HomeMy WebLinkAbout14.C. Preliminary Plat of Riverside Bluffs-Res. No. 6243
If, c ·
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
CASE NO.: 05-030
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Mark Noble, Planner I
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat of Riverside Bluffs
MEETING DATE: June 21,2005
REVIEW PERIOD: January 21 - May 20,2005 (Extended to June 21, 2005 by applicant)
INTRODUCTION:
Ryland Homes has submitted an application for preliminary plat approval of Riverside Bluffs,
proposed for property north of Eagle Creek Blvd, and west of Riverside Fields. The plat, as
currently proposed, contemplates the construction of 101 single family homes on 57 acres,
Access to this development is shown from Eagle Creek Blvd. and from Crossings Blvd. (from
the East), with future connections proposed to tie in with the development to the west
DISCUSSION:
The applicant granted an extension of this application to June 21, 2005; this was to allow for
them to complete a wetland delineation and mitigation report for review before the City Council.
As of the writing of this report, staff have not received documents regarding the wetland impacts,
nor have we received documents identifying the parkland dedication and channel redesign.
There has been a substantial amount of discussion concerning park land and trails, the
configuration of the Prior Lake Spring Lake Channel, compliance with the Shoreland Overlay
Zone, access off Eagle Creek Blvd., the proposed greenway corridor, wetland delineation!
mitigation and sanitary sewer service connection. Previously provided to the Council was the
Planning Commission staff report, which also included summary statements from a number of
the reviewing agencies as well as their complete memorandums/letters, Staff requested that this
developer meet with the developers of the two adjacent developments to address a number of the
issues and to consolidate their plans in an attempt to ensure there is some level of consistency in
the elements that are common to their developments, Staff did meet recently with those
developers to review their latest changes. It was noted that there has been some progress;
however, there remain a significant number of details that still need to be addressed before staff
is comfortable with determining that the projects are ready to move forward.
In addition to the documents noted above, staff have recently received a letter from Mark
Themig, Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director, which provides to the Council an update on
the status of conditions/issues of this development, and a letter from Bruce Loney, Public Works
Director, which included attachments from WSB & Associates, Inc" the City's consultant on the
plan review and in particular the analysis of the hydraulic grade line of the Prior Lake Outlet
,.
Channel, as well as a memorandum from Shannon Lotthammer, District Administrator of the
Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District The general sentiment of these documents is that
there still remain a significant number of issues that have not been addressed, Due to the
significance of these issues and the inability to resolve them, particularly in light of the review
deadline, staff is recommending that this application be denied. These documents are included
for the Council's information.
FINDINGS:
City Code Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations, Section 12,08, Subd. 3,R sets forth the factors that
the Planning Commission and City Council are to take into account in making a decision on their
recommendation regarding approval or denial of a preliminary plat These factors are set forth
below, along with proposed draft findings related to those factors.
a. Whether the layout of streets, lots, utilities, and public improvements and their
relation to the topography of the land, reflect good planning and development for the
City;
Finding A: It has been determined that there are significant issues that pertain to the
layout of this development, as noted below:
. The City's sewer plan contemplates that the Riverside Bluffs property would
be served by sanitary sewer extended from the Prior Lake Interceptor to the
west, through the former Eagle Creek Stables property, and then to the south
to serve the areas on the south side of CR 16, The final design and
installation of this sewer has not yet occurred; therefore, the developer would
like to move forward with a temporary sewer service, which is not the
preferred scenario as it could possibly lead to serious ramifications if it is
installed incorrectly, and that it would create unnecessary utility congestion
within Crossings Boulevard and would require additional congestion to
abandon the temporary sanitary sewer at a later date. If approved, the city
would require that the developer be responsible for all costs of installation,
maintenance, escrows funds for the future abandonment of the temporary
sewer line, and future removal of the connection, additional operation and
maintenance costs associated with the diversion of sewage to the
Southbridge lift station with the developer's agreement of Riverside Bluffs,
and that there is a clear understanding that service to the south will only
become available once the Prior Lake Interceptor connection is made,
. The temporary sewer is shown connecting to the proposed Riverside Fields
4th Addition system at the intersection of Crossings Boulevard and Rye
Court. Once the proposed trunk sanitary sewer from the Prior Lake
Interceptor located to the West is extended to the Riverside Bluffs plat
boundary, the temporary system will be abandoned and rerouted. The
applicant should be required to enter into an agreement with the Riverside
Fields 4th Addition property owner for the installation of the temporary
sanitary sewer. The applicant should also be required to enter into a
reimbursement agreement with the City for the abandonment of the
temporary sanitary sewer and be required to work with the City to develop
an acceptable plan for this temporary service, its abandonment and its
rerouting to a permanent system.
. The applicant shall meet park dedication requirements by providing park
land and the greenway corridor as generally shown on the preliminary plat
Final park land design/dedication calculations have not yet occurred,
. CenterPoint Energy objects to the plans as proposed and will only remove
their objection if the issues addressing the transmission pipeline easement
are corrected.
. The applicant shall modify all preliminary street profiles not in compliance
with the City's minimum design speeds as designated,
. Adequate drainage and utility easements shall be provided along the top and
the bottom of all proposed retaining walls. Retaining walls shall not be
located within drainage and utility easements,
. Approval of the proposed park area is contingent on additional work with the
applicant, the Engineering Department, the Prior Lake-Spring Lake
Watershed District, and the adjacent developer to determine the feasibility of
relocating the channel, as well as the impact of leaving the channel as
proposed in the drawing,
. Approval of the proposed park area IS contingent on additional
documentation related to wetlands and the channel water flow design.
Wetlands or areas that would be flooded would not qualify for park
dedication credit
. Requirements in the Shoreland Overlay Zone ordinance should be
thoroughly researched and strictly enforced.
. Mitigation of sound and sightlines from future County Road 21 and a future
expanded County Road 16 need to be part of the design considerations,
. The city should research the feasibility of relocating the channel further to
the south in order to help provide the contiguous park and greenway.
b. Whether the subdivision preserves the site's important existing natural features;
Finding B: A final determination has not been made regarding issues as they pertain to
the significant natural features located on this property, which include
wetlands, the Prior Lake Spring Lake outlet channel, woodlands and bluff
land. The following are examples of outstanding issues:
. A revised lP A between the City of Shakopee and Prior Lake-Spring Lake
Watershed District for cost sharing of improved channel has not been
finalized.
. The final design and guidelines for the Greenway Corridor in this area
have not been approved,
. Site design, as it pertains to the planting plan and the woodland
management plan, is not consistent with the City's requirements.
c. Whether the proposed plat will facilitate the use and future development of the
adjoining lands;
Finding C: There remain unresolved issues that concern the use and development of the
adjoining lands, as noted below:
. The CSAH 21 EIS is still under review and may impact the development
of this project
. The final design and relocation of the Prior Lake Spring Lake outlet
channel has not been determined.
. The applicant must meet the city's woodland management ordinance
requirements,
. In order for the greenway corridor to qualify for park dedication, the EAC
concurred with the PRAB's thoughts that it must serve some recreational
value, such as a trail corridor-
. The greenway corridor should be designed in such a way that it helps
enhance a contiguous park area,
. The applicant shall be required to construct the recreational trail shown on
the plat.
. Connecting sidewalks shall be provided throughout the development
d. Whether the subdivision can be economically served with streets, public services, and
utilities;
Finding D: There remain design issues that must be addressed, as follows:
. Minimum right-of-way dedication for County Road 16 shall be 75 feet
from centerline, that the proposed road onto County Road 16 shall require
left and right turn lanes to be constructed on County Road 16, and that the
proposed pond along future CSAH 21 shall be designed and permitted
consistent with the County's requirements.
. The proposed extension of Crossings Boulevard to the western plat
boundary does not align with previous submittals of the adjacent property
owner to the West Coordination of this alignment as it relates to the
proposed alignment of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel resulting from the
previously mentioned analysis will be required between the City of
Shakopee, the applicant and properties to the West
. Any change in drainage entering the County right-of-way requires detailed
stormwater calculations to be submitted to the County engineer for review
and approval.
. The proposed road onto CSAH 16 shall require left and right turn lanes to
be constructed on CSAH 16 to County standards.
. The development is proposing a pond in part of the County right-of-way
for CSAH 21. The pond would also need to provide a stormwater benefit
to CSAH 21 in order for it to be located in the right-of-way, A permit
shall be required for the construction of the pond in the County right of
way,
. A revised plat shall be submitted that shows a connection to the land east
of this development, which complies with the City Engineering design
criteria.
e. Whether all applicable provisions of the City Code are met; and
Finding E: A number of performance and design guidelines remain unresolved,
including the following:
. A design identifying two independent water sources that are then looped
together shall be provided, consistent with Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission guidelines,
. The city is working on a detailed proposal from its storm water consultant
to develop a storm water model of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel from
County Road 16 to Dean Lake in order to define the flood profile, The
applicant previously indicated they would pay for this study to determine
acceptable low floor/minimum building opening elevations - this issue
remains unresolved,
. The previously mentioned analysis is being performed to provide the level
of detail necessary to define the design criteria for improvements to the
Prior Lake Outlet Channel that would be required of properties proposing
to develop downstream of County Road 16. The information resulting
from the study will be utilized by the City, the County, the Prior Lake -
Spring Lake Watershed District and future developing properties to
specifically outline the proposed alignment of the channel, the future
crossings of the channel and recommendations for low floor/minimum
building opening elevations for these downstream properties, Results of
this analysis could change the preliminary plat.
. The applicant submitted a wetland delineation report dated November 22,
2004 to the City of Shakopee and to the Scott Soil and Water
Conservation District. Review of the report resulted in a determination the
delineation was performed outside of the accepted growing season, the
delineation was not consistent with an approved delineation of the
adjacent property to the East and no mitigation plan for proposed wetland
impacts was submitted for review, As of this date, no additional
information has been provided, Results of an updated delineation
performed within the growing season could result in a change to the
preliminary plat.
. Scott Soil and Water Conservation District reviewed the submitted
wetland delineation report, noting that there are a number of discrepancies
and that new wetland delineation and supporting documentation are
required in order to provide a determination prior to any proposed wetland
drain, excavation or fill activities.
. The applicant shall obtain the appropriate Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) permits and approvals for all proposed wetland impacts.
. A storm water infiltration system, if required, providing pretreatment of
storm water runoff prior to infiltration shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval.
. The applicant shall work with City staff to eliminate or minimize drainage
over proposed retaining walls,
f. Whether the subdivision is in conformance with any official map of the City and the
Comprehensive Plan.
Finding F: As submitted, the development is proposed as a singlejamily development,
which is consistent with the approved comprehensive plan (Single Family
guiding) and the zoning (R-1B, Urban Residential ZoneJ-
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As detailed above and in the memorandums/letters received by staff, it is clear that a number of
issues have still not been completely resolved, The review deadline for this preliminary plat
application was extended to June 21 st, Since staff has not received the requested additional
information nor been granted an extension of the review of this application, and based on the
number and/or significance of the unresolved issues, staff recommends that the Council deny the
request.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At its May 5,2005 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended (by a 7-0 vote) that the City
Council deny the Preliminary Plat. The Commission had a very thorough and detailed discussion
on this plat, spending a considerable amount of time discussing the number of significant and
outstanding issues, noting that these issues should be resolved prior to any approval ofthe plat. A
copy of the report to the Planning Commission has been attached for the Council's reference,
ALTERNATIVES:
L Approve Resolution No, 6243, a resolution denying the Preliminary Plat for Riverside Bluffs,
2, Approve Resolution No, 6243, a resolution denying the Preliminary Plat for Riverside Bluffs,
with revised findings,
3, Approve the requested preliminary plat of Riverside Bluffs, and direct staff to prepare a
resolution consistent with that action, and secure approval of an extension of the review
period from the applicant in order to prepare the resolution for Council action,
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer a motion to approve Resolution No, 6243, a resolution denying the Preliminary PI t for
Riverside Bluffs, and move its adoption.
g:\CC\2005\06-21 \ppriverside bluffs.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 6243
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DENYING THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RIVERSIDE BLUFFS
WHEREAS, Ryland Homes, applicant, and Mark and Joel Liesener, property owners, have
made application for preliminary plat approval of Riverside Bluffs; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as:
See Exhibit 1 (attached), and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the
preliminary plat on March 7, April 7, and April 21, 2005; and
WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing were posted and sent;
and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee Planning Commission has recommended denial ofthe requested
preliminary plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary plat request at its meetings of May
17,2005 and June 21,2005.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that it adopts the following findings of fact relative to the requested
preliminary plat:
Finding A: It has been determined that there are significant issues that pertain to the
layout of lots, streets, utilities and public improvements in this development,
as noted below:
. The City's sewer plan contemplates that the Riverside Bluffs property would
be served by sanitary sewer extended from the Prior Lake Interceptor to the
west, through the former Eagle Creek Stables property, and then to the south
to serve the areas on the south side of CR 16. The final design and
installation ofthis sewer has not yet occurred; therefore, the developer would
like to move forward with a temporary sewer service, which is not the
preferred scenario as it could possibly lead to serious ramifications if it is
installed incorrectly, and that it would create unnecessary utility congestion
within Crossings Boulevard and would require additional congestion to
abandon the temporary sanitary sewer at a later date, If approved, the city
would require that the developer be responsible for all costs of installation,
maintenance, escrows funds for the future abandonment of the temporary
sewer line, and future removal of the connection, additional operation and
maintenance costs associated with the diversion of sewage to the
Southbridge lift station with the developer's agreement of Riverside Bluffs,
and that there is a clear understanding that service to the south will only
become available once the Prior Lake Interceptor connection is made,
. The temporary sewer is shown connecting to the proposed Riverside Fields
4th Addition system at the intersection of Crossings Boulevard and Rye
Court. Once the proposed trunk sanitary sewer from the Prior Lake
Interceptor located to the West is extended to the Riverside Bluffs plat
boundary, the temporary system will be abandoned and rerouted, The
applicant should be required to enter into an agreement with the Riverside
Fields 4th Addition property owner for the installation of the temporary
sanitary sewer. The applicant should also be required to enter into a
reimbursement agreement with the City for the abandonment of the
temporary sanitary sewer and be required to work with the City to develop
an acceptable plan for this temporary service, its abandonment and its
rerouting to a pennanent system,
. The applicant shall meet park dedication requirements by providing park
land and the greenway corridor as generally shown on the preliminary plat
Final park land design/dedication calculations have not yet occurred,
. CenterPoint Energy objects to the plans as proposed and will only remove
their objection if the issues addressing the transmission pipeline easement
are corrected.
. The applicant shall modify all preliminary street profiles not in compliance
with the City's minimum design speeds as designated,
. Adequate drainage and utility easements shall be provided along the top and
the bottom of all proposed retaining walls. Retaining walls shall not be
located within drainage and utility easements,
. Approval of the proposed park area is contingent on additional work with the
applicant, the Engineering Department, the Prior Lake-Spring Lake
Watershed District, and the adjacent developer to determine the feasibility of
relocating the channel, as well as the impact of leaving the channel as
proposed in the drawing,
. Approval of the proposed park area IS contingent on additional
documentation related to wetlands and the channel water flow design,
Wetlands or areas that would be flooded would not qualify for park
dedication credit
. Requirements in the Shore land Overlay Zone ordinance should be
thoroughly researched and strictly enforced.
. Mitigation of sound and sightlines from future County Road 21 and a future
expanded County Road 16 need to be part of the design considerations.
. The city should research the feasibility of relocating the channel further to
the south in order to help provide the contiguous park and greenway,
Finding B: A final determination has not been made regarding issues as they pertain to
the significant natural features located on this property, which include
wetlands, the Prior Lake Spring Lake outlet channel, woodlands and bluff
land. The following are examples of outstanding issues:
. A revised JP A between the City of Shakopee and Prior Lake-Spring Lake
Watershed District for cost sharing of improved channel has not been
finalized,
. The final design and guidelines for the Greenway Corridor in this area
have not been approved.
. Site design, as it pertains to the planting plan and the woodland
management plan, is not consistent with the City's requirements,
Finding C: There remain unresolved issues that concern the use and development of the
adjoining lands, as noted below:
. The CSAH 21 EIS is still under review and may impact the development
of this project.
. The final design and relocation of the Prior Lake Spring Lake outlet
channel has not been determined,
. The applicant must meet the city's woodland management ordinance
requirements.
. In order for the greenway corridor to qualify for park dedication, the EAC
concurred with the PRAB's thoughts that it must serve some recreational
value, such as a trail corridor.
. The greenway corridor should be designed in such a way that it helps
enhance a contiguous park area.
. The applicant shall be required to construct the recreational trail shown on
the plat.
. Connecting sidewalks shall be provided throughout the development.
Finding D: There remain design issues concerning streets, public services, and utilities
that must be addressed, as follows:
. Minimum right-of-way dedication for County Road 16 shall be 75 feet
from centerline, that the proposed road onto County Road 16 shall require
left and right turn lanes to be constructed on County Road 16, and that the
proposed pond along future CSAH 21 shall be designed and permitted
consistent with the County's requirements.
. The proposed extension of Crossings Boulevard to the western plat
boundary does not align with previous submittals of the adjacent property
owner to the West. Coordination of this alignment as it relates to the
proposed alignment of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel resulting from the
previously mentioned analysis will be required between the City of
Shakopee, the applicant and properties to the West.
. Any change in drainage entering the County right-of-way requires detailed
stormwater calculations to be submitted to the County engineer for review
and approval.
. The proposed road onto CSAH 16 shall require left and right turn lanes to
be constructed on CSAH 16 to County standards,
. The development is proposing a pond in part of the County right-of-way
for CSAH 21, The pond would also need to provide a stormwater benefit
to CSAH 21 in order for it to be located in the right-of-way, A permit
shall be required for the construction of the pond in the County right of
way.
. A revised plat shall be submitted that shows a connection to the land east
of this development, which complies with the City Engineering design
criteria,
Finding E: A number of peiformance and design guidelines of the City Code remain
unresolved, including the following:
. A design identifying two independent water sources that are then looped
together shall be provided, consistent with Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission guidelines,
. The city is working on a detailed proposal from its storm water consultant
to develop a storm water model of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel from
County Road 16 to Dean Lake in order to define the flood profile. The
applicant previously indicated they would pay for this study to determine
acceptable low floor/minimum building opening elevations - this issue
remains unresolved.
. The previously mentioned analysis is being performed to provide the level
of detail necessary to define the design criteria for improvements to the
Prior Lake Outlet Channel that would be required of properties proposing
to develop downstream of County Road 16, The information resulting
from the study will be utilized by the City, the County, the Prior Lake -
Spring Lake Watershed District and future developing properties to
specifically outline the proposed alignment of the channel, the future
crossings of the channel and recommendations for low floor/minimum
building opening elevations for these downstream properties, Results of
this analysis could change the preliminary plat
. The applicant submitted a wetland delineation report dated November 22,
2004 to the City of Shakopee and to the Scott Soil and Water
Conservation District Review of the report resulted in a determination the
delineation was performed outside of the accepted growing season, the
delineation was not consistent with an approved delineation of the
adjacent property to the East and no mitigation plan for proposed wetland
impacts was submitted for review, As of this date, no additional
information has been provided, Results of an updated delineation
performed within the growing season could result in a change to the
preliminary plat
. Scott Soil and Water Conservation District reviewed the submitted
wetland delineation report, noting that there are a number of discrepancies
and that new wetland delineation and supporting documentation are
required in order to provide a determination prior to any proposed wetland
drain, excavation or fill activities,
. The applicant shall obtain the appropriate Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) permits and approvals for all proposed wetland impacts,
. A storm water infiltration system, if required, providing pretreatment of
storm water runoff prior to infiltration shall be submitted to the City for
review and approvaL
. The applicant shall work with City staff to eliminate or minimize drainage
over proposed retaining walls,
Finding F: As submitted, the development is proposed as a single-family development,
which is consistent with the approved comprehensive plan (Single Family
guiding) and the zoning (R-1B, Urban Residential Zone).
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that Ryland Homes request for preliminary plat approval of Riverside Bluffs is
hereby denied:
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
held this _ day of , 2005.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKO PEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Mark Noble, Project Manager
From: Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director
Date: June 16, 2005
Subject: Riverside Bluffs Preliminary Plat Status
INTRODUCTION
I am writing to provide you with an update on the status of approval conditions for the
Riverside Bluffs development.
DISCUSSION
The Park and Recreation Advisory Board's preliminary plat recommendations for the
Riverside Bluffs development contained specific conditions that the approval was
contingent on additional work related to the alignment of the channel and wetland
documentation. In addition, there was consensus that the amount of active park land
needed for the overall area (CR18 to Dean Lake) was 8-10 acres, which would require
additional land from the adjoining development to the west (Noecker).
After the May 17 City Council meeting, I sent Ryland Homes two requests for additional
information on the proposed park areas, The first on May 26 asked for updated park
dedication acreage calculations for proposed park areas that would be in channel
easement, gas line easement, and wetlands. The second on June 2 clarified the
dimensions and alignment of the channel corridor and requested verification of the ability
to make the proposed trail ADA compliant within that corridor-
Answers to theses questions are needed to determine whether or not Ryland Homes is
meeting the Advisory Board's recommendations. As of today, I have not received any
response from Ryland Homes.
This plat is plagued with ongoing issues that are not resolved. Contrary to Mr. Enger's
statement at the May 17 City Council meeting, the City, including myself, asked Ryland
Homes for extensions to the review period in order to continue working on the issues.
However, Ryland Homes declined to provide those extensions. Also, Mr. Enger's
comments at the May 17 City Council meeting indicating that Ryland Homes did not
receive any of the staff reports outlining the unresolved issues was simply not true, My
reports were included in the May 5 Planning Commission packet, and I am certain
someone from Ryland Homes attended that meeting and participated in the discussion.
The review extension that Mr- Enger offered at the May 17 is not adequate to resolve the
issues. I am affirming my previous recommendation that City Council follow the
unanimous recommendations of the Planning Commission and deny the preliminary plat
application.
CITY OF SHAKO PEE
Memorandum
TO: Mark Noble, Planner I
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Riverside Bluff Preliminary Plat
DATE: June 16,2005
Attached to this memorandum is a memo from Todd Hubmer and Ted Witkowski, of
WSB & Associates, Inc., on the Riverside Bluff plan review and in particular the analysis
of the hydraulic grade line of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel, from CR 16 to Dean Lake.
Also attached is a memo from Shannon Lotthammer to the Board of Managers of the
Prior Lake-Spring Lake Outlet Channel north of C.R. 16 to Dean Lake,
In review of the Riverside Bluff plan, with the hydraulic study of the channel, the current
grading plan does not provide enough free board between the 100-year elevation and the
low floor elevation. Additionally, some modifications can be made in the channel design
which could impact the hydraulic grade line, however, would require extensive work near
CR. 16 and extensive retaining walls within the development This would require Prior
Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District approval as well on what the ultimate and final
design would be, The Watershed District has approved a proposal to design the segment
of channel in this area, pending that an alignment can be decided on within the
developments of Riverside Bluff, Ridge Creek and Shutrop North.
In summary, at this time due to the unknown of the channel design near CR. 16 and the
approval on what design would be approved by the PLSL WD, it is recommended not to
approve the grading plan as currently submitted from Riverside Bluff. Additional review
and possible design of the channel is required in order to properly approve the lots
adjacent to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel.
If you have any questions in regard to this memorandum, please feel free to contact me in
my office.
1 ~/
/:~. /
~ce Lo y
Public W s Director
BUpmp
ENGRlEMPLOYEEFOLDERlPPENNINGTONIWORDiRIVERSIDEBLUFF
Memorandum
To: Joe Swentek, City of Shakopee
Bruce Loney, City of Shakopee
From: Todd E. Hubmer, P.E.
Ted Witkowski, Engineering Specialist
Date: June 16, 2005
Re: Riverside Bluffs Plan Review
City of Shakopee, MN
WSB Project No. 1281-84
Weare currently in the process of reviewing the hydraulic grade line in the Prior Lake Outlet
Channel from County Road 16 to Dean Lake. Attached, please find the preliminary profile
showing the lOa-year high water elevation in the channel from County Road 16 to Dean Lake,
We have reviewed the proposed Riverside Bluffs development as it relates to the lOa-year high
water elevation of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel. Based on this review we offer the following
comments:
L The current elevation of homes located immediately north of County Road 16 and
immediately adjacent to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel do not provide 2-feet of free
board between the lOa-year high water elevation and the low floor elevation.
2. Based on conversations with the developer, they are proposing the City drop the
invert elevation of the Prior Lake Channel immediately north of County Road 16 to
an elevation which would accommodate the current grading plan, Accommodating
this request has the following results:
a, An extensive structure would be required to facilitate the drop and retaining walls
would be necessary to allow building at the elevations and distances from the
channel as proposed,
b. The currently provided easement width across the channel would not be adequate
to accommodate the changes in elevations and provide a trail and maintenance
access to the outlet channel.
3, Any alignment, profile, and easement changes to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel will
need to be approved by Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District.
4. The current alignment ofthe ditch north ofthe east-west access road will need to be
modified to remove the oxbow channel alignment currently proposed in the vicinity
C:\Documents and Settings\jswenteklLocal Settings I Temporary Internet Files\OLK31IMEMO - jw bl- 061605.doc
June 16,2005
Page 2
of Pond 5. The City would prefer that Ryland Homes coordinate their activities with
the adjacent property owner to accommodate slight meanders through this section to
maintain a natural and stable stream channel which will reduce future maintenance,
5, Our preliminary recommendation is that the crossing of the stream channel of the
roadway north of County Road 16 consist of a single l2x5 box culvert,
6, We anticipate that the culvert crossing on the north-south street receiving drainage
from the east and entering the Prior Lake outlet channel to be a 10x4 box culvert,
We currently do not recommend approval of the grading plan as currently submitted, This
recommendation is based on the large number of homes that are adjacent to the Prior Lake Outlet
Channel which do not provide the required free board protection, We recommend meeting with
the developer to review the options available prior to resubmittal of the grading plan for
consideration by the City.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact either of us at 763-541-4800.
Attachment
tsh
C:\Documents and SettingsljswenteklLocal SettingslTemporary lntemet FilesIOLK31\MEMO - jw bl- 061605.doc
New Model 100 yr. Future .6
Day [0] Time 00:02:00 Step 1 it
509.0 1018.0 1527.0 2036.0 2545.0 3054.0 3563.0 4072.0 4581.0
0 ~ 11./
790.0
t
780.0
770.0
760.0
750.0
740.0
Deans L~ X-SEC-M2 DL-2 US-CR21 CR21-PLKRD PKLKRDl'JaDIWW8N-M<VLNUSNWLN-RB1 REflB1-Rfm3:RB81B3-R~~2-R8Em<<DZ1\ ~1]BJS
o.om.oo Q: 0.00 OAO 0.00 Q: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Q: 0.00 O,{!l!>>: a.ao.om.ooo: 0.000.000.00 Q: 0.00 0.001: 0.000.Om.0lll40
""'..."'" 836.00 ....220.00."'" 1100.00 ....220.00."'" "-200.00-"'" 550.00 ......250.00...""'.."'" 350.00 ........... 410.00 ...... 300.00 .........
New Model 100 yr. Future
Day [0] Time 00:02:00 Step 1 f:;J;.
502.0 1004.0 1506.0 2008.0 2510.0 3012.0 3514.0 4016.0 4518.0 I
frof ( s-/c.,"I' <-
--
A () f'/ c:..l(
'""
I 6
790.0
780.0
770.0
760.0
750.0
740.0
Deans Lal\:e X-SEC-M2 DL-2 US-CR21 CR21-PLKRD PKLKRDBlSLDfWmj8N-W3NLNUSNWLN-RB 1 REAB1 -REm3::RB81B3-RBIBJ!RB-8~2-RBew:D-2A l\1lroa:m;us
0.000.00 Q: 0.00 0.40 0.00 Q: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Q: 0.00 0.([0): O.OO.OOO.Ooc): 0.00 0.000.00 Q: 0.00 O.OCD: O.OOO.OmoAO
... ..... 836.00 ...220.00..... 1100.00 .....220.00..... "200.00-... 550.00 ...250.00.......... 350.00 .....,..... 410.00 ..... 300.00 ......
Memorandum
June 9, 2005
To: Board of Managers
From: Shannon Lotthammer, District Administrator
Re: Segment 5 Status and Design
Over the past two months, I have participated in several meetings and information exchanges
between the City of Shakopee, the Watershed District and potential developers of the area along
Segment 5 of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel. Through that process, we are getting close to finalizing
the alignment ofthat segment ofthe channel (see attached diagram, which is the latest concept from
the City of Shakopee),
I am hopeful that the alignment question will be worked out in the next couple weeks. Once that is
settled, we will be ready to move into the design phase for that stretch of the channel, and it would be
helpful to get that started as soon as possible after the alignment is decided so we can stay in step
with (and influence, as needed) the development plans, There is also up- front work that could be
accomplished at any time (such as surveying the existing channel cross-sections and completing the
stream typing), even before the alignment question is finally settled. Therefore, I asked Ed and Peter
to put together a scope of work and cost proposal to design and bid Segment 5 (attached),
Note that this proposal relies on PLSLWD staff assistance for the channel survey. By having the
District staff assist in the survey process, we reduce our engineering/landscape architect costs for the
proj ect and PLSL WD staff gain invaluable field experience in the design of stream restoration
projects, which will help us explain the project to other project partners and the public.
The total proposed costs to design and bid Segment 5, which is 6,024 linear feet long) is $74,932, of
which $57,000 is for Kestrel Design, and $17,932 for Wenck Associates, For context, the total
estimated design, construction and project administration cost for Segment 5 of the Outlet Channel
Improvement Project is $903,600 (excluding any easement costs), so the cost proposal for designing
and bidding the proj ect is slightly more than 8% of the total cost estimate for the segment.
Requested Board Action
Authorization of the attached Scopes of Work and Cost Proposals -- $17,932 for Wenck Associates
and $57,000 for Kestrel Design -- to design and bid Segment 5 ofthe Outlet Channel Improvement
Project.
06/17/2005 08:15 FAX 9522266024 RYLAND HOMES I4J 001
,
RYLAND
HOMES LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
PHONE: 952.2296000 DATE: 6/17/05
FAX: 952,229.6024 ATTENTION: Mark Noble
RE: Riverside Bluffs
TO: City of Shakopee
129 Holmes St. So,
Shako pee, MN 56477
CORRESPONDENCE SENT ViA
DMAIL 0COUR1ER c=JFAX - No. of Pages
DOTHER DpICK-UP FAX NUMBER 952-233-3801
DATE
REMARKS: Please add this to the Council Packet.
COpy TO: SIGNED )
Brian Sullivan
Land Dept.Coordinator
TWINS CITIES DIVISION
06/17/2005 08:15 FAX 9522266024 RYLAND HOMES ~002
RYLAND
......_-
the Ryland Group, Inc.
7"00 ex"c.llllv" I)"VI:
Fn<"'n rrnlfi8. MN ;,t>Jdd
June 16, 2005 (O>1rr"m,,'j k # 20035<1/11
Honorable Mayor and City Council 'M\IfIW ry1iind COin
Shakopee City hall
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Riverside Bluffs Preliminary Plat
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
Ryland Homes has been working to finalize the remaining issues related to the Preliminary Plat
approval for Riverside Bluffs. The unresolved issues related to the project were the extent of we~ands
and the resolution of the flood elevation for the Prior Lake Channel. We have also finalized the park
dedication calculations for the property.
Wetlands: Ryland Homes along with our wetland consultant Pioneer Engineering met with the TEP
panel on June 1, 2005 to review the hydrology study prepared this spring. The hydrology study
revealed that the groundwater elevations were not close enough to the surface to meet hydrology
parameters for wetlands. The TEP panel decided that aerial photographs should be reviewed to
determine if there was any influence from the Prior Lake Channel when it is flowing, On June 15, 2005
Pioneer and Ryland met with Pete Beckius of the Scott County Soil Conservation District to review the
aerial photographs. Historic aerial photographs were reviewed and it was determined that after the
channel was built the extent of wetlands has decreased. It also was shown that the Prior Lake Channel
has influence on wetland hydrology when it is running. It was agreed that a conservative approach to
determining the extent of wetlands would be to match the aerial photographs with topographic
contours. Mr, Beckius agreed that since the wetlands located on the site are degraded, that
replacement of the existing wetlands from a wetland bank is acceptable, Therefore the final wetland
delineation will not alter the plat
Prior Lake Channel: The City has retained WSB to determine the flood elevation of the Prior lake
Channel. The preliminary flood elevations provided by WSB is similar to the elevations our engineer
used in determining the lowest floor elevations throughout the development. The channel design
contemplates the construction of a waterfall feature north of County Road 16. City Staff is reviewing
the flood study with the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District on June 21, 2005. Staff has
indicated that if a waterfall is constructed, the cul-de-sac and lots to the west of the channel may need
to be refined. Based on information we have received flood elevations will not cause any change in the
design of the subdivision other than adjusting the grades and possibly refining the lots west of the
channel. It is our understanding that the Watershed District has authorized the design of the channel
alignment. As discussed at the last City Council meeting the design of the Prior Lake Channel can be
concurrent with the Final Plat design of Riverside Bluffs.
Park Dedication: Ryland Homes has met with the EAC and the PRAB numerous times on the issues
of Park Land dedication and the preservation of the Prior Lake Channel as a Greenway Corridor The
EAC and the PRAB both unanimously recommended approval of using the Prior Lake Channel as a
Greenway Corridor and would credit the greenway as parkland if an ADA accessible trail could be
incorporated into the greenway. Ryland Homes has previously provided the City with plans showing
how the trail can be designed along the Prior Lake Channel.
06/17/2005 08:16 FAX 9522266024 RYLAND HOMES !4J003
Ryland Homes is in receipt of the June 2, 2005 letter from Parks and Recreation. The letter did not
reflect the PRAB and EAC decision to allow the greenway corridor to be dedicated towards parkland.
We believe the drainage easement for the channel is developable and the slopes could have been
incorporated into the backyards of very desirable walkout lots. Because the channel is useable for lots
and can be used as part of the City's regional trail system, and incorporates the desire of the City to
create a greenway system, the greenway area meets the City's criteria for parkland. As Ryland has
stated in the past and was agreed to by the PRAB and EAC we will pay for the grading and stabilization
of the redesigned channel and will construct a trail along the channel as long as the Greenway Corridor
is credited towards park dedication requirements, The park dedication proposal is as follows
Park Requirements
Existing Park Riverside Fields Swap 3,70 Acres
Park Area Required for 101 Homes 4,04 Acres
Total Park Land Required 7.74 Acres
Park Proposal
Outlot B 4.2337 Acres
Includes .26 Acres of wetland-mitigated offsite.
Excludes ,58 acres for overflow drainage channel
Outlot D (Including Channel) 1.2832 Acres
Channel Easement is .3992 Acres
Outlot F (Including Channel) 2.3458 Acres
Channel Easement is 1.4738 Acres
Total Par\< Area Proposal for Credit 7.8627 Acres
The park proposal is for 7,8627 acres of upland unencumbered by gas line easements. The existing
stock pond located within the park will be filled and mitigated offsite.
Additional area available for park uses but not requested as park land credit
Outlot C Gas Esm't 1.2718 Acres
Outlot E, Gas Esm't 0.4240 Acres
Total Usable Park Area with Esm't 9.5585 Acres
The 9.5585 acres of Total Useable Park area includes the gas line easements. Ryland has agreed to
relocate the park in its present location because if allowed the City to use the gas line easement as
active open space for sport fields. The Parks Department has determined that the gas line easement is
developable and provided a sketch showing the gas line easement being used for active park facilities.
06/17/2005 08:16 FAX 9522266024 RYLAND HOMES 141004
,
Additional Park Construction costs paid for by Ryland
Trail Construction 3,600 Linea! Feet of 8 I wide Trail $97,000
Trail Easement Area within channel easement is .52 Acres
Grade and Stabilize Stream 1,100 Lineal Feet $82,500
Additional expenses Ryland is undertaking include the construction of the trail and grading the Prior
Lake Channel. Park improvements such as the trail are generally included in the parkland dedication
calculation. The grading of the stream channel would normally be a cost shared by the City and
Watershed. Because Ryland is wishing to develop the property we have agreed to grade and stabilize
the stream.
We are requesting that the City Council adopt the recommendations of the EAC and PRAB and
approve the plat with the park land dedication as proposed with the Preliminary Plat We believe this
will be an outstanding project, which will benefit the residents of Shakopee in innumerable ways. We
respectfully request your approval of the Preliminary Plat for Riverside Fields.
~~ ~~
Brian Sullivan
Land Resources
Ryland Homes
-----._-----." -
RI\ .3RSIDE BLUFFS'
PRELIMINARY SITE, GRADING AND UT~ITY PLANS SHBETJNDEX'
.SHAKOPEE MINNESOTA .~ ~:~~~SITEPLAN
- " Inn B ~ iT' E' 0 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS .
, ~=,. f-,.,f ~ hE' . 4. PRELIMINARY PIAT
\ ~~L.!' -1--1' I / I I ol n 1 t . \ " _ ~ . "! ~ To,' . '. ... 5. PRELIMJNARY GRADlNG PLAN
,\ -:ri5\. -l...I--Ll-- R1VER~JDE Ai 2N! ADDl ON \ /' J 6 PRELlMINARYUTILITYPLAN
UTI LI TY &: . \ /./ \ . I 1--1 i,! \ ".;./' : . ~JAN 2 0 200~ '7: PRELIM!NARYPROFILES '.
l ' . 2 _ .,,/ '. 8. PRELIMINARY PROFILES
...... ...... _ \ ll. ~ m SE AL .L .J,mo~ '. -.-! .. _ ~ . 9. PRELIMINARY l'ROFlL&'l
l> . REDIlC:al{S) \ \ II --..:::::=:: --~ 4) I ~ ENbINEE!'{!f~G, P.A TR-l. TREE INVENTORY .
_ _ _1_'__ f:X1S1lNG WAmu.lA1N \ ~ _- R'I'E CO!IlT ,I
__ __ PROPOSED WA'IERMAfN \ --- _' I .
_ _ _~_ _-"- I'U1lJRtWATEllllAllf \\ ~~_.... =-- - / OU1LOT B I TR-2. TREElNVENTORY
o · SANITARY MANliCU(S) \ KT I I I '.
- - - < - -- ElCIS11NG SANITARY SEY.ER \ \ O' " POND 'I .
-<_ PROFOSSl SANITARY SE\\1:Il \ \ . \ . '-
- - .... < - -- F\IllJRE SANITARY SE\\m "A ~ I I' 7 D' .
o . CAn:Il BASlII a \ \ \ 1 ' I'
o . J.4..INIlCU: ~ L "-... 'i I'. {Q '- II . II. /I I
I> .. F\..\Ral EHD -.., " . In u
\ e 0 Ilm11VE >:\ . ..... - ,
_ _ _<< _ __ EXlS11NO STORlI S<.YoER \ \ __---'. -_ J @ . '-, I 'I" /
/ ----<~ PROPOSED STORM SE\\el.::l! " ',- I I \.. ,). 13 2 CD
;;;.;-~:.-;; :::::- \\ /. 0\[J [] [] D I Qa' '. _ [] [J q D DE ~ D [J GJ EJ gj i B l/ 1 /
,,,.....,,........... \ I
f.:..:::....:................:......~ BI1lIJ,/INOUS SURfACE - \ ~0t; 1r~ * ~~ Q / ~ L
"...."..."..".... ~a' -- bt. ,I. .
.. .. "... "".. 5, 1r.', . a I =-- S'IREET A II,. .,. -
CONCRETe:SURf'ACE \ Cj . l\l V -- - - - ---- -+ ~n;.
7 /. C OUTLOT C 1
o FlELD LOCAlCD /iANlTARY OR STORId IlANHOlE I y,. ~ " -
... f!flO LOCAlCD HnJRANT Il ' 'l."A~"'-- - - - - -1- I [J 0 [] [J -
If FlELD LOCA1EDsat\1ce \ a m II la 17 ",. . .'P' .;,-,' · ~ . I
'fi f!flO LOCAlCD !.AMI SPRIHKlER VALVE . h "' 3 2 I ~
.; ~~:;~:~~~N1<I.mHtAD I _ . I,. ~ -- ... (It ~~~Mt ~""\~ ~ I ~[J . Q 5' I
,,====== f!flO LOCAlCD CUl.VERT I I J ~~G ... \ I 11 LU ('V · '-' ~ I
I2l f1EI.D LOCAlCD CATal BASIN I "R" 7 - - I
A FlELD I..OCAlEl F\..\RED END SEcnOll I J' '. ----- ,. . \ ~~.=- W' Din .~-- '-_--1- F - -. -
~ FlELD LOCATED 'l1IEE LJ<E ..... _ \' ~ ~~ · 1 \--.t..... ~ ------.
Z"\ .' FlELll LCCAlCD l/AJOR 'l1IEE . . ...--...... '_~ . ~ , . . I I I I ' n
_""~cb- f!flO I..OCAlCD OVERHEAD unLJ"TY UNES ,. . , '\. . ...' II -----
-tv-tv- FlELDl..OCAlCDUNOERGROUNDm.E:VISlDHUNE V~[J../~. 04 '-~':'- . ~ \\ . ~ENERGY(IllNHEGASCO) l\~ 1..\ 'L ~ ..'l.= 0 .-1, -7- ,....., -~
-teI-lol- f1!lD LOCAlCD UNDERGROUND lllll'HONE UijE: VI r 1- 0 --, Dill 0 ; II \ '\. '0-. 'r---
_(0-10- f1EI.D LOCATED FlllER 0PlIC UNE: 1 . 11 '" V I . Il' 9 I
_ue-ue- f!flO LOCA'IEll El..EC1RIC'UNE 13' _; 0
_11_0-":' F1El.DLOCA'lalUNllERGROUNDOASUNE CD I 7./1f;7. .~~....... t AlP" ..--. ~.JY )fl ~ &~~ l 0 ~ I
-'-x -x - FlELD LOCAlCD FENCE UNE ' G JY:~ r ... ~~ -- ~S1J~~ · > L""'< .'~ I
. f!flO LOCAlEl W:CllllC BOX OU~ ~./ g /"./'......---..... ~_______ / n~,~ND % - ~ ~ ~
o f!flO LOCAml !l.ECTIllC BOX . / "-
*m FlELD LOCA'IEll l.lomTtJlllNO \\aL ..- . -- ' / 7
a FlELD LOCAml'lElD'HONE BOX . ,,~' .....," ./ -.., -l'--~~ ~ - c-1 f - I ~~ - - - - .
Ii l'lELD 1..OCA'lal 1UEVISlOI BOX // ,., . " * '.. - -. "I ::::.r..::::J
- FlELD LOCAlCD unUlY Pql.E .,' A,~ .,., -ElGS1IIlO CREEK CEHTERUNE I GJ' * -- ..... " -0 1[)' I 0~' ~.
:$: f!flO LOCAlCD UGllT POlE: ", ~ _.....,cP. ,-'~ EJ . . '- ~ ~,
o f1E1llLOCAlEl 'IESI' HOlE ,,<.s .,J.~GP.:>~' . I. 1 --~ .,~ ' , · [] 3
l:l AELD LOCA1ED UAIl.BOX .......~ ~'I:!'~ ...,' --...... o\l> -.., , 1';:3
-.- f1E1ll LDCAlCD SIGN ,,' 0& 9-.....~ /'/ . I (,I ,,~ '-, ~1.1.; -... I ~ " ~
ROnJWAY ~Bfl1JWNOUS PA1H ""-"~~ ,...-' II7l Iii 0 ' Ou '-('~"-,~" . "'-.. r ( ~"..-' ,
IIolPROWdENTS " ~ " L-J m II 7't - ,~Q<~ ,I /'
---=-_____CURS UN!: -"",., , ",.-" I I '':0]' () '')'' -t;l'~ ~, ...--.....,' I U .
-- ___CONO"lm WAlJ( ",,/,-;',,/ . . I 0 [] I' ~ /1j'/0C:S;~~ ','---_.. IIJ
:::::::~:~:v UNE ~,// _ .":';,1,"'11"';"',1: ',' ~.~..<<, '-"'1:'i!!:' "...'" ." .. .. I \ POhO /~, 1~ -,\ ~
"""'1Wf" ~". r::. 0,,:,0" . ".{""t;f.~~~.~~~~,~.~(: ".., .lJ~p.;~k/. 11":,;"[ ~~a~' 7 r .. '"-..
~~fi~~~:~~.~1)j~~":f.}~~~~mli:~ . I DOl, I I ! [;j:--':: - ---.....- -, --. ~ l
~t~?!iH '%":!",P~ Yol:~t.T:~t'li1 ~iI . :' Il "\ '. I
~~...A.;'J.' . :.-er l!.1;;,:; !.:r:~,,~..i!-~~>1,"!,,'f1.;k..'.~,"~:. 10 :L'-. - ) -...~ -...
'.. I '\: .. ."00:,... '.., ,,,,':!:,""." .!~~ I~ or ""I'iJ :A~ '~",' r'.....~ . .~r: ~ I -- .. .
~~~.~.:',m;;"i!:~::rtf/.".4j::.~I.~. 1'~<<1~'>'''''''!~' ,~.~:~~.,.~~.~t..J&': PRBPAREDBYPIONEERENGlNEERlNO,P.A. IOo~ ~ I L ,r~L'/ 8~ J .......1-i-- I
If!'.i'.'~'-kli~.r'''~.'~~,'i'<.~~',,;'1;~,.t! .ut "'-~''-"I'''~ ~_. ~T?'~"":d.'~~'" ' rL-J a ----... 0::--' ...
&fi'~""jl!"~:ii:~<lt~:i"\,' , I,. \~\1;;;;~ ,~i'~ -w.~ (m.j;.,,'!!,T~.,"" !>'!f.i;: ~' 8" . 11
..,.,.~. '1:;;a:-.. ~If;':""" .r ~ ..,.t;....:r...... <fW'('. <;~" .l~r ~.. ,:~:t"'"I"i ;'.?-\1'.. ~ .. "- 1
~~~l';"1';f'1<'t$;:: ,. ,- ~qj2J.l:T\'f: 'ii" ~"6:~~\:!3~i~~a.\f;j:'m DEAN M. ROBBINS . · I ~ ~ - ~ . /
~~~~o(?f:: ~. .':4 'fo i!.J.~~x~t't.i5:tt.. ~~ . to. ~~t:.~:~~~: t1t~~;gt; q...... ~ --... --- .
Th. Inlonn.tlo<I rnd/or ""doring. cruI mcp. ...,t.!oed herd>, "ell .. .!r"t :~~"%\,:\ij;M:'~ :,,' ,.",~::. . J!iffi'~~~'I. . 'li1~.. .~ ;,,~,'.f..v.:\"1t;{~ FROmCf CIVIL BNOINEER. ~ I. r ~ ) ;-t I
J CdUan. dlmwlons. orao.. tcnd.ccpTnll and amenltTc.s. ere af ttut "'~=.r.' !..~,t\ ~:1~,E~ ~..,,J J ..... :",."'''', ~-\Jt'Ni.!~~1~~.~' J~j!'"i ~'. . -....
:~ ~~~M of d.plcU,g d pasalb1. u.- gf!;hl~. IWf cr. subJo~t ;:.~t;t::7Ij~"~i'~i '~~l'~":,,. . {z~'~~?-.g-~~~ h;.~~u;.~.~~~~W:'~(!~\f~&t~~$~.:. PBANMROBBINS I 8 t I ,0 . 1
ch no tirllOt1 or warranty ClI to zonfn9. dllyelo . cot '';'~-~z,,~'''':;rSH~t.~~ ~~ .~~. ~'W,~ ~ .~ ~"". !Jt;~."", . ... r='q.:\...f'~,~~"'~:-o.'.-: .c.
~'"'~..orl.~of.U"'prcparll..Jshlno.m.<Io,..dG::'_'hCUld (Fi'>.f.~;.:~~I,''1{iJ.i'~,....~~~'~,;~.n'f1!.~t~~Y!~. ...':"'~1l!r!~~' REGISTEREDPROFESSIONALOVILENGtNEER,. D. \ D co [J GJ~ MI . U I
nol .nd .m n.l rdy on th. 111crm.lJon orId/or renderlnll' CII1d mops or ~l-~.:&;."",' ":!'~"""')l',."'t~"I"''''~~'' ~.l&fJ1~'I~~~..;,.,., '""';\~,.", . 0' ~ ['
w.... conl.lned htrilln In dlC!dlng to pw-ch..e .ny pnlllOriy, It.. t~~1~V$;' ;;.~. ,~~t:rJ..;i',%~;; :,)f,;'" : ;i,ft..r.1!:il'o" ~}"';:f,1~~"1!. il!.l.,...l<': ,,~, :~ 41968 I - . ~ I j,
i-t;<'z..j-;~~ ~l ~..., ':0 Ilir' ..,.f/p r:. Ai::,I, . .. -.. .:;>. '. 'sYi." 'r':'t.; .'~~':i.~:i~(~~. ,,'" _ 3 ... ~
Pion"'" Enolnoetl1;. P.A. m""e n. WlltTOlltlo. 0(' (lplUsnlollon. .1 any klnd ',;':'\~';i,;r;~iU::~'~~~'" ,ffii;:~j>~Z"!1I'~~: ':. ?~f.4ff.~.~P.t;. '"t>,. .;~.", .i~. ';. REGISTRATION NUMBER D t~ ~!. . "-
_ ~.r.ctllJ': ')l'pra8Iod Dr Jmplflllf, wIth rldSp,r;t to the mcrttcrl' doplcled 01' ~._.../,..~;:J.l.t.~~,~ ~"'r~~. 'l-:,...,,!-I """!~'r" .f~,.:.L. ~ ,!...J.~.'\".!.I ~'f''O''>'I': :. ~ ffi H}.l S1l1EET D '" fI'--- - -
~ ~, . d .. In' J'u h ~ '~~.~ ".;.,,\,~..v . ......,,-.-.. ~.,~~'" ,..,,,,,:r.ifl~ "./::.. "} ., .. , ~, ~ " ----
cownd by the rc:tldcrlno. drawIngs an OWler lorm~1 eTlIllo =.". ':1 ~~/' ,.....;-J.ttJ:;jfdfl...f....ifl.,"!i.:.-::...1J. J. ,': ",:.. . '., .~ J ~'H':' ...... "" -
. t>J;; ';;:~jt.l~"'-.k: ~. ~';!k~';;,i~- j1\f. .~.'t.~'M-: ~~I . '!.':::';';.;..sf~t;.:'~' .,J. . ~~ . "... ""...
for dorton..f .."lIn; dowlopod lltlI.., ",for 10 Ute "",.rd.d lInal plot. Iill'~' .'~ ~~!?!,"':iJ.~~-?1l1~w 'S:ili'~>;;:.^~!>(i.\'~i,~'. . ",' !r-':' -,: DEVELOPER J ! II 4 ~"" I ... Z
Tn. .""er. of lb. PI" arty 011."" ond their .,,,,.....,, end ."'in. r...M ,~".!.;; .I;."'~~';p:.'f';i;'g,,'W1:~: ,'~~:.'~~1:i\~,;;; "'. .:"~:'..' '-" ?J.!<r;." a > "7 ~ .
~...,.--I:,.-~..-~..~I-.._-~~ '''.,;~ ~~I.;l,..'F-~t~~Jj.~%J~,,;;;,.,... RYLAND HOMES D [j [J [J ~ D a0{i1()1 'D ~ 100
""y pOrt(o) ./th. prop.r1l.L ~~:i..~~;~i;,\~~:q~~JJ.. ~\!4;~f-~!~\~~,~!ii'::.-'.~:I'~~)}~i'f 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE ID 0 · 7. ~ _ I 1 I I 20,0
Th. d""".J"" ,...,.,.. 111. riiht to cltcn!J' tho pions wlthout fl!rlh.' naUes. . '. .w.~. ".r.. ....;~ .<'", ".,~,... ;J;:'?-'{ ."-,., EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 D 9
. CON'I'ACf:BRIANSULt.IVAN. . I L-_ il I G"n""~ SC'." '"
SIlbJec! to Clly ond all Gcvommll/ll oPl'''''''''' LOCA nON MAP LAND RESOURCES COORDINATOR ,--- - - "^""'" ~ u, FEET
PI8NEERengineering '. PHONE: (952)229-6046 ,/..- , "L,- - - .
"""""'...... ......"""'... .....""'\'l!\UJ w=.us"""""'" IIl<r<;yocnlr/""',,",pl''''''-=1>7 Rorldoco RYLAND HOMES
:U:!:2~Ild~SSUll MendomHelghtsOfficc ~~~"MN'mi3 :'6.J~~~:1 <>=M.""""'" COVER SHEET 7600 EXECUTM! DRM! RIVERSIDE BLUFFS
=.19t:'P'n:ln-9<U (7"1183.''''0 p",'aJ.'1I3 ><ndo<...~.. or... s=ce_ Ilq.N~ ~ c..~ EDEN PlI.AIRIB. MINNl!SOTASS344 SElAKOPEe,ldlNNESOTA
---..-. _. - -..
-..- .. ...---..-
t> ~~" ~~r-Illr--
~~,. ."1, \.\ C;j K.'
, 0 o~rTr~
~ ~ [J .~. ~
" 0 ~ di~ \ I \ \ \
~~ ~ . ' mL' ~,/ / ;(
.& ~, 'rJt I f~~mE 9! ~
A /' S~ "... L 'I >-" MDI'7~
· ~ ~ ~~ /1)
,~ _I I I J --.."'" 0 .
~~ ' 6 ~ '" F~ '
~ L--=(( 1:. ~I n~NI - I
. .
, ~ - ....~ ~ ,
~~\ n '/1 j":""- \
. . ~ ~~ > ~ rv
'~
IT\."- . .
, -- ~<;:. -= . .' ' I .
1\ \' I ' '~ I I tl I · pll, , '{f( , , ~ ... ::z:
. · \ 4 ;s ,t . · . . I · · .~. · '. · · " "J... t . / Q Il.h HO Ie N _Sri. a 0J ; r 1V02r T
. . I ~ .-', . .' p "- ~ ~
'r: -. ,,~ -
t - t. II 17 .. I . "'. If II GRAPmc SCALE IN Fl!:E'l'
! 7, ,,. ==-_~~ E : (f)" -;- @ · · '.L '/ ~grteJ I~ I~ ~
VM I .' I\,\' ' II PREPARED BY PIONEER ENGlNEERlNG.P.A.
GJ "". do --- II), \.~
~ ~AllI~ ~" 1 DEAN M. ROBBJNS
I I -= ., .
")?;t~. ' ~--t/ >--;- ~ \.~. , PROJECT CIVlL ENGINEER
DEAN M. ROBBINS
;;..y ----- ' ---;- \ MtDT~'" ~ i REGlSI'ERED PROFESsroNAL crvn. ENGINEER
-f//; y~ -.-- - \) I I
//~t'" ~ ~l--- , -;c- - {' ~' ' 4]968
REGlSTRA TIONNUMBE:R.
'" /' ~r-- 'r> ,
V N(DEKOER t" tRTY / ~. :!) L.Ji 11 I .
~IPROOOSED 0 " PMElL I, :- " 'lrl:1 ' DBVBLOPER
RYLAND HOMES
7600 BXECUTIVE DRIVE
EDBNPIlAIRm, MN' 55344
COliTACT: BRIAN SULLlV AN.
LAND RESOURCES COORDINATOR.
r- : 'I. "ll I,ll . \@ PHONE: (952) 229-0046
- I I I I
'-- I
:..1..,
~I N m~
~ :-.::, . .
- /~
-I I I I I -I I I~"
PlaNEERengineering 100"~Plle.SITl!
c:rn.~ J,JJ(t)l'I.U<<DS LAllt1.1U1V'IiTD:l:r lA.'iCl5CAPlacm'l!C1S A.cYiIIOo:l&
J_o<tdrr""''''~p",...._'1 Om ,.IM! RYLAND HOMES
2l"'''_Dri'' Mendora HeighlSOllice "'IU"'~""""'W. "" "''-''1 olI1=t ru"""''''Jl!fl/Ol l.IouIM.ll.blrlU llcI DMl< PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 7600 EXEC[]11VI! DRNE RIVERSIDE BLUFFS 2 OF 9
its'n't~!i;\ti;':;f~ gm~~~;'~I!SJ ~~~~~~ "'~N~ ~ "'" 1.1OoM CrIMI ClVIM "EDEN PRA1RIB- MlNNESOTA 55344 SHAKOPl!B, MINNESOTA
-- ...
p~oposm 'FcAt Cl~lFl1nN ~M PJmflAfN.l1W PH.T PlJRPO~ DillY.
~~'15"'1/ Th. E'oat .591.15 Idet or Utt SouihClClt Ouorhe' of lb.. Horthecs\ Ol.#tct of ~ 14. Tewn.hip 11S. RaniC 22., Scan: County. J.lJm.sota.
Tcg.1tuW" wllk:
co ).J that port. r:r tn. Em WllIIl ot lh_ $D'loIthlcrl CUm.,. ot 51cUQn ''', T~1p 11:1. lbng. 22. s~ott County, l&nll.s~ I~O' lICf:"tharfy of U\.
,.,
:!ij ~t~l1n. af Scott County HlsIhlll'll'l Ha. 10l.
"" Togfth.. trI"th:
<'(
AU thCl\ port. of ~l/c~ C. ~E AELD! 1Sf NJDrnOH, o~V to the ~Ild prat tnal'tof. $t:ott County, J&n~tc.
'.
s:
h PREPARED BY PIONEER ENG1NEERING, PA.
i;i
',.
'" JOHN C. LARSON
'"
z
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'
19828
\ 500'09' 42"S: 356.54 REG.NO:
,
c
'- I ~
"'\
f ('
-
-
I.>J
"
C~
-
0::
m
~':
::> '~
0 \
~')
,t'..",
LEGEND I:
r.~(;:.';':.::;:.+ CONCRETF.: @- CAST mOIl MONlMNT ,
~;:b
f.@;"~~~~ c GRAva. . A a.EClRlC BO~ ~
.;7~c;.;'1~._.. o _ FENCE CORNEll
I::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::I" Bl1UI/INOUS t... fl.ARED END SECTJOIl
=-::: = = ;;: ::I .. CUt.~r o .. fl.,I,D POLE
~.. 11lEE UNE M_ GAlE YJJ..VE
_)>__ SlllRJ.l SElIa! LINE: 't/'- li'IIlRANT
_ > _A SANITARY SEW<R UNE . - FOUND IRDII PIPE ~
_1__WAmlUIIE lil- IIANliDL<: DlliER lli}Jj SA/mAAY OR STQRII r so 120 240
-+-.. UTIUlY POLE I I I
_.~_A OV!JlHEAD U11l.I1Y UNES
-td-- UNDERGROUND 1E1..El'HON!: UNE O. SANITARY 00 STORII MANHOlE GRAPmC SCALE m FEET
_ g -_ lINllERGROUND GAS UNE fi1l '" TfW'HONE BO~
-X-- roleE o ~ TEST HOlE
El - CATCH SASIlI li - 1'El.EV1S1OH BO~
12! - CATCH BA5Iij BEEHIVE ~ l:I WATER VIaL
. PI8NEERengineering /
..
~ &;..tm~ !.J..'I(l)MYIYCl1:S 1.)Jll:1S~NAACal'lI:tI ilorid...
:1'22 "",-,,"am-c Mendola Heights Office ~1 !SlbAYtaJ4N.VI. EXISTING CONDmONS RYLAND HOMES RIVERSIDE BLUFFS
M""""llOl~I,!lUSl2D C"",IUpl"',lolNl.l4l]
l&51J58J-191.4 PJ:t:681~ m:l)75HiiO h%.:7I3-J1U SliAKOI'EB, MINNESOTA
lite ~
Riverside Bluffs Preliminary Plat
Issue Status
May 17,2005 June 21, 2005
PARK DEDICATION: 4.2 acre swap 4.2 acre swap
4.04 acres required 4.04 required for
for this plat for this plat
824 acres required 824 acres required
7.8627 acres shown*
* See Brian Sullivan/Ryland Letter of June 16, 2005, of which 1.873 acres is Channel
easement, which is not acceptable to satisfy park land dedication. Thus, at best a net land
dedication of 5.9897 acres is proposed,
WETLAND DELINEATION: Final wetland delineation Final wetland
Not completed delineation not
completed**
**Per Sullivan letter, Ryland has met with Peter Beckius ofthe Scott County Soil
Conservation Service, however, the delineation has not gone through the Technical
Evaluation Panel (TEP) review.
PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE
WATERSHED OUTLET
CHANNEL ALIGNMENT: Flood study not complete Flood study indicates
Changes needed in
plat elevations
Channel alignment not Channel design not
Decided; channel design completed (about 2
Not begun months required
CONCLUSION: While some progress has been made on discussions related to the
wetland delineation and outlet channel, the major issues identified before the City
Council on May 1 ih, remain unresolved on June 21 st, The additional work done on a
possible active park layout by Mark Themig and Andrea Weber, make it clear that the
land proposed for dedication is not sufficient to provide the type of park contemplated by
the PRAB, and is not sufficient to meet the dedication requirement Given this issue, the
need to re-look at the plat elevations based on the flood elevations, and the time required
for channel design, the preliminary plat in its current form should not be approved.
Approval in its current form would rely on far too many variables and conditions
subsequent in the resolution,