78-18 7900 Great Plains Blvd CUP pt 1CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVESP.O. BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
MEMO RAN DUM
TO: City Planner, Bruce Pankonin
FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth
DATE: March 3, 1978
SUBJ: Sorenson Building - Great Plains Blvd.
At the last council meeting a question was raised in regards to the
consideration given to the "Western Motiff philosophy" in approving
the Sorenson building on Great Plains Blvd. I was unable to remember
what action had been taken by the Planning Commission and Council
in regards to this item as well as general consideration given to the
Western motiff concept. Would you please review your files and forward
a copy of your planning report on this item, planning commission action
and any other general information you feel reasonable in answering
this question.
January 5, 1981
ijon ly. council:
Mayor and City Council
City of Chanhassen
��ie�
7610 Laredo Drive Re}ecyd
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Raf
Honorable Mayor and City Council:` ^
This past year I requested to have the concrete curbing deleted
from the development contract for my building at 7900 Great
Plains Blvd. I saw this process as one in which both the
City and myself could come to amicable solution to our problems.
Specifically, I cannot believe the City currently desires or .
needs to have me construct the storage shed which was originally
approved as a part of my building plan as well as the outside
storage which would have been permitted as a part of that
contract. Similarly, I have always believed that the concrete
curbs required as a part of that development contract were of
no benefit to me. Further, I believe the concrete curbs would
be a greater hazard than the curb stops (which are presently
in place and which have continued to function over the past
three year period).
I continue to believe that the solution which I offered this past
year to be in the best interests of the City, i.e. I will agree
to delete outside storage from my property as well as abandon
all plans for construction of the storage shed if the City
Council will delete the requirement to install the concrete curbs.
I would ask your reconsideration.
Sincerely,
_
Michael Sorenson
7900 Great Plains Blvd.
Manager's ComTmt: Amending development contracts has historically -not been to the
advantage of the City. The requirement to install concrete curbs on the north property
line is more than an issue of design. It is also a question of precedent wherein
all other developments have similarly been required to make this type of installation.
The mitigating circumstance is that, in the early/mid 19701s, redevelopment of the
downtown area to the extent envisioned today, was not considered. As such, Mr. Sorenson
received approval to construct a storage shed and have open storage in the rear
portion of his property. Although this area is obscure from Great Plains Blvd., it
would be highly visible and adjacent to the new Ring Road. In light of the above,
I believe reconsideration is warranted. This is a changed position of this o 'ce.
LAIR -SON & MERTZ
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
CRAIG M. MERTZ
April 10, 1980
OF COUNSEL
HARVEY E. SKAAR �► J
MARK C. MCCULLOUGH C•
� APR1980
Bob waibel RECEIVED
Assistant City Manager VILLAGE OF
BOX 14 7 k,:!�CHANHASSEN'
Chanhassen MN 55317MINN.E4E6Z8�L�'
Re: Sorensen Plumbing Building
Dear Bob:
TELEPHONE
(612) 335-9565
Enclosed you will find my draft of the amended conditional use
permit as ordered by the City Council on December 3, 1979.
Please review this document. If you have any changes or
corrections, please call me. If you find the permit to be in
order, please so advise, and I will contact the applicant to
obtain the necessary signatures on the original copy of the
permit.
Section 4 of the permit deletesthe garage and screened outside
storage area and requires that paved surfaces be substituted for
those structures. Section 7 temporarily deletes the curb, gutter
and sidewalk along Great Plains Boulevard. All other curb and
gutter, including that to be installed along the north property
line, continues to be required by the amended permit. Section 9
concerning outside storage has been reworded for clarification
purposes; the limitations on the parking of commercial vehicles
are found in Section 10. The performance bond mentioned in
Section 12 must be furnished upon request. I contemplate that
you will ask Mr. Sorensen to provide a performance bond or cash
deposit, in connection with the installation of curbs on the
north property line.
If you have any questions or comments, please call.
Very truly yours,
1291
CRAIG M. MERTZ
Assistant Chanhassen City Attorney
CMM:ner
Enc
cc Don Ashworth
P.S. I will submit the contract to Mr. Sorensen with a stated
sidewalk width of 61. I believe that we should state a
broad :width-An.the permit as reducing the agreed width should
be less of a problem than increasina the agreed width.
t
LARSON & MERTZ
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1900 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST
RUSSELL H. LARSON MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
CRAIG M. MERTZ (]
OF COUNSEL August 1, 1980
HARVEY E.SKAAR
MARK C. McCULLOUGH
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Manager
Box 147
Chanhassen MN 55317
Re: Sorenson Plumbing Building
Dear Bob:
TELEPHONE
(612) 335-9565
On April 10, 1980 I provided you with my draft of the amended
conditional use permit for the Sorenson building. In my cover
letter I asked you toadvise me whether you found the permit in
order. To date I have had no response from you.
CMM:ner
Very truly yours,
CRAIG M. MERTZ
Assistant Chanhassen City Attorney
--11 A
Council Meeting JanuaL "19, 1981 -3-
HEALTH OFFICER: Councilman Neveaux moved to designate Dr. David McCollum as the
City Health Officer for 1981 with the appropriate stipend of $1.00 be paid for his
services. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor
Hamilton, Councilmen Geving, Neveaux, Horn, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion
carried.
SITE PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW AND SET INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND HEARING DATE, CHANHASSEN
CLINIC, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, FRONTIER DEVELOPMENT PARK: Doctors David McCollum and Steven
Benson are proposing to construct an approximate 4,000 square foot clinic building.
The following differences between the present proposal and the approved plans of
August are noted:
1. Reduction of the gross floor area from 8,000 square feet to approximately
4,000 square feet.
2. An increase in the parking setback from 8 feet to 13 feet.
3. Removal of any cross easement parking.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan amendment with the
following conditions:
1. That all roof -top mechanical equipment be screened.
2. That the perimeter of all parking and maneuvering areas have concrete curb
installed.
3. That the trash storage area be screened with 100 percent opaque material of
brick or wood with a color compatible with the proposed color of the clinic
building.
4. That the applicant receive grading, drainage, and lighting plan approval by
the City Engineer.
5. That payment of all applicable trunk charges for the sewer and water along
West 79th Street be administered.
6. That the proposal be subject to the 1980 Building Code as proposed to be adopted.
7. That the proposal receive fire marshal review and approval of the site plan
lay -out.
The City Manager recommended that a public hearing be held on the revised Industrial
Revenue Bond application on February 23, 1981.
Councilman Horn moved to accept the site plan review with the recommendations
1 - 9, and as shown on Exhibit A dated January 19, 1981.
8. A landscape theme be prepared by BRW for Frontier Development Park.
9. Sign approval from the Sign Committee.
Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton,
Councilmen Geving, Neveaux, Horn, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT REQUEST, MICHAEL SORENSON: Mr. Sorenson was present
seeking a contract amendment to delete the open storage on his property at 7900
Great Plains Blvd. if the Council will delete the requirement for the installation
of concrete curbs.
Councilman Geving asked Mr. Sorenson what he was going to do with the pipe that
is stored along the north side of the building. Mr. Sorenson stated he would have
it removed within two weeks.
Councilman Neveaux moved to amend the development contract to delete the requirement
for the installation of concrete curbs on the north property line and in their place
the applicant meet with the City Engineer to establish a line of concrete curb stops
to the satisfaction of the Engineer and that the conditions of the development contract
passed by the Chanhassen City Council on December 3, 1979, be made a part of this
amended development contract and be signed by the developer. The signed development
contract be reviewed by the Council at the earliest possible time. Motion seconded
Council Meeting Janua 19, 1981 _4_
by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen
Neveaux, Geving, Horn, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
BILLS: Councilman Geving moved to approve the bills as presented; checks #12331
through #12414 in the amount of $108,399.06 and checks #16106 through #16212
in the amount of $984,933.32. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The
following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, Horn, and
Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
Council members asked for an explanation of check #16161 in the amount of $231.85
to Radio Shack.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS: Councilman Neveaux moved to appoint Councilman
Geving to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Councilman
Horn. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Horn,
and Swenson. Councilman Geving abstained. Motion carried.
Mayor Hamilton moved to appoint Councilman Horn as alternate to the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals. Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following
voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson.
Councilman Horn abstained. Motion carried.
REVIEW STREET ADDRESS PROGRAM: Jerry Schlenk, Assistant Director of Public Works,
explained the continuing program of street and address changes taking place in
the city.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, RECONSIDER STARTING SALARY: Council members will
interview candidates on Saturday, January 24, 1981, at 8:00 a.m. in City Hall.
CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hamilton asked if any member wished to discuss any of the
items separately. Item d. Partial Acceptance of Public Improvements and Reduce
Performance Guarantee, Sunnyslope Addition was previously tabled. Item a. Public
Works/Fire Station/Library and City Hall Budget, Refine Secondary Account
Allocations was removed from the consent agenda. As no additional comments were
received, Councilman Geving moved to approve the following items pursuant to the
City Manager's recommendations.
c. Acceptance of Public Improvements and Reduce Performance Guarantees,
Minnewashta Creek 2nd Addition.
e. Lotus Lake Community Park, Request to Extend Grant Finalization Period.
f. Joint Powers Agreement, 201 Plan Approval.
Motion -seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton
Councilmen Neveaux, Geving, Horn, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
PUBLIC WORKS/FIRE STATION/LIBRARY AND CITY HALL BUDGET: The City Manager presented
a revised Public Works/Fire Station/Library and City Hall Budget. Councilman
Neveaux moved to accept the recommendation of the City Manager. Motion seconded
by Councilman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmen
Neveaux, Geving, Horn, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
STATE OF THE CITY MESSAGE: Mayor Hamilton requested input from council members
so that this could be published. Council members should present their views
at the February 2, 1981, Council meeting.
POLICE SERVICES: Mayor Hamilton requested council consideration of establishing
a citizens task force to review means to provide police services prior to May
1981. Council members will discuss this further at the February 2, 1981, meeting.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Mayor Hamilton requested input from council members for
the February 2, 1981, council meeting.
L
Council Meeting Feb rual ;, 1980 _2-
Hansen & Klingelhutz Construction on their application for -Section 8-new construction --
mortgage financing. Resolution seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted . in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson. No negative' -
votes. Motion carried.
KLINGELHUTZ/CRAVENS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SIGNAGE AND OFFICE USE: Al Klingelhutz
was present requesting approval to install'a sign for Klingelhutz/Cravens Real
Estate at 7811 Great Plains Blvd. The Sign Committee has --reviewed this proposal`
and recommended approval for a 28 square foot sign to be located south of the
entrance drive and 25 feet east of the curb line of -Great Plains Blvd.
Councilman Swenson moved to accept the recommendation-o-f the -Sign Committee with
the addition of letting the sign be -seven-,feet- high -instead 'of-si-x -feet. Motion
seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs,
Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and -Swenson. --No No negative votes Motion -carried.
RESOLUTION #80-04: Councilman Pearson moved the adoption`of a-resolutionamending --
the conditional use permitforthe Klingelhutz-Barnes-,Commercial Building.- Resolution
seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen
Pearson, Neveaux-, Geving; -and Swenson: -- No negative votes.= ---Matiorr-carried:
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT, SORENSO1'+ COMMERCIAL BUILDING, 7900` GREAT PLAINS BLVD.-
Mike Sorenson was present requesting the Council reconsider their action of December
3, 1979, and delete the requirement for concrete curb along the north property line.
No action was taken. -
1.980 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES: Bill McRostie and Harry Pauly were present. Litter in
the downtown area, particularly near Pauly's, Hombre's, -and Kenny's Super Market,
was discussed. The Council asked for a study of what -it -would cost to hire a
police patrol for three nights a week and the cost of hiring someone to clean up the litter prior to establishing the license fees.
Councilman Pearson moved to table action until the second meeting in February.
Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs,
Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNATIONS: Councilman Neveaux moved to accept the resignation
of Roman Roos as presented and instruct: the, City Manager to prepare a, letter of thanks -
to Mr. Roos for his -service to the community. Motion'seconded by Councilman Swenson.
The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving,
and Swenson.` No negative votes. Motion carried.--
Councilman Geving moved to accept the resignation of Tom Droegemueller with -regret'-- -
Motion seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs
Councilmen Pearson,'Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
HRA APPOINTMENT: Mayor -Hobbs nominated Thomas -Russell to the HRA: -
RESOLUTION #80-05: Councilman Pearson moved the adoption -of a resolution confirming
the appointment of Thomas Russell to the HRA.- Resolution seconded by Councilman
Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux,
Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion -carried. -
Mayor Hobbs left the meeting at 10:10 p.m. Acting Mayor Neveaux chaired the
remainder of the meeting.
Council Meeting Dec3, 1979
RESOLUTION -279-71:
Councilman Neveaux moved the adoption of a resolution authorizing the City
Engineer to prepare the feasibility study incorporating the six conditions as
outlined in the City Manager's report of December 3,-1979; with paragraph five
being amended to not exceed four years. Resolution seconded by Councilman
Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux,
Geving, and Swenson'. No negative votes. Motion- carried: -
WEST 86TH STREET: Al Klingelhutz was present requesting the Council reconsider
the deletion of maintenance on West 86th Street and that this item be an agenda
item at the same time as Powers Blvd.
EAST LOTUS LAKE, LA14CON GRANT APPLICATION: Tom Seifert, Ted Coey, Elwood McCary,
and Frank Kurvers were present to voice objection to the -proposed public access
onto Lotus Lake. Wally Coudron, Park and Recreation Commission, "Clark Horn' .
Planning Commission, and Fran Callahan, Community Services Director, were also
present.
RESOLUTION #79-72: Councilman Neveaux moved the -adoption -of 'a-resolutionto proceed
with the -approval, as suggested by the City Manager in- his letter of December 3, 114,79.
Resolution seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor
Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Swenson. Councilman Geving voted no.
Motion carried.
The Council suggested that the Park and Recreation Commission and Lake Study
Committee get together and one group should take the lead in following up in the
areas that were outlined in the Park and Recreation Commission's minutes of
November -20, 1979.
BALTIC NON -CONFORMING USE PERMIT: Lon Holte was present. -Baltic's conformance
with the non -conforming use permit was discussed. The landscape plan will be
.presented to the Council at their January T. 1980, meeting-.
SIGN VARIANCE - M. A. GEDNEY COMPANY:- The M. A. Gedney Company is requesting a
variance to the Sign Ordinance for the construction of -an -identification sign
on the south side of the building. -A variance -from the ordinance is required
because in conjunction with the identification sign, Gedney is also constructing
a wall sign on the north s-ide of the building-. -
Councilman Geving moved to grant the sign variance as requested:. Motion seconded
by Councilman Swenson. The following voted -in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen
Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
Staff reported that the existing painted wall sign will be removed when the
structure is painted. - The new signs WilI.not be illuminated: -- --
DEVELOPMEPJT' CO"1TRAET A�IENDMENT REQUEST, MIKE SORENSON, 7900 GREAT PLAINS BLVD.
Mr. Sorenson is requesting the-deletion,of the requirements for the construction --
of concrete curb and gutter and'sidewalkalong Great Plains Blvd.,, deletion of -
concrete curb construction on the north property line; deletion of -the requirement
to construct an 800 square foot garage on the northwest -portion- of -the-- property,
and deletion of 'the outside storage portion, of --the plan and change -the- use for said storage area to overflow and fleet truck parking. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the requests except for the concrete curb on the north
property 1 ine. _
Councilman Neveaux moved to delete the construction of a 800 square foot garage,
enforce the outside storage- provision in 30 days or direct the City Attorney to
Coun.qil Meeting Dece `' 3, 1979
proceed with appropriate enforcement. The concrete curb along the north property
line remains. Great Plains curb, gutter and sidewalk will be delayed until such
time as the downtown development project, currently under consideration by the City
I, Council and HRA, is approved. Parking of 3/4 ton licensed power driven vehicles
'r will be allowed on the north side of the building. Motion seconded by Councilman
Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux,
Geving, and Swenson: No negative -votes. Motion carried.
JOINT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PETITION,'MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT, REQUEST .BY
CITY' OF EXCELSIOR: Scott Martin, Excelsior City Manager, was present requesting
the Council support a petition to the Minnehaha.Creek Watershed District supporting
a proposed drainage improvement- within the City of Excelsior. The drainage area
includes properties within the Cities of Shorewood, Chanhassen, and Excelsior.
Total costs for the improvements to Galpin Lake are estimated to be $60,000+.with
26% of the cost being assigned to properties in Chanhassen. -
Councilman Geving moved to table action on this item. Motion seconded by Councilman
Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux,.
Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes-. Motion carried.
PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY GRANT APPLICA-rTVV-,-.NEW- COUNTY ROAD 7.7, SOUTH .OF RAILROAD: The
total cost of a 9 x 10 foot precast box culvert to serve as a bikeway/pedestrian
facility will be $46,800, of this amount $10,300 would be Chanhassen's share with
the remainder funded throug' the state and county.
RESOLUTION #79-73: Councilman Pearson moved the adoption of a resolution approving
the grant application. Resolution seconded by Councilman Neveaux. The following votec
in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, and Swenson. Councilman Geving
voted no. Motion carried.
SIGN COMMITTEE APPOINT14ENT: Councilman Geving moved to appoint Councilman Swenson
to be -the Council representative on the Sign Committee. Motion seconded by Councilman
Neveaux. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs, Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux,
Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. -Motion carried.
LAND PURCHASE AGREEME.aT, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK: Councilman Geving moved
that the purchase agreement for Lots 10 and 11, Block 5, Chanhassen Lakes Business
Park as amended by the City Attorney on November 19, 1979, providing for suitable
soil tests as spelled out in the purchase agreement and the representation as to the
use of the building and the -premises together with the requirement of delivery by
seller of a registered title, with a closing date to be established on December
17, 1979. The total purchase price being $79,165.00 subject to special assessments .
Motion seconded by Councilman Pearson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hobbs,
Councilmen Pearson, Neveaux, Geving, and Swenson. No negative votes. Motion carried.
r BUSINESS COMMUNITY MEETING REPORT: Mayor Hobbs gave a report on.a meeting that was
held with the business people on the east end of the business area and representatives
of the Sheriff's Department regarding the recent rash of burglaries and vandalism
s that has taken place in the area.
212/169 UPDATE: Councilman Geving invited members to attend an informational meeting
sponsored by the League of Women Voters, to be held in the Jonathan Community Center
on Thursday, December 6 from 3:00 to 8:00 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hobbs asked if any council member wished to discuss any items
on the consent agenda. Item b. Preliminary Development Plan, Near Mountain and
Item e. Reassignment of City Easement were discussed separately. As no additional
7610 LAREDO DRIVE* P.O. BOX 147oCHANHASSEN, M I NNESOTA55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: November 29, 1979
TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth
FROM: Asst. Manager/LUC, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Development Contract Amendment Request, Sorenson Commercial
Building, 7900 Great Plains Blvd.
PLANNING CASE: P-637
As shown in the attached memorandum dated November 14, 1979, to
the Planning Commission, and the petition from the applicant dated
November 1, 1979, the applicant is requesting an amendment to the
development contract with the.city for the subject property. The
amendments requested for consideration are the deletion of the
requirements for -the construction of concrete curb and gutter and
sidewalk along Great Plains -Blvd., deletion of concrete curb
construction on the north property line, deletion of the requirement
to construct an 8.00 square foot garage on the northwest portion of
the property, and deletion of the outside storage portion of the plan
and -change the.use for -said storage area to overflow and fleet truck
parking.
The planning commission, at its November=.14, 1979, meeting, moved
to table action::`on-the request until information was supplied by the
engineer as•..to .the degree of. difficulty- and expense that would be.
involved in completing the concrete curb and gutter"sections around ;-
the perimeter of -''the parking and manuevering area north of the building.
This was in light of the applicants comments that soils and water
conditions along the northern property line were not conducive to
such construction. It was additionally the applicant's contention
that concrete curbs would not be necessary in this area since the
entry to the parking area had been necessarily shifted to the north
because of a gas main apparatus located where the original entry
was to be and thus the parking was transferred from along the
northern property line to along the northern edge of the building.
The City Engineer had indicated verbally that the construction of
concrete curb along the northern property line could be constructed
without exceptional difficulty or expense with respect to subsoil
conditions and drainage and thus remains essentially a policy decision.
Mr. Don Ashworth f -2- November 29, 197_
The Planning Commission at its regular meeting of November 28, 1979,
moved to approve the subject request as per the planning report
recommendation of November 14, 1979, with the exception that concrete
curb on the north property line be deleted from the contract requirement:
Recommendation
Pursuant to the Planning report of November 14, 1979, I recommend -
that the development contract for the Sorenson Commercial Building
be. amended to permit the deletion of the concrete curb and gutter
and sidewalk installation on Great Plains Blvd., deletion of the
requirement to construct an A00 square foot garage as per the plans
approved by the City Council, and deletion of the outside storage
portion of the plans with the condition that none other than parking
for licensed power driven vehicles, overflow and fleet truck parking
occur on the parking and maneuvering area north of .the subject building.
This office recommends that, for the reasons expressed in the
November 14th report, that the concrete curb requirement for the
northern boundary of the subject property be upheld.
LEM
OFF.: 474-3979" �� RES.: 474-9448
SOUTHWEST PLUMBING & HEATING CO.
COMMERCIAL h RESIDENTIAL
INSTALLATION . REMODELING . •SERVICE k
7606 ERIE AVENUE
CHANHASSEN. MINN. 33317-
November 1, 1979
Don Ashworth
City of Chanhassen
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnestoa 55317
ATTENTION: DON ASHWORTH AND CITY COUNCIL
Regarding: Conditional use permit for Sorensen Office and Retail Center
Please be advised that three of the items, Number 3, number 6 and
number 8, listed on the conditional use permit for the building at 7900
Great Plains Boulevard have become, in my estimation, obsolete and
require re-evaluation for the sake of all interested parties. What I am
proposing, I feel is in the best interest of the city and its overall guide
plan as well as for myself, as it terminates matters that have been dor-
mant for some time.
Under item 3, I propose to delete the 800 square foot garage. The
type of business this.garage was intended for did not materialize and
does not exist; therefore making the need for the garage obsolete.
Under item 6, the area in front of the building on Highway 101, does
not lend itself to any type of curb and sidewalk. Since there are exist-
ing sidewalks around two sides of the building, readily accessable to all
pedestrians on Highway 101, the need for additional sidewalks does not
exist. Curbing as proposed, would obstruct the free flowing natural
drainage of surface water that now exists, causing great amounts of
LM
water to unnecessarily cross and stand in our parking lot. These
additional problems point out the practicality of deleting this curbing. —
Under item 8, we wish to delete the outside storage area and use
the area for overflow parking and fleet truck parking.
I am sure that you will recognize the merit of my proposals. I
will appreciate your immediate action on these changes.
Sincerely,
Michael J. Sorensen
7606 Erie Avenue
Chanhassen, Minnesota
•
-a-
Lake LUCY
PA •
Lake
Ann
J.J
Lake N Ic C,
J.
PL
PK. cc
r3—..
m
ol
6
ti
.. . 1 VA RD R
[Mn
1 f
VL
U •L� /
-F 8
Lake Susan
ice
Lake
-F
*F
34
34 Cl
C3
34
BObLr-VARD
.F
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Manager, Don Ashworth
DATE: August 3, 1981
SUBJ: Michael Sorenson, West 78th Street and Great Plains Blvd.
On the date of preparation of this agenda, Tuesday, July 28th, I
received a call from Mr. Sorenson requesting an opportunity to
meet before the City Council.
Mr. Sorenson stated that he wished to present to the City Council
his disapproval of the negotiations by the HRA for his property at
the southeast_ corner of Great Plains Blvd. and West 79th Street.
Mr. Sorenson asked that a copy of the last HRA minutes be made avail-
able to the Council (see attached).
I do not have a letter or other formal position statement from Mr.
Sorenson in regards to items he wishes to address the Council on and,
as such, find it difficult to make any type of response. However,
I feel the following points are potentially germane:
1). Approximately two years ago Mr..Sorenson did approach the City
Council asking whether the Council would entertain
a proposal for an additional off sale liquor store.
His point was that there was no necessity to proceed
through the various planning requirements, if the
Council would not approve an additional off sale
store. The Council stated that they would consider
such a proposal, but at no time during the dis- -
cussion did the Council review any specific site plans
and cautioned Mr. Sorenson that the statements in no
way limited the Council in reviewing the specific
site plan once prepared.
2). This office is unaware of any additional discussion/
action taking place on this item during the course of
the following year. I would anticipate that Mr. Sorenson
would state that such was a reflection of the moratorium
which was in effect at that time. I cannot second guess
as to whether the application would have been allowed
Mayor and Council -2- August 3, 1981
to proceed or not. However, if the application would
have been made, this office would have recommended that
no action be taken recognizing that one element of the
downtown project was the upgrading of Great Plains Blvd.
and potential road alignment (both vertically as well as
horizontally) would occur _adjacent to or on his property
proposed for the liquor store. In any case, no action was taken.
3). A specific site plan was presented to the HRA approximately
one year ago whereat the same sets of concerns were
raised by the City's consultant - BRW. Specifically,
as the Sorenson building on the west side of Great Plains Blvd.
abuts the existing right of way, any street expansion would
occur on the east side. This coupled with the fact of
the small lot, potential intersection problems of existing
West 79th Street, protential road alignment changes, etc.
led the HRA to the conclusion that the project was either
premature or that additional properties would need to be
purchased prior to further consideration. Complicating
the issue was the fact that the downtown project had not
been approved and, as such, the City's ability to help
Mr. Sorenson in either the purchase of additional land or
the realignment of roads could not be answered until such
time as the project was approved or denied.
4). With signing of the development contracts, at or about the
first of the year, Mr. Sorenson again reapproached the HRA.
At that time, the HRA authorized that an appraisal be
completed for both Mr. Sorenson's property as well as authorizing
an appraisal for the City purchasing and/or condemning
all or a portion of Mr. Kurver's property (that property
lying directly east of the Sorenson property).
5). At the time of receipt of the appraisals, the HRA, again,
relooked at the entire issue and determined that far
less conflicts would exist if the City simply purchased
the Sorenson property - such then leaving various options
open to the City after improvements had been made on
Great Plains Blvd. and additional options for the Kurvers' property,
including not having to condemn such property at this time.
6). The City Attorney's office was instructed, by the HRA,
to begin negotiations with Mr. Sorenson for the purchase
of the property. Such initial negotiations have begun,
which leads us back to the current point in time - Mr.
Sorenson's dissatisfaction with the offers presented by
Russ Larson and responses given by Scott Martin.
I informed Mr. Sorenson that it was my belief that his
appeal to the City Council was premature in that he had
not reasonably informed the HRA of his disappointments
and/or offered a reasonable opportunity for them to
carry out their function, i.e. the negotiation process
for the purchase/sale of properties within the downtown
area.
Mayor and Council
-3-
Again, I am unsure as to whether the above narrative
the points desired to be discussed by Mr. Sorenson.
stress thisnarrative is solely from memory and may .be
one or more details.
August 3, 1981
is germane to
Further, I must
incorrect in
Ivtil i lq��
Hy Minute s
Page 2
CAuthorize Preparation of EAW: Niemeyer moved, seconded by
Russell, to authorize BRW to proceed with the preparation of
the required Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the
Downtown Redevelopment Project at a cost not to exceed $8,000,
as outlined in the proposal letter from BRW dated May 18, 1981.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Concept Plans for Highway 101/Dakota Avenue Intersection:
Mark Koegler, Planning Consultant for Schoell and Madson, Inc.
presented a realignment study for Hwy. 101 at Dakota Avenue
and W. 78th Street. Five (5) different alternative concept
plans were reviewed and discussed by the Commissioners.
A sixth option, that of singly improving traffic signage
in the vicinity of the intersection, was also discussed.
The general concensus was a preference for alternative #5
or some variation of this plan.
c Old Business: Mike Sorenson appeared before the HRA to request
some resolution to his dilema of wanting to develop his
property along Great Plains Blvd. He had waited for nearly
2 years while the Downtown Redevelopment Project was being
planned to see if something could be worked out with the
City relative to the affect of his proposed liquior store
development on City Plans to improve Great Plains Blvd.
Niemeyer suggested that staff contact the adjoining property
owner to the east and determine if land acquisition from that
party could be worked out. Adding more land area to the
Sorenson lot would provide for adequate building setbacks
off-street parking, and building site for reasonable develop-
ment of this property, in conformance with the overall
Redevelopment Plan of the City. Staff was directed to
negotiate with the property owner and proceed with appraisals,
as necessary, for the purchase of a portion of the property.
Zoning Ordinance Revisions: Martin suggested scheduling a
special meeting to review the proposed revisions to the
commercial and industrial regulations of the City Zoning
Ordinance since this will likely be a time consuming process.
He recommended that commissioners pay particular attention
to the proposed zoning district -boundaries and permitted
uses in each district when reviewing the draft report.
The Commissioner's agreed to meet on Thursday, June 4, 1981
at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
June 11, 1981
Minutes
Chairman Gullickson called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m.
with the following members present: Commissioner Bohn, and Horn.
Commissioners Whitehill and Russell were absent.
Minutes of May 21, 1981: Bohn moved, seconded by Gullickson,
to approve the minutes of the May 21, 1981 meeting. Gullickson
and Bohn voted in favor; Horn abstained, motion carried.
`G Sorenson Property: Scott Martin, HRA Director, updated the HRA
on the status of the Sorenson property. Appraisals for the
Sorenson and Kurvers property have been ordered. A determin-
ation of what alternative approach the HRA should take to resolve
the problem of development of the Sorenson property can be made
once the appraisals are available.
Resolution #81-3: Craig Mertz, HRA Attorney, presented the
proposed resolution requesting the City Council to authorize
the issuance of bonds to finance the public redevelopment costs
in the Downtown Redevelopment Project area. He also reviewed the
proposed Tax Increment Agreement between the HRA and City
Council.
Horn and Gullickson expressed concerns that both documents
were late in being presented to the HRA for their consideration.
Horn moved, Bohn seconded to adopt resolution No. 81-3 as presented.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
The proposed revisions to the zoning ordinance were discussed
and continued until the June 18, 1981 meeting. The meeting
adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
�'f
Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
June 18, 1981
Minutes
Called to Order: Horn, Bohn and Whitehill were present;
Chairman Gullickson and -Russell were absent. The
meeting was called to order at 8:30 p.m.
Approval of Minutes: Motion by Horn, seconded by Bohn to approve
the HRA minutes of June 11, 1981 as presented. Motion carried.
Review of Proposed Zoning Ordinance Revisions: Scott Martin
reviewed the background of the preparation of the Zoning Ordinance
revision report.
Paul Krause, BRW, explained,the reasons why the overlay district
concept was discarded in favor of comprehensive zoning ordinance
amendments for all Commercial and Industrial Uses in the Down-
town Project Area. The general philosophy behind the report
was to provide different levels of commercial development around
the Downtown Core Area, and an industrial zone that would ac-
commodate a variety of light industrial and office uses sup-
portive of the city's population and overall employment needs.
Bohn and Horn preferred to extend the B-1 district along the
west side of the B-3 district, up to the Burdick Office Park.
Whitehill thought the B-3 District should be extended into this
area, rather than the B-1 District. This change would eliminate
the proposed Frontier Home Center from the Bloomberg Co. Site
just west of the ring road. The Board also felt that the B-
2 District should be extended to encompass the southerly half
of the R-4 District lying north of West 78th Street, just east
of Powers Boulevard.
Whitehill moved that the comments of the HRA be forwarded to
the Planning Commission along with the Draft Ordinance, and
that the other members of the HRA (Gullickson, Russell) be
invited to submit their comments along with the HRA's. Horn
seconded. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Sorenson Property Ap-,.raisal: Bohn moved, seconded by Horn,
to acquire the Sorenson property at the appraised value of
$22,000. Motion carried.
Resolution_#81-4: Horn moved, Bohn seconded, approval of Re-
solution #81-4, revising the proposed Public Redevelopment
Cost budget, as provided in Resolution #81-3, by transferring
$300,000 from "Refinance of Temporary Improvement Bonds of 1978"
to "Option Cost for Land Acquisitions". All voted in favor
and the motion carried.
„Chanhassen HRA MeetiL,
July 23, 1981
Page 2
"If specific negotiations reach an impasse due to a significant
disagreement over the adjusted appraised value of certain properties,
staff will encourage the property owner to arrange for a second
certified appraisal of his property in order to help resolve such
differences. The property owner's appraiser must be certified to
conduct such an appraisal and said appraiser must be approved by
Staff prior to commencement of the appraisal. The property owner
will be reimbursed up to $300 (not to exceed the actual cost of the
appriasal) for the cost of such an appraisal, upon satisfactory
completion of the appraisal.
If minor adjustments to the HRA appraisal are necessary to reach
a negotiated settlement, Staff shall have the authority to use
its discretion in making such adjustments prior to presenting
the negotiated settlement to. the HRA for final acceptance and approval.”
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Sorenson Property Acquisition (Parcel #8): Russ Larson reported
on his negotiations with Mike Sorenson for acquisition of his
vacant property located along the east side of Great Plains
Boulevard, just south of West 79th Street. A letter from Mr.
Sorenson (dated June 16, 1981) which itemized expenses he's
incurred for proposed development on his property was reviewed
by the Commissioners.
Bohn moved, seconded by Horn, to reconfirm the action of June 18,
1981, and authorize the acquisition of the Sorenson property at
a cost not to exceed the appraised value of $22,000. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
Huber Property Acquisition (Parcel #26): Russ Larson updated the
Commissioners on his negotiations with John Huber.
Horn moved, seconded by. Bohn, to authorize the attorney to negotiate
for an option agreement for the purchase of the Huber property
at a cost not to exceed the appraised value of $185,000. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
Ha_vlik Property Acquisition (Parcel #30): Following an update on
----i--r - - -T
the negotiations wit Jo n Havli for acquisition of his property,
Russell moved, seconded by Horn, to hold firm at the adjusted
appraised value of $246,105 for the Havlik property until September 1,
1981, after which time the Commissioners will reconsider their
action of December 18, 1980, and possibly make a cTownward adjustment
of the adjusted appraised value. An option agreement for the
purchase of the Havlik property should be diligently pursued by
the attorney immediately after the sale of the downtown project
bonds.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
cr
CHAPTER FIVE
SUBDIVISION PLAN
-39-
SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL
Chronology
.Introduction
Persons desiring approval of a subdivision plan for a parcel of
land less than ten (10) acres of land shall follow the following
procedure: (Note: Subdivision of land larger than ten (10) acres
shall follow the procedures as outlined "Planned Residential
Development" section of this manual.)
Step-by-step procedure for processing an application for
subdivision plan (Ref. Ordinance 33.)
Step 1. PETITIONER
All applications for subdivision plan approval shall be filed in
the office of the Zoning Administrator and shall be accompanied
by a signed copy of an application for subdivision approval and
a "sketch plan." The "sketch plan" shall be based upon "tax map"
information or some other similarily accurate base map at a scale
of not less than 200 feet to the inch and which enables the entire
tract to be shown on one sheet. Such "sketch plan will be con-
sidered for informal discussion between the applicant and the
Planning Commission.
Step 2. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
a. Reviews documents submitted in Step 1. above, and requests
any additional information from petitioner.
b. ':`Forward copies of the petition to other staff or governmental
agencies (i.e. Metropolitan Council, Department of Natural Resources,
Minnesota Highway Department, Watershed District, Environmental
Quality Council, Soil Conservation Service, Adjacent governmental
,_-units, Fire Chief," -Park Board, etc.) as deemed appropriate at least
fourteen °'(14) days prior -to =the Planning Commission meeting.
c. Prepares planning report which includes comments from
other staff and forward copies to each Planning Commission member
and petitioner no later than Friday prior to the Planning Commission
meting.
Step 3. PLANNING COMMISSION
a. Reviews documents and reports as submitted in Steps 1
and 2 above.
-40-
b. Hears petitioner's informal presentation of the
proposed subdivision.
c. Advises the petitioner of the extent to which the
sketch plan conforms to the Comprehensive City Plan, Zoning
Ordinance and other ordinances of the City.
Step 4. PETITIONER
a. Reviews the comments made in Step 3 above.
b. Prepares a preliminary plat containing the following
information in conformance with adopted City design standards:
L. Identification and Description
a) Proposed name of subdivision, which name shall
not duplicate nor be alike in pronunciation to the name of any
plat recorded in the county wherein said land is situated.
b) Full legal description of the land involved in
said plat.
c) Names and addresses of the owner and subdivider
of the land, and the designer and surveyor of said plat. If the
subdivider is not the fee owner of the land, the subdivider shall
submit the written consent of the fee owner to the filing of the
preliminary plat.
hundred feet.
d) Graphic scale of not more than one inch to one
e) North point, designated as true north.
f) Date of preparation.
g) Certification by registered surveyor certifying
to accuracy of survey.
2. Existing Conditions
a) Boundary line survey, including measured distances
and angles, which shall be tied into the nearest quarter section or
section line by traverse.
b) Total acreage.
c) Existing zoning classifications for tract of land
in and abutting the preliminary plat.
d) Location and names of existing of platted streets
and other public ways, parks and public open spaces, permanent
buildings and structures, easements, and section and municipal
boundary lines within the plat and to a distance of 100 feet beyond
--41-
e) If the preliminary plat is a re -arrangement or
a re -plat of any recorded plat, -the lot and block arrangement of
the original plat, its original name, and all revised or vacated
roadways shall be shown as dotted or dashed lines.
f) Location and width of existing streets including
type of surfacing, railroads, sanitary sewers, water mains, storm
sewers, culverts, grades, invert elevations and locations of catch
basins, manholes and hydrants and any underground facilities with
the plat and to a distance of 100 feet beyond::'.shall be shown.
g) Boundary lines of land within..-:100 feet of the tract
of land within. the plat, and the name of the owner thereof, but.
including all contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider
or owner of the tract proposed to be platted.
h,) Topographic data, including contours at vertical
intervals of not more than two feet, except that where the horizontal
contour interval is 100 feet or more, a one foot vertical shall be
shown. Water courses, lakes, marshes, wooded areas, rock outcrops
and other significant physical features shall be shown. U.S. .'
Geodetic survey data shall be used for all topographic mapping.
i,) A copy of restrictive covenants, if any, on all
abutting land shall be filed with the preliminary plat.
j) Such other data, including soil tests, as may be
requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer or Attorney.
3. Design Features
a);. Layout of proposed streets, showing right-of-way
widths and proposed names of streets. The name of any street
heretofore used in the City or its environs shall not be used,
unless the proposed street is an extension of an already named
street, in which event said name shall be used.
b) Locations and widths of alleys, pedestrian ways
and utility easements.
c,-). Profiles of existing and proposed centerline
grades of streets, alleys, sanitary sewers, water mains, storm
sewers, drainage ditches and culverts.
d.) Layouts of lots and blocks with numbers of each,
square footage of lots and lot dimensions scaled to the nearest
tenth of a foot.
e.) Areas, other than streets, pedestrian ways and
utility easements, intended to be dedicated or reserved for public
use, including the size of such areas.
f.) Minimum front and side yard building setback lines
as required by the ordinances of the City..
g)-.Proposed method of disposing of surface water
drainage within and beyond the limits of the plat.
i
-42-
h) Whenever a portion of a tract of land is proposed
for subdividing and said tract is large enough or is intended for
future enlargement, a tentative plan for the future subdivision of
the entire tract shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator.
4. Additional Information to be Furnished
a). Statement of proposed use of lots, i.e., whether
residential, commercial, industrial or combination thereof. If
residential, state type and number of dwelling units. Furnish
sufficient details for all types of usage in order to reveal the
effect of the subdivision development on traffic, fire protection
and density of population.
b) Source of water supply.
c) Facilities for sewage disposal.
d) If zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed
zoning plan for the area.
e) In areas affected by inadequate surface drainage
or subjected to periodic flooding, furnish proposals designed to
make area safe for occupancy and to provide for adequate street and
lot drainage.
f) Proposals for street lighting, curb, gutter,
sidewalks and boulevard improvements.
g) Such other information as shall be requested by
the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, or City Attorney.
5. Deposits with the City on escrow account as outlined
in item 10 on page 2. Said escrow account shall be deposited prior
to Planning Commission review as outlined in Step 5 below.
Step 5. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
a. Reviews documents submitted in Step 4 above, and request
any missing information from petitioner.
b. Forwards copies of preliminary plat to other staff or
governmental agencies as deemed appropriate at least fourteen (14)
days prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
C. Prepares planning report which includes comments from
other staff and forwards copies to each Planning Commission member
and petitioner no later than Friday, prior to the Planning Commission
meeting.
Step 6.
PLANNING COMMISSION
a. Reviews documents and reports as submitted in Step 1 - 5
above. The Planning Commission in its review of a preliminary plat
shall determine whether the proposed subdivision is in conformity
with the Comprehensive City Plan, and shall take into consideration
-43-
the requirements of the community and the best use of the land.
Particular attention shall be given to the arrangement, location
and width of streets, drainage and lot sizes and arrangements.
b. Hears petitioner's informal presentation of the proposed
subdivision.
c. Sets date for public hearing -or requests additional
information from petitioner.�'If additional information is, requested,
Steps 4 and'5 shall be repeated.
Step 7. PUBLIC HEARING
a. City Administrator
1.. Advertises notice of public hearing as governed by
State Statute and City Ordinance.
2. Notifies owners of adjacent property within 350 feet,
as supplied by petitioner, of public hearing at least ten (10)
days prior to hearing.
b. Planninq Commission
Opens public hearing for the purpose of hearing:
1. Petitioner's formal presentation.
2. Arguments from general public.
c. Planning Commission
Either continues public hearing to a future date or
closes public hearing.
d. Planning Commission
Forwards a report to the City Council stating its findings
and recommendations within ten (10) days after the public hearing.
It shall be the duty of the Planning Commission to determine whether
preliminary plat is compatible with the Comprehensive City Plan and
conforms with or exceeds the design standards established by
City Ordinance 33.
Step 8. CITE'' COUNCIL
a. Considers Planning Commission recommendation at the second
regular meeting after Planning Commission action.
b. Shall act to approve or disapprove the preliminary plat.
If the Council disapproves said plat, the grounds for such disapproved
shall be set forth in the proceedings of the Council and reported to
--44-
the petitioner within seven (7) days thereafter.
c. Approval of a preliminary plat by the City Council is
tentative only, subject to the compliance with all requirements
and recommendation as a basis for preparation of the final plat.
d. Subsequent approval by the City Council shall be required
of all engineering considerations presented in the preliminary
plat which shall -include, but shall not be limited to easements,
water supply, sewage disposal, storm drainage, surface water storage,
gas and electric.services, road gradients and widths, and the
surfacing of streets, prior to the approval of the final plat by
the City Council.
Step 9. PETITIONER
a. Construction of Improvement
Upon receipt of preliminary approval of a plat by the
City Council and prior to council approval of the final plat, the
subdivider shall make provision for the installation, at.the sole
expense of the subdivider, of such.improvements as shall be required
by the City which improvements may include: streets, sidewalks,
public water systems, sanitary sewer system, surface and storm
drainage systems, and public services. The installation of such
improvements shall be in con-formity with City approved construction
plans and specifications and all applicable City standards and
ordinances.
b. Performance Contract
Prior to the installation of any required improvements
and prior to City approval of the final plat, the subdivider shall
enter into a contract with the City which contract shall require
the subdivider to construct said improvements at the sole expense
of the subdivider and in accordance with City approved construction
plans and specifications and all applicable City standards and
ordinances. Said contract shall provide for the supervision of
construction by the City Engineer; and said contract shall require
that the City be reimbursed for all costs incurred by the City
for engineering, legal fees, City Administration, and other expenses
in connection with the making of such improvements. The per-
formance of said contract shall be financially secured by a cash
escrow deposit or performance bond as -set forth by Ordinance 33.
c. Financial Securit
The performance contract shall require the subdivider
to make a cash escrow deposit or in lieu thereof to furnish a
performance bond in the following amounts and upon the following
conditions:
-45-
1. Escrow Deposit
The subdivider shall deposit with the City Treasurer
a cash amount equal to 110% of the total cost of such improvements
as estimated expense of the City for engineering, legal fees,
City Administration, and other expenses incurred by the City in
connection with the making of such improvements.
2. Performance Bond
In lieu of a cash escrow deposit, the subdivider may
furnish a performance bond, with a corporate surety satisfactory
to the City, in a penal sum equal to 110% of the total cost of
such improvements as estimated by the City Engineer, including
the estimated expense of the City for engineering and legal fees
and other expenses incurred by the City in connection with the
making of such improvements.
3: Conditions
The performance contract shall provide for a com-
pletion date on which all of the required improvements shall be
fully installed, completed and accepted by the City. The completion
date shall be determined by the City Council after consultation
with the City Engineer and the subdivider, and shall be reasonable
in relation to the construction to be performed, the seasons of
the year and proper correlation with construction activities in
the subdivision. The performance contract shall provide that
in the event the required improvements are not completed within
the time allotted, the City shall be allowed to exercise its
power to recover on the performance bond or utilize the escrow
deposit to complete the remaining construction to City standards
and specifications. In the event the amount of funds recovered
is insufficient to cover the cost of construction, the City Council
may assess the remaining cost to the lands within the subdivision.
d. Construction Plans
Construction plans and specifications for the required
improvements conforming in all respects with the standards and
ordinances of the City shall be prepared at the expense of the
subdivider by a professional engineer registered by the State
of Minnesota. Such plans and specifications shall be approved
by the City Engineer and shall become a part of the performance
contract. Two prints of said plans and specifications shall be
filed with the City Clerk.
e. Inspection
All required improvements shall be inspected during
the course of construction by the City Engineer and acceptance
of said improvements by the City shall require the prior written
certification by the City Engineer that said improvements have
been constructed in compliance with the plans and specifications.
1 746-
f. Prior Improvements
Improvements which have been completed prior to
application for final plat approval or execution of the per-
formance contract shall be accepted as equivalent improvements
provided the City Engineer shall certify in writing that said
improvements conform to City standards.
g. Construction by Cit_,;�
The City shall have the right to install such of the
required improvements as it may elect, and upon such terms
and conditions as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances.
h. As Built Plans
Upon completion of installation of all -.required improve-
ments,.the subdivider shall file with the City Clerk a tracing.
and two copies of plans and specifications showing all improvements
as finally constructed and installed.
i. Street Improvement Standards
All street improvements shall comply with Ordinance 33,
Section 9.09.
j. Drainage Facilities
All drainage facilities shall comply with Ordinance 33,
Section 9.10.
k. City Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems
All water and sewer systems shall comply with applicable
City Ordinances.
1. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Ways
Required by the City and shall conform to the design
standards as outlined in City Ordinance 33, Subdivision 9.13.
m. Public Utilities
Shall conform to the design standards as outlined in
City Ordinance 33, Subdivision 9.14.
n. Final Plat
Prior to City Council approval of final plat, the
following procedure shall.be followed:
1. Filing of Final Plat
Within six (6) months following approval of the
preliminary plat, unless an extension of time is requested in
writing by the subdivider and granted by the City Council, the
subdivider shall file ten (10) copies of the final plat with
-47-
the Zoning Administrator and shall pay a filing fee as established
by Ordinance 47. The final plat shall incorporate all changes
required by the City Council, and in all other respects, it shall
conform to the preliminary plat as approved. If the final plat
is not filed within six (6) months following approval of the
preliminary plat, the approval of the preliminary plat shall
be considered void. The final plat may constitute only that
portion of the preliminary plat which the subdivider proposes
to record and develop at that time, provided that such portion
shall conform to all requirements of City Ordinance 33, and
provided further that the remaining portion or portions of the
preliminary plat not submitted as a final plat shall be subject
to the right of the City to adopt new or revised platting and
subdivision regulations.
2. Required Final Plat Data
Shall conform. to City standards as outlined in
Ordinance 33, Section 10.04.
3. Filinq of Abstract
At the time of filing the final plat with the
Zoning Administrator, the subdivider shall also file with the
Administrator an abstract of title or registered property abstract,
certified to date, evidencing ownership of the premises involved
in the plat.
4. Easements
Prior to the submission of a final plat to the
City Council for approval, the subdivider shall furnish the City
with all easements for utilities, drainage, street right-of-way,
surface water ponding areas, and such other public uses as shall
be found to be necessary, convenient or desirable by the City.
Said easements shall be in proper form for recording in the
office of the Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles.
Step 10. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
The Administrator shall refer copies of the final plat to the
City Engineer, and shall refer the abstract to the City Attorney
for their examination and report.
a. Reports
The City Engineer and City Attorney shall submit their
reports to the City Council within fifteen (15) days after the
filing of the final plat. The Engineer shall state whether the
final plat and the improvements conform to the engineering and
design standards and specifications of the City. The City
Attorney shall state his opinion as to the title of the
premises involved.
I
b. Prepares planning report which includes comments from
other staff and forwards copies to each member of the City Council
no later than Friday, prior to the Council meeting.
.Step 11. CITY COUNCIL
The City Council shall act on the final pl
days of the date on which it was filed wit
The final plat shall not be approved if it
the preliminary plat including all changes
Council, or does not meet the engineering
and specifications of the City.
Step 12. CITY ADMINISTRATOR
at within sixty (60)
h the Zoning Administrator.
does not conform to
required by the City
and design standards
a. Following approval of the final plat by the City Council,
the City Administrator shall promptly notify the subdivider of
said approval and within thirty (30) days, thereafter, the final
plat shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds or Registrar
of Titles of the County in which the subdivision lies. The
Administrator shall receive from the subdivider a tracing and
three (3) copies of the final plat as recorded. .
b. Instructs City Attorney to prepare and execute Final
Plat Development Contract as per City Council action.
-49-
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING ADMINISTP.ATIVE FORM ENTITLED:
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST, SUBDIVISION
PLAN.
(Note: This instruction sheet should be given to each applicant
petitioning for planned development).
1. The applicant should become familiar with the provisions set -
forth in Ordinance 33 as amended entitled "Chanhassen Subdivision
Ordinance".
2. Case No., escrow paid and date will be filled out by the
Administrator, or nay other authorized person charged with accepting
forms for the Planning Commission.
3. Applicant refers to the person actually submitting the form,
if different than owner. If applicant is also the owner, write
"same" after "name.` Address refers to the applicants mailing address.
4. Owner refers to the actual person holding title to the property
in question; it does not refer to a contract buyer, renter, or
lessee. Address refers to the owners mailing address.
5. Address of Property in question fefers to subject property
street name and number. If the property is undeveloped, the address
may be obtained from the City Building Inspector.
6. Legal Description of property in question refers to the lot
number, block number and name of subdivision, or if unplatted, the
meets and bounds description or registered land survey as recorded
of the subject property. This information may be obtained from the
Carver County Register of Deeds, located in the County Courthouse,
Chaska, Minnesota.
7. Present zoning of property .refers to the specific zoning district
in which the property is located.
8. Present use of property refers to the existing land use, i.e.,
single family residential, office building, agricultural,.etc..
9. Proposed use of property refers.to the specific improvement
intended for the property in question.
10.
Documents attached are
required by City
Ordinance 33.
11.
The remaining portion
of the application
is for administrative use.
-50-
SUBDIVISION PLAN
CASE NO. SUB._
City of Chanhassen
Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST /
Date of Application -?
Escrow. Paid -'Date
Received by
Applicant
Name:_ Q2.5v1✓
Last
First) inn Initial
Address; ' 1 K) 0 � -" E Q- I E ft%E �hf4K ( 1' I
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Owner: JAMS
Last First Initial
Address: _
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Address of property in question:
Legal description of property in question:
Present zoning of property: E > j
Present use of property: 1f
Proposed use of property:
The following documents if appropriate shall be attached to this
application:
Date Received Initial
,.1. Sketch Plan %
2. Preliminary Plat
3. Escrow Account /�
-51- ..
Date Received
4. Abstractor's Certificate
5. Final Plat
Initial
I hereby declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are true., and that I shall reimburse the City
for all expenses incurred in processing this application for sub-
division.
Signature of App icant
— Kudt'(_� '9' . I
Signature of O ner
9�2,V22�?
Date
Received by Title Date
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City Official)
CHRONOLOGY
-DATE
_ BY
Sketch Plan on Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Preliminary Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Newspaper Publication
Adjacent Property Owners Notified
Public Hearing
Planning Commission Action
Preliminary Plat on
Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Final Plat on
Planning Commission Agenda
Planning Commission Postponed to
Planning Commission Action
Final Plat on Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Final Contract Executed
Escrow Returned - Amount:
' t
-52
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (Preliminary Plat)
On this day of 19 , this preliminary plat
was recommended for (approval), (disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Preliminary Plat
On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Attest:
City Administrator
r°
-53-
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - Final Plat
On this day of _19 this Final
Plat was recommended for (approval), (disapproval) subject to the
following conditions:
Chairman of Planning Commission
Action by City - Final Plat
On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved)
this Final Plat subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor
Attest:
City Administrator
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP 0 BOX 147*CHANHAS_SEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: October 24,: 1975
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Ass't. City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Sorenson Subdivision Request, Sketch Plan Review
APPLICANT: Michael Sorenson
PLANNING CASE: P-594
Ua4-i i-i nn
Mr. Sorenson is requesting to subdivide an approximate .7 acres into
one residential site.
Background
1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject property
is located approximately 400' NE of the intersection of 77th Street
and Erie Ave.
2. Existing Zoning: The subject property and its environs are presently
zoned R-1 single family residential district.
3. Utilities: Sanitary sewer and water are presently available to the
subject property.
4. Comprehensive Plan Proposals:
a. Land Use - Pursuant to the adopted City Comprehensive Guide Plan,
the subject property and its environs are to assume and maintain a low
density single family residential identity.
b. Transportation - The adopted City Transportation Plan indicates
Erie Avenue and W. 77th St. to function as local streets.
Planner's Comments
1. As shown in the attached sketch plan, Mr. Sorenson intends to create
a residential lot to the hest of the residents indicated as house #7606.
The proposed house on the now lot division is to gain access via a 420'
driveway from Erie Avenue. The southerly 150' of the indicated driveway
is shown on the plan to be easement for ingress and egress to the City
of Chanhassen for access for carrying out maintenance on the holding pond
west of the property. it is Mr. Sorenson's proposal to give alternate
PLANNING REPORT -2- --tober 24, 1978
easement rights along the proposed driveway and the T turnaround in
place of the easement already existent. A proposal such as the one
at hand, would require the Planning Commission to grant a variance to
the requirement that each residential building lot is to have 90' of
frontage on a public street.
2. Although Mr. Sorenson's proposal may be workable, there is.another
possible alternative that I would request be further investigated before
any subdivision does. occur. Enclosure 2 shows conceptually how -this
property could be alternatively accessed as well as provide the needed
access to the drainage holding pond, which would take into consideration
what may be considered the most optimal way that the surrounding area
may be subdivided for development in the future.
3. What is- needed at this time is for the Planning Commission to
order a public hearing to gather neighborhood sentiment concerning
the alternate plan shown in enclosure 2 before proceeding with any
further review of the Sorenson subdivision request.
Planner's Recommendation
I recommend that the Planning Commission order a public hearing to
gather neighborhood sentiment to the possibility of accommodating the
Sorenson subdivision through the concept presented in enclosure 2.
All�*a j-j
-AMA
�d�6J
A
m oo°� a o� � � ��1�0 0
Cal
�oQgi- cm
/O�DOO�o '' a
U Lj
ro
Lim
*flv
p
Or
PK
OF
Lake Susan
Rice
Marsh
Lake
OF
-F
•F
4
34a3
EM
34
LYMAN BOULEVARD
A
lu
i
i
17
i3
i
e
ca
.v
5
cr
w O vO
Z ,D
w4
w
aS.i�E ,sTip£ET
225 ----- 100 100 150— 3 '
:GO -
� 1,{— ' �oA$. LARSON
IG
MAN B86,115
fi �
.
- LYNN
oZIMMERMAN 28 CHAR
BK 120, P.142 SK 101, P
51.7
rAM
1ULY -! oMICHEL S ENSEN luAow SK . P605 b,
AUGUST WELTER e 46579
BK 118, P 298 � a �' w ° i tl�¢ j,V 1�iCoif�% Y
a3 n cd
to a 141 I� 379.88
t =ti
45 pN --
C tr 0. 0
M
,PdSON�i m SARGENT G. PALMER
SK 79,P204
Li
_.44 IM as ;ao IY 29397
1 N n an U a N �N �1 6j LA top 0 U Z
.�f O- o m h `� ry a z z n
otiv j m PAUL F ROJINA Cv a 4
Oo rS! m �m _ BK 52,P.523
Q 4
r 7.4 112.5 112.5 6G 100 100 191.7 122.9 84 100 !
D. KERBER �+ i BK 99, ,n
W. 77TH CTF NO.4913 S�. P.23 °
66 66 F7 11 !30
i
3 4 5 I 6 7 to 9 8 7 6 14 13 1 12 1 I I 109 $
Z og`
„ 1 w
Q to ouj
to P
`; VIEW f
7-7 4 51 2
ROSE B. PAULY-
BK 101,P70 °� .w
436 100 is
22
PAR OF LO
PART OF
LOT 16
Q T to M .o �y
1 as��
3
2 al
5 6 7 spy
c) .'
t ora
Ci;AiV
L. SCPROEDER o . w VIEW 0
BK w2, P 410 0 _ 00 —
100 LL.
7 re
ID
OF ST HUBF_R
1 i
12 II IS9 8-7if�
i
11
./1 100
I 2
5ts
w i
oi
5 ,/ �PFRI
I 2 3 4 n