HomeMy WebLinkAbout8B - Simpson Adm. Land Div.
,.
r
I
I
I
..
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
PRESENTER:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
SITE CONDITIONS:
wi:J
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF SIMPSON ADMINISTRATIVE
LAND DIVISION
HORST GRASER, PLANNING DIRECTOR
MARCH 7, 1994
The Planning Department has received an Administrative
Land Division application from Mr. John Simpson of 3437
Sycamore 'Irail SW. Prior Lake. The applicant proposes to
subdivide Outlot C, Maplewood. to create two parcels as per
attached survey reduction. The application has been f1led
pursuant to Section 6-1-3: Administrative Land Division
process, outlined in the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance
87-10.
The subject site contains 22,197 square feet and is zoned R-1.
SD. The minimum lot size in this district is 10.000 square feet.
and 12.000 square feet for corner lots. However. the definition
of a corner lot is a lot that is situated at the junction of and
abutting two or more intersecting streets. Sycamore 'Irail
bends around Parcel B and therefore is not considered a comer
lot. The coverage ratio of 22% for structural coverage and 30%
impervious surface also apply.
The subject site abuts the private section of Sycamore 'Irail for
296 feet. The last 550 feet of Sycamore Trail are private. The
road section consists of a 22 foot bituminous mat with no curb.
An informal homeowners association maintains the roadway. A
utility stub was installed for the proposed lot when the area
was served with utilities in anticipation of a future subdivision.
The Subdivision Ordinance does not permit the creation of
private streets. unless approved by the Council. The City has
approved lot splits on private roads before. as long as
standards of the Zoning Ordinances and requirements of the
Subdivision Ordinance are met.
The topography of the site slopes from east to west with
approximately 15 feet of relief over the proposed vacant lot. An
existing single family home is located on the southern lot with
a screen porch that straddles the common property line. which
must be removed if the lot split is approved. There are five
trees worth noting on the vacant lot. three Ash trees. an
unidentified tree, and a 24 inch caliper Oak. The Oak will have
to be removed due to the proposed driveway location. A three
inch caliper Ash tree at the northwest corner of the house will
likely be lost also. However. the development plan may change
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
T
r
'~
j
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION &
SUPPORTING
ANALYSIS:
likely be lost also. However. the development plan may change
somewhat depending on a future owner. The adjacent home
owner to the east of the vacant parcel has expressed concern
over a 30 inch caliper Maple tree that is within a few feet of the
property line. The grading effort to accommodate the proposed
home will come within 14 feet of the Maple which may cause
damage to the tree. The adjacent home to the east has a picture
window that affords a view of the lake. The proposed home is a
walkout to the south, and would block that view. Grading is
required at the front and rear of the home to accomplish the
proposed development plan. Although this plan does not
indicate a retaining wall. one may be required.
Staff notified in writing the owners of land contiguous to the
parcel. and has received numerous letters of objection. Since
there were objections. the application has been forwarded to
the City Council who shall hear the objections and decide the
matter. The following objections and concerns were raised:
. Possible loss of a mature Maple tree, as well as possible
monetary and aesthetic value loss to the adjacent
property to the east. should a retaining wall be
constructed along that property line.
. Possible drainage problems to adjacent property owners.
. A concern regarding the loss of property value to the
applicant's home by removing the screened in porch.
which would be contrary to some of the neighbors'
objectives of improving the value of the neighborhood.
. An increase of traffic in the neighborhood. Please see
the attached letters for specific information.
In addition to the neighborhood objection. the City's
Engineering and Building Inspections Departments indicated
that a development plan for the proposed lot must be
submitted, acceptable to the City, as a condition of approval. A
letter dated January 24, 1994. was sent to the applicant
indicating that objections had been received. the necessary
components of the development plan that were needed. and the
applicant's alternatives. Please see the attached letter and staff
reports for further information.
The applicant asked staff to set the meeting date on March 7.
1994 to allow him time to resubmit his plans to address the
concerns of the City's Engineering and Building Inspections
Departments and the adjacent property owners.
The City's Engineering. Building Inspections, and Planning
Departments have reviewed this application. and it appears
that the development plan has addressed all of the concerns
that have been made by the departments. The lot split requires
no variances, and meets the criteria outlined in Section 6-1-3 of
the Subdivision Ordinance. The concerns with the development
plan and potential damage to the 30 inch caliper Maple tree on
the lot to the east will be reviewed again at the time of building
permit application for Parcel B. This will be done to reduce the
negative effects to the adjacent property owners when Parcel B
T r
is developed.
Verlyn Raaen of the Engineering Department, recommends as
a condition of approval that the easement as shown in the
northwest comer of Parcel B of the survey be dedicated to the
Home Owner's Association or appropriate body which owns the
roadway right-or-way. and an executed copy of this document
be forwarded to City Hall, prior to filing the Administrative
Land Division with Scott County. It is also recommended that
a 5' wide side yard and 10' wide front and rear yard drainage
and utility easements be dedicated to the City for each parcel.
according to Section 6-6-5:A of the Subdivision Ordinance.
acceptable to the City Engineer. He also stated that storm
water runoff from both proposed lots will drain to the west onto
Sycamore Trail, and then south to a catch basin, which then
conveys the storm water to the lake. Since no curbs exist, some
minor erosion problems may occur at times in the roadway
right-of-way. This will need to be monitored by the association
and corrective action taken when required. An alternative
available is for the applicant to install bituminous curb to
convey the runoff to the catch basin within the paved section of
Sycamore Trail. Ideally however. all benefitted property owners
should contribute to this alternative.
Ralph Teschner, Finance Director and Bill Mangan. Director of
Parks and Recreation. have reviewed the proposal. and stated
that the development fees of $287.50 for Collector Street Fees.
and $188.70 for the Park Dedication Requirement be collected
as a condition of approval of the Administrative Land Division.
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN IMPACT:
The Comprehensive Plan indicates low density residential land
use for this area. Therefore, the application has no impact with
respect to the plan and is consistent with the Land Use Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1.
2.
3.
Approve the Administrative Land Division as requested.
Table the item for further discussion.
Deny the application for specific reasons.
RECOMMENDATION: The recommendation from staff is to approve the
Administrative Land Division as requested. subject to the
following conditions: .
1. The existing screened in porch be removed by May 7.
1994.
2. The easement as shown in the northwest comer of
Parcel B of the survey be dedicated to the Home
Owner's Association or appropriate body which owns the
roadway right-of-way. and an executed copy of this
document be forwarded to City Hall. prior to fIling the
Administrative Land Division with Scott County.
3. 5' wide side yard and 10' wide front and rear yard
drainage and utility easements be dedicated to the City
for each parcel. according to Section 6-6-5:A of the
Subdivision Ordinance. acceptable to the City Engineer.
T
r
,.
ACTION REQUIRED:
4. Development Fees of $287.50 for Collector Street Fees.
and $188.70 for the Park Dedication Requirement must
be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit.
5. The Administrative Land Division has to be filed with
Scott County. and the new Parcel Identification Number
given to the City of Prior Lake by May 7, 1994, or the
Administrative Land Division will become null and void.
The rationale for granting approval is that the application
meets the Prior Lake Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance
requirements, and it is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The action required depends on the outcome of the Council's
discussion.
T r' "1"'"'''''''''''''''-''-''''--'''''
..
D rn~~[]~^[gl\~\ .tJY~~
Gte L 1.. I. ~- () l
..... ;PIDt.J ... A- /3-C
8~8
AIMINI N
APPLICM'ION rolM
=~ o.ne?; .;g .J~,~~:~~"
AJip1icant: L
Address: ;:> ot"l- -- ~ -A (1-:c... La
S"..-v
-;:fhone: #Y7. 66.:l Y
rc.r J."",~~ J9f/V
Phone:
Name of Slrveyor: t.J ,q'1 ~ C ~ Qa..5
Phone: l./.5 :2 - 3a;J";l'
Bas the Aw1icant previously sought to plat, rezone, ootain a variance or
conditional use penuit on the subject site or arrj part of it:
No V" Yes What was r~ested:
When:
SBUSSION REX)JIREMENrS:
A. Call>leted application fOI111 and Property Identification N.mber (PID).
~ Caup1ete Legal description of existing and proposed parcels.
~. Filing fee. 'fV'-.
D. SJrvey prepared by a registered land surveyor.
E. 15 copies of the application, survey and supporting data and 1 set
reduced to U8 X 178.
F. Total square footage and or acreage of existing and proposed parcels.
G. Names and addresses of owners who own property contiguous to the
subject site.
~Y CXl4l'LE:l'E APPLICATIONS SJALL BE A~l'W roR RE.VnW.
'1'0 the best of 1Ifi knowledge the infocnation presented on this fom is correct.
In addition, I have read Section 6-1-3 of the Prior Lake &Jbdi.visiat Ordinance
wbich specifies the requirEments and procedures for Mninistrative Plats. I
agr rCN infocoation and follow the procedures an out! ined.
;:;Ur ~"3
Dat~
/-<~ ~..?
Date
'1HIS SEx::TION '10 BE FILLED IN BY THE PLANNIN; DIRECl'OR
DISllOSI'l'ION a APPLICATION: -flPP01ID DENIED
CI'l'! <DmOL <APPFAL) APPRmD DENIm
aR>mONS:
Dt\TE
Dt\TE (R HF.ARIN;
Signature of the Planning Director
Date
1 I
D!7C,
..-
~ '.). ",...
- -" j.)
P:~~~~n9 Di~3c:8r
4- :~ 2 ~ 7) a ;Z 0 t a St.. s. s .
Pr~o~ LaKe, M~:, 55372
Erj,c ~
R~~: A. Acim:~ist=ative Land JiV1Sl0~ Appl:8at:o~.
... .
s-.: ;~".::!::
15 Co~:.es.
ELl ("1
<...
De::::: S:.r~.
':'::..e intent
Ma?let...1ood lntc
of this ap91i~ation is to resubrt~,,~de o~~
:.t's forme;:- tt.:c parcels. _ a""" S"-:--:::~",:',:",~
the full understandin~ th~t ::~~_ ~~or~~;~l
t. :--;.: -:.
.".. ,
....,.:.. :.. .
a0~~1:.ca~.1.::'n ~itn.
: .-j G 1:. C ~ \,-1 2~:-_ ~
be c~ntlngen~ ~po~ removal of ~t~ indi~ateG ~0rc~.
t.o r--~;~.uc.~ the .,"'8.1~.;.e of my homeb; re~O"l.Tl!,,;.g the ?c::.::h ~,JJ..:~;.O';.:
approval; The cart before ~~.~ hG~~~. :~ A~~c~d~~~~ ~:~:
the t~~low:ng lS submi:ted:
A.
3.
ro
,-. .
:-i.
"::'
.~:::. -
'25-C93013-0.
?ro?e~ty ID N~mbe~ (PID)
(l) ~egal Descri?~:on of ex:stin; property. OU~;8~ ~.
Mapl.ewood.
l2) Lega~ Desc~iption of p=opcsed ?a~cel
Parcel "A" The So~th 95.14 tee: {as meas'<.:=ec at ":lgl-::-
angles to a parallel with ~~~ south 1~~~~ af O~l~:.~~ ~
Maple\<JooG.
P3.::cel "B" C;u.tls: CoO 14~p:et4cod, E:{::~?t ~he S;j~..:~r:,;;::-~
(as measured at -:ight ang~e5
line of sa~d o~t:ot C).
to
a:1':'
,~, ~
:?ara.:.~"',
-1--.;:.
'01", ~ ;-,
Chec~ ~Jumber 20~5 Marque~te Ban~
::::"l'-': 1 03,,:::-e ':'n.::!.
E::,:~o5;;.r.e 7.....;0.
~:...:..:;ti~,#r ~arcel..
2:.197
Sq
~:-:::'Q"
- - - - ..
Parcel A.
::':.26C.
s~ Feet.:
?~'=-~-
t"arc-?.:.
..;.. .j . ~
C!~~tl~ge~~ properties.
1>.1::. D. Jc~ns~on
~.1r . F..
'" - - -; ...
~ ..~..... .....-'
3~~5 Sy~a~o~e Tr.SW
M:.-. G. De:. Je:-,
346"3 Sycarrorfo? 'II". ;::.j -:-'.:; 36 :.;:.: J~..;
P r :. 0:'- i...: a K e: ~ Y.j;
5 ?~~. 7 .;: ..
.. "
(;~0! /-r'..JC'.....-'
/?ohn iJ. ~;TlpSO"
Q 3437 SVc8mor~ Tr S~
/? p_~ 'Y";' '.I~~ -t:'....-.-
t _~~c.~uaKe ,L....:.J,... ~...J.:..::.
..... t"
?rlc,":
Pr~or I..ake. MN
55372
:'
iJai: ~
I
I
SIMPSON ADMINISTRATIVE PLAT SITE
LAKE.
PR\OR
-
L~':J
-:, ""/1 z...
o
"-
~
';;
I"-
c:o
'l()
4'
C\I
.2
~5o,
~570 .
'N.:I: L.,L.,ovv ~
"!lS5CJ ~II 01'- ,!>c..o~
3
2
351>1
2
5
4
3
'r--
12 I 13 14
, ~51."2. _ ~~ I~
. . ~'W"O~.C) c:=.. -:r:::~c:..
~ ] I ~58~' -~ ~ .~: q
('(U_ 2 !ld~
10 1 >f1'3
lit 0 ,,~
~ ~ '
~~ 2 3 ~
l"V' II' r-
'~<:>1 IE
~ J "?>5or-i
:3~O~
~3("1
~~., I ".
DRIVE
t-
j
2
J
<(:
, - __. I ~
5
"!I!!59/
ELM
4
PARK
\
---
-
I
I
I
,.... \
\
\
\
\ I
"'" j ".z.'
..s'
;-
N
'jV
1
oii<
DBV.LOP"B~ PLAB ron:
MR. JOHN SIMPSON
)4]l Sycalore tuil 'rior Lah,I'.
J :''1; .I::.! I:;" ~
Scale: ,".20'
-SURVEYORS CERTlFICATION-
I Iter"' certlf, tMt tilts "'"I'. ,I... or
.....t "I prtpIrtd by _ or '"*, .,
dlrecl ,,,,""IU.. .nd llItl 1 . . dul,
..,tstltt4 L.'" Swneyor ttndtr the I"" of
UIt Statl .f "'MlMU.
rili.... fl Cf- .... Z{,t I~
=~" SIGMA
~~ I ... SURVEYING
_ SERVICES INC
"." Seneca lload .Suite
~;NI"'u.rw..'G'!'H'2:
. .~, ....~--_.~._---,---.~--~~~_.-.......~..~_."..,~.~~........-...
T I
, ~..
- ~,~
t,&-b....
....
.I,,>';
2
"-
;...-t.....)
~e15
---ct,---- ./
/- /'
~- ;...-
./ /'-
o
~.-~~~.,
-- -- 7/1
J'~
I
~TEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE:
Planning
Ralph Teschner. Finance Director
Outlot C Maplewood Townsite
(assessment/fee review)
January 7. 1994
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Outlot C Maplewood originally existed as two parcels, N 1h Outlot C. Maplewood (pIN# 25 098
0120) and Slh Maplewood (pIN# 25 098 013 O) which were served with water and sewer utilities
in 1973 under Project 72-7 and was 100% assessed for frontage and trunk acreage charges.
Subsequently in 1989, the two parcels were combined. All past applicable assessment amounts
have been paid and no special assessment balance remains against the property. The taX status of
the property is in a current state with no outstanding delinquencies.
Since the proposed administrative land division requires no associated street improvements or
storm water facilities, no storm water fee is applicable.
The area fee calculation for the Collector Street fee excludes Parcel A because a residential
home exists on the parcel and was based upon the 10,273 sq. ft. for Parcel B only. A summary of
the development fees to be collected upon approval of the administrative lot split is detailed as
follows:
Collector Street Fee
-0-
-0-
.23 ac. @ $1250.00/ac = $287.50
Trunk Water & Sewer Charge
Storm Water Management Fee
SPLt7.WRT
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 I Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLDYER
_.__.~~_~._~,...".,_..._,,~__._____,,",--......._~~~.........,+.L~-'-"'-'. .~ -,....~._~""'--_..",.,...,~~~,',-~-
I
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
fY11
GINA MITCHELL, ASSOCIATE PLANNER / '/ / L
BILL MANGAN, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENT FOR JOHN SIMPSON
JANUARY 25, 1994
Gina. based on the fact that this is a lot split with the end result being an additional lot. the newly
created lot would be subject to Park Dedication.
To determine the Park Dedication for this example. I use a raw land value of $8.000 per acre.
Applying that figure toward the acreage of Outlot "e" (10.273 s.f.). I have detennined a raw
land value of $1.887. When applying the 10% Park Dedication to this figure. the cash dedication
requirement for this split would be $188.70.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me.
Thank you.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
T
.
"'
I haVe rENiewed the attached prop:>sed request in the following areas:
-2lLWATER CITY ODE ~Glll\IlI~ ?!If.- ~,u..,~k
2f$-SEWER EWI~1r SIGNS
ZONJ:m FLCXD PLAIN <DUNl'Y OCIN) ACCESS
pAR(S NM'UPAL FF.A'l'Um:S LmAL ISSUES
ELECrIUC ~TRAN~RrATION SEPrIC SYSTEM
~ srom WATER AS~
BID ODE EIDSION <DNrI(L omER
I r~: ~APPKlVAL
DENIAL
<DNDITIONAL ~pfOlP.L
=: ~ -Tel, rATE.$/Jd
BY MTE: Z,-23-1L/
~~:~
RE:1'UHI roo - - 11 }ujj -'
* Ju lk~r ~4 c~AU Ill/II
I
I have revier.oed the attached proposed request in the following areas:
~ WATER
V SEWER
ZONlN:i
PARKS
ELECrlUC
Gt\S
BID O)DE
CITY COOE / GRADlOO
_EWloomENl' _SIGNS
_FLCXD PLAIN 0)UNlY ~ ACCESS
_Nt\TUFAL FEATURES _.r.mAL ISSUES
TFANSFORl'ATION SEPl'IC SYSTFM
V Sl'OR>1 WATER - ASSESS>\EN1'S
-;;;:- ErosION <DN1'KL - Ol'HER
I recomnend: _APPWlAL
DENIAL v/' <X>NDITIONAL APPfOVP.L
v .. .', ._,....-.._-~._-_.,-~>>,~-..._.,"._,~-
1 I
f)~CJ ~ - f:?uIli fJcnh ~ R~ cd!
k ~~~})a1N~~~~
~g~_~~ f.().tJ'/~~~
~. 7fucdU~ID~~-+1k~1
~ of rk.~ (!o.t.J.~ ~~MMdd1J ~
~tVt<.M. .JJe~1~~~tfn~6
wiL!,k ~ ~~ ~ "'4~~
~~~~a&-~~q~
~'. 7k1/~7f~+AM
::;;:7 ~~f:: ~~:::t:t
~~. u(~#!.t.~tUtff~lj(-/kJ
~/~~ 1~ ~/L~kie,~.zo(
51k~(~IAft.~~~;;I-.J .-110
1i:/f-UJ wid ~ ~ nt ~ g. /)4 ~ Ik .
~8'~~1Ad-~~Fn-
~ " ~#.e tik ~. J.C~~
~ ~wJ%J~~~ . Jdl
~p. #.<.kf-~~fpd2~~~~~
4~) 1Iu-~?1&.~c<rIt-~
~~~~J~~(12-u
6?1.~,U;)' 1TorrMA--~wW.k~ ~
~ ~ rr--,dii;m ~. '5' t..ihAA aJ.. ro' wr:A
~~~ ~M' ~~
6e-~ . ;if ~ 'Je;,~.
..... ,---"...,....,'.'...,.,-"~._~.....-.,~~._,_._--'..
T I
I have rel.liewed the attached proposed request in the following areas:
-I- GRADIl'G
SIGNS
aJUN.LY RJAD ACCESS
LEXiAL ISSUES
SEPrIC SYSTEM
ASSF,SS4ENrS
amER
CITY CCDE
ENVI~l1'
FLCXD PLAIN
W\TUBAL FF.A'l'ORES
TRANSPORrATION
Sl'OEM WATER
EI()SION roNl'KL
WATER
SEWER
ZONIro
PARKS
ELECl'RIC
G\S
V- BID CODE
I reconmend:
~
APProvAL
DENIAL
roNDITIO~ APPFDVAL
f',
CXl1MENl'S: I-.J~I./L/~ O/~
(
~ ( , 4-1' .... ~ $- (ir-=-- ~ .
t.-.c:;,P~::: r~ ~
I
~
'<'2-~ "
SIGNM:'URE:
REl'UBN 'ID:
TITLE: ZJd & mTE:..J- 1.:C.J9~
BY DATE: <-2 -2'3 - q4
I
I have reviewed the attached proposed request in the following areas:
WATER
SEWER
ZONIOO
pl\R<S
ELOCl'RIC
~
BID roDE
CITY COOE
EN/IromENl'
FLCXD PLAIN
~TUPAL FEATURES
TRANSPORrATION
srom WATER
ER)SION OONl'lQ,
_GRADlOO - -
_SIGNS -
<X)UNl'Y R:)N) ACCESS
_.LmAL ISSJES -
_SEPI'IC SYSTa-t
_ASSESS>\ENl'S
_ornER
I recorrmend:
_APpFOJAL
DENIAL f- OONDITIONAL ~pIOJ1riL
<.)l>1MENl'S: D~"J~'~AA.=-I~ 0 ft-- s-\r--....:.\. ~
(
L~ -\-'-,....... -\-~ --<. - (JtE.o,J~~~
I!/' c.. lo,j .l :. ~I ~u~ -h~.::::.... > j,~..... ~-' ....
G'""7',....,-h"...: L
~
~A:,~~~
CI.~I-c ,~....
~ ..........;;..
bE..
~~~~
cll'~
I I
c:>>-R,'v.:f ...J~l
~~,~
I ~~-h~~
..,c f ,l.c-J
(
t.2. ~ .
':""')
,~.~ ./~~~~
/-
N .,E-.J
'\ :sr-;2~ \
.-
k-
12..:::..~-.,) ,k ~ ' ~
s. ~ :..~ \ ~ Co c. A
~I ,~
VZ ~ -=-.,c. ::.. _ V1
CfZ-,'~~ ~
~~
k...
--===-
SIGmTURE:
REl'URN mer
/~~
,
,~
d.cv~ '~~,.J~
~""
~
p~~
,,~
C~~*'~
~ .Lt\-."
~
f'k~
L~
~-~d ,~,:...:~
~ ):; ~ v... Co
'.N\ -4001 +
I "'-
IN
J.----rr~~ ,
I r..,...J r ~
-t!2,...:;;
\k-
~ '" ~~ \ ..l=.
d "C-lJ'-' C""-.)~
~,,~
-l.-E. -......,) .c. \.... . ~.,
r
M-=\b."'I.-:::,~k'b ~
--....)
c:.~-
--:..~ ..::::::.
+hr_ +- + \....,.':..,. I ~+ CJ~
, .
IJ..,:)' ~...s\. ( """ ,p,A L..J, (/'-..,
r- ~
r- N ~ -\-, ....."E ~ P--t .
~..;: .-_ ~ . r ,r- .:::'~ \..:.. ~ -
IS (J . I F}~#~
TITLE;!ls5Cuo...( b. Dl\TE: .
. ~ BY DATErU1/lt1-er Tan. Ii, 19CJLj
/
f1..-g
1 I
DNR MET~U REGION 6
~.
TEL:612-772-7977
Mar 01 94
15:33 No.Oll P.02
..
NOTJf:E OF HEARING
.EQR
ADMINISTRATIVE LAND DIVISION
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the City Council in the Prior L3ke Council
Chambers at 4629 Dakota Street S.E. on:
March 7, 1994 at
1:45
P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING:
To consider an Administrative Land Division for
John Simpson of 3437 Sycamore Trdil. Prior Lake,
Minnesota.
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION:
3437 Sycamore Trail. Outlot C. Maplewood, Prior
Lake. Scott County, Minnesota.
REQUESTED ACTION:
The: applicant proposes to divide OutlOt C.
Maplewood into tWO parcels. as per attached survey
reduction. Objections from neighborhood residents
have been received. therefore this item must be
considered by the City Council.
If you dcslJ"~ to be heard in reference to this matter. you should attend this hearing, Oral and
written commentS will be acc~pted by L'i.e Cit). Council. For more infonnation. contact Gina
Mitchell in the Prior Lake Planning Depanment at 447-4230.
Prior Lake Planning Department
DATE MAiLED: February 28. 1994
3/1
P~44G
~
~ %
bo 11-.
~ "-'1'cJ...)
~-
~~ -tk
M.~ l-\', \M.l.(. ~
s\~
; J'V'I ~;r"VI-~!.{5.
C'ov-era.~
-h
/''7~5.
k, 0-...
isS(,.C.( 7'
J. S
t'v^ ~~
M~o-~-
~'~
~,- L>{ N ("L.-\
tv! '\ 1) N \2-
,77- -77/0
4629 Dakota St, SE., Prior Lake. Minnesota 5.5372-1714 / Ph (612) 447-4230 I Fax (612) 4474245
AN EQlJAI. oPPORrUNli'V EMPLOYF.R
~,~..~"-,-""-"'-,~."-_._._,.--....."...,,_.-,,--~--"--~-_......,,.......''"-_....>--~-_._.;,,--,-,-----"-.-..,._.....-.".~.._._,.....~,.,,-.--..----
f
I
NOTICE OF HEARING
IOR
ADMINISTRATIVE LAND DIVISION
You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the City Council in the Prior Lake Council
Chambers at 4629 Dakota Street S.E. on:
March 7.1994 at
7:45
P.M.
PURPOSE OF HEARING:
To consider an Administrative Land Division for
John Simpson of 3437 Sycamore Trail, Prior Lake.
Minnesota.
SUBJECT SITE LOCATION:
3437 Sycamore Trail. Outlot C. Maplewood, Prior
Lake, Scott County, Minnesota.
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant proposes to divide Outlot C.
Maplewood into two parcels, as per attached survey
reduction. Objections from neighborhood residents
have been received. therefore this item must be
considered by the City Council.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter. you should attend this hearing. Oral and
written comments will be accepted by the City Council. For more information. contact Gina
Mitchell in the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447 -4230.
Prior Lake Planning Department
DATE MAILED: February 17, 1994
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
f
I
NOTICE OF PROPO~ED ADMINI~TRATIVE T.AND DIVISION
January 4. 1994
The Prior Lake Planning Department has received an application from Mr. John Simpson of
3437 Sycamore Trail SW, to consider an Administrative Land Division located within the
existing plat of Maplewood. The proposal is to subdivide Outlot C, Maplewood, in order to
create another lot. as per attached survey reduction.
Section 6-1-3 of the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance allows the City Manager or
representative to authorize subdivision approval without a public hearing under the
following circumstances:
1. The division of the property will not result in more than three parcels.
2. The property to be subdivided is a lot of record in the office of the County Recorder of
Scott County.
3. The resulting parcels generally conform to the shape and area of existing or
anticipated land subdivisions in the surrounding areas.
4. The division will not cause any structure to be in violation of setbacks.
5. Any easements which may be required by the City must be granted.
6. The owners of land contiguous to the parcel must be notified in writing. and D.Q
written objection received within ten days followin~ notification.
7. Any written objection shall constitute an appeal. Such an objection shall be
forwarded to the City Council who shall hear the objection and decide the
matter.
A copy of the Administrative Land Division and location map are attached. Please accept
this as official notification of this proposed Administrative Land Division. Written
comments or objections regarding this matter should be submitted to the Planning
Department by January 18. 1994. For more information. contact Gina Mitchell at
447-4230.
Sin~erely.
~JjIlOv m 'trf! ~'(L
Gina M. Mitchell
Associate City 'Planner
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 I Ph. (612) 4474230 I Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL oPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.."._._.","._,."...~~"...~_o,..___".""__
1
I
,.~-
January 12, 1994
3469 sycamore Trail
prior Lake, MN 55372
,,',\ l"IT'~-u ~~ l~ i~' \
I ~
_.JI14. .\
' . ..' <:a--
.,.,~~...~.rV~.~~'
Ms. Gina Mitchell
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
4629 Dakota st. SE
prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Ms. Mitchell:
We have received by mail a copy of the Administrative Land
Division proposed subdivision of Outlot C, Maplewood, proposed by
Mr. John Simpson of 3437 sycamore Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN.
please review the following written objections and/or concerns.
Our home is adjacent to Mr. simpson's property and our address is
3469 sycamore Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN.
Our house is positioned on a hill with rip-rap retaining wall on
the east end, which is approximatelY eight feet high and 8 feet
out from the edge of our garage. This rip-rap wall runs half-way
through the lot. The front of our house has a very steep hill
and driveway that runs the width of the lot.
Our property line on the west end of the house is approximately
14 feet from our house. It is our understanding that excavating
and/or putting in a retaining wall could also be put on the
property line or very close to the property line, which would
adversely effect the aesthetic value of our home. This would
leave me with an 8' rip-rap wall on one end of our house and a
possible retaining wall on the other end. A two-story house
sitting in this situation not only worries and concerns us, but
would certainly raise questions and doubts of a prospective buyer
should we decide to sell our property. The salability as well as
the value of our house would be in severe jeopardy.
We also have a mature (94" circumference; 30" diameter) maple
tree adjacent to Mr. Simpson's property. The tree is on our
property, but is within a foot of the lot line. Should any
excavating be done too close to this tree, the tree would be lost
due to damage to the root system. The aesthetic value that a
tree of this stature gives to our property as well as the entire
neighborhood, is unmeasurable, much less what it means to the
value of our property.
We feel these issues warrant your consideration in this
situation. Thank you for your consideration.
~~'J .
Gary and Cind~
_._--,----..-"-"_....._---'"--~",."'~,,...,-
I
. .
i.
,
: !
; \
J/!"duaY'l/ / r J /9/7"
/ / .
. I
. I
11M G' )V/ -11f/
:1 J. IA/O.. ~ ,M/le: ~
Ii
! 111.'1.1'0 C;"'1'c C ; 7jJJlcnVA/M-
llCi7/' of' ,J/)oLt- t-#/C
: I
! \ /J fCl~ /!1 f. A i 7Ci~ll~
U 'I
II ;J!eaJc ~ ~c~: r-:, :.j,,~ ;;.~y-~/
Ilea ~~ ~"'-0-"u~"/2,v Y~rrll;' d; f''?;: Hud
; 1 ' . I I
i! /lclmlyir--!r;//vp /b'T S" ire.
i I
II
I
! I ,41,/ ~/ee.J~~J"7 c o,v-c ~/2J?. ;- 5" --f;j~ -I- ;+.- c/"-dw i~"z/
il ' / v 'I /J
i ; -th (t IJAI ;/ //Ti / /5 a f'(/~ t~~ t ?.(
:' I I / /
: '/at;
A . J . ./
~~!J/~;///u i e t?/?,
"",7~;...--
i f/JJlo"'v -tv -(j,{. /',;;1,?iI/ Q~// -Co
! \
Cidj~/:vi,t(/., ~/e/jc.r7/;r "
" I ill /
: I /':--- .
il c.; ~I
II .
: !M t\ V ht/v~
,I ' .
! I t / J
, ,
II
,i){(/e!oJl~R /k vdtl/""tY5P~') y}., (20J/;d~ Ar?> Jj~
i I' / r
i 1 leA;:.! Lt? ti SIVfn/y lI./Q rj~/-- /)(A-r- ;'()vc/ ~,,~/ 70
II
\ I U/pft!J1 1,1/1/;';;/11 r f~ ~ (~/(,Jw!l- 5-fn;'et 1Yl II A OU.J"CS .
I: /.
, I
II
II
...
_J_
<-_/?~ l..
d;j
.~-r-
I ~ - '. -
5rft/cio' V1:1/#PJ' CC//I/S/Cldr.,.7'/O,uS'
cl. (I Jr (? /.
,~t/ ~j
c' 04 ;cl
./JCJSJ; b A-
t
_......._"_~~_",._.......~..~........-'""______.''''..n_'.-.~_..-...._...."..." "..._.",....,.._..................._-,.~,"
T t
(7J
! 7h tlj'~ -h/c! -1- tubC"/C/ 451" ti.. -r -Cht?
I /
I I ~ c-: ../ <1 /-f~c "f~/ :.r<C? ~/0 ch.../~~ S e~ k~.."c€'
Ii
ll~~ l;qtJ{ -t4~ 7' 0ou/c/ Jd;.qc/ ~ .4J/pvld/:V~
II t/ L' -'- ' ~/ / ~
IJ C( CL()flTqt'//~ S"ok'/lt:/p.j- 70 fZA/{4rL rJ1~ tl/7 11
I! f'-<c, /tfy ,>1""/4"/ r 'Ch~ I l</~ 9/1 r", J.o.6'A; t(V
:1 O-:.Ir /~ our ccn#/n~,uI7j
, '
I
~\7iM~ Vo~ .
II /
\ I
II
! 1
! i
-c:~
~~~~
"~ ,,'.' J /
j'/7;"S~Oif~~ T~< Sw.
/
,
: i
,
: i
. :
j i
i
,
i I
i I
II
II
I,
! I
I'
, I
1 '
II
If
~
f I 1
To: Gina M. Mitchell
Prior Lake Planning Commission
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
01/14/94
Re: Proposed Administrative Land Division of Mr. John Simpson's Land.
Dear Planning Department,
I am writing you today in response to a letter I received dated
January 4, 1994 from Ms. Gina Mitchell, Associate City Planner. (see
attached).
My response to the proposed land division of Mr. John Simpson's
property located at 3437 Sycamore Trail S.W. is that I object. I
have several reasons for my objection to Mr. Simpson's request. These
reasons I have listed in outline form below as follows;
Neighborhood Property Values: The area in which I, and the Simpson's
live, has had many improvements in the quality of the homes made by
homeowners over the past ten years that I have lived here. There
have been two new homes built at 3402 and 3406 within the past two
years. 3406 is actually a replacement of an extremely old cabin that
was an eye sore to the entire neighborhood prior to its demolition
this past autumn. There have been improvements made at 3420, 3380,
3486, and even 3437, Mr. Simpson's residence prior to his purchase.
There have been extensive landscape work done at 3478, 3470 and 3508
Sycamore Trail within the past two years, dramatically improving these
home's external appearances. 3415 Sycamore, and my home at 3442, were
both built five years ago. My home, just like 3406, was a replacement
of an old cabin.
All of these improvements have gradually increased each other's
property values. Good looking, well cared for homes all surround
Mr. Simpson's piece of property enhancing his homes' value.
It is my opinion that Mr. Simpson's proposed land division will
have a negative impact on all neighboring property values. Any home
that could be built on that proposed site would obviously be very small
and of lesser market value that its neighboring homes. A residence of
this nature will bring down all the home values in the area offsetting
the improvements we've all made. I see a home on this proposed site as
a giant step backwards in our neighborhood's quest towards improving
the area and therefore should not be allowed. Granting Mr. Simpson's
request would not be fair to many of my neighbors, as well as, myself.
We have all made large financial commitments to our home's and our
community by paying increased taxes. I feel this proposed land division
seriously tarnishes our reasons for faithfully doing so.
T
I
Water Drainage: The plat sketch that Mr. Simpson furnished along
with his request for land division, I believe, does not accurately
tell the whole story. Mr. Simpson's survey is only for the purpose
of determining square footage, completely ignoring elevation. The
proposed site has a rather steep incline to the north and west sides.
Assuming Mr. Simpson's proposed site would be a corner lot, both of
the street sides would have sharp drop offs to the curb. Once the
property is developed, and a home is built, where is the run off
from rain and melting snow going to go? Well I'll tell you, it is
going to go into my basement and Ron Johnson's basement like it
has been doing for years. The new homes roof and driveway will divert
water downhill out into the street which is not capable of properly
disposing of it.
This past autumn both Ron Johnson and myself had extensive work
done on our homes to try and resolve our wet basement problems. Know-
ing that our efforts were only a band aid to a more serious problem,
I felt that I had to try something because my five year old home has
had a wet basement ever since I built it.
I feel the only solution is to improve the street. Widen the
road, install an adequate storm sewer, (unlike whatever was done this
past autumn between 3402 and 3406), and prohibit the development of
Mr. Simpson's proposed site. I realize this is easier said than done,
however, I feel it is the only solution to the existing water run
off problem currently in this area. Development of Mr. Simpson's
proposed site would only compound the water run-off problem worse.
Street Standards: Although I am not an expert on residential street
code requirements, I think it is safe to assume that the street in
front of Mr. Simpson's proposed site is not up to current Prior Lake
residential standards. This issue, I feel, was overlooked when you
granted permits at 3415 and 3406. The setbacks from the street at
both 3415 and 3406 are very close to the minimum requirements. Should
this portion of Sycamore Trail be upgraded to current Prior Lake
residential street codes these two homes will have doorsteps at the
curb, or at1east, one of those homes will.
Before this proposed land division be granted, I suggest that the
residents of Sycamore Trail in this particular area, and the city
planning department, mutually agree on a future street plan. Every-
one has had their own surveys done by several different surveyors.
I have seen a few of my neighbors, I have reviewed Mr. Simpsons survey,
and I have one of my own. All of these surveys seem to contradict
each other.
Also, I think the city may need a larger portion of Mr. Simpson's
proposed site just to create a decent navigable roadway.
T .
"
Approximately a year and a half ago the city granted a change
in property lines between 3454 and 3470. This was done without
any notification of contiguous landowners. By doing this the city
shrunk the lot size of 3454, a lot that has an old cabin on it.
Not only did this substantially reduce this parcels buildable area,
it severely limits this lots' street access. At 3454 there is an
older garage built too close to the roadway. (Actually it is located
partially in the vacated roadway).
My feeling is that since 3454 now is limited in its street access
and buildable surface area, I think the roadway should be changed to
cut off a larger corner of Mr. Simpson's roadway easement. If that
is not possible, then I think the city should condemn the garage at
3454 to accomodate a wider, more navigable turn in the roadway.
The turn in the roadway, as it presently exists, is very unsafe.
There is a huge blind area when driving around Mr. Simpson's hill.
With the road too narrow, and the absence of any street signs, I
firmly believe there is going to be an accident at this corner in the
near future. I have also expressed my concerns several times to the
Police Department in recent months concerning this very same issue.
With the increased traffic lately. this is literally "Dead Man's
Curve". I think the safety issue should be seriously evaluated before
any further development takes place down on this portion of Sycamore
Trail.
The road's width is only one aspect of the problem. The quality
of the pavement is yet another issue. The neighboring homes have
privately paid for the asphalt on this segment of Sycamore prior to
Mr. Simpson's purchase of his home. Neither Mr. Simpson, nor the city
have paid a dime towards our streets' maintenance. Both parties should
realize this was paid for by individuals who desire to improve their
neighborhood. Without our assistance, this street would still be a
gravel path. I think both Mr. Simpson and the city take this for
granted. This road was improved by the individuals who use it to
better our neighborhood's quality of life, not to enhance Mr. Simpson's
proposed site, and not to take pressure off of the city to improve
this roadway. Allowing further development on this portion of Sycamore
Trail will only further deteriorate its condition.
I feel the city should repair the road in front of 3406 for
granting a permit without adequate street repair. If the city allows
development on Mr. Simpson's proposed site, I insist it should upgrade
the roadway in advance to meet current Prior Lake development require-
ments. If it does not, I feel it is unfair to other area developers
who currently are having to comply with such standards.
The Proposed Lot: The proposed lot was declared "un-buildable" by its
previous two owners. Why it is all of a sudden okay to develop it
astounds me. Development of this site means drastically changing
Mr. Simpson's own homes' value, a change that will decrease his home
value.
T' .
Tearing off his three season porch will reduce his homes' value,
even if he plans to re-assemble it in the rear of his home. De-
velopment on this proposed site will kill one of the areas largest
maple trees that is presently owned by neighbors, Mr. and Mrs.
Gary Detjen. Furthermore, excavation on the proposed site will
require extensive retaining wall work around Mr. and Mrs. Detjen's
home. This cost will be out of their control and will be incurred
by them just to preserve their homes' structure. It financially
would be unfair to them to grant Mr. Simpson's request to divide
his land. It would also be unfair to Ron Johnson, as well as,
myself in terms of further compounding an already bad water run
off situation in this area.
I am confident that the city of Prior Lake did not solicite
Mr. Simpson's request. With the rapid growth our city is incurring
I am sure there are more serious planning issues to address than
this one. This proposed land division not only depreciates the
quality improvement efforts made previously by devoted tax paying
citizens, it also causes financial hardships on them. I can't take
anymore water in my basement neither can anyone of the westward
side of Sycamore Trail in the area. I don't believe Mr. and Mrs.
Detjen should have to further invest in their property to protect
it from foundation erosion just to accomodate Mr. Simpson's request.
Either our children, as well as, ourselves shouldn't be subject to
unsafe roadway conditions in order to develop this questionable piece
of land. And finally, this segment of Sycamore Trail, needs to be
improved just to handle the present traffic safely. I think the
planning department may need a portion of Mr. Simpson's lot in order
to make these necessary changes.
. Mr. Simpson's objective is to make a quick buck and get out.
His goal isn't to be a Prior Lake citizen. His goal is short term
and money motivated. His plan is to sellout and move to a hobby
farm. He has made that public to his surrounding neighbors.
I ask that the city planning department deny or postpone Mr.
Simpson's land division request. Deny it in the name of creating a
quality city, or postpone it until the road be clearly defined and
upgraded. I have spent everything I've got on my home. I am a good
citizen devoted to creating a better community. I am here to stay
and hope that you can appreciate that. I firmly believe that Mr.
Simpson's proposed land division will adversely affect my property
value, as well as, my neighbors. I firmly believe that after living
ten years at the bottom of his hill that this development will further
compound my basements' water problem. Please do not let this proposal
of Mr. Simpson's go through.
hew
442 Sycamore Trail S.W.
rior Lake. MN 55372
1 I
~[i@~O~l~ :'
) Il II'
\ .. I. Il94 l!JJ'
*** PETITION ***
I hereby object to the proposed land division as requested by
Mr. John S1..pson. I object on the basis that I believe the proposed
land division will depreciate.., own propertys' value, as well as, the
value of the entire neighborhood. I also believe that this proposed
land division will increase the traffic on this segment of Sycamore
Trail, as well as, create an unsafe curve for the traffic to navigate
around. Furthermore, I don't believe that this segment of Sycamore
Trail can handle any added traffic, including construction traffic,
without first upgrading the streets' pavement quality. Along with
upgrading the streets' pavement, I also believe the street needs to
have an adequate stor. sewer systea installed to properly dispose of
water run off. Please do not grant Mr. Siapson' s request for land
division on Sycamore Trail.
a
./~ : f '/ ). '
. v~ "tc~lW'~ I '-::f~ ;'-;83 S~(4""~'~X
J;~~0/~ .t:;~ 0t/-99SrAmlJ~!I~.
~.~t/{~ " ,. 'I
3410 :Sy~ T~
T,}
3 ;?l
~~~~3<jO
t
I
\~
\
~i
. .'
~61 P ~ N'r,('
ID~OID~~~j
3470 Sycamore Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372-2342
(612) 440-1069
January 15, 1994
Ms. Gina M. Mitchell
Associate City Planner
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Reference: Mr. John Simpson's application for an
Administrative Land Division at 3437 Sycamore Trail SW, and
your Notice of January 4, 1994, regarding it.
Dear Ms. Mitchell,
We own the property immediately across the street from the
lot that is proposed for division, and are vigorously
opposed to the division for the following reasons.
First,. homes on the lake shore side of Sycamore Trail S.W.
are already suffering from water drainage problems. The
combination of heavy rain, and run-off from the property
proposed for division (and property adjacent to it),
contributed to the collapse of a retaining wall on our
property. which had to be reconstructed at a cost of
approximately $12.000. We also have had to replace the
floor in a lower bedroom, and reconstruct a small retaining
wall that abuts the house, because of water penetration.
It is also my understanding that neighboring properties to
the South have had lower level water problems.
Adding another house and driveway right across the street
will obviously reduce water retention and increase run-off
onto our property and/or neighboring property.
Second, the street has a sharp curve with limited
visibility at the property proposed for division. Adding
another house and driveway at this location will
substantially increase the risk of accident.
Third, the street is currently not maintained by the city,
presumably because it is not to City Codes. To further
subdivide property in this location prior to developing a
plan for upgrading the area, will limit the options that
would be available in the future, for current residents.
'f
..
Therefore, we request that the Proposed Division not be
approved at this time.
If a plan can be developed and implemented that would bring
the street up to City Codes and allow the City to maintain
it, and that would deal with water run-off and safety, then
I would no longer oppose the division.
Kind regards,
We.a k; \IV\~
Wesley and Charlotte Mader
T
I
.. ..
January 24. 1994
Mr. John Simpson
3437 Sycamore Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Simpson,
Neighborhood comments related to your Administrative Land Division were due to the City by
January 18. 1994. If no negative comments had been received from the adjacent property
owners, the Administrative Land Division could have been processed without going before the
City Council. Please be advised that the following objections and concerns were raised by
persons notified of the proposed land division:
1. Possible loss of a mature Maple tree. as well as possible monetary and aesthetic value
loss to the adjacent property to the west, should a retaining wall be constructed
along that property line.
2. Possible drainage problems to adjacent property owners.
3. A concern regarding the loss of property value to your present home by removing the
screened in porch. which would be contrary to some of your neighbors' objectives
of improving the value of the neighborhood.
4. An increase of traffic in the neighborhood.
In addition, the City Engineering and Building Inspections Departments will require that a
development plan for the proposed new lot be submitted acceptable to the City, as a condition of
approval. Specifically. the development plan will need to define a future building pad location;
indicate existing and proposed elevations at all comers of the lot and building at at 25' intervals
in all proposed drainage swales; the elevation of the street at the proposed driveway location and
existing elevations at the adjacent corners of existing homes on adjacent lots; a proposed home
style (rambler, split entry. two-story etc...) must also be indicated for proposed Parcel B. This
information is necessary in order to show that the proposed lot can be developed without causing
drainage problems to adjacent properties. In addition, a possible park dedication fee to be
detennined by the Parks Director may be needed, as well as other associated development fees
will be required to be paid at the time of land division approval.
In a phone conversation with Mrs. Simpson on January 18, 1994 it was indicated that you would
be out of town on February 7. 1994. Because the neighborhood objections have been fJ.led. Staff
cannot approve the application. It will be necessary for this item to be decided by the City
Council. It is my intent to schedule this item for discussion before the City Council on Monday.
February 21. 1994. If that date poses a problem for you. please contact me by February 4, 1994
so that an alternate date can be detennined.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUN1lY EMPLOYER
~'-----~---~'"----'--~'-""'''''.-------...-_.
J
.
1
.. "
. ~
At this point there are several alternatives available to you regarding the application:
1. Attend the hearing before the City Council on February 21, 1994 and explain the reason
for the request Please be advised that Staff will recommend that the issue be tabled until
all of the conditions outlined above by the Engineering and Building Inspection
Deparunents are resolved.
2. Contact a land surveyor to provide the elevation. house style and drainage information
requested by the City. in which case Staff could make a recommendation to approve the
Administrative Land Division.
3. After considering the issues outlined in this letter. the option does exist to withdraw the
application without refund.
If you have any further questions. or would like a copy of the written comments that have been
received. please give me a call at 447-4230, extension 213.
Sincerely.
,Jlina '1f7. ~~
Gina M. Mitchell
Associate Planner
. 1
3470 Sycamore Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372-2342
(612) 440-1069
March 5, 1994
Prior Lake City Council
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Reference: Notice of Hearing for Administrative Land
Division, Scheduled for March 7, 1994
Property of John Simpson
3437 Sycamore Trail
Prior Lake, MN
Dear Council Members,
Regarding the above referenced Hearing, I am unable to
attend because of an out-of-town commitment. However, I
have previously voiced my objection to the proposed land
division, by letter to the Planning Department. I presume
my letter is still on file, and would like it to be entered
into the record at your Hearing.
Kind regards,
W.t.4I11~
Wes Mader
cc Gina Mitchell
Prior Lake Planning Dept.
T I
3470 Sycamore Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372-2342
(612) 440-1069
March 5, 1994
Prior Lake City Council
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Reference: Notice of Hearing for Administrative Land
Division, Scheduled for March 7, 1994
Property of John Simpson
3437 Sycamore Trail
Prior Lake, MN
Dear Council Members,
Regarding the above referenced Hearing, I am unable to
attend because of an out-of-town commitment. However, I
have previously voiced my objection to the proposed land
division, by letter to the Planning Department. I presume
my letter is still on file, and would like it to be entered
into the record at your Hearing.
Kind regards,
Wul11~
Wes Mader
cc Gina Mitchell
Prior Lake Planning Dept.
T
I
\~
L
~6\ P '. l\i'\"lI'
ID~GID~[i~
3470 Sycamore Trail SW
Prior Lake, MN 55372-2342
(612) 440-1069
January 15, 1994
Ms. Gina M. Mitchell
Associate City Planner
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Reference: Mr. John Simpson's application for an
Administrative Land Division at 3437 Sycamore Trail SW, and
your Notice of January 4, 1994, regarding it.
Dear Ms. Mitchell,
We own the property immediately across the street from the
lot that is proposed for division, and are vigorously
opposed to the division for the following reasons.
First" homes on the lake shore side of Sycamore Trail S.W.
are already suffering from water drainage problems. The
combination of heavy rain, and run-off from the property
proposed for division (and property adjacent to it),
contributed to the collapse of a retaining wall on our
property. which had to be reconstructed at a cost of
approximatelY $12.000. We also have had to replace the
floor in a lower bedroom, and reconstruct a small retaining
wall that abuts the house, because of water penetration.
It is also my understanding that neighboring properties to
the South have had lower level water problems.
Adding another house and driveway right across the street
will obviously reduce water retention and increase run-off
onto our property and/or neighboring property.
Second, the street has a sharp curve with limited
visibility at the property proposed for division. Adding
another house and driveway at this location will
substantially increase the risk of accident.
Third, the street is currently not maintained by the city,
presumablY because it is not to City Codes. To further
subdivide property in this location prior to developing a
plan for upgrading the area, will limit the options that
would be available in the future, for current residents.
I
Therefore, we request that the Proposed Division not be
approved at this time.
If a plan can be developed and implemented that would bring
the street up to City Codes and allow the City to maintain
it, and that would deal with water run-off and safety, then
I would no longer oppose the division.
Kind regards,
W~k; \4\~
Wesley and Charlotte Mader
I
January 12, 1994
3469 Sycamore Trail
Prior Lake, MN 55372
.';\ l'-~ '@ili-u -:~ l.-J .~' .
l -~
,,'4. \
. . '_~-'-.i"'oo~"'-:a=""~'
.' :-:.'J... ~~......~... ".co.~. ...-.;-
Ms. Gina Mitchell
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
4629 Dakota st. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Ms. Mitchell:
We have received by mail a copy of the Administrative Land
Division proposed subdivision of Outlot C, Maplewood, proposed by
Mr. John Simpson of 3437 Sycamore Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN.
Please review the following written objections and/or concerns.
Our home is adjacent to Mr. simpson's property and our address is
3469 Sycamore Trail SW, Prior Lake, MN.
Our house is positioned on a hill with rip-rap retaining wall on
the east end, which is approximately eight feet high and 8 feet
out from the edge of our garage. This rip-rap wall runs half-way
through the lot. The front of our house has a very steep hill
and driveway that runs the width of the lot.
Our property line on the west end of the house is approximately
14 feet from our house. It is our understanding that excavating
and/or putting in a retaining wall could also be put on the
property line or very close to the property line, which would
adversely effect the aesthetic value of our home. This would
leave me with an 8' rip-rap wall on one end of our house and a
possible retaining wall on the other end. A two-story house
sitting in this situation not only worries and concerns us, but
would certainly raise questions and doubts of a prospective buyer
should we decide to sell our property. The salability as well as
the value of our house would be in severe jeopardy.
We also have a mature (94" circumference; 30" diameter) maple
tree adjacent to Mr. Simpson's property. The tree is on our
property, but is within a foot of the lot line. Should any
excavating be done too close to this tree, the tree would be lost
due to damage to the root system. The aesthetic value that a
tree of this stature gives to our property as well as the entire
neighborhood, is unmeasurable, much less what it means to the
value of our property.
We feel these issues warrant your consideration in this
situation. Thank you for your consideration.
~~8
Gary and cindy Detjen
T I
. ,
; I
; :
I
"J//,dUCfYV / r J /9/.:;r
/ /
I
!
: I AAA /'.
:! I/'f I J. f.:7J I AI OJ
II
i 11l5JO c;~'i2-
ilcilJ of
: I
: i
i i /J (lett' /l1 f. ~ i 7C'~II;
. /
i I Ilea] C Q l C 'ire- flit f .f':U. j~~ /,,/ k,r_." /
: ! ("0 Q1 ~ ~^''0-'" ~c e/1 v f' v 7 C/;:'/I,? -cJ, t' S/~ ~ Co-c/
il lief lJ1/bir7r;'7/~,p ;lb'/SiTe.
: I
, I
i I
I
!I ,/:1'1 c,/e~~tJJ"'7 COA:/C~/2/Z "'j -f;hb-r ;,L'a-dwitf'-'v
i' , / v .
il-tJ,~/ft'/~rTy /5 d""",d<jdj
: I~ J'17,{};{1t. d7d/-tJ&-r ;t!j' a r'e /;,. d!i,r R
; II ,r. I
! f/JJIOA/ -tv -r:J,(. /'~.::f/ Q.-:7// -Co c;c/iC?/~j.c/'1 tOn/~t:,I'/7/;r.
II ., I ~I /
)V/~ ,/U;7r h~/!
C;/;JhPU€L
t1/IO/l f,;J/c
.
-/ / -...J-- /1 'J. ./
<J1 0 I ~>-1fl J.-z;t/ // '-' i e c; /? ~
Z.:::. A /' ~",.~~ -r tv e:-7~;-
y
/ J e'J.1'(?/.
~ I
: !j{t./ek,Jltf/l /k vddr~5.J/"~") Thr (lVJ/;d~ Ar..:> )"'41
I I' / r .
I! /~,f(-J Lt? ti SfVfn/y u./Q rJ,,/. /)(A-r ;"()vc/ tA,,~/ 70 .(JCiSJ,/;,A-
! I f
i I LUaft!A: J:1/vl1/t/1" r i ~ (~/tJt(/,(J- S-f,.~ ~ II A ()(,fscS .
;1 I'
I !
~J_
<--"V: (.
C:~;F
..~-r-
T r .,
C>>
II Th
I I I J / ,L; ..J'/.-r-.. ~'/.A
I I' t'1"r; -tt//c! -1-' tub(~/c/ c:; 5.f:... CJ7... L ~C/
: I '
! I -;-t;: c-: ,,< <1 I-.f~c i,pi? ~p ~/r, Ch-,~~ S (?A/ k4'..vc~'
IIA~ /~C1tJ{ -ihp' 7' 0ou/c1 ;a4c/ ~ 4J/pvld/v~
II " j' /,
L1 a cc. ()lJfq b I~ r 04 '7'-;11 '"v 5 Co fZ A/ f Gfl"tE -ck p t lj ~
II f',{~~fr S1"q/4~.l'r t:hQ f lU~ 9/1 r4vH/",ffy
i i O-j''f I~ Oftr Cc.n1'1.h1ij,vi'7Y
" I
II .
117iMK< VOy .
II /
II
-c:~
! I
II
! I
I,
, ,
4/ ~ ~--:!j ~
3 i/ 7;> SV~/lH7 /t'E T~, Stv,
./
! !
; ;
: I
:
i i
. !
i I
: i
II
II
! I
I.
11
'I
! I
i:
; I
i I
r,
~
1 I
To: Gina M. Mitchell
Prior Lake Planning Commission
4629 Dakota St. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
01/14/94
Re: Proposed Administrative Land Division of Mr. John Simpson's Land.
Dear Planning Department,
I am writing you today in response to a letter I received dated
January 4, 1994 from Ms. Gina Mitchell, Associate City Planner. (see
attached).
My response to the proposed land division of Mr. John Simpson's
property located at 3437 Sycamore Trail S.W. is that I object. I
have several reasons for my objection to Mr. Simpson's request. These
reasons I have listed in outline form below as follows;
Neighborhood Property Values: The area in which I, and the Simpson's
live, has had many improvements in the quality of the homes made by
homeowners over the past ten years that I have lived here. There
have been two new homes built at 3402 and 3406 within the past two
years. 3406 is actually a replacement of an extremely old cabin that
was an eye sore to the entire neighborhood prior to its demolition
this past autumn. There have been improvements made at 3420, 3380,
3486, and even 3437, Mr. Simpson's residence prior to his purchase.
There have been extensive landscape work done at 3478, 3470 and 3508
Sycamore Trail within the past two years, dramatically improving these
home's external appearances. 3415 Sycamore, and my home at 3442, were
both built five years ago. My home, just like 3406, was a replacement
of an old cabin.
All of these improvements have gradually increased each other's
property values. Good looking, well cared for homes all surround
Mr. Simpson's piece of property enhancing his homes' value.
It is my opinion that Mr. Simpson's proposed land division will
have a negative impact on all neighboring property values. Any home
that could be built on that proposed site would obviously be very small
and of lesser market value that its neighboring homes. A residence of
this nature will bring down all the home values in the area offsetting
the improvements we've all made. I see a home on this proposed site as
a giant step backwards in our neighborhood's quest towards improving
the area and therefore should not be allowed. Granting Mr. Simpson's
request would not be fair to many of my neighbors, as well as, myself.
We have all made large financial commitments to our home's and our
community by paying increased taxes. I feel this proposed land division
seriously tarnishes our reasons for faithfully doing so.
1 I
Water Drainage: The plat sketch that Mr. Simpson furnished along
with his request for land division, I believe, does not accurately
tell the whole story. Mr. Simpson's survey is only for the purpose
of determining square footage, completely ignoring elevation. The
proposed site has a rather steep incline to the north and west sides.
Assuming Mr. Simpson's proposed site would be a corner lot. both of
the street sides would have sharp drop offs to the curb. Once the
property is developed, and a home is built, where is the run off
from rain and melting snow going to go? Well I'll tell you, it is
going to go into my basement and Ron Johnson's basement like it
has been doing for years. The new homes roof and driveway will divert
water downhill out into the street which is not capable of properly
disposing of it.
This past autumn both Ron Johnson and myself had extensive work
done on our homes to try and resolve our wet basement problems. Know-
ing that our efforts were only a band aid to a more serious problem,
I felt that I had to try something because my five year old home has
had a wet basement ever since I built it.
I feel the only solution is to improve the street. Widen the
road, install an adequate storm sewer, (unlike whatever was done this
past autumn between 3402 and 3406), and prohibit the development of
Mr. Simpson's proposed site. I realize this is easier said than done,
however, I feel it is the only solution to the existing water run
off problem currently in this area. Development of Mr. Simpson's
proposed site would only compound the water run-off problem worse.
Street Standards: Although I am not an expert on residential street
code requirements, I think it is safe to assume that the street in
front of Mr. Simpson's proposed site is not up to current Prior Lake
residential standards. This issue, I feel, was overlooked when you
granted permits at 3415 and 3406. The setbacks from the street at
both 3415 and 3406 are very close to the minimum requirements. Should
this portion of Sycamore Trail be upgraded to current Prior Lake
residential street codes these two homes will have doorsteps at the
curb, or atleast, one of those homes will.
Before this proposed land division be granted, I suggest that the
residents of Sycamore Trail in this particular area, and the city
planning department, mutually agree on a future street plan. Every-
one has had their own surveys done by several different surveyors.
I have seen a few of my neighbors, I have reviewed Mr. Simpsons survey,
and I have one of my own. All of these surveys seem to contradict
each other.
Also, I think the city may need a larger portion of Mr. Simpson's
proposed site just to create a decent navigable roadway.
T
.
1
Approximately a year and a half ago the city granted a change
in property lines between 3454 and 3470. This was done without
any notification of contiguous landowners. By doing this the city
shrunk the lot size of 3454, a lot that has an old cabin on it.
Not only did this substantially reduce this parcels buildable area,
it severely limits this lots' street access. At 3454 there is an
older garage built too close to the roadway. (Actually it is located
partially in the vacated roadway).
My feeling is that since 3454 now is limited in its street access
and buildable surface area, I think the roadway should be changed to
cut off a larger corner of Mr. Simpson's roadway easement. If that
is not possible, then I think the city should condemn the garage at
3454 to accomodate a wider, more navigable turn in the roadway.
The turn in the roadway, as it presently exists, is very unsafe.
There is a huge blind area when driving around Mr. Simpson's hill.
With the road too narrow, and the absence of any street signs, I
firmly believe there is going to be an accident at this corner in the
near future. I have also expressed my concerns several times to the
Police Department in recent months concerning this very same issue.
With the increased traffic lately, this is literally "Dead Man's
Curve". I think the safety issue should be seriously evaluated before
any further development takes place down on this portion of Sycamore
Trail.
The road's width is only one aspect of the problem. The quality
of the pavement is yet another issue. The neighboring homes have
privately paid for the asphalt on this segment of Sycamore prior to
Mr. Simpson's purchase of his home. Neither Mr. Simpson, nor the city
have paid a dime towards our streets' maintenance. Both parties should
realize this was paid for by individuals who desire to improve their
neighborhood. Without our assistance, this street would still be a
gravel path. I think both Mr. Simpson and the city take this for
granted. This road was improved by the individuals who use it to
better our neighborhood's quality of life, not to enhance Mr. Simpson's
proposed site, and not to take pressure off of the city to improve
this roadway. Allowing further development on this portion of Sycamore
Trail will only further deteriorate its condition.
I feel the city should repair the road in front of 3406 for
granting a permit without adequate street repair. If the city allows
development on Mr. Simpson's proposed site, I insist it should upgrade
the roadway in advance to meet current Prior Lake development require-
ments. If it does not, I feel it is unfair to other area developers
who currently are having to comply with such standards.
The Proposed Lot: The proposed lot was declared "un-buildable" by its
previous two owners. Why it is all of a sudden okay to develop it
astounds me. Development of this site means drastically changing
Mr. Simpson's own homes' value, a change that will decrease his home
value.
,
.
Tearing off his three season porch will reduce his homes' value,
even if he plans to re-assemble it in the rear of his home. De-
velopment on this proposed site will kill one of the areas largest
maple trees that is presently owned by neighbors, Mr. and Mrs.
Gary Detjen. Furthermore, excavation on the proposed site will
require extensive retaining wall work around Mr. and Mrs. Detjen's
home. This cost will be out of their control and will be incurred
by them just to preserve their homes' structure. It financially
would be unfair to them to grant Mr. Simpson's request to divide
his land. It would also be unfair to Ron Johnson, as well as,
myself in terms of further compounding an already bad water run
off situation in this area.
I am confident that the city of Prior Lake did not solicite
Mr. Simpson's request. With the rapid growth our city is incurring
I am sure there are more serious planning issues to address than
this one. This proposed land division not only depreciates the
quality improvement efforts made previously by devoted tax paying
citizens, it also causes financial hardships on them. I can't take
anymore water in my basement neither can anyone of the westward
side of Sycamore Trail in the area. I don't believe Mr. and Mrs.
Detjen should have to further invest in their property to protect
it from foundation erosion just to accomodate Mr. Simpson's request.
Either our children, as well as, ourselves shouldn't be subject to
unsafe roadway conditions in order to develop this questionable piece
of land. And finally, this segment of Sycamore Trail, needs to be
improved just to handle the present traffic safely. I think the
planning department may need a portion of Mr. Simpson's lot in order
to make these necessary changes.
. Mr. Simpson's objective is to make a quick buck and get out.
His goal isn't to be a Prior Lake citizen. His goal is short term
and money motivated. His plan is to sellout and move to a hobby
farm. He has made that public to his surrounding neighbors.
I ask that the city planning department deny or postpone Mr.
Simpson's land division request. Deny it in the name of creating a
quality city, or postpone it until the road be clearly defined and
upgraded. I have spent everything I've got on my home. I am a good
citizen devoted to creating a better community. I am here to stay
and hope that you can appreciate that. I firmly believe that Mr.
Simpson's proposed land division will adversely affect my property
value, as well as, my neighbors. I firmly believe that after living
ten years at the bottom of his hill that this development will further
compound my basements' water problem. Please do not let this proposal
of Mr. Simpson's go through.
hew
442 Sycamore Trail S.W.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
. 1
D'm@rnD~~: .
\\1 .. I - Bl4 ~\
*** PETITION ***
I hereby object to the proposed land division as requested by
Hr. John S:I.pson. I object on the basis that I believe the proposed
land division will depreciate my own propertys' value. as well as. the
value of the entire neighborhood. I also believe that this proposed
land division will increase the traffic on this segment of SYcaJlOre
Trail. as well as. create an unsafe curve for the traffic to navigate
around. Furthermore. I don't believe that this segment of Sycamore
Trail can handle any added traffic. including construction traffic.
without first upgrading the streets' pavement quality. Along with
upgrading the streets' pavement. I also believe the street needs to
have an adequate storm sewer system installed to properly dispose of
water run off. Please do not grant Mr. S:lJllpson' s request for land
division on Sycamore Trail.
/<{t,;/~p i c:;p~ ;~18'3 S~'(4M".~;n.
J/;j~>:"";';~ ,t;~jt,t9B~~Am4~I~.
~.~ t, /5d"L1 I, " 'I
T~
T,}
3,-zt
~~gfd?3<jO
.
Wltt1&? ~ /991
._l
,tlIJ; ~ <1 ..dutd4?wU../~ t-W-t ~.uc
,do 'IJl1'~ ~~~
..in 11Ju i~ ~:
(') ~().tU;t ~ ~ tUUaw~ ()/? tVn
.. ~~MuI~~.
(A) Iv ~ ~ tJn tl ~.
~ctahl~, ~-
~.
....,
Ef)) ~ ~ ~'Pff tJ?1.. a ~
.. ~ dV f1+'~ M4/ ~7'
350 I cfyttJ./J?(//,e ?rev'l J'w
u-
t!hz VJz,JI/u/d
6//er; 111, cf/U$dt
.' ....... -.., ._. .... ..., .,.....__.........T-.-..._..-,.. ......
..~._._.______.._._.__. _"","_"_H.._ _.__._
.