hazard or the products hazard; (2) arising out of operations performed for the named insured by independent con- tractors other than (i) maintenance and repair of the insured premises or 0i) structural alterations at such premises which do not involve changing the size of or moving buildings or other structures; (3) resulting from the selling, serving or giving of any alcoholic beverage (i) in violation of any statute, ordinance or regulation, (ii) to a minor, (iii) to a person under the influence of alcohol or (iv) which causes or contributes to the intoxica- tion of any person, if the named insured is a person or organization engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing, selling or serving alcoholic beverages or, if not so engaged, is an owner or lessor of premises used for such purposes but only part W of this exclusion (b) (3) applies when the named insured is such an owner or lessor; (4) due to war, whether or not declared, civil war, insurrection, rebellion or revolu- tion, or to any act or condition incident to any of the foregoing; (c) to bodily injury (1) to the named insured, any partner therein, any tenant or other person regularly residing on the insured premises or any employee of any of the foregoing if the bodily injury arises out of and in the course of his employment therewith; (2) to any other tenant if the bodily injury occurs on that part of the insured premises rented from the named insured or to any employee of such a tenant if the bodily injury occurs on the tenant's part of the insured premises and arises out of and in the course of his employment for the tenant; (3) to any person while engaged in maintenance and repair of the insured premises or alteration, demolition or new construction at such premises; (4) to any person if any benefits for such bodily injury are payable or required to be provided under any workmen's compensation, unemployment compensation or disability benefits law, or under any similar law; (5) to any person practicing, instructing or participating in any physical training, sport, athletic activity or contest unless a premium charge is entered for sport activities in the policy with respect to Premises Medical Payments Coverage; (d) to any medical expense for services by the named insured, any employee thereof or any person or organization under contract to the named insured to provide such services. II. LIMITS OF LIABILITY The limit of liability for Premises Medical Payments Coverage stated in the declarations as applicable to "each person" is the limit of the company's liability for all medical expense for bodily injury to any one person as the result of any one accident; but subject to the above provision respecting "each person", the total liability of the company under Premises Medical Payments Coverage for all medical expense for bodily injury to two or more persons as the result of any one accident shall not exceed the limit of liability stated in the declarations as applicable to "each accident". When more than one medical payments coverage afforded by this policy applies to the loss, the company shall not be liable for more than the amount of the highest applicable limit of liability. III. ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS When used in reference to this insurance (including endorsements forming a part of the policy): "insured premises" means all premises owned by or rented to the named insured with respect to which the named insured is afforded coverage for bodily injury liability under this policy, and includes the ways immediately adjoining on land; "medical expense" means expenses for necessary medical, surgical, x-ray and dental services, including prosthetic devices, and necessary ambulance, hospital, professional nursing and funeral services. IV. POLICY PERIOD; TERRITORY This insurance applies only to accidents which occur during the policy period within the United States of America, its territories or possessions, or Canada. V. ADDITIONAL CONDITION Medical Reports; Proof and Payment of Claim As soon as practicable the injured person or someone on his behalf shall give to the company written proof of claim, under oath if required, and shall, after each request from the company, execute authorization to enable the company to obtain medical reports and copies of records. The injured person shall submit to physical examination by physicians selected by the company when and as often as the company may reasonably require. The company may pay the injured person or any person or organization rendering the services and the payment shall reduce the amount payable hereunder for such injury. Payment hereunder shall not con- stitute an admission of liability of any person or, except hereunder, of the company. ADDITIONAL INSURED (State or Political Subdivisions --Permit, Relating to Premises) City of Chanhassen it is agreed that the "Persons Insured" provision includes as an insured any state or political subdivision designated in the schedule belowp subject to the following additional provisions: 1. The insurance for any such insured applies only with respect to such of the following hazards for which the state or political subdivision has issued a permit in connection with premises owned by, rented to or controlled by the named insured and to which the Bodily Injury Liability Coverage appliesa (a) the existeence, maintenance, repair, construction, erection or removal of advertising signet awnings, canopies, cellar entrances, coal, hol,ee, driveways, manholes, marquees, hoistway openings, sidewalk vaults, street banners or decorations and similar exposures; (b) the construction, erection or removal of elevators; (c) the ownership, maintenance or use of any elevators covered by the policy. 2. If Property Damage Liability Coverage in not otherwise afforded, such insurance *hall nevertheless apply with respect to operations performed by or on behalf of the named insured in connection with the hazard for which the permit has been issued subject to the limits of liability stated herein. SCHEDULE Designation of State or Political subdivision: Limits of Property Damage Liability $ 50,000 each occurrence $ aggregate Premium $5.74 G ill 0 ��: Chanhassen, Minn.,— Setember17 75 M Harold Hesse IN ACCOUNT WITH CITY OF CHANHASSEN TOTAL ESCROW PAID .11 41.5.0.0 RE -CAP OF EXPENSES IDesign.Planning (Planner) 1,085.22 Russell Larson (Legal) 1,095.20 Publications 32.38 Engineer 326.00 City -Bruce Pankonin (Planner; 21.25 TOTAL EXPENSES 2,560.0.5 BALANCE DUE TO CITY 1,145. 5 t ENCL. Breakdown of.expenses W I.! r VILLAGE 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P: O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESO.TA 55317 • (612) 474-8885 HAROLD HESSE PROPERTY ESCROW FEE PAID 9/20/73 15.00 5/30/74 1,400.00 $1,415.00 EXPENSES INCURRED RE: DEVELOPMENT Russell Larson 2/22/72 Sun News 2/22/72 DESIGN PLANNING 11-19-73 Meet with.P.C. Chairman & Administrator RUSSELL LARSON' 11-23-73 Review proposal for Bluff ;View Re: Plat and detailed report to L. Schnelle SCHOELL & MADSON 1-21774 Review prelim plat and concept plan 10/73 DESIGN PLANNING May '74 meeting with City Staff & Developer DESIGN PLANNING June '74 Report 60.00 Prepare for meeting 30.00 Mileage 8.75 DESIGN PLANNING July Report 45.00 Study park needs 60.00 Prepare for Plan Commission meet 30.00 Attend Plan. C. meeting 25.00 Mileage _ _ 8.29 RUSSELL LARSON 7/4/74 Check maps to determine legal descrip for public hearing notice, draft public hearing notice and arrange for pub. 85.00 7/24/74 Attend Public Hearing 50.00 CHASKA HERALD 8/19/74 Public hearing notice DESIGN PLANNING_ 9/,6/74 Discuss Plan C agenda items W/adm 7.50 9/11/74. Attend meeting 25.00 9/30/74 Meet W/City staff Re; Hesse farm 75.00. Mileage 10.00 60.00 20.70 45.00 67.00 50.00 60.00 98.75 168.29 135.00 11.68 117.50 1 N DESIGN PLANNING_ August '74 Park Study for Hesse. farm 30.00 Report on park needs Vicinity H. farm 30.00 A--rq-'7zu-1�41 Park Study 30.00 Discuss P.U.D. with planner 15.00 Meeting with Hesse planner 30.00 Prepare for meeting 30.00 Xerox Copies 3.00 Mileage 4.83 Attend Park Meeting 75.00 Attend Plan C. meeting 8/14/74 25.00 Attend Plan C. meeting 8/28/74 25.00 297.83 RUSSELL LARSON 9-30-74 Conf. with engineers, planners & L. Schnelle regarding planned district zoning 80.00 DESIGN PLANNING 10-7-74 Review Farm Home Owners Assn document 30.00 DESIGN PLANNING 11-8-74 Review Prelim. map 30.00 11-19-74 Report to Administrator 45.00 12-16-74 Meet with City Staff 30.00 12-16-74 Final Review of P.U.D. 45.00 12-16-74 Prepare for City Council meeting 30.00 12-16-74 Attend City Council meeting 75.00 Xerox copies and postage 12.85 267.85 RUSSELL LARSON 12-14-74 Review file, drawings, minutes of meet- tings, and public hearing, covenants, articles of Inc. and by laws of prop- erty owners association covering Phase I of P-1 Development District. 175.00 12-16-74 Attend Council meeting __ 70.00 245.00 RUSSELL LARSON 4-20-75 Review of Plan. Commission minutes,reports and reaps of Design Planning, City Engr, Soil.Conservation Service and Lloyd Schnelle, Review of Hesse proposed covenants and res- trictions, articles of Incorporation and by-laws of home owners assn, and prelimin- ary plat of Phase 1. 200.00 4-23-75 Conf. with City Planner, Herb Baldwin, Harold Hesse, Gary Larson, Barry Brooks and Frank Burg regarding Phase 1 prelim- inary plat and planned development dis- trict contract. Attend Planning Commission meeting regarding approval of Phase 1. 87.50 287.50 CITY PLANNER 14 hours @ 17.50 21.25 SCHOELL & MADSON Review plat of Hesse Farm; prepare report re drainage plan, etc. 276.00 RUSSELL LARSON 5-5-75 Review revised covenants and restrict- ions and planning materials & report to Council 50.00 Prepare development Contract 150.00 Xerox and postage 20.70 220.70 BALANCE DUE TO CITY 'f7 IT. 6s RUSSELL H. LARSON ATTORNEY AT LAw 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 R.USSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ July 28, 1975 Mr. Barry R. Brooks City Administrator Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Hesse Farm Dear Barry, Enclosed is the warranty deed given by Mr. and Mrs. Hesse to the City of Chanhassen covering Outlot C of The Hesse Farm. TELEPHONE 335-9565 This deed has been recorded as Document No. 26063 in the office of the Register of Deeds of Carver County on June 25, 1975. The record- ing is found in Book 122 of Deeds at Pages 451-452. The deed should be placed in the "Real Property" file of the City. Very truly yours, Russell H. Larson (%, Chanhassen City Attorney JUL 1975 RECE►VED RHL:m -�AOE ofEncls. 1, MIMIC AE CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CONTRACT THE HESSE FARM PHASE I. THE AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this 19th day of May 1975 by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN , a Minnesota municipal corpo- ration, hereinafter referred to as the City, and HAROLD HESSE and MARY PATRICIA HESSE, hereinafter referred to as the Developers. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developers are the fee owners of those certain lands described on Exhibit "A" , attached hereto and made a part hereof, Carver County, Minnesota, situated in the City of Chanhassen, and consisting of 338.89 acres, and WHEREAS, the Developers have submitted to the City for its consideration under the City Zoning Ordinance a proposed preliminary development plan, known as The Hesse Farm, encompassing said lands, the original submission of which was dated March 11, 1974, with resubmission dated June 11, 1974, under which Devel- opers set forth their proposals to subdivide said lands into single family dwelling sites of large acreages (said plan having been heretofore filed with the City) , and WHEREAS, the City and the Developers recognize the unique characteristics of the site with its heavily wooded steep slopes and ravines overlooking the Minnesota River Valley, and are aware of their responsibilities to preserve to the greatest extent possible the natural amenities of the area, and -1- WHEREAS, the Developers have made application under the City Zoning Ordinance to the City Council for the approval of said proposal as a P-1 Planned Residential Development Plan, including a preliminary plat of Phase I of said The Hesse Farm Phase I, a copy of said proposed plat, dated March 18, 1975 being attached hereto as Exhibt "B", and hereinafter referred to as the "plat", and WHEREAS, the City Council by its resolution adopted May 5, 1975, approved said proposed preliminary development plan, preliminary plat, subject to and on condition that the Developers enter into this agreement, and WHEREAS, the City has established a policy requiring land developers to furnish public and quasi -public improvements, including surfaced streets, drainage facilities, recreational and common open space areas, and underground utility service lines to all lots in plats approved by the City, all of the foregoing hereinafter sometimes referred to as improvements, and WHEREAS, the Developers have made application to the City to be allowed at Developers' expense to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials in connection with the installation of the following improvements: a. Street grading, stabilizing and surfacing b. Storm and surface water drainage facilities c. Street signs d. Driveway surfacing e. Underground utility lines NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and acceptance by the City of the preliminary development plan and plat of The Hesse Farm, Phase I, the City and the Developer agree as follows: 1. Improvements by Developer. Developers agree at their expense to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials and equipment in connection with the installation of the following improvements: a. Street grading, stabilizing and surfacing b. Storm and surface water drainage facilities C. Street signs d. Driveway surfacing e. Underground utility lines -2- 2. Standards of Construction. Developers agree that all of the foregoing improvements shall equal or exceed City anadndaspecifications approved by standards, t he Gityand tall- ed in accordance with engineering plans engineers and the requirements of applicable City ordinances and standards , and that all of said work shall be subject to the supervision of the City engineers. 3. Materials and Labor. All of the materials to be employed in the making of said improvements and all of the work performed in connection therewith shall be of uniformly good and workmanlike quality, shall equal or exceed City standards and specifications, and shall be subject to the inspection and approval of the City. In case any material or labor supplied shall be rejected by the City as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced and approval of d material, and rejected labor shall be done anew to the satisfaction the City at the cost and expense of the Developers. 4. Schedule of Work. The Developers further agree that they shall commence work hereunder on or before June 30 , 19 75 , and shall have all work done and imp rovements fully completed to the satisfaction and approval of the City on or before June 30 19 75 . The Developers shall submit a written schedule indicating the proposed rprogress schedule and order of completion of work covered by this contract, which schedule shall be a part of this contract. Upon receipt of written notice from the Developers of the existence of causes over which the Developers have no control which will delay the spec specified for c mpletion,,the City, in its discretion, may extend the date hereinbefore 5. Roads and Storm and Surface Water Draina::e Facilities. a. The Developers agree to cause their engineers to prepare all plans and specifications necessary for the installation of roads, and storm and surface water drainage facilities in said plat, said plans and specifica- tions to be in substantial accord with proposed plans thereof prepared by 7 Pril Consulting o sul ing Engineers Diversified, Inc. , and filed with the City on _ All plans and specifications shall be subject to the final approval of the City engineers. b. Upon completion of construction, Developers shall cause their engineers to prepare and file witn the City an "as built" plan showing the installation of the foregoing facilities within the plat. 6. Reimbursement of Costs. Tne Developers shall reimburse the City for all costs, including reasonable in connection wt h alalpllmattersaredlating to the adminis- administrative expenses, incurred by the Y tration and enforcement of the within agreement and the performance thereof by the Developers. -3- 7. Disclaimer by City. It is understood and agreed that the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the Developers, the Developers' contractors or sub- . contractors, materialmen, laborers or to any other person, firm or corporation whom- soever, for any debt, claim, demand, damages , actions or causes of action of any kind or cnaracter arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the work and improvements hereunder; and that the Developers will save the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City harmless from any and all claims, damages, demands, actions or causes of action arising therefrom and the costs, disbursements and expenses of defending the same. 8. Written Change Orders. The Developers shall do no work nor furnish materials not covered by the plans and specifications for which reimbursement is expected from the City unless a written order for such work or materials is received from the City. Any such work or materials which may be done or furnished by the Developers without such written order first being given shall be at its own risk, cost and expense, and Developers hereby agree that without such written order Developers will make no claim for compensation for work or materials so done or furnished. 9. Performance Bond. For the purpose of assuring to the City that the improvements to be by the Developers constructed, installed and furnished as set forth in Paragraph 1 hereof shall be constructed, installed and furnished according to the terms of this agreement, and that the Developers shall pay all claims for work done and materials and supplies furnished for the performance of this agreement, Developers agree to furnish to the City a Subdivision Improvement Guarantee Letter of Credit approved by the City Attorney and in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "C" , or in lieu thereof, a corporate surety bond approved by the City Attorney and naming the City as Obligee thereunder. Said letter of credit or corporate surety bond shall be in the amount of $65 ,000.00 , and shall be conditioned upon the performance by the Developers of their obligations hereunder, said sum being equal to 110% of the total cost of such improvements as estimated by Scnoell & Madson, Inc. , the City Engineers, and as set.forth in the reports of said engineers to the City dated April 21, 1975, and May 6, 1975, which reports are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this agreement. 10. Driveways. The Developers agree to furnish, construct and install, at Developers' sole expense, the following improvements for the benefit of each lot within the plat: a. Driveway surfacing, the materials and installation of which shall be approved by the City engineers. For the purpose of assuring to the City that the improvements required by this Paragraph 10 shall be constructed and installed according to the requirements of this agreement, Developers agree to deposit the sum of $ 100.00 per lot with the City at the time application is made for a building permit for each lot. Said deposit shall be returned to the Developers upon approval of the installations by the City. 11. Erosion Control. Developers, at their expense, shall provide temporary dams, earthwork or such other devices and practices , including seeding of graded areas, as shall be needed, in the judgment of the City, to prevent the washing, flooding, sedimentation and erosion of lands and roads within and outside the devel- opment during all phases of construction, including construction on individual lots. Developers shall keep all streets within the development free of all dirt and debris resulting from construction therein by the Developers or their agents. 12. Access. Reasonable access, including temporary grading and graveling, shall be provided to all occupied residences in the plat until the streets are approved by the City. 13. 'Replacement. All work and materials performed and furnished hereunder by the Developer, its agents and subcontractors,, found by the City to be defective within one year after approval by the City shall be replaced by Developers at Developers' sole expense. 14. Liability Insurance. The Developers shall take out and maintain during the life of this agreement public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developers' work or the work of their subcontractors, or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall be not less than $ 50,000.00 for one person and $ 100,000.00 - for each accident; limits for property damage shall be not less than $ 25,000. 00 for each accident. The City shall be named as co-insured on said policy and the Developers shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City. 15. Building Permits. . The Developers covenant. and agree that no building permits shall be requested and the City shall not be required to issue any building permits for construction in the said plat until the Developers have completed the installation of the improvements set forth in Paragraph 1 nereof to the City specifi- cations, and that issuance of any building permit or permits to the Developers prior to the acceptance of said improvements shall not constitute a waiver by the City of its rights hereunder to require completion of said improvements before issuance of additional building permits. Breach of any terms of the within agreement by the Developers shall be grounds for denial of building permits within the plat. -5- k 16. Special Conditions. a. Location of structures, landscaping and location of individual sewage disposal systems on individual lots shall be determined through discussions between City staff and Developers prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the following standards and conditions: l (i) Location of structures, landscaping and location of individual sewage disposal systems shall take into consideration the preservation of trees , slope protection, surface and subsurface drainage , prevention of siltation and similar potential problems. (ii) In the event agreement cannot be reached between the City staff and Developers, the City shall have the right, at the expense of the Developer, to engage the services of the City Engineer, Planner, a landscape architect, a soil conservation consultant, and others , to advise as to specific problems. (iii) The certificate of occupancy for each homesite , or covenants and restrictions, may contain conditions governing landscaping, tree maintenance, preservation and removal, and slope protection and maintenance. b. Developers acknowledge receipt of the Soil and Water Consider- ation Reports of July 12, 1973, June 4, 1974, July 17, 1974, and October 1 , 1974, by United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and accompanying maps, which reports and maps are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and agree to provide individual site drain- age and soil erosion and sedimentation controls reasonably consistent with said reports. c. Developers acknowledge receipt of the reports of the Zoning Admin- istrator, City Engineer, Planner and Attorney, and Planning Commission Minutes, which are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof, and agree to comply with the conditions of said reports and Minutes reason- ably consistent with the provisions of the within contract. d. Developers shall dedicate to the City a perpetual easement for storm and surface water drainage 40 feet in width, being 20 feet on each side of lot lines between Lots 17 and 18 of said plat, and extending the full distance along said lot lines from the end of the cul-de-sac to the Chicago & Northwestern Transportation Company right of way.. Until maintenance of said drainage way easement is formally accepted by the City, the responsi- bility for the maintenance thereof shall be the obligation of the. Developers, their successors and assigns. e . Outlot C , being the ravine area at the eastern limits of the plat, shall. be conveyed by Developers to the City at the time of the recordation of the final plat of Phase I, but shall be left by the City as wild open space not for general public access until such time as the City completes its greenway open space corridor along the Bluff Creek watershed or has a specific plan for the use of said outlot. f. Variances of the following provision of the Chanhassen Subdivision Ordinance are hereby granted: (i) 8.02(c) (lots abutting major thoroughfares) (ii) 8.03(c) (street grades) (iii) 8.03 (g) (cul-de-sac length) (iy) 8.03 (k) . (private streets) (v) 8.06(a) (2) (resubdivision plan) g. Control of erosion and siltation during and after construction is required throughout the plat, and said controls shall follow the guidelines of "Urban Erosion Control Handbook" , August, 1973 edition. h. Streets within.the plat shall be finished with one prime coat and two seal coats of bituminous penetration oil, the second coat to be applied during the second year of use. . i. Street lighting shall be private, i.e. furnished by individual lot owners. j . Drainage and utility easements along lot lines shall be sized and located as required by the Chanhassen Subdivision Ordinance. k. Topsoil removed during construction shall be saved and used for finish grading. Topsoil removed during road construction shall be placedon embankments and side slopes which are to be held at a 4 to 1 slope, or flatter, if feasible. 1. It is recommended that homesites be located on slopes of less than 12% and that no slopes over 18% be used for homesites. m. Where feasible, alternate individual disposal system drainfields shall be planned as part of the building permit issuance procedures. n. Slopes over 18% shall be maintained in natural cover of grass, .shrubs and trees, and shall be managed as protection for open space. All exposed areas shall be seeded within 30 days after construction. -7- o. Three catch basins shall be provided at the end of the short cul-de-sac of Outlot B, in addition to an overland flow swale . p. Erosion protection shall be provided at the siltation pond outlet. q. Any future acquisition by the City of Outlots A or B shall be without cost or compensation by the City to the then owner or owners thereof. r. The City, its employees , agents , successors and assigns , fire , police and public service utilities shall have a non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress over Outlot B as shall be necessary for public service and utility purposes, and a non-exclusive easement for ponding and drainage purposes and ingress and egress over Outlot A. s . Variances of Sections 2.01 and 2. -02 of Ordinance No. 45 are hereby granted. t. All covenants and restrictions, homeowner association articles of incorporation and by-laws setting forth construction use, maintenance and other pertinent controls within the plat shall be approved by the City Attorney. U. Developers shall submit to the City a projected time schedule for the development of the balance of the 338.89 acre tract not contained within Phase I. v. All applicable provisions of Chanhassen ordinances are incorpo- rated herein by reference. 17. Remedies Upon Default. In the event the Developers shall default in the performance of any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, and such default shall not have been cured within 10 days after receipt by the Developers of written notice thereof, the City, if it so elects, may cause any of the required improvements to be constructed and installed, and may cause the entire cost thereof, including all reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expense incurred by the City, to be paid by drafts drawn against any letter of credit deposited under Paragraph 9 hereof, or in lieu thereof, the City may take legal action against the Developers and the surety on any performance bond filed hereunder to collect all of the costs of the making of any of said improvements. In the event of an emergency, as determined by the City Engineers, the notice requirements to the Developers shall be and hereby are waived in their entirety, and the Developers shall reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the conditions creating the emergency. 18. Address of Developers. The address of the Developers for purposes of this development contract is: Route 1 , Chaska, Minnesota 55318. 19. Successors and Assigns. It is agreed by and between the parties hereto that the agreement herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of their respective legal representatives, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF CHANHASSEN In Presence of: B y Cl 7V' j MAYOR Attest Cler Administrator �. . DEVELOPER STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) On this -day of 19 Z�, before me a notary public within and "for said County, personally appeared .,n % and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sw.)rn they did say that they are respectively and (,c,�_o ��._,,,�,�,G,�z..vr� the persons named in the foregoing instrument, and and edged said instrument to be their free act and deed. I&AAAAA&AA&AAAAAAAAAAA""AAAAAAA" KAY KLiNGELHUTZ :40TARY PUBLIC • MINNESOTA i� CARVER COUNTY ' My Commission Expires Jan. 30, 1981 STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF CARVER acknowl- Notary Public Carver County, Minnesota My commission expires /.✓/ On this-ze7" day of M rs"'y 19 before me a }p�p�tary public within ar d for said County, personally appeared A. �4�►'i0 4� H,54SE and Q�cIp 7 ..SSF to me personally known, who, ing each by me duly sworn they. did say that they are respectively r`.�/F 044C and the persons riamP4 in the fo going instrument and f 4`a ✓SS and . MlYcv ��2t G/A H;,&Sr acknowl- edged said instrument to be their free act and deed. Notary Public Carver County, Minnesota My Commission expires G. A. REKOW MARY PUBUC " )AINNES0TA -10 - r-AWER CouxTy I Commfssion ,Expires Sept, 21;1977 • " EXHIBIT "A" All that part of the Northeast -, of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of the Chicago and Ttlorthwestern Railway Company and lying Westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Northeast -; thence North 86 degrees, 31 minutes, 31 seconds West, assumed bearing along the North line of said Northeast 4 a distance of 645.83 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be herein described; thence South 28 degrees, 33 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 168.36 feet; thence South 12 degrees, 03 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 235.62 feet; thence South 34 degrees, 56 minutes, 32 seconds East a distance of 795.54 feet more or less to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and 330 feet West of the East line of said Northeast ;4 as measured at right angles to said East line; thence Southerly along said parallel line to the South line of said Northeast ;4 of Section 35; also that part of the Northwest I,, of said Section 35 lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of said Chicago l;orthwestern.Railway Company and lying Easterly of the centerline of Bluff Creek Drive said centerline of Bluff Creek Drive described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Northwest 14; thence East along the forth line thereof a distance of 1049.12 feet to the centerline of said Bluff Creek Drive, said point being the actual point of beginning of the centerline to be herein described; thence deflecting to the right 39 degrees, 47 minutes, 44 seconds a distance of 157.83 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right, the radius of which is 654.4G feet, the central angle of which is 14 degrees, 48 minutes, 00 seconds, a -distance of 169.05 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to said curve a distance of 721.76 feet more or less to the Northeasterly or most Northerly corner of Hesse's Bluff Creek, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Register of Deeds, in and for said Carver County, Minnesota; thence continuing Southeasterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course and along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 343.24 feet; thence deflecting to the left 4 degrees, 55 minutes along the Northeasterly boundary of Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 610.75 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right, along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek, the radius of which is C�170.93 feet, the central angle of which is 13 degrees, D6 minutes, a distance of 199.13 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to said last described curve and along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 267.10 feet more or less to the Southeasterly ur most Easterly corder of'said Hesse's Bluff Creek; thence continuing Southeasterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course to the Northerly right of way line of said Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company and there terminating; and that part of the Northwest ;4 of said Section 35, Township 116, Range 23 lying Southwesterly of the center line of said Bluff Creel: Drive according to the description of ;aid centerline described herein, and lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of ;aid Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company, excepting all that part of said Northwest ?� Smbraced in the plat of llesse's Bluff Creek; also the Southeast '.; of the Northeast ;4, the lortheast I, -of the ?northeast '4 of Section 34, Township 116, Range 23, in said Carver County; also that part of the Southeast !�j of the Southeast 4 of Section 27, Tovrnship '116, Range 23 in ;aid Carver County lying Southwesterly of the center line of said Bluff Creel; Drive, said :enter line described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southeast :` of ;ne Southeast I" of said Section 27; thence on an assumed bearing of South 87 degrees, 52 iinutes, 35 seconds East along the ;north line of said Southeast of the Southeast I; a distance )f 741.86 feet to the center line of said Bluff Creek Drive the actual point of beginning of :he center line to be herein described; thence Southeasterly along a circular curve not tangent to said last described course, concave to the Southwest, the radius of which is 406.25 Beet, the chord of which bears South 65 dearees, 40 minutes, 38 seconds East, the central angle if which is 8 dearees, 57 minutes, 16 seconds, a giszance or 53.4'9 feet; thence South 61 dearees, 2 minutes, 00 seconds East and tangent to said last described curve along the center line of ;aid Bluff Creek Drive a distance of 326.65 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right, ,long the center line of said Bluff Creel: Drive the radius of which is 605.38 feet, the central ngle of which is 18 degrees, 04 minutes, 31 seconds a distance of.190.98 feet; thence South 3 degrees, 07 minutes, 29 seconds^;'along the center line of said Bluff Creek Drive a distance ,f 115.82 feet and there terminating, except the following described tract; Exhibit "A" continued. id Southeast 14 of the Southeast 14 OfSection27i of the S described utheast faas follows: Section 27; That pars of say es 52 minutes, 31 seconds East a actual point line of said Corrnencing at the Southeast corner of said Southeast 4on P thence ;north 0 degrees, feet 14 of the Southeast ; eeS, distance of 311secondsoEast.along said East line of the Southeast continue Forth 0 :eardistance of 47.51 feet to the center line of said Bluff Creek Drive; of the Southeast 07 minutes, 29 seconds West along the center line of said Bluff Creek thence ;,'orth 43 dcyrees, 32 minutes, 31 seconds west a distant • hence South 24 degrees, 47 minutes, 29 seconds East a distance of.•160 feet; Drive a distance oen102.71 feet; thence .,outh 68 degrees, ante of 272.84 feet more or less to of 261.51 feet, th 16 minutes, 00 seconds East a dirt thence i;orth 64 degrees, art of the Southwest �.; of the Southwest of heGS Section -the actual point of beginning'saidoCarverthat pCounty described as follows: Commencing at the South 26, Township 116, Range 1 thence :forth along the 1•lest line of said thence deflecting to the right 93 west corner of 5 edSouthwestt14 a distanceuofw440.71 feet; to the right 1th degrees, 37 Southwest •, of degrees, 47 minutes a degrees,21 ninutes a distance of 151.56 feet; thence deflecting the minutes a distance of 105.40 feet; thence deflecting to the left, 61 f said distance of 383.00 feet more or less to a point on the South lineof the Southwesth'<eof the fSouth- Soutl1west '; distant 220.00 feet East of said Southest corner vest ''-4 of said Sec tion 26; thence :•test along said South line 220.00 feet to the point of be ginning; also iP That part of the Southw est i.; of the Southeast 'a of Section 26, S017coVrnerlof�saidgSouth�esta 4a Carver County, i•linnesota, described as beginning at the Southtire ?• of the South�•iest 'a a 1• thence North along the Jest line of said Southwest . of the Southwest a; F feet to the actual point of beginning of ancelofd151.56 feet: thencelde distanto be herci ce o� 440.71 thence deflecting to the right 93 degrees, 21 minutes a distance ss f i ec ti ng to the l e ft 52 degrees, 23 minutes a distance of 260.70ceet more tion ongotheecentertlene center line of Bluff Creek Drive; thence in a wort rn;ester y thereof to the actual point of of Bluff f Creek Uri ve to its i ntersecti en with the (Jest line of said Sout h. of said center lute thence South along the West lit West of the Southwest beginning• k s v J F i _T cc i ` EXHIBIT "B" All that part of the Northeast 4 of Section 35, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of the Chicago and Northwestern Railway Company and lying Westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Northeast 4; thence North 86 degrees, 31 minutes, 31 seconds blest, assumed bearing along the North line of said Northeast.- a distance of 645.83 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be herein described; thence South 28 degrees, 33 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 168.36 feet; thence South 12 degrees, 03 minutes, 28 seconds West a distance of 235.62 feet; thence South 34 degrees, 56 minutes, 32 seconds East a distance of 795.54 feet more or less to its inter- section with a line drawn parallel with and 330 feet West of the East line of said Northeast 4 as measured at right angles to said East line; thence Southerly along said parallel line to the South line of said Northeast -,,.of Section 35; also that part.of the Northwest 4 of said Section 35 lying Northerly of the Northerly right of way line of said Chicago Northwestern Railway Company and lying Easterly of the centerline of Bluff Creek Drive, said -centerline of Bluff Creek Drive described as -follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Northwest.'; thence East along the North line thereof a distance of 1049.12 feet to the center- line of said.Bluff Creek Drive, said point being.the actual point of beginning of. the centerline to be herein described; thence deflecting to the right-39 degrees, 47 minutes, 44 seconds a distance of 157-..83 feet; thence on a.tangential curve to the right, the radius of which is 654.46 feet, the central angle of which is 14 degrees, 48 minutes, 00 seconds, a distance of 169.05 feet; thence South easterly tangent to said curve a distance of 721.76 feet.more or less to the Northeasterly or most Northerly corner of'Hesse's Bluff Creek, according to the plat thereof on File and of record in the Office of the Register of Deeds, in and for said Carver County, Minnesota; thence continuing South- easterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course and along the.Northeaste,rly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek.a distance of 343.24 feet; thence deflecting to the left 4 degrees, 55 minutes along the Northeasterly boundary of Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of 61.0.75 feet;.thence on a tangential curve to the right, along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek, the radius of which is 870.93 feet, the central angle of which is 13 degrees, 06 minutes, a distance of.199.13 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to said last described curve .and along the Northeasterly boundary of said Hesse's Bluff Creek a distance of`267.10 feet more or less to the Southeasterly or most Easterly corner of said Hesse's Bluff Creek; thence continuing South- easterly along the Southeasterly extension of said last described course to the Northerly -right of way line of said Ch-icago and Northwestern Railway Company and there terminating. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHASKA CHASKA, MINN. 55318 (612) 448-2350 GEORGE C. KLEIN, Chairman of the Board GERALD A. REKOW, President DENNIS D. KOPECKY, V. President A Cashier LARRY A. HEUER, V. President - Operations CHARMAINE WOLF, Assistant Cashier DIANE M. KARST. Assistant Cashier May 27, 1975 The City of Chanhassen Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 18 Gentlemen: We hereby open our irrevocable credit in your favor, available by your drafts at sight drawn on us for a sum not exceeding $35,000.00 for the account of Harold Hesse and Mary Patricia Hesse (Developers), to be accepted by your signed statement that drawing is due to the default or failure by the Developers the following improvements on or before July 31, 197.6. The construction of those certain improvements set in the Planned Residential Development District Contract, dated �-' , 75, for The Hesse Farm, Phase I development in Chanhassen, Minnesat . Acting through the Chanhassen City Engineer, you will notify us when either: 1. The improvements have been timely and satisfactorily completed and the credit may be released; or 2. The Developers have failed to perform or are in default. All drafts drawn under this credit must be marked: "Drawn under First National Bank Letter of Credit No. 18, dated May 27, 1975." We hereby agree with the drawers, indorsers and bona fide holders of drafts under and in compliance with the terms of this.credit that the same shall be duly honored if presented on or before July 31, 1976. Very truly yours, First National Bank of Chaska By President -Chanhassen City Coun(_�l Meeting May 19, 1975 -2- with both school districts to find out the total cost and how this will be paid for. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. Councilman Shulstad requested the Park and Recreation Commission submit to the Council recommendations on a recreation program plus how a prograt-, would be financed. W Community Schools is asking for a financial commitment of $1,250 based on 50� per capita from Chanhassen. A motion was made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to table approval of the 1975 agreement and the 1975 Summer Program until June 2. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. MOLNAU/DUBBE CONDITIONAL.USE PERMIT: A motion was.made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman.Shulstad to adopt.the Conditional Use Permit and direct the Administrator and Mayor to sign this agreement., The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. G_ARF CARLSON - ASSESSMENT ABATEMENT: The City -Engineer in his letter of May 2,_1975, stated there is adequate drop available from Mr. Carlson's house to the sewer service stub to hook up. Bill Schoell recommended the sewer assessment not be removed. Mr. Carlson was present but did not receive a copy of the City Engineer' report until this meeting. He requested the Council defer action until he has studied the report. A motion was made by.Councilman Shulstad and seconded by Councilman Hobbs to defer this to'another meeting. The following.voted in.favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No.negative votes. Motion carried. HESSE FARM PHASE I DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT: A motion was made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Shulstad that the Mayor and Administrator be directed to execute this contract when all necessary information has been supplied. The following voted'in favor:__ Mayor'Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No.negative.votes':=-Motion carried. HORSE COMMITTEE: The Horse'Owners Association submitted four.names of persons who are willing to serve on the Horse Committee. A motion was made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to appoint Dr. Tom Rainey, Terry O'Brien,. and Dave Headla to the Horse Committee to review Stable Permit Applications and Howard Hallgren as an alternate. The following voted in favor: Mayor_Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No negative votes.. Motion carried. A motion was made by Councilman Shulstad and seconded by Councilman Hobbs to extend the. June 1 annual registration statement date to June 20 for 1975 only. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz Councilmen Hobbs and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. SOLICITOR'S LICENSE APPLICATION - ART CRAFT PRESS, INC.: Jerry Schlenk, representing the fire department, was present requesting the Council R.USSELL H. LARSON ATTORNEY AT LAw 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 RUSSELL H. LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ May 15, 1975 Mr. Bruce Pankonin Chanhassen City Planner Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Hesse Farm Dear Bruce, TELEPHONE 335-95G5 Enclosed are two copies of The Hesse Farm, Phase I contract for review by you and Barry. The matter should be placed on the Council meeting agenda for Monday, May 19, 1975, for action by the Council. Please note that certain exhibits need to be marked for the contract, and that certain dates need to be inserted. I will rely on you to organize these matters for us. Very truly yours, Russell H. Larson Chanhassen City Attorney RHL: m Encls . cc: All Councilmen Mr, and Mrs. Harold Hesse Schoell & Madson, Inc. Kelly & Larson, Attorneys Frank Burg, Jr. WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER a. JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E.DAHLIN 1 - SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. LARRY L. HANSON T RAYMOND J. JACKSON } ENGINEERS ANO SURVEYORS WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY� JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 May 6, 1975 Mr. Russell H. Larson 1900 First National Bank Buioding Minneapolis, MN 55402 Subject: The Hesse Farm Dear Russ: Following are the items which should be included in the bond for the Hesse Farm plat: Storm drainage and pond excavation $23,000 Road construction, including gravel base and seal coats 42,000 Total Estimated Cost $65,000 The above costs include an item of 10% above actual construction costs for engineering and other incidental costs. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. WDSchoell:sd cc: Barry Brooks 01 RUSSELL H. LARSON ATTORNEY AT LAW 1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANX BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 RUSSELL H . LARSON CRAIG M. MERTZ May 5, 1975 Chanhassen City Council Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: The Hesse Farm Gentlemen: TELEPHONE 335-9565 A review of the proposed preliminary plat of the Hesse Farm covering the develop- ment of that section of the planned development district lying east of Bluff Creek Road and north of the Chicago Northwestern Railroad right-of-way, discloses that the following specific points should be considered as a part of your action on the proposal and the development contract which is to follow: 1. Outlot C , being the ravine area at the eastern limits of the plat, is to be dedicated or conveyed to the City at this time, but left as wild open space not for general public access until such time as the City completes its total park system and has a specific plan for the use of this property. 2. A variance of the Platting Ordinance would be required to permit this plat to be filed without a proposed lot resubdivision. Discussions between the owner's representatives and the City staff resulted in a recommendation that the showing of a proposed lot resubdivision for future use was not advisable at this time. 3. Control of erosion and siltation throughout the entire project area would be required under the provisions of the development contract and would follow the guidelines of "Urban Erosion Control Handbook", August, 1973 Edition. 4. Tree cover would be preserved. 5. The engineers' report of April 21, 1975, recommends that the streets be finished with one prime coat and two seal coats of bituminous penetration oil, the second seal coat to be applied during the second year of use. It is my under- standing that the owner's representatives have some objection to this requirement. 6. Street lighting will be private, i. e. furnished by the individual lot owner. Chanhassen City Council 2 May 5, 1975 7. The location of structures on each lot shall be determined through consultation with the City staff and shall take into account the environmental considerations of the area, including drain field location. 8.. The drainage and utility easements seem to be located as required by our platting ordinance. 9. As a part of erosion control, topsoil removed during construction is to be saved and used for finished grading. In addition, topsoil during road construction is to be placed on embankments and side slopes which are to be held at 4 to 1 or flatter if feasible. 10. A variance for the 2 , 000 foot cul-de-sac will be needed. 11. The Soil Conservation Service report of July 17, 1974, recommends that homesites be located on slopes of less than 12% and that no slopes over 18% be used for this purpose. 12. Throughout the various technical reports we see the recommendation that alternate drain fields should be located on the site plan as furnished with each building permit. 13. The Soil Conservation report of July 12, 1973, recommends that slopes over 18% be maintained in natural cover of grass, shrubs and trees and should be improved, planted and managed as protection for open space. In addition, all exposed areas shall be seeded within thirty (30) days after draining. A variance of Platting Ordinance Section 802(c) will be required. This section prohibits the platting of lots abutting city roads. 14. The city engineers' report of April 21, 1975, recommends provision for two additional catch basins plus an overland flow swale at the end of the cul-de-sac. 15. The engineers' report of the above date, recommends erosion protection to be provided at the siltation pond outlet. In addition to the foregoing review, this office has reviewed the proposed covenants and restrictions , articles of incorporation and by-laws of the homeowners association. With the attorneys for the owner, we have worked out the necessary changes as they relate to the rights of the City, including easements over Outlots A and B for public service purposes. This office recommends approval of the plat with a development contract to follow which will include such conditions as tho Counci hall direct. Very truly y Russell H. Larson RHL:m Chanhassen City Attorney Chanhassen City Counci :Minutes May 5, 1975 :SIM A motion was made. by Councilman. Neveaux... and seconded by Councilman Hobbs to refer this matter to the City Staff until all provisions of the Zoning and Platting Ordinances have been resolved and the Council gets a full report from the Planner and the City Attorney. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, and Shulstad. No g negative votes. Motion carried. The Peterjohns have filed with the City a petition for the Council to consider the installation of sewer and water lines in Outlot 1, Cedar Crest. HESSE FARM FINAL PLAT: Mr. and Mrs. Harold Hesse, Frank Burg, and Herb Baldwin were present. This 333 acre PUD is located on Bluff Creek Drive. Phase I is on the east side of Bluff Creek Drive. The private road is shown as Outlot.B, ponding area Outlot A', and ravine area is Outlot C which will be dedicated to the City as part of the trail system. The City Attorney discussed his report of May 5, 1975. Outlot C will be conveyed to the City at this time but left as wild open space not for general public access until such time as the City completes its total park system and has a specific plan for the use of the property. A variance. to the provision of the Platting Ordinance not requiring, at this time, a proposed subdivision of the larger lots. The natural environment will be preserved to the extent possible. Preservation of tree cover will be controlled in the development contract. The Engineer's report of April 21, 1975, recommends the streets be finished with a one prime coat, two seal coats of bituminous penetration oil. The second seal coat to be applied during the second year of use. Street lighting will be private. The location of the structures on each lot shall be determined through consultation with the City Staff and shall take into account the environmental considerations of the area including drainfield location. The drainage and utility -easements as they relate to each lot seem to conform to the Ordinance. The contract will provide for the preservation of the top soil during construction and is to be used within the. area for finished grading. The top soil during road construction is to be placed on the road embankments and side slopes which are to be held to a 4 to 1 ratio or flatter if that is feasible. A variance is needed to the Subdivision Ordinance for the length of the cul-de-sac. The Soil Conservation Service report of July 17, 1974, recommends that home sites be located on slopes of less than 12% and that no slopes of over 18% be used for home'siting purposes. Alternate drainfields be located on the site plan as as furnished with each building permit. The Soil Conservation Service report recommends that slopes over 18% be maintained in grass cover. Shrubs and trees should be improved, planted and managed as protection for open space. All exposed areas shall be seeded within 30 days after grading. A variance of Section 8.02 (c) of the Platting Ordinance will be required. 'The City Engineer's report of April 21, 1975, recommends provision for two additional catch basins plus an overland flow swale at the end of the cul-de-sac. The report also recommends erosion protection to be provided at the siltation pond outlet. The City .Attorney has reviewed the proposed covenants and restrictions with the developer's attorney and worked out changes in the covenants as they relate to the City, specifically the City retains an easement over Outlots A and B for public service purposes. A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Hobbs to approve the final plat of Hesse Farm Phase I as presented this evening and direct that the Staff of the•City_of Chanhassen adopt and draft a planned development district contract for Phase I covering the points raised by the City Attorney in his letter of May 5, 1975, and previous Chanhassen City Councii Minutes, May 5, 1975 -4- communications from his office, the recommendations of the U. S. Soil Conservation Department, the Chanhassen City Engineer, and City Planning Commission and the City Planner. When this contract is drafted it be brought back for final approval by the City Council. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. APPLE VALLEY RED-E-MIX BUILDING PERMIT: Mr. John Ericson -was present. The City Planner discussed his report of April 30, 1975. Apple Valley Red-E-Mix is proposing to reconstruct the damaged cenemt plant by adding colored metal or wooden panels to screen the hopper mechanism that was damaged in a recent fire. They are proposing to construct a redwood fence along the east property line; state highway right-of-way and landscape along the railroad tracks. Apple Valley Red-E-Mix has agreed to furnish the City with a detailed landscape plan prepared by a landscape architect. The City Planner researched passed history of the plant to see if there were any original conditions placed on the property. He found nothing as far as landscaping. 'No official report has been received from the Building Inspector as to whether the building was 50% destroyed. Mr. Ericson was asked if they were planning on relocating. He answered that to completely remove that plant and start up a new one today is just not in the mor_ey market. This plant was less than 50% damaged and we feel we can go in'there and clean it up and we will have to do rewiring and go through our batch panels. We will have a good sound physical plant when we are done. We will landscape it, work with the City, and keep it clean. We have looked at other sites throughout the western suburbs. With the money market the way it is we do not feel this is the time to make a move. Councilman Shulstad - If there is one thing in the Village that I have received more complaints about and have identified to me as being an eyesore it is that plant and I would love to see that thing relocated. I think now obviously would be a time to consider that. Are you prepared to discuss the measures you will take to not make this an eyesore? John Ericson - We have said we.will come forward with a landscape plan for approval by the City. We are willing to take and post a performance bond showing our good faith.in.that we will do it. We will repair the'roof over the block part of the building, enclose the silos, the office will not be replaced. We intend to -paint the whole structure. The existing fence on the east end of the property actually belongs to the drive-in. Should -he want .to take that fence down, we,.will put one on our own property. We'_intend to clean up the north side of the property but not interfere with the railroad. The landscape plan will cover all these things. A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Hobbs that if the Council gets a written statement on the question of whether the building was 50% destroyed from the City Administrator or a qualified representative of his choosing, the Council grants the building permit to Apple Valley Red-E-Mix_for the restoration of the building subject to withholding of the occupancy permit until an approved landscape and screening plan has been submitted and that the conditions of the Planning Commission's recommendation of April 23, 1975, be adhered to !_,,I 0 \-U T I OIL o . 1776-1976 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 553170(612) 474-8885 DATE: April 30, 1975 FROM: City Planner TO: Mayor, City Council and Mr. Harold Hesse SUBJ: Hesse Farm Final Plat Background: Attached hereto please find the April 23, 1975 planning commission minutes. In addition, I believe you recently received a copy of the Hesse Farm final plat. If you cannot locate your copy please call my office. Planners Comments: 1. Since I have not been involved with the Hesse PRD, I would like to defer my comments to Russ Larson and Bill Schoell. SPECIAL CHANHASS3,0 CITY COUNCIL MEETING APR. -.,I 26, 1975 Mayor Klingelhutz called the special Council meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with the following members present: Councilmen Hobbs, Shulstad, and Kurvers. Councilman Neveaux came late. STREET LIGHTING CONTRACT - ECKLUND AND SWEDLUND: A motion was made by - Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to provide under Section 13 of the Ecklund and Swedlund Minnewashta Woods contract that the expense of furnishing electrival energy for street lighting -purposes shall be assumed by the City 24 months after completion of the installation of the street lighting system or after 750 of building lots have been improved by construction of residences thereon, whichever is first to occur. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Kurvers, and Shulstad. No negative votes. Motion carried. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE: The Administrator has maps of the Minnesota River Valley Flood Plain and Riley -Purgatory Creek Watershed showing the 100 year flood areas. The City has to have an application into HUD of areas where the City can determine that there is a need. Other areas of the City can be added at a later date but areas cannot be deleted once they have been submitted. He asked the Council to pass a resolution authorizing the application. Councilman Shulstad moved the adoption of a resolution authorizing the Clerk -Administrator to submit the proper application for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. The area delineated is the 100 year flood potential as shown on plates 9 and 10 of the Lower Minnesota River Valley Flood Plain Study dated 1973. Resolution.seconded by Councilman Hobbs. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. HESSE FARM PHASE I: A motion.was made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Kurvers to table Hesse Farm Phase I. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN_'- LYMAN LUMBER: David Ohde, B.R.W., Tom Lowe, and Bill Ziemer were present. Tom Lowe explained some of the background of Lyman Lumber and -what they propose to do. They operate lumber yards in Excelsior, Wayzata, and Annandale, a component plant in Long Lake, and a millwork plant in Excelsior. They have experienced substantial growth and find they are being crowded out. The site in Chanhassen will have no retail sales. They intend to operate the Excelsior and Wayzata locations for retail trade. When all phases are built they plan on employing 150 people. David Ohde gave the presentation. The site is located on the north side of Highway 5 in Hennepin County. They need to provide rail service to the millwork plant, component plant, and lumber distribution yard. A frontage road is proposed along the north edge of Highway 5. A temporary access onto Highway 5 is proposed. The site has 7-8 acres of tree cover, approximately 3-3Z acres of trees may be removed. The millwork operation will be completely enclosed in a 42,500 square foot building of tilt up concrete or architectural block. Box cars on the rail spur in the center of the site will be screened.by grade changes. The majority of the traffic into and on the site will be Lyman trucks. Three types of storage structures are proposed in the lumber distribution yard; two completely enclosed warehouses, a 3 sided storage building and umbrella sheds. The 3 sided :J IT S s i 7,ialdvzin, Planner, and Fran' 2uj. �h e S rm r1l Y Side 0`1 '1 Uff - Creak Drive. rfv7,^: -CA C!ze 4.6 ac- a n -J --p. A fl ma, el-ve-,i pnerll- C4-m-tratc-L wN I I J I ot"s, rai,lodmr Si-ilr thfa ce-,feloper. G�u`,:Jut A is a Inending area. Ouflfot- is A a %,j 4 d.pV,3'Zi- .3pzr xnrc-1, a 1-itid n pri Va. u -a 1-1 a Y .1 d .9 ro; 'isa s so, m a �.,J umI Ou"t-lat C -1 s, a r a %! I I -P an-d that v-4,111 be dedlcateml tn, the- Cr i t-Y ,-%, i., t,,-A_,•,--jjT,,,-% 4-�- I-jp I.JSzkj !�' r, !'a. "i D,:Irt fj? sysst, i. The C11-ity Attorney, 6.?-ueloper a n d S ta-��4� h, pI a,�_ -4 ; flej t1j, -1 -I ,Y ave i cv jes led E Jt.4 ., k. , th -1 S P r U. p C, -M, because -�ue Tuture for s�2war Jn5 lorj S Is m,"u,"y Vvlev, that-, it V10111 d n 011. be �rlase at tfin.e to ally i &YInq rj,vQ,-IMVr,S for lat resubill vis! orn of Lats Is , IS, 6 , 18, and 19. They will be prescribz I -,,rcslwn COT-O."-rols as reco-miin-mrdad by I.,hv GI-i'y EnGinea, and, ;ire So ;I COM, F, e ry i.z,, t On .) rls`n i 'ct , d torl I provide, for thm preservation of trea cover and Pove-MI the locatkn of thQ On th-e Various lots fing til,*, contract. The C"ity Will provide -For t1l,io saviiig of t , 1p S. a -i I for use 1--Ii n Uie am-R. The e-mb.anki-n-111ts and sl de s- lop"w-, of zme road 1,11 "a I be p r o it, e c t e d . Ibe deiveloper has agreed follcming SlUggefstion's that 'Ll"hey, give. the C-Ity an a1dittiional 14 feet, of- re-giht-of -way 011-th-n cast -side of 111"PuflF Craelk Drive so f, - L T e City wil" the granted'i an ez_,Selmii�,It over tb�2 f,4ty Can Widen '-flat Stm-ei,. il an A pu511c se,rvize purposes. Tire .City Attorney the City Staff is sait-Is'led with the plan zind 'Chink they -an a contract t.Nal.- w1,11 'be wor",I-able bollllh fivinl tiii& davnflpoint-.and fig"3 -:he city's S,,-ndprjfirts a �_d ver I'.- a �.!-,nd, rastrict-lcns and th-e hnm�:.,mners eistnf. Cqty A',',2,o*,�,!,��,v -h and 'Fou-nd 11.hzm, acceptable. 11-le ♦has C"n-an-as whi'Ch tflia di�-_�valopar has agre- 6 to M A lby H-ud.,�an H-ollenback awd sa-andae. by alm, ?11111elke to rer, nd tt•m- , t - t �� t.E Cuun I pprova., the NnO .�Ji4�velopnml; Plan Of be Hesse Farm'Ppase I Sub IU th ml act 'D I e ple hau-111gro-und, data, Is anallable it varligous msiqws and rarjurts ti-I'Et I�he City Pliani-ieri C-1t;,y- EjigMeej, and City Staff. have prepared'. The Planning recomt-ic-nds the Comic-131 enll.�-er Into ,, eaVelop-merst contmd' n raquired 'I the Marl.9--d Da%seloyrent Ordin-ance. Mloi,lon manimously appiroved IRrkII,,q SIE1,10-i IfIEVELMMENTI GUIDIE: A proposal �as bean b-mughl, to the Plann"Ing Cmmission's S,,mEol P_ WaIH-S W bt;'I'd on Jo-ts wh!-h' cm port.",loil o,F tdhe thie Planning Cmmrilssion does not want to Provide SIL,-Mets. It is 2, SI-M-_A -t-ha-11. t-he Plan ShotIs as� beinm to aa Utility -easement Vjit-h. a waIN.,ding pal; h it ;.,as asti-mied uixt ZI-I pro--ertles that frollt On HUron also have access to CaMizer. Beach R73ae;., This as nol", vho casta. -Merw�, are salvar.--O 10i'l-S that only have access to Huron, A -0tion was made by Dan, Herbst and seconded by ji.m. Mle'alke that- the applItca-liens for the I d-I r, g p a iml t 10 v. k an t-I o ha Carver Sec C jh S - 41" ri dy C a li i ttee f o r r ez/ I a P d they Sub.mit Speeffic rye end! back to the City Sta-FiF and cormue before the Plarming their F-lut-Ion ur-arimously ajap5oved- PARK CROMANCIE: A motlorn was miade by 'Mal !,laCAlpine and seconde-d by Tom Haona.q to nt Some. Concern bla given "cc Sect;on '15 apFrove the proposed oMflm.-am :,Lmd 0 - JIA th'a ii nat, it is Planning CommISS"A �nls •feelings tha-I'_- discriminal"Ie use of alccftlic baverages be L4trrl to be consumed but. not sold. The, vctad in fa,vorzz Dan Herbst,, 1110 tl-acfflpine, Hudskyn Ift'llerlback, uberry N'eher, and Tot Nliaonmwn- Jim, WelIke voted no. NOtion carried. The Planner to "l-the Planning A mvtlor, was made by Ji7 41alke and secondee, by Oierry Nleher to Fleelt-ing ac"Journed U,- P.M. B,, o Clerk-Admi M., s 11.rator WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA - SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS ?) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HORKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 April 21, 1975 Planning Commission c/o Mr. Barry Brooks, Administrator P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Review of The Hesse Farm Final Plat and Street and Drainage Plans Gentlemen: We have reviewed the Revised copy of the Final Plat of the Hesse Farm, the street grades as shown on the plan dated July 24, 1974, revised to show the drainage plans and the drainage calculations received by us on April 4th. The lot sizes and road alignment shown on the Final Plat conform with those shown on the Preliminary Plat approved by the City Council on December 16, 1974. The Final Plat as revised shows 10' wide drainage and utility ease- ments on all front and rear lot lines and a 20' easement along all side lot lines except between Lots 17 and 18, where there is a 40' easement. These easements are adequate for drainage purposes and exceed ordinance requirements. The gas, power and telephone utilities have been contacted and the easements are adequate for their needs. The street grades are a maximum of 10% as recommended in our report of July 17, 1974. This increase from the 7% ordinance requirement maximum was recommended in order to more nearly conform with the existing topography. The typical street section shown on the street grade plan indicates a 26' improved width, while the street plan shows 24' width. We understand the 26' width was intended. We recommend.that the streets be finished with one prime coat and two seal coats of bituminous penetration oil, the second seal coat to be applied during the second year of use. The drainage plan shown is adequate with the following exceptions: 1. The projected flow of 9.6 CFS indicates that additional catch basin capacity (two units) is required, plus an overland flow Swale, at the end of the cul-de-sac. 2. Erosion protection should' be provEed at the siltation pond outlet. We recommend acceptance of the final plat, subject to the conditions noted above and the posting of a bond to cover ordinance-regizi_r.ed improvements in the amount of $65,000. Very truly yours, sv DSCItGei1 su SCHOELL & IvLAIIS,ON_ INC. Chanhassen City Council Minutes April 21, 1975 -7- A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to authorize the Planner to finalize this letter and get copies to Carver County for distribution with the change added that we support the general theory of the Metropolitan Council to be an advisory agency that we support the general theory of developing a development framework plan. The letter to be signed by all Councilmen and the Mayor. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. It was suggested that the first paragraph on page 4 be inserted on page 1. DOG LICENSE: A problem has arisen whereby if a dog was vaccinated against rabies in December 1973 and is good until December 1975. If a license is obtained May 1 the license will run until May 1, 1976, but the vaccination runs out in December 1975. It is a question of either getting a I. vaccination early or how does the City know that it will be vaccinated again. The City Administrator has done some checking on the proble. This can be accommodated by issuing the license and send the owner a notice when the rabies vaccination is due and give them 30 days to respond with a certificate. He has talked to the Veterinary Clinic and found that the type of shot given now is actually good for as much as three years. A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Shulstad granting the issuance of a Dog License to Mrs. Donlin notwithstanding the literal provisions of the Dog Ordinance. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. HESSE FARM:- A meeting is scheduled Wednesday morning with their Engineer, Planner, the property owner, their Attorney, and City Attorney and Planner to work out preliminary type of approval for the Planning Commission meeting Wednesday evening. A motion was made by Councilman Neveaux and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to table action on the Hesse Farm Phase 1 PUD and Final Plat until results of the Wednesday night Planning Commission meeting and final report from the City Engineer and Planner. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. CBD MINUTES: The Council has not received any minutes from the CBD Committee lately. A motion was made by Councilman Hobbs and seconded by Councilman Shulstad to continue this meeting until Monday evening April 28 at 7:30 p.m. The following voted in favor: Mayor Klingelhutz, Councilmen Hobbs, Neveaux, Shulstad, and Kurvers. No negative votes. Motion carried. Time 12:30 a.m. Barry Brooks Clerk -Administrator WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON . JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R.ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON RAYMOND J. JACKSON WILLIAM J. BREZINSKY JACK E. GILL FRANK V. LASKA SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC. ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS 18-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 December 12, 1974 Mr. Lloyd Schnelle, Administrator P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Subject: Review of Hesse Farm Preliminary Development Plan (Area East of Bluff Creek Drive) and Concept Plan (Area West of Bluff Creek Drive) Dear Mr. Schnelle: We have reviewed the revised "Preliminary Plat" of The Hesse Farm, undated but received by us on November llth, along with the boundary sur- vey received at the same time, and the supplementary soil percolation tests reported by Soils & Materials Engineers, Inc. dated October 29. We had delayed responding to the latter because the absorption tests still show inadequate soil absorption, slower.than 60 minutes per inch in nine out of 16 holes. We agree that use of some special equipment, such as the cumotic system manufactured by Sewage Osmosis, Inc., 1300 Kelly Drive; Medicine Lake, might prove feasible, or construction of very shallow tile fields, with not over 12" of dirt cover, where liquid.disposal occur- res by evaporation rather than by soil absorption might prove equally feas- ible.. In any case, the lots,are'sufficiently large to allow use of either of these alternatives. It is unfortunate that land which provides such good agricultural product -seems to be most difficult in which to dissipate wastes. In connection with our previous comments, the following: 1. The walkways will be private, so do not need to be shown. 2. Final plans for roadways should show details of covering the dumped materials in the ravines, protection against erosion, and there should be some binding commitment prohibiting deposition of deleterious mater- ials in the ravines in the future. 3. All,roads are to be private, as recommended by the Planning Commission. We recommend that they have adequate granular base, finished with one prime coat and two seal coats' of bituminous penetration oil, the lat- ter shot on the second year of use. Roadways should be installed not later than the time when one-half of the building permits in a partic- ular addition have been given. The roadway tracts should be a total of 60' width, with 20' surface and a graded 6' sidewalk bench (but no sidewalk) on each side. We recommend your acceptance of this Preliminary Development Plan for the area east of Bluff Creek Drive, described on the drawing as a "prelim- 'inary plat", with the above conditions. Very trul ours, T.7T1Crhnal 1 • ��, �� CITY ENGINEER 1 2) DESIGN BnPLAI�l,�ieING MinnesotaASSOCIATES, INC. 4826 22 2jnr_ CuuINGILMEN _ CGUPli;tlJ,^.EMI November 20, 1974 MEMORANDUM SSi. 2.ONiNG To: Lloyd Schnel1e, Administrator BLNG.iNSP. City of Chanhassen, Minnesota PUB. WK. su RUTILITY. From: Carl R. Dale, AIP Planning Consultant, Subject: SI-al:us and Sil:ual;'ion Ro'-Burt can Currow, 1'1inrlr!•in'i A. Hesse Farm (PUD and. Preliminary Subdivision Plan) I have recently received apparently revised copies of this proposed plat; they still do not, however-, include the notations I requested from Herb Baldwin. These notations,would_.:point out the open green space and "common" areas referred to in the proposed home owners' association legal papers. Without this information, I cannot.make any final recommendation as to the plans consistently with staff recommendations. It is my understanding, however, that the soil percolation tests have been poor and still further plan revisions may be required, -In any event, I would not recommend final approval of this plat until such time that a clear relationship is demon- strated between three elements: 1. Plan map notations; 2. Home owners' association documents; and 3. Staff recommendations and public open space policy. B. Development Moratorium and Housing Policy/Guidelines/Criteria This matter seems to he in a state of total confusion, My comments and Iow. '11•11 w. follow..: * An official policy statement is needed even if it states only that the City has no policy. * Federal and State financial aids (sewer, water, parks, etc.) and approval of such -funding by the Metropolitan Council reciu_ires a suitable housing policy. * The Central Cities have been most active in developing housing policy and very general guidelines have been developed by the Metropolitan Council. Suburban communities have far more discussion than actual, concrete results. w Metropolitan Council staff assistance is available but they are v("ry slow and very general (working on it for over three years wiU1 Wuudbury and Shoreview with no specifics approved to date). * Some close -in suburban communities have developed housing policy state-. ments of sorts although most are _limited to the',question of requiring a minimum amount of low-cost housing. For example, Golden Valley requires fr17 DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATES, INC. L 4826 Chicago Avenue So. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 Phone: (612) 822.2106 August 9, 1974 PLANNING REPORT For: Planning Commission City of Chanhassen, Minnesota By: Carl R'. Dale, AIP Planning.Consuitant Subject: Park, Open Space, Recreation Needs- Vicinity'of Hesse Farm At your request,:l have examined the needs for parks, open space,.and active recreation areas and facilities in the vicinity of the Hesse Farm (related to sub- division and PUD'Requirements for development of the Hesse Farm for residential use). My comments and suggestions are based upon field inspection of the site, a general review of your Comprehensive City Plan, an analysis of the Brauer Park Study (1969 report), and a meeting with the Park and Recreation Commission. My findings, conclusions, and recommendation's are as follows: GENERAL 1. For all practical purposes, the Brauer Park Study and the open space plan portion of the Comprehensive City Plan are.the same; both are quite general and in- dicate only a "skeletai framework" consisting, primarily of open space corridors following established drainageways.and low -wet areas., While some mention is made of Community Park needs, very little is mentioned about local,. neighborhood "playground". or active recreation areas. or fact ltl ies.. . 2. Existing plans are almost totally devoid of any.standards or policy guidelines for meeting -future recreation needs and/or evaluating private development proposals. 3. There is, in'fact, very little in.the way.of officially adopted policy planning and/or standards to utilize in properly evaluating the'recreation needs of current private development,prroposals. SPECIFIC 1. The only -public open space or recreation plan existing and affecting the Hesse Farm development is the indication of a "primary natural resource" on the Brauer Park Concept Plan and a similar area designated for "semi-public/public" on the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. it can only be presumed that this area was Intended for some type of -public protection due to physical conditions (steep slopes, drainageway, tree" cover, etc.). No Indication is given for active re- creation area needs such as.ball fields, childr6n6 play equipment, and the like. ,. t PLANNING REPORT -2- August 9, 1974 2. In the apparent absence of any specific or detailed long-range plans, standards, and policy, we would recommend the following: a) Bluff Creek and adjacent slopes should be dedicated to the public; said dedication should be up to, at, or near the "no build line" as indicated on the proposed subdivision plan. This would involve permitting subdivision of lots to be retained under private ownership of less than five (5) acres but the net effect would be the same and in accordance with acceptable con- temporary zoning practice (cluster platting, density transfer, etc.). The exact line for designation of public land dedication should be determined by negotiation with the land owner based,upon specific development plans. b) There mayor may not be a need for an active play area (organized sports ac- tivities such as hockey and baseball). Such needs, if present, migh7- be met privately,by use of the very large residential lots involved; if not, other.' areas might.be provided by a home owner's association. Due to the nature of the proposed development, the location and site characteristics, and rasidential deni.Ity -, it is recommended that no "public" land be required for _active - recreation needs. c) It is recommended that the "principle" of cluster platting,be accomplished as follows: * The roads, ponds, and all slopes and tree cover below the no -build line beset aside as common property (undivided interest) and be maintained, controlled and regulated by a home owner's association; this may or may not include the re -arrangement of some lots on the buildable land. The City should require a "blanket"'easement over ali roads, trails; ponds, ponds, and common open space with various conditions set forth In the PUD Permit. d) New roads.ln the plat should be private and maintained by the home owner's association but with PUD conditions Included to reserve City rights to eventual take-over and the right to assume maintenance responsibility (with costs assessed) should the home owner's association fail to properly exercise its responsibilities. Similar conditions should be placed upon the ponds.and other common open space: e) Among other things, the City should reserve the right to obtain, free of charge, public pedestrian t rail easements through the common open space in the future if a need is indicated and/or the home owners' association does not properly provide its own Inter -connected trail system Indicated as an intent on the proposed subdivision plan. Also, the City should reserve the right to utilize suitable areas of the common open space for active play areas if a need becomes apparent; said public use could be abandoned at any time the neighborhood age structure or other changes in conditions eliminate the public need, f) PUD conditions should include certain standards for proper maintenance of the streets, ponds, and common open space and remedial action recourse. PLANNiNG REPORT -3- August 9, 1974 g) Land along Bluff Creek required for public dedication shoudd simply be held in a public "land bank" and not opened for public use until a more complete public open space "system" is secured and a.datailed public policy and use plan is formulated and approved by the City Council. SUMMARY It is believed that'the greatest common good (both public and private) can be - obtained by the above recommendations at the least public expense. . Total Bill Escrow Account Balance Due HESSE'S BLUFF CREEK Total Bill Hesse's Question Amount of of 1,354.87 Paid in Escrow $2,560.05 1,415.00 1,145.05 2,560.05 1,354.87 1,205.18 677.47 1,882.65 1,415.00 467.65 ...r and 1-'rs ' Iarold Fesse Ezoute 7, fox 75 Chaska, t- innesota 55318 re ease Project- �-hanhassan uar : -arold and !'at ursuant to our meeting with Parry E�rook3, Chanhassen C-ity :,.anger, I i:ave poured over any files of the fast years work In an effort to sub- stantiate the city's atate m ant for extra charges for processing your project. In rLy opinion, tl-,e atatement for extra charges is not reasonable and fair. -Although it is difficult to pull-out specific charges several IM-Ocific points can be made which effect the charges againist tltr:e l-roject generally, they are: 1 Your project i:aa suffered the burden of disorganization, confusion, indecision, and Ina ieien6as of many changes In the city's administrative staff. : he review of the I:rojact began with kdolph Tassnese through interim ataff, to -Lloyd : chnalle, through intfarirt: stag, to Parry-Erooks, to this point in tit. 0, witY. interim staff. 2 I was expressly led to understand by Lloyd L ennelle that the escrow fee of $1400.00 (orijinally set at 4a006.00 in November 1973), which you paid to the city, was sufficient to cover all expenses and that the city would make regular postlnrs on the project to he: sent to us monthly for our review of progress and costs. 'I his was not done. 3 :'eview and approval processig was not fully understood by the stag which was apparent in their interpretation of applicable ordinances, orderly scheduling, and providing for sufficient lead time i;iven to the city's special consultants for review of the project. 4 The city made unnecessary and inefficient work assignments to the planning consultant especially concerning the park study (L-rauer-=eport) which was a general city wide issue. 5 The city made untlaiely work assi nrr ont to the le al consultant winch appeared to be in severe conflict with pressing city/metro/state problecis herb baldwin landscape architect route two jordan minnesota five five three five two Page two arold and —Pat F'esse during the last phases of your project. Throughout the project I believe our design/developr.:ent intent was presented in an acceptable ,Manner adequate for the city's review and approval. I -.any times I had the feeling we were the victims of in- decission and unfortunately learned of the lack of coordination within the staff through several unpleasant phone conversations with Lloyd L�chn©lle. In view of the above, I recommend that you not pay the extra charges and that you consult your attorney for legal advice. HANBASSEN VILLAGE 7610 LAREDO DRIVE • P. O. BOX 147 0 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 HAROLD HESSE PROPERTY ESCROW FEE PAID 9/20/73 15.00 " " if 5/30/74 1,400.00 $1,415.00 EXPENSES INCURRED RE: DEVELOPMENT Russell Larson 2122172 60.00 Sun News 2/22/72 20.70 DESIGN PLANNING 11-19-73 Meet with P.C. Chairman &Administrator 45.00 RUSSELL LARSON 11-23-73 Review proposal for Bluff View Re: Plat and detailed report to L. Schnelle 67.00 SCHOELL & MADSON 1-21-74 Review prelim plat and concept plan 10/73 50.00 ? DESIGN PLANNING May '74 meeting with City Staff & Developer 60.00 ? DESIGN PLANNING June ' 74 Report 60.00 011C Prepare for meeting 30.00 Mileage 8.75 98.75� :2 DESIGN PLANNING July Report 45.00 0 Study park - needs 60.00 Prepare for Plan Commission meet 30.00 Attend Plan. C. meetina_ 25.00 Mileage 8.29 168.29 RUSSELL LARSON 7/4/74 Check maps to determine legal descrip for public hearing notice, draft public hearing notice and arrange for pub. 85.00 7/24/74 Attend Public Hearing 50.00 135.00 CHASKA HERALD 8/19/74 Public hearing notice 11.68 DESIGN PLANNING 9/6/74 Discuss Plan C agenda items W/adm 7.50 9/11/74 Attend meeting 25.00 9/30/74 Meet W/City staff Re; Hesse farm 75.00 Mileage 10.00 117.50 �;j 437. PAGE 2 HESSE FARM DEVELOPMENT 7 DESIGN PLANNING August '74 ` Park Study for Hesse farm -a�' `1''30.00 ° k Report on park needs Vicinity H. farm 30.00 Park Study .Q30:00 Discuss '�'.U.D. with planner 15.00 Meeting with Hesse planner 30.00 Prepare for meeting 30.00 Xerox Copies 3.00 Mileage 4.83 Attend Park Meeting 75.00 Attend Plan C. meeting 8/14/74 25.00 Attend Plan C. meeting 8/28/74 25.00 297.83 7 RUSSELL LARSON 9-30-74 Conf, with engineers, planners & L. Schnelle regarding planned district zoning 80.00 DESIGN PLANNING 10-7-74 Review Farm Home Owners Assn document 30.00 DESIGN PLANNING 11-8-74 Review Prelim. map 30.00 11-19-74 Report to Administrator 45.00 12-16-74 Meet with City Staff 30.00 12-16-74 Final Review of P.U.D. 45.00 12-16-74 Prepare for City Council meeting 30.00 12-16-74 Attend City Council meeting 75.00 Xerox copies.and postage 12.85 267.85 7 RUSSELL LARSON 12-14-74 Review file, drawings, minutes of meet- tings, and public hearing, covenants, articles of Inc. and by laws of prop- erty owners association covering Phase I of P-1 Development District. 175.00 12-16-74 Attend Council meeting 70.00 245.00 7 RUSSELL LARSON 4-20-75 Review of Plan. Commission minutes,reports and maps of Design Planning, City Engr, Soil Conservation Service and Lloyd Schnelle, Review of Hesse proposed covenants and res- trictions, articles of Incorporation and by-laws of home owners assn, and prelimin- ary plat of Phase 1. 200.00 4-23-75 Conf. with City Planner, Herb Baldwin, Harold Hesse, Gary Larson, Barry Brooks and Frank Burg regarding Phase 1 prelim- inary plat and planned development dis- trict contract. Attend Planning Commission meeting regarding approval of Phase 1. 87.50 281.50 CITY_ PLANNER 1 , hours @ 17.50 21.25 SCHOELL & MADSON Review plat of Hesse Farm; prepare report re drainage plan, etc. 276.00 RUSSELL LARSON 5-5-75 Review revised covenants and restrict- ions and planning materials & report to Council 50.00 Prepare development Contract 150.00 Xerox and postage 20.70 220.70 BALANCE DUE TO CITY 'f ,11,.D-5- Chanhassen, Minn.,__..______-__.___ -._....._ _ 19 IN ACCOUNT WITH CITY OF CHANHASSEN ��-i7-�'� i � � �� �ae.� G?tea �;-� �• , r�,� i �,, At 3 f , � r ice.. �%'., �+•` E r 17 ii).•C��Lk.�,i �`_e.r�,=flyLe-rtJ �•u �!�Q. `.� '`.l �"'-!; �� r `./ %_�1�7, iu� w*ce"! t-�ar��� f!'•..r-.tee. �.;i '�� \ '• �.. . U .. ��%`>•' e.� G•r G�L!d is ; a. I JOS'G7 �'y � I F 1 I d 4ii �U C hic.ayu Avtl 1� So. ;%1 h1.1a3PU115, Mkr1i1,;!50(] EYJ 11 / }ail 1j1': f i l L! 622 t 2 OS Jul I;', 1974 i`_;'' 12.1 f NG RIEPORT For: Planning Commission City of Chanhassen, Minnesota By: Carl R. Dale, AIP Planning Consultant Subject: Planning Review and Recommendations - Harold Hesse Farm Subdivision Phase I development. Pl anni n : Considerations 1. Comments concerning the entire plan contained in a Planning Report dated June 20, 1974 are still considered valid. At that time, we suggested that a "cluster" planning approach may be more desirable and that a pre - plat plan be submitted i ndi c,ati ng how the . 1 ots could be re-subdivided' in the future if and when sanitary sewer service is provided. Apparently the developer has not responded to such suggestions nor has he been led to believe such is the desire of the City. 2. Under consideration now is a subdivision plan.for'the first phase of development based upon the more; general overall subdivision plan sub- mitted and reviewed earlier. If development is to proceed based upon the current design plan and concept, we recommend approval of the first stage -preliminary plat subject to the following: a) Drafting of detailed conditions relying heavily upon the soils and engineering reports; there are many details which .are and should be incorporated in these reports. The final draft should be quite similar to that developed for Minnewashta Woods. b) A determination should be made as to what land shall be dedicated to the_public'and what lands should be retained under a home owners association, Related to this is the question of proper maintenance of-ponding areas to be retained; there is also the question of pedes- trian trail easements (width, location, improvements, public use, and the like). c) Soil tests and certain other requirements should be made prior to filing of a final plat with the County. d) As with the Minnewashta Woods development, a great variety of con- siderations are involved such as: Erosion controls Public land dedication and/or Preservation of tree cover cash in -lieu of Street surface Street lighting. Storm drainage Location of structures on lots (speci.al conditions) 3. Conditions for a final plat can be drafted based upon receipt of all staff reports, public comments, and resultant directions from the Planning Commission. DESIGN PLANNING ASSOC,P, 7 73, MIC. 4826 Chicago Avenue So. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 Phone: (612) 822.2106 Juen 20, 1974 PLANNING REPORT For: Planning Commission City,of Chanhassen, kAnesota By: Carl R.- Dale, AIR Planning .Consultant Subject: Planning Analysis an.d'Recommendations Hesse Farm Subdivision ,q. Planning Considerations 1. This subdivision proposal has been before the Planning Commission at several previous meetings; essentially, the plan is to develop very large (five acres or more) single °family lots -on terrain that is very rugged (large"amount of a.rea.in steep slopes, tree cover, some low areas, etc.).. 2. In order to plat large lots on this site in- reasonable relation to proper streets, it had been necessary to "strain" the site by lot and street arrangements that will'provide the necessary large lots (i.e. provide the necessary land area per lot). By providing such large 1 ots,' the question also arises as to the potential, later for re -subdivision into smaller -lots if.and;when public utilities are extended into the area. 3: It is our suggestion that the .plat as submitted can be accommodated but that a "better" subdivision plan solution is possible; that solution is the techn•i que of "cluster platting" .with the use of smaller lots (net lot acreage) while leaving steep slopes and other Problem areas in a natural state under either a home owner's association or dedicated. to the public. 4. Neither a cluster plat plan nor' a potential re -subdivision plan for smaller lots has been submitted; the applicant apparently believes that such a plan is not desired by_the Planning Commission. It is our recommendation, however, that such plans are not only desir- able but essential to proper long-range planning. 5. Based upon the above, we suggest the following: a) Approval of the plat as submitted but with final approval or the final plat (for recording with the County) to be -with vari- ous conditions as suggested by the C.Ity.Engineer, the SCS, and others. A larger..ngmber of conditions would be. included such as A PLANNING REPORT City of Chanhassen, Mn, 2- .June 20, 1974 r� open space dedication vs, home owner's retention, drainage, special conditions for prevention of silting and erosion, preservation of plant cover, and the like. If this plan'is approved, however, we would strongly recommend'that-a poten- tial re -subdivision plan be submitted ;indicating ,how the large lots (or a portion) could be platted into"s,maller lots if and when utilities become available. b) Suggesting to the land owner that a "cluster" platting approach might be more satisfactory in the long'run for,'both public and private interests. This would enable a more realistic view of future smaller lot needs (potential) =and enable better planning to preserve open green space without "straining" to include such land in private (individual large lot) ownership. 6. We recommend approval of the proposed p1`at as submitted subject to drafting of detailed conditions but suggest that a better subdivision plan approach is possible from both the.public and private viewpoints: CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE9P.O BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: September 8, 1978 TO: Planning Commission, Staff, and Harold Hesse FROIAI: Assistant City Planner, Bob Wa bel SUBJ: Hesse Farm Phase II and III, Preliminary Development Plan, Public Hearing APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Patii-inn Petition before the Planning Commission at this time is to hold a public hearing to gather public sentiment to the subject proposal, and to form- ulate recommendation to Council. Planner's Comments 1. Since the past meeting on this subject item, I have reviewed the property with Don Berg of the Carver Soil Conservation Service. The following are excerpts from our discussion of findings while viewing the site. Phase I or Sheet I In reviewing the site, there was some question as to the placement of the no build line. Along the rear edges of lots 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, the no build line seems well beyond what is considered conventionally buildable slope. This office realizes that there are many styles of architecture which will permit residences to be safely constructed on considerable slopes, however, it is also the opinion of this office that there presently does not exist adequate building guidelines or standards which will guarantee to protect the health, safety and welfare of the municipality for houses constructed on extremes slopes. The southern portions of lots 19 and 20 have a low area of glencoe-class soils which have relatively severe problems with moisture. This area of glencoe soil extends to the northern line of lot 20 with considerable slope both on the east and west sides of this glencoe-class area. PLANNING REPORT -2- ,,ptember 8, 1978 As indicated on your copy of the street -grade plan, the street on Sheet I will have an approximate grade of 7.856 as it fronts lot 21 and 27. This may be acceptable to the City Engineer, however the accomplishment of producing this ultimate grade should be demonstrated through al overall grading plan. Lots 23, 24, and 27 will require a significant amount of precaution as to location of house and septic system with respect to the rear slopes to the rear of these properties. Phase II or Sheet III Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8, have areas of soils with inherent moisture problems. The larger amounts are found in lots 1, 2, and 4. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 16, and 17, have the most marginal slope atributes with much of the slope over 18%. Also within these areas are significant areas of slopes of 12-18%. The areas designated as outlot A is a perennial water holding area with a controlled outlet at the eastern edge. At a point where the southerhlimb of the road system crosses the water control system flow -way at lot 16, there is a proposed finished grade of 8.15% which exceeds the city's standards by 1.150. The same reservation of this office as previously mentioned applies to this particular road section. Portions of this phase also have a no build line extending well into the areas of very severe slopes, to which the previously mentioned reservations of this office are applicable. Lots, 11 and 12 are significantly restrictive as to the ability to place a house and septic system on the property and still have regard for the slopes on the rear of the parcel. At previous Planning Commission meetings, the issue of demonstrative resubdivision of the property when a -ewer is emminent had been discussed. Stemming from that discussion, the Planning Commission expressed a desire for the City Engineer to do a study on the application of most effective septic systems. Performing such a studyhas been more than difficult in a time such as the present with much development in public improvement construction. It is possible that such a study could be completed before any building permits would be issued on the proposed phases-, however approval of the Hesse Farm Plan contingent upon adoption of new septic standards would significantly delay the site.preparat on activities of Mr. Hesse. With respect to the requirement of demonstrative resubdivi.sion of the proposed property, it appears that lot 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 27, and 28 could potentially be resubdi.vided. Remaining areas -because of questionable soils or slopes would not be recommended for any further subdivision. I:t is not clear to this office at this time of any unique status of lot 26.. It is assumed that this lot will not be considered for building because of the absence of a building setback, no build information, and inundation of slope, and lack of proper access. PLANNING REPORT -3- geptember 8, 1978 The subdivision ordinance of the City of Chanhassen, states that all developments within the City shall show regard for the existing terrain and vegetation. The plans submitted to date have topographic contours at intervals of 4 feet. I strongly recommend that the Planning Commission require the applicant to submit a grading plan for the entire area Z'contour information, then review said grading plan before any submittal of information to City Council. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF HEARING STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF CARVER Don Ashworth } ss. } and says that he is and was on 4 being first duly sworn, on oath deposes September- 5 78 , 19, the duly qualified and acting City Clerk -Administrator of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date he caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of hearing on a Proposed subdivigionij__ conditional use permit and variance for in the Harold Hesse, Chanhassen, Minnesota City 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 mails 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 of Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of =-= Notary Public Don Ashworth City Manager CITY OF 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP 0. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 23, 1978 TO: Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Enclosure for Hesse Farm Phase II and III, Preliminary Development Plan Review APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Please include the Planner's Report dated August 23, 1978, with your copy of exhibit 1, Hesse Farm development plan and bring it to this evening's meeting. 7610 LAREDO DRIVE0P.O. BOX 147*CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 65317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: August 23, 1978 TO: Planning Commission and Staff FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Hesse Farm, Phase II and III, Proposed Preliminary Plan Review APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 PPtitinn Mr. Hesse is proposing to subdivide Phases II and III of the Hesse Farm which is located on the west side of Bluff Creek Drive. Planner's Comments 1. The two phases are divided along a line extending southwestward of a point approximately 600 feet north of the entry way to Hesse Farm Phase I. The northerly phase contains 18 residential lots and the southerly phase contains 9 residential lots all averaging approximately 5 acres in size. 2. The subject property is presently P-1, planned residential development. As mentioned in previous reports, resolution 911721 prohibits the Planning Commission from reviewing planned unit development proposals beyond the sketch plan phase in the unsewered areas of the city. The city council, upon recommendation from the Planning Commission, moved to rescind resolution 911721 in the occasion of the Hesse Farm at it's July 17, 1978, meeting. 3. Of initial importance at this time, is the consideration of several variances to city ordinances 47, 33 and 45 that are applicable to this particular plan. The Planning Commission first must establish grounds for a variance to Section 2.01 of Ordinance 45 which states that the platting and subdivision of lands within areas of the city not served by sanitary sewer shall be prohibited until sewer systems are available to serve the areas proposed to be platted or subdivided. Planning Commissior -2- August 23, 1978 Additionally, the planning commission will have to establish grounds for variances to sections of subdivision ordinance 33 which require that all residential lots have frontage on a public street, and said public streets are to have hard surface with concrete curb and gutter, that subdivisions of this nature demonstrate the resubdivision of properties as would happen when sewer is eminent, and that cul-de-sacs should not be more than 500 feet in length. Pursuant to city ordinance, a variance may be granted from the require- ments of an ordinance as to the specific tracts of land where it is shown that by reasons of topography, soil conditions, or other physical characteristics strict requirements with these requirements could cause an exceptional or undue hardship to the enjoyment of a substantial property. right, provided, that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely affect the comprehensive Village plan nor the spirit and intent of the ordinances. 4. The attached copies of the minutes of city meetings concerning the Hesse Farm indicate that the entire parcel was rezoned to P-1 along with the approval of the preliminary development plans of Phase I, east of Bluff Creek Drive. 5. As mentioned in previous reports, there was some question of this proposals applicability to Metropolitan Significance regulations. A copy of the plan has been forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for a determination concerning this matter. We would hope that the Metropolitan Council would respond within the time requested and would not unduly delay the remainder of the review process. 6. The applicant should make an escrow deposit to defray staff costs in processing this application in amount to be yet determined by staff and said deposit should be made no later than September 1, 1978. Planner's Recommendation The -Planning Commission at this time should delineate it's position on either granting or denying the above stated variances and each member should give his reasons, for the record, for the recommended action. If the commission favors granting the above stated variances, then a public hearing should be ordered for the preliminary development plan review, and the variance requests. If the commission should decide against recommending approval of the variances, the commission should then advise the applicant of his right to public hearing, and the commission should order the said public hearing if the applicant so requests. Planning Commission K—ting August 23, 1978 - 7- Roman Roos - There are two separate proposals being reviewed together. Craig Mertz - It would be two separate plats. Bob Meuwissen - When they start developing which way are they going to bring in the ready mix and the equipment? Mr. Bloomberg invited residents to meet with Mr. Davis or himself to discuss the proposal. Jack Melby —There was a Planner's recommendation which really hasn't been discussed and that was what,to do with Hill Street. Since some of the residents are here that should be reviewed. Bob Waibel - What my recommendation essentially was that these be blocked off and that the residents, if they so desire, gain a safer access through the transportation system of the development. Bob Davis - I don't want to pay for improving roads for other people. They have a road now. If the city would recommend some public improvements this is something else. John Segner - There was four of us that were assessed $1,000 extra for putting tar on Hill Street and I don't see why anybody else should be cutting in on it now. Bob Davis - I am not using Hill Street and that was one of the Planner's original comments back two meetings ago that we not put any additional traffic on Hill Street: Bob Waibel - My recommendation was to essentially eliminate what I thought was a hazardous access onto 101. Bill Brezinsky I think we are saying that we still wish that something could be done about the Hill Street thing but with this plan as it is presented right now I don't think it's worth it. Jerry Neher - It is a very dangerous place for a school bus to be turning around. Mal MacAlpine moved to close the public hearing and hold the.public record open for one week to receive written comments: Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved. Hearing closed at 9:25 p.m. DAVIS/BLOOMBERG SUBDIVISIONS: Mal MacAlpine moved to table discussion until September 13, 1978. Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanimously approved. HESSE FANI, PHASES II -AND III = PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Mr. Hesse is proposing to subdivide phases II and III of the Hesse Farm which is located on the west side of Bluff Creek Drive into 27 residential lots averaging approximately five acres in size. -The Council moved to rescind resolution 911721 in the occasion of the Hesse Farm at its July 17, 1978 meeting: The Planner discussed his report of August 23, 1978. The property is rezoned P-1. Roman Roos - Let's take the four variances and state our reasons. The first would be the platting and subdivision of lands within the area not served with sanitary sewer. Mal MacAlpine - At our last meeting we felt that if we did make a recommendation to approve this recommendation that we should be very sure that the City Engineer took the necessary steps to see proper type septic system was designed. Hud Hollenback - I agree. I think that's the main consideration here. Apparently it worked for the first phase. Jerry Neher - A previous Planning Commission had more or less approved the whole project. This was grandfathered in in my opinion. Roman Roos - Once we made the recommendation to rescind that resolution 911721 to the Council that automatically said that we figured that Ordinance 45 would not take effect in that area but we did state that the se-ptic Planning Commission Mnoting August 23, 1978 100 systems snould be very stringent. That ti,,s my big concern. It is the concensus of the Planning Commission based on our comment; that we grant the variance to Ordinance 45 in respect to sewer. The second variance required would be in regards to Ordinance 33 which requires all residential lots have frontage on a public street. Craig Mertz - Mr. Hesse advises me that he is proposing to do the same thing he did on the first addition and that would be to make the streets an outlot and the outlot would be owned by the homeowners. associatic3n. Hud Hollenback - I have no problem with,that. Jerry Neher -_I have no problem.. Bob Waibel - The Subdivision Ordinance requires that large tracts of land demonstrate that they can be resubdivided when sewer is imminent. Frank Burg - I am Harold Hesse's engineer. We went through the same routine tinat we are embarking on right now when we did the first addition and a think the first and foremost premise that Mr. Hesse goes on is that (1) the lot will not be resubdivided. The area is to remain large .and I think if,you look at the plan that we have on this particular Phase II and Phase III development.the' topography of the area, the available building sites per lot are very -limited --and a resubdivision of the.lots.is,just impractical. You said the same thing when we did.the first phase, that they will.not be resubdivided and I think. Harold, that went in to the covenants. Hud Hollenback - That's probably the.only-reason.we are doing this is because we agree there is a - need for that type of homestead, however, there is nothing to say that the City -Council again after the year 2000 can come through if they are told sewer has to go in there and assess each lot owner four assessments or five or six like has happened in some of these other areas where we had large lots. What we find is somebody dies and the son inherits the house and the. first thing you know he comes up here and wants to subdivide. There is nothing we can do about it. Frank Burg - We agree wholeheartedly with the City's position on this. In this particular one we looked at them from a soils configuration,from a topographical configuration, and the lots are just there. I would say that probably 90% of the lots, no way could be resubdivided. Some of those lots are going to have 13, 15 acres in them but they are unbuildable other than one area which is the area the house is going.to'be which is going to -be very'compatibie to some of your other,maybe,one acre parcels elsewhere in the City. I am going to guess that by the time sewer and water gets to this area which is going to be past the year 2000 that our technology in treating and handling sewage and the transportation of sewage is going to be quite different than it is today. Roman Roos'- There -is' very few lots that :can. be subdivided.- Hud Hollenback - You can always make the 'argument -'that -doesn't front ona "it public street or a private street for that matter and therefore .you can't replat it. I guess there is .no problem. Roman Roos - In essence what: we are saying is the four variances, we feel, should be granted — Mal DISEASED TREE DISPOSAL SITE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: The City Planner gave his report of August.-21, 1978. Doug Mitchell -'As far'as hours go, if we would open it up to the public and to 7610 LAREDO DRIVE®P.O. BOX 147oCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 December 26, 1978 Insurance Services office of Minnesota Attn: Mr' Thomas Moores 12 South Sixth Street_ Minneapolis, MN Deer Mr. Moores: The City of Chanhassen is requesting that your office review the attached copies of the Hesse Farm Development, Phases I, II and III, for the purposes of assessing the overall developments effect on the fire insurance classification rating for Chanhassen. At present, Phase I, which lies east of Bluff Creek Drive,is already platted and undergoing construction of.homes. Phases II and III which lie west of Bluff Creek Drive have recently received preliminary development plan approval from the City Council. Not indicated on the plans of Phases II and III is the provision of an emergency access easement along the southeasterly side of Lot 3. Phase I consists of 21 residential lots, and Phases II and III comprise a total of 28 residential lots. Also enclosed with this matter, is a copy of the existing land use. map of June, 1977, and the trunk water service area map, for the City of Chanhassen. . If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact our staff at 474-8885 Thank you. SinceY'a 4:-Y' Walter B. Hobbs �--' Mayor WBH;k CITY OF LAREDO DRiVEoP.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 December 15, 1978 Herb Baldwin Route 2 Jordan, Minnesota 55352 Dear Herb: As you remember, I requested from you copies of the development plans for Phases I, II, and III, of the Hesse Farm. As of yet I have not received those plans that will be necessary for final- ization of the preliminarily approved Phases II, and III. If you could kindly remind your associates of our need for those copies and have them forwarded to our office, it would be greatly appreciated. I am looking forward to working with you`in the near future. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Bob Waibel BW:njo 7610 LAREDO DRIVEoP.O. BOX 147oCHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 November 22, 1978 Insurance Services office of Minnesota Attn: Mr: Thomas Moores 12 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN Dear Mr. Moores: The City of Chanhassen is requesting that your office review the attached copies of the Hesse Farm Development, Phases I, II and III, for the purposes of assessing the overall developments effect on the fire insurance classification rating for Chanhassen. At present, Phase I, which lies east of Bluff Creek Drive, is already platted and undergoing construction of homes. Phases II and III which lie west of Bluff Creek Drive have recently received preliminary development plan approval from the City.Council. Not indicated on the plans of Phases II and III is the provision of an emergency access easement along the southeasterly side of Lot 3. Phase I consists of 21 residential lots, and Phases II and.III comprise a total of 28 residential lots. Also enclosed with this matter, is a copy of the existing land use map of June, 1977, and the trunk water service area map, for the City of Chanhassen. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact our staff at 474-8885. Thank you. Since Walter B. Hobbs Mayor WBH;k CITY 0F fl 00, CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 3, 1978 TO: Bob Waibel, Ass't. City Planner FROM: Jerry Schlenk, Building Inspector SUBJ: Hesse Plat I talked with the Insurance Services Office and they request that you send to them a copy of the Hesse Pam, Phases I & II. Also, they would like a Copy of the City map showing the location of the development, a map showing location of existing water systems and location of the fire station. Please send the above along with a letter for reason for request that should be made under the Mayor's signature. cc: Don Ashworth CITY''OF � CHANHASSEN 7610 LAREDO DRIVE•P.0 BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 474-8885 PLANNING REPORT DATE: November 3, 1978 TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel SUBJ: Hesse Farm Phase II & III Preliminary Development Plan Review APPLICANT: Harold Hesse PLANNING CASE: P-058 Pai-i i-i nn As shown in the attached preliminary development plan, Mr. Hesse is proposing to subdivide phases II & III of the Hesse Farm into 28 residential building sites. Of major importance to this request, is that a variance be granted to Ordinance 45 to permit the subdivision and platting of a parcel of land in the unsewered area. Background 1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Bluff Creek Drive and the Chicago Northwestern Railroad. 2. Existing Zoning: The subject property is presently zoned P-1, Planned Residential District. 3. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and municipal water are presently un- available to the subject property. It is most likely that this area of the community will not receive any such services until or after the year 2000. 4. Comprehensive Plan Proposal: a. Land Use - Pursuant to the adopted City Generalized Guide Plan subject property is to assume and maintain a.low density single family residential identity. b. Transportation - Pursuant to the adopted Transportation and Thoroughfare Plan, Bluff Creek Drive is to function as a local street PLANNING REPORT -2 November 3,..1978 Planner's Comments As can be seen in the attached previous planning reports, there were questions raised about the soils and slope suitability in various portions of the development. These questions concerned the buildability of some of the parcels i.e. septic tank suitability, slope suitability, and overall acceptability of some of the street grades of which a maximum proposed was 8.150 occurring in the vicinity of Lot 16 of the proposed development. Although the minutes of the Planning Commission of October 25, 1978 are not available at the time of writing this report, these questions to a large extent were discussed by Mr. Frank Berg, Engineer representing the Hesse Farm development, and the City Engineer, Bill Brezinsky. A significant change in the planned proposal occurred recently during Planning Commission review, which involved the elimination of the previously proposed northerly access from Bluff Creek Drive which was to go along the southeasterly boundaries of proposed Lot 3. This change has essentially resulted in a situation having an unusually long cul-de-sac however, mitigated by the unusually low number of lots to use the interior streets. For secondary emergency access purposes, the Planning Commission recommended that minimally a fire and safety easement be established for the development. It would be the opinion of this office that said easement be placed in the vicinity of the previously proposed northerly egress from Bluff Creek Drive. Additionally, along the lines of public safety, a development proposal such as the one at hand could have an effect on the overall fire classification rating for the City of Chanhassen due to such elements as response time, and on site available water capacity. The City Engineer will have a report available to the City Council concerning the adequacy of water availability for the proposed development. Planner's Recommendation it is the opinion of this office that approval of the roposal at hand, would set a precedent which would severely jeopard:ize� pirit and intent of Ordinance 45 and the Ci.ty's ability to administer planned urbanization within the entire geographical boundaries of Chanhassen especially within the Musa line. Should it be the pleasure of the City Council to approve the preliminary development plans of the Hesse Farm Phases II & III, this office would recommend that minimally the following conditions be set forth: 1. That final development plans be reviewed in light of a response from the insurance service's offices concerning the overall effect of the development upon the fire classification ratings for the City of Chanhassen. PLANNING REPORT -3- November 3, 1978 2. That a development contract responsibility for maintenance the developer. be drafted that consigns the of the interior streets to 3. That a development contract be drafted that delineates the variances to ordinance, including lots abutting private streets, street grade, cul-de-sac length, resubdivision plan and platting and subdivision in an unsewered area. 4. That a development contract be drafted which provides for better construction of interior streets than is found in the first phase, and also requires the developers to prepare plans and specifications necessary for the installation of roads, and storm and surface water drainage facilities with said plans to be approved by the Chanhassen City Engineer.