6.10. SR 06-18-2001Item #
6.10.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Mayor and City Council
Michele McPherso~irector of Planning
DATE: June 18, 2001
SUBJECT: Administrative Subdivision Request AS 01-04 by Arne and
Marilyn Engstrom
Request
The applicant requests approval of an administrative subdivision to split 22.19 acres into
three parcels.
Attachments
· Location Map
· Certificate of Survey
· Letter from the City Engineer dated June 11, 2001
· Letter from Sherburne County dated June 7, 2001
Zoning/Land Use
Rla, Single Family Residential (2-1/2 acres)/LR, Low Density Residential
Location
The subject property is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of 209th Avenue
and Meadowvale Road.
Analysis
Overview
The subject property is 22 acres including approximately 1.94 acres in Big Lake Township.
Located on the subject property is a single family dwelling unit, a shed, garage, barn, and
corn crib. In 1995, the area around the dwelling was annexed into the City of Elk River.
The applicant's proposal is to split the property into three parcels; Parcel A for a new
dwelling, Parcel B for the existing home and structures, and Parcel C as vacant unbuildable
Memo to Mayor and City Council/AS 01-04
June 18, 2001
Page 2
property. The applicant owns additional land in Big Lake Township that is proposed to be
subdivided under the County's cluster subdivision provisions.
Lot Requirements
Two of the parcels exceed the minimum lot area and lot width requirements. Parcel A of 10
acres will be a corner lot and will have frontage on both 209~h Avenue and Meadowvale
Road, however, it will gain its access from the existing driveway on Meadowvale Road. The
County comments that Parcel A's access should come from 209th Avenue. Staff has no
objection to a shared driveway provided a joint access/driveway agreement is recorded
against both parcels.
Parcel B is 10.08 acres and will be for the existing dwelling and other structures.
Parcel C is .54 acres and 50 feet in width. This parcel does not meet the minimum lot area
requirements for the Rla District. The applicant desires to dedicate this to the City in order
to provide a public trail corridor for recreational purposes.
The City Engineer notes the need for right of way dedication to the City for 209t~ Avenue
and drainage/utility easements along all lot lines. He also notes a minor encroachment into
a delineated wetland for the driveway to the proposed dwelling on Parcel A that should
qualify for an exemption from the Wetland Conservation Act rules.
The applicant will be required to comply with Sherburne County's requirements.
Park Dedication
The Park and Recreation Commission, at is June 13, 2001 meeting, reviewed the request for
park dedication requirements. The plan that was reviewed by the Commission indicated that
Parcel C was 1.36 acres in area and 112 feet in width. The Commission voted unanimously
to recommend to the City Council that Parcel C be accepted for park dedication in lieu of
cash. The applicant spoke of creating a public recreation trail through Parcel C and through
land under his ownership in Big Lake Township that will be subdivided as a cluster
subdivision.
Based on the reduction of Parcel C, staff would recommend that it be combined with Parcel
B and that the trail corridor be granted via easement with dedication occurring by a cash
dedication.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request for the administrative
subdivision to create three parcels with the following conditions:
I. All comments of the City Engineer be addressed.
2. All comments of Sherburne County be addressed.
3. Parcels C and B shall be combined.
S:\PLANNING\MICHMC\CCREPRTS\AS01-04.DOC
Memo to Mayor and City Council/AS 01-04
June 18, 2001
Page 3
4. The applicant shall pay park dedication for one lot prior to releasing the
subdivision for recording.
5. The applicant shall pay storm water management fees for one lot prior to
releasing the subdivision for recording.
6. A joint access/driveway agreement be recorded against both parcels prior
to recording the administrative subdivision.
If the applicant desires to establish a public trail corridor, then an easement for those
purposes can be granted over Parcel B.
S:\PLANNING\MICHMC\CCREPRTS\AS01-04.DOC
212TH
211TH
210'1~.1
209TH
208TH
207'n't
206TH
204TH
20~I~D
202ND
2015T
200TH
Case Number:
Location Map
AS 01-04
N
06/08/01 FRI 15:42 FAX 7636823522 Otto Associates, Inc. ~002
A Certificate of Survey
' l'T[ [m a
Howard R, Green Gompany
June 11, 2001
File: 814790J-0240
Mr. Scott Harlicker
Senior Planner
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
PO Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330-0490
RE: ARNIE AND MARILYN ENGSTROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION
Dear Mr. Harlicker:
As requested, we have reviewed the administrative subdivision for the Arnie and Marilyn
Engstrom property. The property is located on the west side of County Road 32 (Meadowvale
Road) just south of 209"~ Avenue. Based on our review, we would offer the following comments.
1. The administrative subdivision proposes to take a parcel of land just over 22 acres and
create three separate parcels. Parcel A is proposed to be 10.83 acres, Parcel B, which
contains the existing house and outbuildings, is 5.74 acres, and Parcel C is 5.62 acres.
2. Approximately 1.94 acres of Parcel B, including the house and garage, falls outside the
City of Elk River into Big Lake Township. We question whether or not approval of this
administrative subdivision needs to be provided by Big Lake Township also, due to the
portion of the property that falls in the Township.
3. A separate description should be provided for the right-of-way of 209t~ Avenue so that it
can be dedicated to the City of Elk River.
4. A separate description needs to be provided for Meadowvale Road. The administrative
subdivision shows 33 feet of right-of-way along the road. We question whether this is
sufficient. The administrative subdivision should be reviewed by Sherbume County.
Typically they ask for 50 feet in new subdivisions along County roads.
5. Drainage and utility easements need to be provided along all lot lines; five feet on either
side of all common lot lines, and 10 feet around the perimeter lot lines of the subdivision.
6. A proposed house location is shown on Parcel A with proposed pdmary and alternate
septic locations. There is no such designation shown on Parcel C. We question
whether there is a buildable site on Parcel C, given that there is no topography and there
is a large area of wetland shown. The wetlands have been delineated according to a
note on the Certificate of Survey by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Co. However, no
report has been provided. Topo should be shown on Parcel C together with the house
area and primary and alternate septic locations.
7. The proposed ddveway to the home site on Parcel A crosses the delineated wetlands.
This will need to be reviewed by Steve Rohlf for WCA requirements.
8. Parcel A and Parcel B show sharing a common driveway. This also needs to be
reviewed by Sherburne County regarding access to the three parcels.
Ltr-060701-Harliker. doc
1326 Energy Park Drive · St. Paul, MN 55108 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389
Mr. Scott Harlicker
June 11, 2001
Page Two
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please call.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
Te~E.
Ltr-O60701-Harliker. doc
Howard R, Green Company
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
PUBLIC
June 7, 2001
City of Elk River
Attn: Michele McPherson
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: June Adm. Subdivision Comments
Sherbu~
WORKS DEPARTMENT
Rhonda F. Lewis, P.E.
425 Jackson A venue
Elk River, MN 55330
(763) 241-7030 · 800-594-5208
Dear Ms. McPherson;
After reviewing drawings that have been received in our office during the past several weeks we
offer the following comments:
We support William Zacharda's request to split his land (County Highway 33) and create
parcels A and B. We required 17 feet of additional right of way be granted in fee title (for a total
of 50 feet). Parcel A and B must share access on the existing driveway; no change within the
right of way will be permitted.
We support Sharon Bauer's request to split her land (County Highway 31) and create parcels
A and B. We require 17' of additional right of way be granted in fee title (for a total of 50").
Parcel A and B must share an access located on the common lot line and the existing access must
be removed. This requires a permit from our office.
Sherburne County does not oppose the proposed land split for Arne Engstrom, however we
recommend not encumbering Parcel A & B with a driveway easement. For the short term this
may seem like a good idea. Access to 209th Avenue seems like the logical access point. We
would not allow access to County Highway 32. We will require 17' of additional right of way be
granted in fee title (for a total of 50'). If parcel C requires its' own access, a permit from our
office is required.
Richard D. Corbin
Sherburne County Public Works