04-17-06 PCITEM 3-1
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED C0N$IJLTAH1r-S, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
TeIephonw 763.231-2555 Facsimile: 763,231 ,2561 plannem' nacplatin ing-corn
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Laurie Shives / Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - Nelson CUP; Building Relocation
REPORT DATE: 4 April 2006 APPLCIATION DATE: 22 March 2006
NAC FILE: 176.02-06.10
BACKGROUND
Richard and Claudia Nelson have submitted an application to relocate a single family
dwelling to 14123 88th Street NE (Lot 13, Block 3, Otsego Acres 1St Addition). The site
is presently developed with a manufactured home and a detached garage. The subject
site is zoned R-3, Residential — Long Range Urban Service Area District and single
family uses are a permitted use in this District. Section 19 of the Zoning Ordinance
requires consideration of a conditional use permit (CUP) for relocation of existing
buildings to lots within the City.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Site Plan
C. New Home Photos
ANALYSIS
Existing Structure. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing manufactured
home from the property, but the detached garage is proposed to remain. Removal of
the existing structure will be required prior to issuance of a permanent occupancy permit
for the relocated dwelling.
Building Relocation. The relocation of existing structures to lots within the City of
Otsego requires compliance with the performance standards outlined in Section 20-19-
2, as follows:
A. Upon relocation, the building shall comply with applicable requirements of the
State Uniform Building Code.
Comment: A building permit is required prior to relocation of any structure.
Review and approval of the Building Official for conformance with the Uniform
Building Code shall be made a condition of approval.
B. The proposed relocated building shall comply with the character of the
neighborhood in which it is being relocated, as determined by the City Council.
Comment: The neighborhood is fully developed with single family dwellings
consisting of a mix of manufactured housing and wood frame structures. The
structure to be located on the property is a newer -style manufactured home and
will be consistent with this character.
C. The relocated use will not result in a depreciation of the neighborhood or
adjacent property values.
Comment. Because the structure has a similar character as adjacent dwellings
and is in conformance with applicable performance standards, no depreciation is
anticipated.
D. The relocated structure shall be similar to the market valuation of adjacent
principal structures as determined by the City or County Assessor.
Comment: The structure currently on the property has an assessed market value
of $13,200. The average market value of several properties (land and buildings)
adjacent to the subject site, within Block 1 of Walesch Estates 2"d Addition, is
determined to be $148,940 according to Wright County assessment data.
Although no tax info was provided on the relocated structure, it is expected to
have a value at least comparable to other properties in the area based on similar
construction, size and compatibility with applicable performance standards.
E. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months from
the date of location on site.
Comment: This requirement will be made a condition of approval.
Lot Standards. The applicant has submitted a site plan indicating the proposed
location of the relocated home in relation to 88th Avenue NE. The site plan also shows_
the approximate locations of the existing home and detached garage. The following
table illustrates required performance standards for single family lots and dwellings in
the R-3 District.
2
As shown on the submitted site plan, the proposed new home location complies with the
required setbacks for the R-3 District.
Single Family Dwelling Standards. Section 20-17-11 of the Zoning Ordinance
establishes minimum design standards for single family uses, which apply to this
application. The basic requirements are for a perimeter foundation, minimum
dimensions of 30 feet by 24 feet, a shingled roof and minimum overhangs of 1 foot.
Based upon the photo exhibits and other information provided by the applicant, the
structure to be located to the property is in conformance with these requirements.
CUP Criteria. When considering CUP applications, the Planning Commission and City
Council must also take into account the possible adverse impacts of the building
relocation based upon, but not limited to, the following factors outlined in Section 20-4-
2.F of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: Stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is that `the character of
individual neighborhoods shall be reinforced, maintained and upgraded" the
proposed CUP proposes to upgrade the existing dwelling unit by replacing it with
a newer, more spacious structure.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The surrounding area is developed with low density, single family
residential uses which are planned to continue as discussed in the
Comprehensive Plan. Thus, the proposed use will be compatible with present
and future land uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: As noted above, the subject site and relocated structure comply with
all applicable performance standards.
4 The mmnncarl IICP'C effer-t hpnn the oroo in \AIk;/ k i4
r. -r-- ul V" 111 VVI mali Il ic) til V'.JjoO-U.
Comment: The relocated dwelling and single family use of the property may be
considered an improvement of the property from its existing condition and, as
such, it will likely have a positive effect on the neighborhood.
3
Setbacks
Lot
Area
Lot
Width
Local
Street
Side Yard
Rear
Yard
Required 1 acre
150 feet
35 feet
10 feet
20 feet
Proposed 1 acre
150 feet
35+ feet
36+ feet
20+ feet
As shown on the submitted site plan, the proposed new home location complies with the
required setbacks for the R-3 District.
Single Family Dwelling Standards. Section 20-17-11 of the Zoning Ordinance
establishes minimum design standards for single family uses, which apply to this
application. The basic requirements are for a perimeter foundation, minimum
dimensions of 30 feet by 24 feet, a shingled roof and minimum overhangs of 1 foot.
Based upon the photo exhibits and other information provided by the applicant, the
structure to be located to the property is in conformance with these requirements.
CUP Criteria. When considering CUP applications, the Planning Commission and City
Council must also take into account the possible adverse impacts of the building
relocation based upon, but not limited to, the following factors outlined in Section 20-4-
2.F of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: Stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is that `the character of
individual neighborhoods shall be reinforced, maintained and upgraded" the
proposed CUP proposes to upgrade the existing dwelling unit by replacing it with
a newer, more spacious structure.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The surrounding area is developed with low density, single family
residential uses which are planned to continue as discussed in the
Comprehensive Plan. Thus, the proposed use will be compatible with present
and future land uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: As noted above, the subject site and relocated structure comply with
all applicable performance standards.
4 The mmnncarl IICP'C effer-t hpnn the oroo in \AIk;/ k i4
r. -r-- ul V" 111 VVI mali Il ic) til V'.JjoO-U.
Comment: The relocated dwelling and single family use of the property may be
considered an improvement of the property from its existing condition and, as
such, it will likely have a positive effect on the neighborhood.
3
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: The relocated structure will access off of 88th Avenue NE, as the
previous dwelling did, and will not generate traffic beyond the capabilities of
streets serving the subject property.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
Utilities. The applicant is proposing to install a new on-site septic system and well,
which are shown on the site plan. The applicant has stated that the new septic system
and well will be installed following the building relocation. As such, it is not anticipated
that the relocation will have any impacts on the septic system and well. However, the
drainfield area must be protected from construction traffic during the relocation process.
The systems will be subject to review and approval by the Building Official to ensure
that they are installed properly and adequate to accommodate the proposed single
family home.
Security. Section 20-19-3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a security be posted
for the relocation of existing structures. This security is required in part to cover any
costs that may be incurred due to damage during the relocation, as well as to
encourage completion of the project. The security shall be determined by the building
official and will be required as a condition of approval.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed relocation of an existing single family dwelling to 14123 88th Street NE is
an improvement of the nronerty and is cnnsistpnt with rPni iramantc fnr hi ii1dinn
relocations based on the information that has been provided by the applicant. The
request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies which support and
encourage improvements within existing neighborhoods. As such, our office
recommends approval of the requested CUP, subject to the conditions outlined below.
51
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
A. Motion to approve the CUP, subject to the following conditions:
A building permit is applied for and approved by the Building Official prior
to relocation of the structure.
2. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months
from the date of location on site, subject to approval of the Building
Official.
3. A permanent occupancy permit for the relocated structure shall not be
issued until such time as the existing dwelling and all debris is removed
from the property.
4. A security as required by Section 20-19-3 of the Zoning Ordinance as
determined by the Zoning Administrator is posted.
5. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and/or Zoning Ordinance provisions.
C. Motion to table the application.
PC. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Tim Rochel, Building Official
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Richard and Claudia Nelson
k
m
x
D
D
OAD
V,
�-e
EXHIBIT B
.....
Bathroom
u ................ M
2 Bedroom
2 Ba th
26x38
i
1998 Fairmont
Double Wide Home
Excellent
Condition!
Price includes: Delivery, Set-up, Steel Step, Furnace, Stove, Refrigerator
�, and Dishwasher.
IIBIT C-2
ITEM 3-2
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone. 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 plan ner&'cbnacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
DATE: 13 April 2006
RE: Otsego — Featherwind Farms; WS District Variance
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 05.23
BACKGROUND
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has contacted the City of Otsego with
concerns about Featherwind Farms. The DNR does not believe the necessary
applications were processed to allow for City approval of the Featherwind Farms
preliminary plat and final plats with lots subject to the standards of the R -C, Residential
Rural Open Space Cluster District for portions of the site within the WS, Wild Scenic
Recreation River Overlay District. The lot area and width requirements of the R -C
District are less than the lot area and width requirements of the WS District. The City
and Shadow Creek Corporation (the developer) have agreed to address this issue by
processing a variance from the requirements of Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance establishing the minimum lot area and width requirements of the WS District.
Fyhihitc-
A. Approved Preliminary Plat
B. Alternative subdivision sketch
ANALYSIS
The Featherwind Farms Final Plat approved by the City Council on 27 February 2006
has 64 lots having home sites within the WS District. The table below illustrates the lot
requirements of the R -C District and WS District:
Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width
R -C District 1.0ac. net 100ft.
WS District 2.5ac.(gross) 200ft.
All of the lots within the Featherwind Farms Final Plat conform to the minimum lot area
and width requirements of the R -C District. The 64 lots having home sites within the
WS District do not conform to the WS District minimum lot area and width standards.
The developer has submitted a sketch plan to show a potential subdivision of the
subject site in compliance with the minimum lot area and width requirements of the WS
District. The sketch plan locates 64 building pads within the WS District. More
significantly, the sketch plan illustrates a loss of the 168.47 acres of permanent open
space outlots provided for with the approved final plat, including the 63.86 acres
immediately adjacent to the Mississippi River and including the 400 foot deep scenic
easement acquired previously by the DNR. The subdivision of the property as shown
on the sketch plan would result in more limited water access opportunities for residents
within the subdivision and the general public and because of the fragmented property
ownership, make more difficult preservation of the shoreline areas in a natural state.
To this end, approval of a variance from Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning Ordinance is
requested to allow for those lots of the Featherwind Farms Final Plat within the WS
District to have a minimum lot area and width compliant with that required in the R -C
District. Consideration of the requested variance is subject to the criteria established
by Section 20-95-21 and Section 20-6-2.13 of the Zoning Ordinance. These criteria
require a finding that the strict enforcement of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance
will cause an undue hardship that is not the result of actions by the applicant.
Furthermore, the granting of the variance must be consistent with the intent, if not the
letter of the Zoning Ordinance requirements from which the variance is being sought.
The subject site is within the Rural Residential Preserve Area established by the
Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of maintaining rural character and preservation of
innate natural amenities and resources in the area of the City north of CSAH 39 west of
Nashua Avenue generally corresponding to the WS District. The City established the R-
C District based on these goals to allow for limited, rural density development that
simultaneously provides for establishment of permanent open spaces and protection of
significant environmental resources. Subdivision of the subject site in the manner set
forth by the submitted sketch plan would be inconsistent with the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan and R -C District as well as the intent of the WS District.
Compliance with the minimum lot area and width requirements of the WS District does
result in an undue hardship; not one borne by the developer, but by the community for
the inability to realize the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan for natural resource
protection and preservation of rural character in this area of the City.
RECOMMENDATION
Our office recommends approval of the variance allowing those lots of the Featherwind
Farms Final Plat within the WS District to be allowed a minimum lot area and width as
required by the R -C District.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
A. Motion to approve a variance from Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
based on a finding that compliance with the regulation causes an undue hardship
in preserving rural character and protecting significant natural resources,
including the shoreline of the Mississippi River consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and the criteria for approval of a variance as set
forth by the Zoning Ordinance.
C. Motion to table.
C. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Dale Homuth, DNR
Lucinda Gardner, Shadow Creek Corporation
Brian Johnson, Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
J
[it
A !�I
I
_ ff
� 11
�. It .y.9 �r ,t/r- h�F .�,-j r 'v---�\\♦�.♦ ,�J — - -
y It
r � 5
If 5f; /pr;.., —'---`°-....:.. - • � i 1, �. �` ` ��
71
if
Y - I
f
2 `ti {t! : 11 g. j1 (/ "'` �• 1, ,
IP
If
1
j
•1 � 1 � 1 I I I� 1
1 ar. /�� � 1 � y1 i I •S
Y ws
' � /� / t�r �+F )� r i41 � � f ._ _•:t. _� � t �`P r. �gt �,e ��%i iit
l ' j
if rit
AM
ITEM 3-3
N'Q,,RT14WF*,T, &SSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC
4300 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 plannersra)nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
NAC FILE
Otsego Planning Commission
Laurie Shives / Daniel Licht
April 12, 2006
Otsego — Davis Mississippi Cove; Rezoning/PUD-CUP/Preliminary Plat
176.02 — 06. 11
APP. DATE: 15 March 2006
BACKGROUND
CITY FILE:
REVIEW DATE
2006-15
15 May 2006
Mississippi 39, LLC is seeking approval of a preliminary plat for a single family
subdivision on a 141 acre parcel located north of CASH 39 and east of Mason Avenue
NE. The development proposal consists of 45 single family lots to be developed under
the requirements of the R -C, Residential Rural Open Space Cluster District. The subject
site is guided for rural residential uses by the Comprehensive Plan and is currently
zoned A-1, Agricultural Rural Service Area District. Portions of the subject site are also
within the boundaries of the Wild, Scenic and Recreational River District (WS District) of
the Mississippi River.
Consideration of the proposal requires a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject
site from A-1 District to R -C District and approval of a preliminary plat. The applicant
has also requested approval of a PUD/CUP to allow for the establishment of lot widths
which are inconsistent with the requirements of the R -C District. Additionally, a variance
from Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning Ordinance is requested to allow for the
proposed lots within the WS District to have a minimum lot area and width compliant
with that required in the R -C District. Finally, the City must vacate portions of the
original Otsego Town plat underlying the subject site prior to approval of the request.
The developer had previously received approvals for a Zoning Map amendment, CUP
for transferred development rights and a preliminary plat for the west 59.8 acres of the
subject site. The approved preliminary plat included 20 single family lots. The
developer is seeking to replat the original development parcel with additional lands
acquired to the east necessary to provide required access to the development at
locations consistent with Wright County spacing requirements along CSAH 39. If
approved, the current applications will supersede the previous preliminary plat approval.
Exhibits:
A.
Site Location
B.
Existing Conditions
C.
Preliminary Plat
D.
Grading Plan
E.
Utility Plan
F.
Landscape Plan
G.
Phasing Plan
ANALYSIS
Zoning. In addition to the request for a CUP for the transfer of development rights, the
proposed subdivision requires approval of a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the
subject site from A-1 District to R -C District. The requests for a Zoning Map
amendment and CUP are to be evaluated based upon (but not limited to) the criteria
outlined in Section 20-3-2.F and 20-4-3.F of the Zoning Ordinance, respectively:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan establishes the rural residential preserve
within this area of the City to encourage development of unique single family
neighborhoods that incorporate natural or rural character elements. This type of
development is especially appropriate for areas included in the Mississippi River
Wild, Scenic and Recreational River District in terms of density and opportunities
for access to the Mississippi River. The proposed development is consistent with
the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The table below summarizes the surrounding land uses. As indicated
in the table, the proposed development will be compatible with existing and future
land uses in the immediate area.
Direction I
Land Use Plan I
Zonina_ Map
Existina Use
North
NA
NA
Mississippi River
East
Rural Residential
A-1 District
Single Family
South
Agriculture
A-1 District
Agriculture
Single Famil
West
Rural Residential
I R -C District
Featherwind Farms
4
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained herein
(i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The proposed use will be required to conform to the open space,
neighborhood and general development standards of the R -C District.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed development furthers the implementation of the R -C
District and the development of unique residential neighborhoods within the rural
residential preserve area.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to have a negative impact on area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets serving
the property.
Comment: The subject site is accessed via CSAH 39, which is a major arterial
roadway. CSAH 39 has adequate capacity to accommodate traffic generated by
the proposed 45 dwelling units.
7. The proposed uses's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed development is not anticipated to have a negative
impact upon the City's service capacity.
Density. The R -C District allows up to 12 dwelling units per 40 acres, or a maximum of
15 dwelling units per 40 acres if transferred development rights are approved. With 45
proposed dwelling units on 141 acres, the density of the development is 13.8 dwelling
units per 40 acres. A CUP was approved with the initial preliminary plat application to
allow three dwelling units to be transferred to the subject site. As such, the proposed
density of the development would be consistent with the requirements of the R -C
District.
Approximately 121.5 acres of the subject site is within the WS District. Development
density within the WS District is limited to one dwelling unit per 2.5 acres. This density
requirement would allow for 48 dwelling units within the WS District. As the applicant is
proposing a total of 45 dwelling units, the development is compliant with the WS District
density standards.
Access. The subject site is to be accessed from CSAH 39 via extensions of Mason
Avenue NE and Naber Avenue NE. The developer is also proposing to leave an
existing roadway leading to an existing home which is proposed to remain, located to
the east of the exception parcel. This existing roadway will provide another
egress/ingress point for the subdivision as well as the existing property. There will be a
total of three access points for the proposed subdivision.
A divided rural section roadway with an oversized, landscaped median is proposed
along Naber Avenue for approximately 320 feet north of CSAH 39 to the intersection
with the east -west collector road for the development. The applicant has provided a
landscape plan for this median.
Open Space. The R -C District requires that a minimum of 50 percent of the net area of
a proposed development be set aside as permanent open space. The preliminary plat
identifies a new buildable area of 118.13 acres, therefore requiring 59.1 acres of open
space. The proposed preliminary plat illustrates 59.11 acres of neighborhood recreation
open space, which is consistent with the requirements of Section 20-60-7 of the Zoning
Ordinance. This area is to be retained by the homeowner's association and a
landscape planting and maintenance plan is required as a condition of approval.
Lot Area/Width. The table below illustrates the lot requirements of the R -C District and
WS District applicable to the subject site:
Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width
R -C District 1.0ac. (net) 100ft.
WS District 2.5ac. (gross) 200ft.
All of the lots within the preliminary plat conform to the minimum lot area requirements
of the R -C District. All proposed lots meet the required 100 foot lot width as measured
at the front setback line, except for Lots 31, 32, 44, and 45. These irregularly shaped
lots are necessary to accommodate existing dwellings and each parcel has adequate
building area. The City has approved irregular lot shapes within the R -C District for
other developments to accommodate existing dwellings or provide access to unique
views. Since the applicant is requesting a PUD/CUP as a part of the preliminary plat
application, these irregular lot shapes are permissible. All of the proposed lots are
within the WS District and all but two do not conform to the WS District minimum lot
area and width standards.
The developer has submitted a sketch plan to show a potential subdivision of the
subject site in compliance with the minimum lot area and width requirements of the WS
District. The sketch plan locates 45 lots within the WS District. More significantly, the
sketch plan illustrates a loss of the 59.11 acres of permanent open space outlots
provided for with the approved final plat, including the 20.66 acres immediately adjacent
to the Mississippi River. The subdivision of the property as shown on the sketch plan
would result in more limited water access opportunities for residents within the
2
subdivision and the general public and because of the fragmented property ownership,
make more difficult preservation of the shoreline areas in a natural state.
To this end, a variance from Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning Ordinance is requested
to allow for those lots within the WS District to have a minimum lot area and width
compliant with that required in the R -C District. Consideration of the requested variance
is subject to the criteria established by Section 20-95-21 and Section 20-6-2.B of the
Zoning Ordinance. These criteria require a finding that the strict enforcement of the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will cause an undue hardship that is not the
result of actions by the applicant. Furthermore, the granting of the variance must be
consistent with the intent, if not the letter of the Zoning Ordinance requirements from
which the variance is being sought.
The subject site is within the Rural Residential Preserve Area established by the
Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of maintaining rural character and preservation of
innate natural amenities and resources in the area of the City north of CSAH 39 west of
Nashua Avenue generally corresponding to the WS District. The City established the R-
C District based on these goals to allow for limited, rural density development that
simultaneously provides for establishment of permanent open spaces and protection of
significant environmental resources. Subdivision of the subject site in the manner set
forth by the submitted sketch plan would be inconsistent with the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan and R -C District as well as the intent of the WS District.
Compliance with the minimum lot area and width requirements of the WS District does
result in an undue hardship; not one borne by the developer, but by the community for
the inability to be able realize the stated goals of the Comprehensive Plan for natural
resource protection and preservation of rural character in this area of the City.
Setbacks. The following table outlines the required building setbacks for lots within the
R -C District and the setbacks being proposed in the subject development. As shown in
the table, the proposed setbacks comply with the requirements of the R -C District and
WS District. There is an existing home, located within the proposed Lot 33, which does
not meet the required bluffline setback. However, because this is an existing structure it
is considered to be non -conforming and is therefore not required to comply with the
current bluffline setbacks. The submitted plans do not indicate the OHWM of the
Mississippi River. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall be required to illustrate
the OHWM on the plat showing that the proposed building sites are compliant with the
required setback.
Blocks. The proposed single family lots are proposed to be platted as one Block.
Section 20-6-7 of the Zoning Ordinance limits block length to 1,320 feet to allow for
access to the common open space. The preliminary plat has the one Block arranged in
Setbacks
Front Side
Rear Bluffline OHWM
Required
35 feet 10 feet
50 feet 30 feet 100 feet
Proposed
135 feet 1 10 feet
50 feet 30 feet I Not Available
Blocks. The proposed single family lots are proposed to be platted as one Block.
Section 20-6-7 of the Zoning Ordinance limits block length to 1,320 feet to allow for
access to the common open space. The preliminary plat has the one Block arranged in
segments of two to thirteen lots, thereby providing access to the open space areas
between these segments. Although two of the proposed block "segments" are longer
than 1,320 feet, staff advises that this is appropriate given the overall plat design and
can be approved as a part of the PUD.
Park and Trail Dedication. Section 21-7-18.H of the Subdivision Ordinance requires
dedication of 10 percent of the area of the subject site (14.1 acres) for park
development. The preliminary plat would propose to dedicate 18.5 gross acres (9.4 net
acres) of land including the outlet and bluff area to the City to satisfy 66.7 percent of
applicable park and trail dedication requirements. Access to the outlet area is provided
via a connection to the internal public street. This land will be combined with land
dedicated to the City as part of the adjacent Featherwind Farms development. The City
intends to develop a greenway corridor along Northwest Creek from the Mississippi
River southwest towards the west sanitary sewer service district. The outlet for
Northwest Creek to the Mississippi River is located at the northwest corner of the
subject site. The balance of the park and trail dedication requirement must be met as a
cash fee in lieu of land calculated as follows:
($3,054 per lot * 33.3%) x 45 lots = $45,764.19
Landscape Plan. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan showing the addition
of boulevard trees along the proposed east -west collector road and the addition of tree
and shrub clusters within Outlots A and L to provide additional buffering along CSAH
39. The applicant shall submit additional information including tree and shrub species,
the number of each species proposed as well as the proposed plant height at
installation and at maturity.
Easements. The preliminary plat illustrates drainage and utility easements around the
perimeter of each lot as required by Section 21-7-15 of the Subdivision Ordinance. All
easements are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
Grading and Drainage. The applicant has submitted grading, drainage and erosion
control plans. These plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
Utilities. The single family lots are proposed to be served by on-site septic systems
and wells. Provision of primary and secondary septic drainfield sites have been
illustrated on the preliminary plat. Septic and well locations are subject to the review
and approval of the City Engineer.
Original Town Plat. A certificate of survey of the subject site identifies portions of the
original Otsego town plat underlying the property. Established in the 1800s, the original
town plat identifies lots, blocks and riqhts-of-wav that do not meet the City's current
development regulations and are not considered to have development rights under the
non -conforming lot provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Platting the subject subdivision
request requires vacation of the existing plat based on a finding that it serves no public
purpose.
6
Attached Garage Area. The developer is also seeking an amendment of the Zoning
Ordinance to allow larger attached garages. Section 20-16-4.13.4 of the Zoning
Ordinance currently limits attached garages to 1,000 square feet. The developer is
concerned that the current area limit does not allow sufficient depth for a four -stall
garage to accommodate larger trucks or recreational vehicles/trailers. Given the larger
home sizes that can be accommodated on R -C District lots (and other Zoning Districts
requiring a minimum area of at least one acre) a larger attached garage can likely be
accommodated. To this end, we have drafted the following language for the Planning
Commission to consider. This language would allow for construction of a four -stall
garage with a depth of 30 feet.
4. Attached accessory garages:
a. The minimum floor area of an attached garage shall be 480
square feet.
b. Within the A-1, A-2, R -C, R-1, R-2 and R-3 Districts, the
maximum floor area of an attached garage shall be 1,200
square feet.
C. Within the R -4A, R-4, R-5, R-6 or R-7 Districts, the maximum
floor area of an attached garage shall be 1,000 square feet.
d. The floor area of an attached garage shall not exceed that of
the principal structure.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed preliminary plat is consistent with the intent and provisions of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and requirements of the R -C District. As such, we recommend
approval of the Zoning Map amendments, variance and preliminary plat/PUD-CUP,
subject to the following conditions.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
Decision 1 — Zoning Map Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject site from A-1
M;s4r...} } . [Dr' n;S+rin+ 6...A -n n finrJ;nn +ham+ +ham, r�irl Inn+ ;o n-nl+ic +on+ IAIi+h +hn
L.JIJ Erict to IX %_0 LJIJ LI ItiL LlQJGV V11 a III Ita II IIJ UIGIL %11V IGI.'UGJt IJ UVItJIJtI'1 IL YYILII LI 1%,
Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
7
C. Motion to table.
Decision 2 — Variance
A. Motion to approve a variance from Section 20-95-7.C.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
based on a finding that compliance with the regulation causes an undue hardship
in preserving rural character and protecting significant natural resources,
including the shoreline of the Mississippi River consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and the criteria for approval of a variance as set
forth by the Zoning Ordinance.
Decision 3 — Preliminary Plat/PUD-CUP
A. Motion to approve a preliminary plat and PUD -CUP for transfer of development
rights for Davis Mississippi Cove, subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall submit additional landscaping information including the
proposed tree and shrub inventory (number, species) and the proposed
height of all plants at installation and maturity.
2. The applicant shall submit revised plans showing the proposed plat's
compliance with the OHWM setback.
3. Outlots E, F and J shall be dedicated to the City and the developer shall
pay a proportional cash fee in lieu of land for the unmet portion of required
park and trail dedication at the time of final plat approval.
4. All street, grading, easements and utilities are subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Decision 4 — Town Plat Vacation
A. Motion to approve vacation of the original town plat underlying the subject site
based on a finding that the request necessary to allow for development
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision
Ordinance.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding the request is inconsistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
Decision 5 — Zoning Text Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Ordinance amendment related to allowed accessory
garage area for single family and two family uses based on a finding that the
request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the action would be
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
PC. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Ron Wagner
Andy MacArthur
Dale Homuth, DNR
Scott Dahlke, QSD, LLC
9
_ _ J
i
V�
�e&c3eeeaesetea N
2
a€
m
2
W
ai/tom
r`7/K Iw. � sa]M
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVE
Sept. 1B. Twp. 12'., ?ng. 23
Obego, mN
� �Spe
�$e
1N
wwon
auumsne DEMGKLlle
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI ma
Twp, 121,e
a,.r .
§@ 2 z
! §} \
_.
>sv�u
rz4. 4a A III
��ELG�LLLbBc (n
°ii Z C
L �
_g!I f
.y�� e S
a
r�
u
_B
DAVIS Mf SIP
SSIS PI COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 727, Rng. 23
Dt-go, AIN
N
5€$
_ $�
^ m
OUYlfY 811E DEBIO`�, LLC
�^
A6WWf/ NAT �
I8
evos
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 121. Rng. 23
Otsego. MN
Sf $
= �$Y .
� Y� �
n 50
em<_
. Jqt r �'=lL• r
s/s4�
W�lITV44I-fE Ol810_µLLC
aeo® m
Y V ,."—�"
vimrwe M.
I
rt
�yt�.�gLLJLLLLL�- (n
rn
m
- ON
2
_v
a
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 12'., Rng. 23
Otsego, VN
f $ __
OLA� WE
Ivo,
8
$
=
A
DAMS MISSISSIPPI COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 121. Rng. 23
Ot-g.. MN
aF s=3
iii €'
83
n
µ
n, �
M!mD NMi dm
eoo° _
,gpp�ell MYI[ �Dllee merw�
_
WALRY ARE DtlIDw. LLC
=
Y V 'ti
muauwnr ntt wx SR
nmsw cwrroLAN
m
x
m
le
_
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 121, Rng, 23
Obego, MN
I 3 s
Cg _
8 � g' �
2 >f
��aTup'urtt�ertEo®aN,ue
//�I ���
1a.®n m
�_ mac_
raQM[u !oY[ �Glat mll[
e®®n
NmwMvf�y nw
§
|--
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVE
a ||
®- -*
m. _ .
MN
` ~
| \!
e t 9
•
-�
�® !# ;
1 _ ^�
MISSISSIPPf 39, LLC
rot
WN ��`�I/• ' ���..
Ins
ii IN,� �IVA ►;!f �� ,;�� ;,
ns
Il ie � �� i
illsslSslA'el
66Ncw26XIl: 6uv,Xn6R - gfi1.20 M.c.v 6. 192q)
PLANTING NOTES:
cmvm�p -a� oda. -. rap piormW or pl�penl mel«b. mr wm.nr.�
papn Ua o Na L -ai ,Ncnitaoll Nan ec
<lmtFq. Raw�mn.nl Plm am aleN p.a new a m.�a1;e, q nm,.
ommandy uDm pbntbgi
•N wml. le ea n«Imm�-qo,n and MNy
%pnN Id pa In.1pX.d pa Par almd.d dAN P.I.q p tka..
u. mFiawn 12" loan P..t., .oN m paaa ma " m —.
upvmep .nal wXr iu dr nugba Prep io Falaplbp a pmN.
SIlpN or ban wlana: rapoplbn a m1 pmr6 arta ma y.p.
16q pl amaetn-ppRad 6aaa-realm vp ab eellpn. Ranow Dy p%p 1.
a— lap al Wdap m 66 molmbla: nmow 1.1 m 1.1- pmt.: Wit and
Yppl awvl P.ol pal..
%6n. psb oa n«..wr - vm atmdmd npamr —I—
app ala s..lPm.bi. rp maFlmm.. mlm o< D =. a 1n. ,« r . wnm
mm. t X na.aa e D r nY
«aoa 1.
m miw m m.. m r a-.
m n p< .oddad �daaa olM1mwae ndad. Sod .ndl pv w.lne n po.,
bnIF9dNWa m Wup. pial new (1 0: mF.) ,aM emrly rmrlc,
e. p: n waR I.p.daau .m wn �ada��`mmnmaa pea.) pw.a pay ,agFq. m. vdgFq anm
5-d— npd— I— C d.. Nal pa Prodded pound d FalaWd Iraaa.
DEVELOPER:
MISSISSIPPI 39, LLC
de66 NoM n. xo.
m
P wd��Wal SSaa>
j N
z
BRODSHO CONSULTING���;''�
696 NOR RWM CWRT
F11:N1, MN 55123
1W L 651-666- W
PAX: 651-16526
REG.
I IIE
ppt
SHEET INDEX
L rr�rur aomaaw
tL
q
q
s) um-w.np .lw
tl
�I �I
f6F nR
1
tl
b
mr6r
w�
m
ry _
w ran,
° EXHIBIT F-
__.. I
z
AV
kRk�
3
RF n
;6V
X6
CChE:1.,s.e..... N
m
S� 1
F E
.MMI m
M 1111g11
ttb $ x
a€
le
aK w/1•
.�S w+ °""
s�,u uw
DIIIS MISSISS1111 COVE
Sect. 18, Twp. 121. Rng. 23
Otsego. MN
¢ F w�
ff ` $ '� N
2 i g5
Ha
er sD
T
� n
5M OEDGM. MC
Review No. 2
Hakanson
Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
ENGINEERING REVIEW
Commercial and
Residential Subdivision
for the City of Otsego
by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
cc: Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Scott Dahlke, Quality Site. Design, LLC
Mike Leuer, Mississippi 39, LLC
Reviewed by: Ronald J. Wagner, P.E.
Shane M. Nelson, P.E.
Brent M. Larson
Date: April 13, 2006
Proposed
Development: Davis Mississippi Cove
Street Location A portion of the NW %4 of Section 17 and NE V4 of Section 18,
of Property: T121N, R23W, north of C.S.A.H. No. 39.
Applicant: Michael Leuer
Mississippi 39, LLC
3600 Holly Lane No. Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55447
(763)550-1961
Developer:
Owners of Record:
Mississippi 39, LLC
Mississippi 39, LLC
Purpose: Davis Mississippi Cove is a proposed 45 lot single-family Open Space
residential development on 141+ acres in the City of Otsego, Wright
County, Minnesota. The proposed development will be served with
municipal water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and public streets typical of
an urban setting.
Jurisdictional Agencies: City of Otsego, Wright County, Minnesota Department of Natural
(but not limited to): Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Wright Soil and Water
Conservation District.
Permits Required:
(but not limited to): NPDES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
SUBDIVISION CONFIGURATION, LOT SIZE, DENSITY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
WATER SYSTEM
STORM SEWER SYSTEM
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
STREETS
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
WETLANDS
ENVIRONMENTAL
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Preliminary Site Plan for Davis Mississippi Cove, 3/14/06, by Quality Site Design, LLC
Preliminary Plat for Davis Mississippi Cove, 3/14/06, by Quality Site Design, LLC
Existing Conditions for Davis Mississippi Cove, 3/14/06, by Quality Site Design, LLC
Preliminary Grading Plan for Davis Mississippi Cove, 3/14/06, by Quality Site Design, LLC
Preliminary Street and Storm Sewer Plans for Davis Mississippi Cove, 3/14/06, by Quality Site Design,
LLC
Drainage Analysis, dated 5/06/04, by Quality Site Design, LLC.
City of Otsego Engineering Manual
Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 — EAW Requirement
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, 10/14/02
National Wetland Inventory Map, 1991
SUBDIVISION CONFIGURATION, LOT SIZE, DENSITY
1. The gross density of this development is slightly greater than 12 units per 40 acres. (45 units on
141 acres) Developments within the R -C District shall be limited to a gross density of 4 units
per 40 acres, except where the City Council may allow an increase in density, up to as much as
12 units per 40 acres. (20-60-6)
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Existing zoning for land abutting the subdivision shall be shown. (21-6-2.B.2)
2. Location, right-of-way width and names of existing or platted streets, and all streets within the
plan, to a distance of 150' beyond the plat shall be labeled. (21-6-2.B.4)
3. Label the type and width of all roads within 150' of the plat. (21-6-2.B.5)
4. Identify by name and ownership all unsubdivided or subdivided land within 150' of the plat.
(21-6-2.B.6)
5. Label the existing 100 -year High Water Level (100 -yr HWL) and Normal Water Level (NWL)
of the wetlands, creeks, and Mississippi River in and adjacent to the plat. (21-6-2.B.9)
6. The size, type, and inverts of all culverts within 150' of the plat shall be labeled.
7. Boundary lines to include bearings, distances, and curve data shall be clearly indicated.
8. A legend is needed.
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
1. Access to the development is being provided at 3 points along C.S.A.H. 39. Spacing of the 3
roads along C.S.A.H. 39 appears to meet the minimum of '/o mile spacing required by Wright
County.
2. All existing driveways and field entrances off of C.S.A.H 39, within Davis Mississippi Cove
plat, shall be removed.
3. An access permit will be required for the connections to C.S.A.H. 39. The county may require
an additional bypass/turn lane at the eastern road entrance.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
1. vynbht County requires '75' of rigi_t_or-`.':ray, from the centerline, all onb C.S.A. H. 39.
2. A 20' wide drainage and utility easement centered over the pipe is required over the storm sewer
between Lots 14 & 15 and 5 & 6, Block 1.
3. A drainage and utility easement is required for Lots 20 & 21, Block 1 to cover the ponding water
in the rear of these lots up to the E.O.F.
4. Outlots shall be covered by drainage and utility easements.
5. Depict the pond, creek, and wetland boundaries (100 -yr HWL) on the plat. Lots adjacent to the
ponds, creeks, and wetlands shall have drainage and utility easements to cover the 100 -yr HWL.
6. The R.O.W. shall be rounded by a 10' radius at all intersections.
7. Drainage and utility easement is required to cover the E.O.F. at the north end of Pond P2. The
easement shall cover the path of the water to the storm sewer at the intersection of the driveway
and the street to the northeast.
8. The shared driveway to lots 44 and 45 shall be covered by a drainage and utility easement.
9. The boundary lines shall include bearings, distances, and curve data.
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
The delineated edges of the wetlands shall be depicted and the NWL and 100 -yr HWL shall be
called out.
2. Label the Mississippi River's and the creek's NWL and 100 -yr HWL.
3. A legend for the different line types is needed.
4. Streets shall be named according to the Wright County street naming grid system.
5. The City requires that the existing road providing access to C.S.A.H. 39 on the east side of the
development be overlaid with the proposed development.
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
1. This development is being served with individual septic systems. The soil borings results shall
be submitted with verification from the geotechnical engineer that the depicted sites are suitable
for placement of the septic systems.
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
1. Each lot is to be served by an individual well.
STORM SEWER SYSTEM
1. The NWL, 2 -Year, 10 -Year, and 100 -Year HWL shall be shown for all ponds, wetlands, creeks,
and rivers.
2. HDPE pipe shall have a minimum of 3' of cover. HDPE is not allowed under traffic areas.
STREETS
1. The City requires that the existing road providing access to C.S.A.H. 39 on the east side of the
development be overlaid with the proposed development.
2. Streets shall be named in accordance to the Wright County grid naming system.
3. The typical sections shall be based on a geotechnical engineer's recommened R -value.
4. Turn lanes along C.S.A.H. 39 are subject to Wright County approval.
DETAILS
1. No comments.
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
1. The NWL, 2 -Year, 10 -Year, and 100 -Year HWL shall be labeled for the Mississippi River,
creeks, and wetlands.
2. Please depict all drainage and utility easements.
3. Ponds P 1 and P2 do not agree with the pond detail.
4. Provided a minimum of 2% grade over land where possible.
5. A minimum of 1.5' of freeboard is required from the E.O.F. from the lowest opening. Please
revise of 4, Block 1.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
1. A revised Drainage Analysis report shall be submitted for review.
WETLANDS
1. Delineated edges of the wetlands shall be depicted on the plans. A wetland delineation report
shall be submitted for review.
ENVIRONMENTAL
1. A statement certifying the environmental condition of the site is required. (21-6-2.B.10)
OT; EJ."M l.0 � IDER X11 j 01 •�
1. Geotechnical data shall be submitted for review. Also, the geotechnical report shall include
pavement recommendations (Section 21-6-2.B.11).
2. The soil borings results shall be submitted with verification from the geotechnical engineer that
the depicted sites are suitable for placement of the septic systems.
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
We cannot recommend approval at this time due to a incomplete submittal.
ITEM 3.4
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
FIV4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, Mid 55422
Telephone. 763.231.2555 Facsimile. 763.231.2561 plan nersI_cynacplanning. com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
DATE: 12 April 2006
RE: Otsego — Boulder Creek
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 06.02
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission tabled action on the above referenced development
application at their meeting on 3 April 2006 to allow the developer to revise the
submitted plans to address issues related to the design of the preliminary plat.
Following the Planning Commission meeting, City staff forwarded the developer a letter
extending the statutory review period to 30 June 2006 to ensure that adequate time is
available to resolve the issues identified with this project.
City staff and the developer met on 10 April 2006 and discussed the recommended
conditions for approval of the project outlined in the Planning Report dated 29 March
2006. The developer has not made revisions to the submitted plans and intends to
submit instead a response to City staffs comments for further discussion at the Planning
Commission meeting on 17 April 2006. As no revisions have been made to the
submitted plans, please reference the exhibits attached to the Planning Report of 29
March 2006.
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Plan guides the subject site for a mix of
low to medium density and medium to high density residential uses that could result in
as many as 1,731 dwelling units being developed within the subject site. The Future
Land Use Plan is not an entitlement to development, however. The Comprehensive
Plan states that in order to provide for proper growth management, provision of
adequate services and prevent on over -allocation of any one type of land use, an
interim land use allowing only A-1 District zoning and development densities is to be
maintained as base entitlements for undeveloped properties.
A decision to approve a rezoning of a undeveloped site to allow those uses guided by
the Future Land Use plan and thus entitlements to development are to be evaluated
based upon the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and conformance with applicable
development regulations established by the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance
and Engineering Manual. Even if processed as with a PUD, a proposed development
plan must be consistent with at least the intent, if not the letter, of the City's
development policies and regulations. The comments and conditions raised by City
staff in response to the proposed development plans for Boulder Creek are intended to
maintain consistency with the City's established development policies and regulations
and equal treatment of similar projects approved under similar circumstances.
These policies are significant as to the proposed balance of townhomes within this
project and the sewer districts overall. The City's stated goal is that 70 percent of the
total housing in the City is to be single family homes. Further, development in the sewer
districts is also to be oriented primarily to single family homes. The current balance of
housing preliminary platted within the sewer districts is 53 percent single family and 47
percent townhouse or multiple family dwellings. The proposed housing mix within
Boulder Creek is 322 (48 percent) single family lots to 348 (52 percent) townhouse
units. The proposed housing mix shifts the balance of housing overall within the sewer
districts slightly to 52 percent single family and 47 percent townhouses or multiple family
uses. We provide this information not to take issue with the proposed housing within
Boulder Creek, but to head -off any suggestion that compliance with the City's
established development policy regulations would justify increasing townhomes as a
percentage of the housing developed on the subject site.
School District Boundaries (Condition #4). The subject site is divided between the
Elk River and St. Michael -Albertville School Districts along a line from the southeast
corner of Pheasant Ridge south to CSAH 37 with school district boundaries going
through single family lots, townhouse unit lots and townhouse base lots. Section 21-7-
4.M prohibits division of a single lot by a school district boundary. Wright County has
stated that they object to the plat being approved having lots in two school districts and
we concur with their position. The preliminary plat must be revised such that single
family lot lines follow the school district boundary, townhouse buildings are located so
as not to overlay the school district boundaries and townhouse base lots are divided into
separate outlots at the school district boundary.
CSAH 37 Right-of-Way/65 Foot Setback (Condition #5). The applicant has not
submitted a revised preliminary plat to provide for 75 feet of right-of-way for the north
half of CSAH 37 as required by Wright County. Likewise, the site plan has not been
revised to provide the 65 foot setback from the minor arterial roadway as required by
JCI:UUI I LV-VO-V.D. I of 11h e LUI IIr, g vl un in an wC. R.au icr, a is appncan. iS caSkiiig a c
Planning Commission to consider a 25 foot reduction in the required setback based on
the reasons outlined in their response to staff comments. We do not agree that the
requested flexibility is appropriate under the proposed PUD -CUP for the following
reasons:
1. Right-of-way needs for CSAH 37 are determined by Wright County and are
required based on the Northeast Wright County Transportation Plan adopted in
2004 and is beyond the control of the City.
2. The intent of the 65 foot setback required by the Zoning Ordinance along arterial
and major collector streets is to provide for maximum physical separation and
area for vegetative buffering to minimize traffic impacts. The change in
topography along the existing CSAH 37 corridor should be considered positive in
addition to, not in lieu of the 65 foot setback.
3. The ultimate design of CSAH 37 will likely be a four lane roadway with space for
dedicated left and right turn lanes along the corridor. Projected traffic volumes
can be estimated to be 30,000 vehicles per day creating a need to create
maximum separation and buffering of adjacent residential uses.
4. The topography changes between the proposed floor elevations of the
townhomes along CSAH 37 and the existing roadway are directly related to the
proposed grading plan which raises the elevation of the site along CSAH 37 to
accommodate the proposed slab on grade dwellings.
5. Proposed retaining walls along CSAH 37 to achieve the proposed floor
elevations of the adjacent dwelling units must be removed from the right-of-way
and outlots to be deeded to the City.
6. The elevation changes between the edge of the proposed CSAH 37 right-of-way
and the proposed floor elevations are only two feet to 13 feet above the north
edge of the CSAH 37 right-of-way line making a blanket relief of the setback
inconsistent with the reasons offered by the developer to justify the reduced
setback.
7. Vegetation proposed along CSAH 37 is already required by Section 20-16-7.D of
the Zoning Ordinance and does not exceed City requirements.
8. As future CSAH 37 has not yet been designed, assumptions about the final
grade of the roadway cannot be made at this time.
9. The 150 foot wide right-of-way requirements for CSAH 37 apply from Queens
Avenue east of TH 101 west to 1-94. Likewise the 65 foot setback applies over
the entire corridor. Granting flexibility for Boulder Creek establishes precedence
for reducing the setback in other locations.
10. Duerr Creek, Martin Farms, Zimmer Farms and Remington Coves have all
complied with the right-of-way requirements and 65 foot setback along the CSAH
37 corridor.
11. Stonegate Estates, Prairie Creek, The Pointe, and Wildflower Meadow have also
complied with the 65 foot setback requirement along a minor arterial roadway,
although the right-of-way requirement was less for these projects based on date
of approval or specific site location.
12. Prairie Creek, Pheasant Ridge, Crimson Ponds, Crimson Ponds West, Martin
Farms and Arbor Creek all provided a 65 foot setback along major collector
streets with anticipated lower traffic volumes.
13. The status of the exception parcels along CSAH 37 that were subdivided from
al..... a site a relevant ♦o i4.c � application. Each f +has.- parcels
LIIC subject SIIC IJ IIVI IGIGVAIIL W IIID present appii�+auvl I. �ai.ii vi uicoc Nui�.cio
is an existing developed lot zoned A-1 District and entitled only to the uses
allowed by that Zoning District. Any potential impact to the status of these
properties as it relates to expansion of CSAH 37 is for Wright County to address.
The preliminary plat must be revised to provide for the 75 feet of right-of-way for CSAH
37 and a 65 foot setback for dwellings adjacent to the roadway.
Street F (Condition #6). City staff has requested that Street F, which currently dead -
ends in a cul-de-sac be extended through to the west property line. A cul-de-sac at this
location is not justified under Section 21-7-6.A of the Subdivision Ordinance as a
through street is physically feasible. Further, extension of the street is necessary to
allow for future development of adjacent unsubdivided parcels as required by Section
21-7-5.E of the Subdivision Ordinance and minimize unnecessary streets.
Westerly Exception Access (Conditions #7 and #10). City staff requested that a
public street with 50 foot right-of-way be provided from the intersection of Street A and
Street O to the west line of the westerly most exception parcel. The developer has not
revised the preliminary plat stating that grades in this area make this (and connection of
DRWY 17 and DRWY-18) not feasible. Upon further review of the grading plan, it is the
proposed grades that do not make the connection possible. Section 21-7-5.0 of the
Subdivision Ordinance states that a developer cannot create undue hardship for the
future development of adjacent undeveloped parcels, which the proposed grading plan
clearly does. The preliminary plat and grading plan must be revised to provide for the
public street from Street A and Street O to the west line of the westerly exception
parcel.
Street G (Condition #8). City staff has requested a street extension from Street G to
the west plat line to provide inter -neighborhood access and circulation for adjacent
undeveloped parcels as required by 21-7-5.E of the Subdivision Ordinance. The
developer has agreed to provide this street. The preliminary plat must be revised to
provide a public street from Street G to the west plat line not less than 50 feet from the
south edge of Lefebvre Creek, subject to approval of the City Engineer.
DRWY-3 (Condition #9). City staff recommended that DRWY-3 be revised to a 28 foot
wide section based on eight units accessing directly to the driveway and six more units
utilizing it for indirect access to Driveways 10 and 11. The City's policy has been that
private drives providing access to more than four dwelling units be 28 feet wide. The
City did provide an exception to this for the Wildflower Meadow preliminary plat allowing
dead-end private drives between back-to-back townhome buildings to be 22 feet wide.
The developer's response to the City staff comment is that DRWY-3 is not a primary
through route, which is provided by DRWY-2 in this area. Given the number of dwelling
units accessed directly or indirectly by DRWY-3, City staff stands by its
recommendation for a 28 foot wide driveway design.
DRWYs 24 and 26 (Condition #11). City staff has recommended that DRWY's 24 and
26 be extended to intersect Street D to eliminate long dead-end sections of the private
driveway. The developer responds that not connecting DRWY's 24 and 26 to Street D
minimizes poleriLial lllrough traffic. City staff ack—nowiedges that there are three other
instances where the private driveways for the Hans Hagen units dead end. However,
intersection spacing requirements are at least partially the reason for these designs. In
that there is only one access to Units 206-255 (50 units), City staff stands by our
recommendation that DRWY's 24 and 26 be extended to intersect Street D.
Streets D and Q (Condition #12). City staff has recommended that Streets D and Q
be revised based on the section having a 26 foot drive aisle and 9 foot parking bay on
one side. The developer has not revised the preliminary plat to comply stating that they
believe the site plan as presented meets City requirements. The reason for this change
is to account for the loss of 284 potential guest parking stalls at the Hans Hagen
townhomes which because of their site design do not have a driveway apron typical of
most townhome site designs. The driveway apron provides space for two off-street
parking stalls in addition to the two stalls required in a garage and the one-half stall of
guest parking. Without providing the bump -out on -street stalls on Streets D and Q, the
site plan creates unnecessary risk for congestion in the public streets.
Streets J and S. City staff had previously recommended that Streets J and S be
revised to meet the 250 foot centerline radius requirement of Section 21-7-7.G of the
Subdivision Ordinance. Upon further review, the City Engineer is satisfied that the
design of Streets J and S are based upon existing physical conditions and the design of
the streets is acceptable.
Single Family Setbacks (Condition #14). The preliminary plat illustrates proposed
front yard setbacks to local streets less than required by the R-5 District. The City has
allowed such reductions in the past based on unique site designs (Pheasant Ridge and
Remington Coves) or superior housing design. City staff is supportive of the reduced
setbacks for the proposed alley accessed lots given their unique configuration. City
staff has requested typical house plans to be developed within the proposed preliminary
plat to justify the proposed reduction consistent with past City actions. This information
has not been provided. The 35 foot front yard setback (also applied to the side yard of
a corner lot abutting a public street) is an established community standard and a
characteristic of existing neighborhoods. Deviation from this standard without
appropriate justification would compromise the intent of the provision and undermine its
consistent application.
Townhouse Setbacks (Condition #15). The developer has suggested providing a 23
foot setback from a private drive by reducing the design width of the 24 and 28 foot wide
private drives two feet. The City agreed to allowing 22 foot wide private drives for
Wildflower Meadows for the dead-end stubs between buildings. City staff would support
a similar design here. The 28 foot section is required on more significant circulation and
access routes and we do not support the requested two foot reduction. Any revisions to
the private drives must be subject to further review by City staff.
Revised Townhouse Building Plans (Condition #16). The developer showed
illustrations of revised exteriors for the Sharper and Novak -Fleck townhomes at the
Planning Commission meeting on 3 April 2006. The developer has not followed through
with City staff's request for building plan elevations to be submitted to determine if the
changes meet the intent of our initial comments. These plans must still be submitted.
The developer also does not agree with City staff's comment that a patio area should be
provided for as part of the site plan for the Sharper and Novak -Fleck townhomes. Given
the pedestrian oriented amenities of the project, the opportunity for outdoor recreation
by residents would seem to be a logical request given that there is adequate space on
the site plan in most areas. We would suggest that the patio at least be made a buyer's
option.
Grading Plan (Condition #20). The City Engineer remains concerned about the
proposed grade change at the temporary dead -ends of Streets L and N. The proposed
grades are approximately five to 10 feet higher than that of the adjacent undeveloped
parcel to accommodate walkout building plans. Without the consent of the adjacent
property owner to match these proposed grades when their property develops, the
grading plan must be revised to better tie into the existing grades of the adjacent
property so as not to cause a hardship for that property in developing in accordance
with Section 21-7-5.0 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
Phasing Plan (Condition #23). At our meeting on 10 April 2006, the developer
indicated that a phasing plan outlining development of 130 to 140 dwelling units per
year had been prepared. The phasing plan has not been submitted however. City staff
would recommend a condition stating not more than 140 dwelling units shall be final
platted each calendar year unless approved by the City Council. If less than 140
dwelling units are final platted in any given year, those dwelling units would be allowed
to be rolled ahead to future years. This approach should provide the City sufficient
confidence in the staging of the project while allowing the builders flexibility to match
product to current market conditions.
CSAH 37 / Quaday Avenue (New Condition #24). Wright County responded to the
project EAW that the proposed development would cause the need for a traffic signal to
be constructed at Quaday Avenue and CSAH 37. As this is a capital expense the City
has not planned for and is directly related to traffic generated by the project, the cost of
this signal will be the developer's responsibility. The City may agree as part of the
development contract to obtain funds from other benefiting properties at such time as
they develop to partially refund the cost of the improvement. This issue is subject to
further review by the City Engineer.
RECOMMENDATION
The developer has submitted responses to the comments and recommended changes
to the preliminary plat offered by City staff. From our meeting with the developer on 10
April 2006 and further review of their comments, we disagree with both the basis and
conclusions of the responses. We continue to recommend significant and numerous
modifications to the preliminary plat prior to Planning Commission action and thus
suggest tabling the requests again. Although it is preferred that the City always act in
the affirmative with regards to development requests even with many conditions, if the
developer indicates a continued unwillingness to revise the preliminary plat as set forth
by City staff, findings for denial have been provided. If the Planning Commission
moves to deny the requested Zoning Map amendments, no action is required on the
preliminary plat.
0
POSSIBLE /ACTIONS
Decision 1 - Zoning Map Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the subject site from A-1
District to R-6 District and R-7 District based on a finding that the action is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the following provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinance:
■ The preliminary plat is premature under the Comprehensive Plan as it
inconsistent with the City's interim land use plan goals to avoid over -allocation
of any one -type of land use (townhouses) and does not meet the City's goals
for increasing single family homes as the predominate housing type available
within the sanitary sewer service districts.
■ The preliminary plat does not provide right-of-way for CSAH 37 as required by
the NEWC Transportation Plan. Until this right-of-way can be acquired, the
proposed preliminary plat is premature in accordance with Section 21-4-2.0
of the Subdivision Ordinance.
■ Wright County will require the City to provide for installation of a traffic signal
at CSAH 37 and Quaday Avenue as a result of the proposed development.
This is a capital expense not planned or budgeted for by the City making the
proposed development premature in accordance with Section 21-4-2.0 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
■ The preliminary plat does not conform to the 65 foot setback required from
minor arterial streets by Section 20-68-6.113.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
■ The preliminary plat includes single family lots, townhouse unit lots and
townhouse base lots that are divided by established school district boundaries
prohibited by Section 21-7-4.1M of the Subdivision Ordinance.
■ Street F as shown on the preliminary plat terminates in a permanent cul-de-
sac when extension of a through street to the west property line is physically
feasible and required by Section 21-7-6.A of the Subdivision Ordinance.
■ Not extending Street F to the west plat line may create a hardship for future
development of adjacent unsubdivided parcels as prohibited by Section 21-7-
5.E of the Subdivision Ordinance.
■ The preliminary plat does not provide for extension of a public street from
Street G to the west plat line to provide inter -neighborhood access and
circulation for adjacent undeveloped parcels as required by 21-7-5.E of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
■ Lots 501 to 505 and Lots 580 to 586 have double frontage to local streets
where such lots are prohibited by Section 21-7-4.N of the Subdivision
Ordinance unless it is demonstrated that double frontage iots are the only
reasonable alternative for development. The developer has not demonstrated
that the double frontage lots are the only reasonable alternative.
VA
■ The minimum lot area and width requirements shown on the preliminary plat
for single family lots are less than required by Section 20-66-6.A of the Zoning
Ordinance for the R-5 District.
■ The front yard and side yard setbacks abutting a street of a corner lot for the
proposed single family lots shown on the preliminary plat are less than
required by Section 20-66-6.0 of the Zoning Ordinance for the R-5 District.
■ The front yard setback for townhouse units shown on the preliminary plat is
less than that required by Sections 20-67-6.B.1 and 20-68-6.B.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance for the R-6 District and R-7 Districts respectively.
■ The preliminary plat does not provide public street access to PID 118-500-
273405 as required by Section 21-7-5.0 of the Subdivision Ordinance
because of the elevation changes to existing grades proposed by the
developer's grading plan.
■ The submitted grading plan does not provide for a property transition to
adjacent undeveloped parcels at Streets L and N as required by Section 21-7-
5.0 of the Subdivision Ordinance as the proposed grade elevations are
significantly higher than the existing grades on the adjacent property to
accommodate proposed walk -out home designs.
■ The preliminary plat does not address the need for additional dedicated on -
street parking along Streets D and Q due to the lack of garage apron parking
for the Hans Hagen Townhome units that would cause increased congestion
in the public street.
C. Motion to table.
Decision 2 — PUD-CUP/Preliminary Plat
A. Motion to approve a PUD-CUP/Preliminary Plat for Boulder Creek, subject to the
following conditions:
Approval of the preliminary plat shall not guarantee access to sanitary
sewer service. The City shall only allocate sanitary sewer capacity to
approved final plats with signed development contracts and payment of
applicable SAC and WAC fees to assure the City of timely development.
2. A phasing plan shall be submitted prior to approval of the preliminary plat by
the City Council outlining the anticipated final platting of the proposed
subdivision. The phasing plan is subject to approval of the City Council, its
schedule shall be made a condition of preliminary plat approval and it shall
be incorporated as part of the terms and conditions of a development
contract executed for the initial final plat of a phased development.
3. rinai plats shall designate sequentially numbered WW within separately
designated blocks with townhouse base lots designated as outlots overlaid
by drainage and utility easements.
4. The preliminary plat must be revised such that single family lot lines follow
the boundary between ISD 728 and ISD 885, townhouse buildings are
located so as not to overlay the school district boundary and townhouse
base lots are divided into separate outlots at the school district boundary.
5. The preliminary plat shall be revised to dedicated 75 feet of right-of-way
for the north half of CSAH 37 and abutting structures shall be setback a
minimum of 65 feet.
6. Street F shall be extended to the west plat line to parallel the south peak
of the steep slope running west of the subject site, subject to approval of
City staff.
7. The preliminary plat is revised to extend a public street with a 50 foot wide
right-of-way from the intersection of Streets A and O to the west or north
line of the most westerly exception parcel fronting CSAH 37.
8. The preliminary plat must be revised to provide for extension of public
right-of-way and street to from Street G to the west plat line at Lot 536,
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
9. The site plan shall be revised to utilize the 28 foot wide driveway DRWY-3.
10. The site plan at the southwest corner of the preliminary plat must be
revised to extend the north stub of DRWY-18 to provide a second outlet to
both DRWY-18 and DRWY-17.
11. The site plan must be revised to extend DRWY's 24 and 26 to intersect
Street D.
12. The preliminary plat is revised such that Street D and Street Q utilize
public street section with a parking bay on the north and east sides of
these roadways, respectively, subject to approval of the City Engineer.
13. All single family lots shall conform to the lot area and width requirements
standard requirements of the R-5 District except:
a. Lots 396-430 and 696-723 shall be exempt from the lot area and
width requirements of the R-5 District.
b. Lots 508-532 and 537-579 shall be exempt from the lot area
requirements of the R-5 District.
14. All JII IgIG fai idly IULO Sl]aii be Sub)cCI. to the fviiovving SiwuckS:
0
15. All townhouse buildings shall conform following setbacks:
CSAH 37
Setbacks
Lot
78 St./ ! Front Side Rear
Type
25ft.
CSAH 37 Interior Corner
Alley Lot
65ft. 25ft. 7ft. 25ft. 25ft.
Other lot
65ft. 30ft. 7ft. 30ft. 20ft.
a. A 35' front yard setback shall be required where a front accessed
attached garage projects closer to the front lot than the front building
line of the dwelling unit.
b. Except for yards abutting 70th or 78" Streets, the same setback
as required for a front yard shall apply to a side yard abutting a
street of a corner lot or the rear yard of a double frontage lot.
15. All townhouse buildings shall conform following setbacks:
CSAH 37
Other Street
Between
Bldgs.
Private
Drives
65ft.
25ft.
20ft.
23ft.
16. The Sharper and Novak -Fleck building plans shall be revised consistent
with the comments of City staff and an outdoor patio provided for each unit
adjacent to the front entrance, subject to review and approval of the
Planning Commission.
17. The landscape plan is revised to address the following comments of City
staff, subject to review and approval of the Planning Commission:
a. All plantings installed within public rights-of-way shall be maintained
by the abutting property or a homeowners association.
b. Boulevard trees are to be provided along all local streets at not
more than 40 feet on center, including side lot lines of corner lots
and townhouse base lots abutting public streets.
C. Along streets where on -street parking bays are provided, boulevard
trees shall be continued at not more than 40 feet on center, but the
tree shall be installed in the front yard behind the sidewalk.
d. Additional plantings shall be added to the southeast of Units 108 to
126 to provide the required buffer from CSAH 37 (realizing the
existing grade change).
e. Additional site plantings must be added to the open spaces
between the quad -townhouse units at the northwest corner of the
plat and along the north plat line to the north of units 611/612,
Q1G/CJ1G R1/6:I C')'2/CZ-)A
V 1 w// 1 V, V 1 Jo / VLV7n n GI IV VLV VLT.
The foundation plans for Rowhomes A and B do not provide
sufficient quantities of plantings, particularly at the corners and
ends of the building. Greater variety in the shape of the foundation
planting beds should also be encouraged.
g. The landscape plan does not specify the plans for the area
between adjacent townhouse driveways. Rock cannot be located
in these areas as it is drawn out into the private driveway or street
during snow removal.
h. A buffer yard planting shall be established at the rear of Lots 501 to
505 and Lots 575 to 581, subject to City staff approval.
18. Park and trail dedication shall be satisfied by dedication to the City of
Outlots D, E, F, and G with the only the net area of these parcels credited
towards the required land dedication. Any unment portion of the required
land dedication shall be satisfied as a proportional cash fee in lieu of land,
minus any credits due for construction of trails or other improvements,
paid at final plat approval for each phase based on the current fee in effect
at that time. The developer shall identify the net area of the land proposed
to be dedicated to the City and provide a cost estimate for improvements
to be installed or constructed within the parcels to be dedicated.
19. Outlots A, B and C shall be dedicated to the City for stormwater area
charge credits as approved by the City Council.
20. The grading plan and all erosion control issues shall be subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer.
21. All utility plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
22. All drainage and utility easements are subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
23. All existing structures within the subject site that shall become non-
conforming upon approval of a final plat or that are platted within an outlot
intended for a future phase of development shall be demolished or
otherwise removed within six months of approval of the initial final plat.
24. The developer shall escrow funds for construction of a traffic signal at
CSAH 37 and Quaday Avenue as required by Wright County in relation to
the project. The City may partially reimburse the developer for the costs
of the improvements if additional funds can be obtained from other
i indevelnneri hanafiting nrnnartiec at the time of nreliminary plat approval.
11
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and
Engineering Manual.
C. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Wayne Fingleson, Wright County Engineer
John Jackels, 37 Inc.
12
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Judy Hudson
City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
City of Otsego
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Otsego, Minnesota 55330
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55106
651.772.7900
April 12, 2006
RE: Boulder Creek Residential Development Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Ms. Hudson:
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the EAW prepared for the proposed
Boulder Creek residential development project in the City of Otsego. We offer the following
comments for your consideration.
Description (Item No. 6d)
This item states that Boulder Creek Development has no plans for additional phases of this project.
We note, however, that the wetland delineations for this project included parcels immediately to the
south and east of the parcel. Additionally, the plat book shows ownership by the same company. Item
No. 29, Cumulative Impacts, states, "It is reasonable to expect that surrounding properties will be
developed for residential use in the future." We recommend that the project proposer clarify their
plans for those parcels and consider how their development may affect common resources. For
example, there may be better wetland replacement opportunities on the parcel to the south.
Cover Types (Item No. 10)
The table in Item No. 10 shows the conversion of 11.2 acres of wooded/forest cover. Depending on
the condition of this wood, the project proposer may elect to market it A& sawlog, landscaping material,
firewood, or bio -fuel for the production of energy. We strongly recommend that the City contact Jean
Mouelle, Regional Forest Utilization and Marketing Specialist (651772-7567), for advice on this
subject.
Additionally, the removal of this amount of forest during the migratory bird nesting season may result
at a' L ,7 T.
.� l :�»... �...... 1..:...7 j-11- -f ....s and lTR may be
in -1 ie destnictlon of active ulru nests. . akd gS LS rn.b. aLw L't..tJ, 1:.. :b s a: ebbs, i:i' j vv
subject to provisions of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Acct. The bird nesting season typically
extends from mid-April through mid-August, with a peak from mid-May through mid-July. We
recommend that site clearing occur either before or after the bird nesting season.
An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 1-800-657-3929
Boulder Creek EAW
April 12, 2006
Page 2
Fish. Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources (Item No. 11
According to part A of this item, the project proposer intends to avoid impacts to wetlands and wooded
4reas to the extent possible. Part B indicates that potential impacts to loggerhead shrikes will be
minimized by preserving grassy open areas with scattered trees and shrubs. Item No. 10, however,
shows the loss of 127.2 acres (83%) of wooded, grassy and brushy habitat. It also shows plans to
preserve 16.6% of the total parcel acreage as open space in the form of wetlands, ponds, creeks, forests
and brush and grasslands. Rather than retaining more area in open space, we recommend that open
grassy areas, including stormwater pond and creek buffers and especially undeveloped areas near
Quaday Avenue be enhanced to restore additional shrike habitat. This can be accomplished by
planting native tallgrass prairie grasses and adding scattered plantings of red cedars, wild plums and
flowering crab trees.
Vehicle -Related Air Emissions (Item No. 22)
This item has not been adequately addressed. According to Item No. 21, the project will include the
addition of 1,318 new parking spaces. The federal guidelines referred to in the response are not
relevant. The directions to Item No. 22 state that if the project involves 500 or more parking spaces,
the RGU should consult the EAW Guidelines to see how to proceed.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and the EAW. We look forward to receiving your
record of decision at the conclusion of environmental review. If you have any questions about these
comments, please contact staff ecologist Michael North at 218-833-8726.
CC: Wayne Barstad, Steve Colvin, Bernice Cramblit, Paul Diedrich, Gretchen Heaser, Dale Homuth,
Michael North, Pam Perry, Roger Stradal, Heather Tetrault (DNR)
Jon Larsen (EQB)
I .i-- RIIW--1 1 /illi .111-i1-- \ YyON
ERDB 20050730-0002
BoulderCreek.doc
An Equal Opportunity Employer N4'ho Values Diversity
DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 1-800-657-3929
Review No. 2
ENGINEERING REVIEW
Hakanson Residential Subdivision
Anderson for the City of Otsego
Assoc., Inc. by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
cc: Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
John Jackels, 37, Inc.
Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Pioneer Engineering
Reviewed by: Ronald J. Wagner, P.E.
Shane M. Nelson, P.E.
Benjamin S. Nelson, E.I.T.
Brent M. Larson
Date: March 29, 2006
Proposed
Development: Boulder Creek Development
Street Location A portion of the Section 27, T121, R23. 221+ acres, south of 78'h
Street, west of Odean Avenue, and north of C.S.A.H. 37.
Applicant: John Jackels
Developer: 37, Inc.
1875 Station Parkway NE
Andover, MN 55304
(763)755-6554
Owners of Record: Emmerich Development
Purpose: Boulder Creek Development is a proposed 290 single-family
residential homes and 372 multi -family units development on 221±
acres in the City of Otsego, Wright County, Minnesota. The
proposed development will be served with municipal water,
sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and public streets typical of an urban
setting.
Jurisdictional City of 0tscgo, `YTJL1 ht Cmurty, 1:L1.inesota Department of
Agencies: Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
(but not limited to) Minnesota Health Department City of Otsego, Wright County
Permits Required: NPDES, Minnesota Department of Health (water), and
(but not limited to) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (sanitary sewer)
MaMShared Docs\MunicipalWotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
SUBDIVISION CONFIGURATION, LOT SIZE, DENSITY
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
WATER SYSTEM
STORM SEWER SYSTEM
STREETS
DETAILS
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
WETLANDS
ENVIRONMENTAL
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
\1Ha01\Shared Docs\MunicipalWotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Preliminary Plat of Boulder Creek Development of Otsego, 3/24/06, by Pioneer
Engineering
Existing Condition Plan for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego, 3/24/06, by Pioneer
Engineering
Preliminary Site Grading Plan for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego, 3/24/06, by
Pioneer Engineering
Preliminary Utility Plan for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego, 3/24/06, by Pioneer
Engineering
Preliminary Storm Sewer Design Calculations, 2/21/06, by Pioneer Engineering
Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego,
February 28, 2006, by 37, Inc.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego,
February 28, 2006, by Pinnacle Engineering
Wetland Delineation Report, 9/19/03, by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company,
Inc.
Geotechnical Report for Boulder Creek Development of Otsego, 2/15/06, by STS
Consultants, LTD.
City of Otsego Engineering Manual
Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 — EAW Requirement
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, 10/14/02
National Wetland Inventory Map, 1991
MaMShared Docs\MunicipalWotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
SUBDIVISION CONFIGURATION, LOT SIZE, DENSITY
1. A 25' building setbacks along alleys, local, and collector streets is proposed. A
minimum of 35' is required.
2. Wright County requires 75' of R.O.W. along C.S.A.H.37. The minimum building
setback for lots along county roads is 65' from the R.OW. This will require
extensive reorganizing of the lots along the county road.
3. Alleys are proposed along the rear lot lines of many of the single-family lots. A
setback of 23' is proposed along the alleys. City zoning ordinance does not permit
alleys within residential areas. (21-7-8.E) City standard required minimum
setback is 35'.
�. 4. The minimum side yard setback required is 10'. (20-67-6.B)
5. The double frontage lots between Streets A & E and Streets G & H are not
allowed. The street and lot configuration for these areas shall be revised.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Provide all utility information (size, type, invert elevations, etc.) for all utilities
within 150' of the boundary line. (i.e. intersection of Quaker Avenue NE and
Quaday Avenue NE and the south & east plat lines of Pheasant Ridge 801
Addition).
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
1. Access to the plat is being provided off of C.S.A.H. 37, Quaday Avenue NE, 78th
Street NE, and 76th Street NE.
2. Streets A & B have center medians proposed. They are not per city standards and
will require city approval.
3. Alleys are proposed to serve as access to the single-family lots between Streets C
& B, and Streets A & M. Alleys are prohibited in residential areas. (21-7-8.E)
PRELIMINARY PLAT
1. Outlots A, B, and C have existing drainage and utility easements over them.
Outlots in town homes areas will require drainage and utility easements to cover
�:1'.:.. a �.-a 4 E nr4c. - alc van�ire over all ponds wetlands and
ii flitics arU SL1%, L i..cweiia%.uw cuv ua v ivy uvu , ,
creeks up to the 100 -year high water levels. Please show/label all easements.
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
2. All local streets are required to have a minimum of 60' of ROW. Street "S" is
shown with only 50' of ROW, please revise.
3. Street "S" shall be realigned to provide a minimum 250' radius for the horizontal
curves. This may require redesigning the current layout of the lots surrounding
the street to provide proper access to the exception.
4. All sidewalks and bike paths shall be covered by a permanent easement.
5. The R.O.W. along C.S.A.H. 37 is subject to county approval.
6. A 25' building setbacks along alleys, local, and collector streets is proposed. A
minimum of 35' is required.
7. Streets shall be named in accordance to the Wright County grid naming system.
8. The double frontage lots between Streets A & E and Streets G & H are not
allowed. The street and lot configuration for these areas shall be revised.
9. Depict the easements and setbacks associated with the ponds and wetlands. Please
verify that the proposed lots are not inside wetland setbacks.
10. Depict any shoreland overlay district boundaries. Lefebvre Creek shall be
covered by a 100' easement centered on the creek or an easement to the 100 -year
HWL, which ever is greater.
11. A street connection shall be made to the property to the west of Street G and south
of Lefebvre Creek. This was a requirement during the concept plan review.
12. Mitigated wetland areas need to be shown on the plat. (north half of Outlot G)
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
Sidewalk shall be extended to the cul-de-sac at the north end of Street F.
2. A temporary cul-de-sac is required at the west end of Street O.
3. A street connection to the property west of lots 534-536 shall be made. This was
a requirement during the concept plan review.
4. The sidewalk along Street G shall be switched to the opposite site of the road to
limit the number of street crossings.
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
1. All sanitary sewer pipes shall be placed at appropriate grades so as not to exceed a
flow velocity of 15 fps. It appears that drop structures will be required for the
sanitary sewer along Street `B" and Street "K'.
2. The connection to the existing sanitary sewer manhole at the intersection of Street
"B" and Quaday Avenue shall be made within 2' of the existing downstream
invert to avoid the need of drop manhole at the connection. This will require the
invert of the upstream manhole to be lowered.
3. The detail for the multi -family area (row townhome neighborhood) depicts 4'
horizontal separation between the storm sewer and sanitary sewer under the
driveways. A minimum of 10' of horizontal separation is required.
4. The sanitary sewer shall be stubbed to the west under the required street
connection to serve the property west of Street G and south of Lefebvre Creek.
5. An existing 70'-8" SDR 26 PVC stub with an invert elevation of 848.78 has been
provided out of the existing sanitary sewer manhole at the intersection of Street A
and 78a' Street. This stub shall be used to avoid the need for boring and jacking
under 78`h Street to make a connection.
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
1. Hydrant coverage is insufficient. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 300' (150'
radius) for commercial, industrial, or multi -family residential areas and 500' (250'
radius) for single family residential areas.
2. The method of connecting to the existing watermain shall be called out. A wet
tap connection shall be made if a connection is made where there is no stub
provided.
3. Additional valves are required at many watermain tee and cross locations
throughout the project.
4. The watermain serving the multi -family homes in the southwest corner of the
development shall be looped.
5. The 12" DIP watermain at the south end of Street A shall be connected to the west
property line just north of C.S.A.H1. 37.
6. The geotechnical report identifies a ground water elevation in the range of 868-
871. Plugs are required on all hydrants below the ground water elevation.
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
STORM SEWER SYSTEM
1. The NWL, 2 -Year, 10 -Year, and 100 -Year HWL shall be shown for all proposed
and existing sedimentation ponds, wetlands, and Lefebvre Creek.
2. A drainage and utility easement will be required over all the treatment ponds,
storm sewer outside of ROW, wetlands, and drainage swales.
3. The location of the low point and the catch basins along Street 33 do not agree.
STREETS
Any alleys permitted shall have a right-of-way width of at least 24'. (21-7-8.13)
2. The street intersections shall be rounded by a radius of no less than 20 feet. Radii
to arterial and collector streets shall be no less than 30 feet and 50 feet for all
streets to C.S.A.H. 37.
3. A temporary cul-de-sac is required on the west end of Street O. All temporary
cul-de-sacs shall be covered by a temporary easement. Please submit the easement
documents to be filed with the Final Plat.
4. The cul-de-sac at the end of Street F will need to have tip out curb around the
center island. A 20' wide lane is required around this center island.
5. It appears that cross gutters will be required at many of the private drive
intersections. Provide intersection details and/or spot elevations to depict the
intended direction of street runoff at the intersections. Intersections with grades
of less than 1.0% over bituminous surfaces will require cross gutters.
6. A street connection is required to the property west of Lots 534-536. This was a
requirement during the concept plan review.
7. B618 curb and gutter is required for all multi -family areas and along all single-
family lots being served by alleys.
DETAILS
Street sections have been selected based on a geotechnical engineer recommended
R -value of 50. Though all street section details agree with the City of Otsego's
typical section used for a 9 Ton residential street, it is unclear which street section
is to be used for which street. Please clarify.
2. The house grading elevation "key" detail shall call out a lowest opening elevation.
MaMShared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
3. The setbacks called out in the individual details for each type of building do not
agree with the setbacks on plans, City Standards, or the preliminary plat.
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
1. The NWL, 2 -Year, 10 -Year, and 100 -Year HWL shall be shown for all
sedimentation basins.
2. The soil borings shall be shown on the plan. (21-6-2.B.8.)
3. Some of the spot elevations depict a crown in the private streets and driveways
and others indicate a cross slope. Please clarify.
4. A minimum 1.5' of freeboard is required from all calculated 100 -year HWL's or
emergency overflows for non -calculated areas.
5. Please depict all easements and setbacks for ponds, wetlands, and Lefebvre Creek.
6. For Street L and Street N, the difference in elevation at the east end of the road
and the existing ground elevation just offsite is approximately 10'. This appears
to be strictly done for the type of building pad (walkout). Making a future
connection to Street L and Street N to require an extensive fill on the adjacent
property as well as at the eastern end lots of Street L and Street N within Boulder
Creek. Please revise to more closely match the existing offsite ground.
7. Permission from the adjacent property owner is required to extend any grading
onto the adjacent property at the north end of Street Q.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
There is a low area to the west of Lot 533 that currently has a natural overland
outlet to the creek that will be cut off by this development. An outlet for this low
area shall be provided.
2. The 100 -year HWL of the ponds and wetland along the creek shall be no less than
the 100 -year HWL of the creek.
3. The hydrology and storm sewer design is still under review.
WETLANDS
1. Wright Soil and Water Conservation District, has identified more wetland area
and requests that these wetlands be mapped.
2. Wetlands must be mitigated at 2:1.
Ma01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc
ENVIRONMENTAL
1. A statement certifying the environmental condition of the site is required. (21-6-
2.B.10)
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
No comments.
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
We cannot recommend approval at this time due to the extent of redesign that will be
necessary to meet city and county requirements.
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2281\ot2281-RVW2.doc