06-19-00 PCNORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
NINC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT -addendum
�I
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 13 June 2000
RE: Otsego - Ranch Acres; Preliminary Plat
FILE NO.: 176.02 - 00.07
BACKGROUND
At their meeting on March 20, 2000, the Planning Commission tabled consideration of the
above referenced application to allow the Cities of Dayton and Otsego to finalize
agreements regarding the provision of sanitary sewer to areas east of the subject parcel
in Dayton. Consideration of the application necessitated having these agreements in
place to ensure that sanitary sewer service would be provided to the area.
The City of Dayton has received approval of a grant for construction of their sewer facilities
and is proceeding with the project. As such, this application has been placed on the June
19, 2000 Planning Commission agenda for consideration. The purpose of this
memorandum is to outline or provide further information on issues outlined in our office's
planning report dated March 14, 2000.
Attached for Reference:
Exhibit A: Letter from Wright County dated May 22, 2000
ANALYSIS
Sanitary Sewer. The City of Dayton is proceeding with its project to provide sanitary
sewer service to areas of its City through capacity purchased from the Otsego waste water
treatment plant. The two communities must still formally approve of an agreement and
hold necessary assessment hearings for the cost of the project. Staff is confident,
however, that the project will go forward. One potential issue is a policy decision by the
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5541 6
PHONE 61 2-595-9636 FAX 61 2-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
Otsego City Council as to any required connections and assessments for existing
residents. This policy decision is not at issue with this application, as the applicant has
requested sanitary sewer service and payment of the costs to receive service will be
addressed as part of the development contract, if the subdivision is approved.
Zoning. The applicants have indicated that they want their property zoned to R-3 District
based upon the six lot subdivision that has been proposed. The lots within the proposed
subdivision all meet the minimum lot design requirements of the R-3 District. The R-3
District is currently applied to areas of the community that developed without sanitary
sewer service, when the additional lot area is necessary to ensure adequate area for on-
site sewer treatment systems. An additional reason the applicant's are requesting R-3
District zoning is the greater allowance for detached accessory building space.
It has been our office's suggestion that a previous concept plan for development of the
subject parcel with 15 lots consistent with the design standards of the R-4 District is a
preferred alternative. The preference for the R-4 District is based upon full utilization of
the land area for development and consistency with the development to the east of the
subject parcel. However, the decision as to the appropriate Zoning designation for the
subject parcel is a policy decision that must be determined by City officials.
Landfill. The applicant has provided documentation from Wright County Planning and
Zoning (Exhibit A) that the former landfill located at the southwest corner of the subject site
has been restored to the County's satisfaction. Wright County would have had regulatory
authority for the cleanup of the landfill prior to incorporation of the City of Otsego in 1991.
The letter states that there are still materials on the site, but that further clean-up efforts
may be more detrimental to the land along the Crow River than removing the debris.
Drainage. The City of Dayton Engineer has made a preliminary drainage plan for the
subject site as part of their sanitary sewer extension project. The Otsego City Engineer
will be responsible for review and approval of all necessary grading and drainage plans
for the proposed preliminary plat.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The necessary decision by the City of Dayton on whether to proceed with extension of
sanitary sewer service to the Otsego Slabtown Area and areas of Dayton has been made
and will proceed. As such it is appropriate to consider the preliminary plat application for
Ranch Acres.
As outlined in the March 14, 2000 planning report, the proposed expansion of the SSSD
to include the subject parcel satisfies the criteria in the Comprehensive Plan for such
actions. Further, the proposed low density residential use is consistent with and likely
compatible with the existing character of the area. If the Planning Commission and City
-2-
Council reach similar conclusions, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and
rezoning applications would be appropriate. Actions for the Planning Commission and City
Council to consider are outlined below. Specific direction should be given as to whether
the six lot or fifteen lot subdivision is to be approved.
Decision 1 - Comprehensive Plan
Motion to approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to expand the
Sanitary Sewer Service District to include the subject parcel and designate itfor low
density residential use based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the
following policy of the Comprehensive Plan:
Amendments to the Sanitary Sewer Service District boundary shall be
evaluated and allowed only in compliance with established City evaluation
criteria. (Policy Plan, p. 44)
2. Motion to deny amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to expand the Sanitary
Sewer Service District based upon a finding that such action is inconsistent with the
established criteria.
3. Motion to table the application. (Specific direction should be provided to the
applicant and/or staff regarding changes or additional information to be provided.)
Decision 2 - Zoning Map Amendment
Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject parcel R-4 or
R-3 District based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the policies of
the Comprehensive Plan:
Single family residential land shall be developed in a manner responsive to
determined market trends and compatible with surrounding development.
(Policy Plan, p. 45)
A balance of quality house choices throughout the City shall be maintained.
(Policy Plan, p. 46.
2. Motion to deny a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject parcel R-4 District
based upon a finding that the action is inconsistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Decision 3 - Preliminary Plat
Motion to approve the preliminary plat of Ranch Acres, subject to the following
stipulations:
-3-
a. Sanitary sewer and water service shall be acquired at the applicant's cost
and no on-site systems shall be permitted. Preliminary plat approval does
not guarantee access to sanitary sewer service. The City shall only
guarantee such service to approve final plats with signed contracts, which
assure the City of timely development.
b. Access to CSAH 36 shall be subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer and Wright County Highway Department.
C. The preliminary plat is revised to illustrate a 65 foot setback from CSAH 36.
d. All drainage and easement issues shall be subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
e. Park and trail dedication fees in lieu of land is paid at the time of final plat
approval, equivalent to $1,075 per lot.
The applicant enter into a development contract with the City and post all
required securities, subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
g. Comments of other City Staff.
2. Motion to deny the preliminary plat of Ranch Acres based upon a finding that the
application is inconsistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and that it
is premature as defined by the Subdivision Ordinance.
pc. Mike Robertson
Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andy MacArthur
Rick Gruppa
-4-
JNT Y p�
I.P.
2
= m
0
7855
May 22, 2000
Mr. Rick Grupa
19026 Zane Street NW
Elk River, MN 55330
Office of
PLANNING AND ZONING
WRIGHT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
10 second Street NW, Rm 140, Buffalo, MN 55313-1185
(763) 682-7338
Fax # (763) 682-7872
RE: Old Dump Site on PID #118-500-364400
Dear Mr. Grupa:
The old dump site on the above mentioned parcel number was cleaned up to the satisfaction of
Wright County. Some inert material remains, but to retrieve it would only cause more damage to
the river bank and would be counterproductive.
Sincerely,
Charles Davis
Environmental Health Officer
Printed on recycled paper.
Equal Opportunity / Affirmatiue Action Employer
Bonestroo
Rosene
`— Anderlik &
Associates
Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderfrk and Associates, Inc. is an Affirmative Actrbrr'Equal Opportunity Employer
Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. PE. • Joseph C. Anderlik• P.E. • Marvin L, Sorvala, RE t'1 3
,' -.t
Glenn R. Cook. P.E. • Robert G. Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon, PE.
Robert W. Rosene, RE.. Richard E. Turner. PE. and Susan M. Eberlin, C.P. ., Senior Consultants
Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford, P.E. • Keith A. Gordon. P.E. • dbei'CR. PfeffeiTe"RE - •—� •!
Richard W. Foster. P.E. • David O. Loskota, PE. • Robert C. Russek. A.L. • Mark A. Hanson, P.E.
Michael T. Rautmann. P.E. • Ted K.Field. P.E. • Kenneth P. Anderson, P.E. rs— PE :-"'"---`------
Sidney P Williamson, PE.. L.S. • Robert F Kotsmith • Agnes M. Ring • Allan Rick Schmidt. P.E.
Offices: St. Payl, Rochester, Willmar and St. Cloud. MN • Milwaukee. WI
Engineers & Architects Website: www.bonestroo.com
To: Mike Robertson - Otsego Administrator
Cc: Shirley Slater, Jason Osberg — City of Dayton
Rick Grupa
MSN, VTV - Bonestroo
From: Mark Hanson
Subject: Preliminary Flat — Ranch Acres (Rick Grupa Property)
Our File No. 174-98-053
Date: March 8, 2000
We have reviewed the preliminary plat of Ranch Acres in Otsego and offer the following comments.
Refer to the attached drawings for further detail.
A 30 -foot wide permanent drainage utility easement is required for the construction of sanitary sewer
and water main to serve the future lots along County Rd. 36. The easement would be extended from
Bates/Richardson Avenues. Its assumed the utility extensions in the easement will be owned and
maintained by Otsego. The utility extensions could be constructed by the Dayton utility project and
added by change order. The cost for the utility extensions would be the responsibility of the two lots
on Co. Rd. 36.
• The preferred alternative to convey storm water runoff from 62nd Lane/County Street in Dayton and
Otsego is south through a vegetated swale along back lot lines in Ranch Acres. To accommodate the
storm sewer pipe/sedimentation basin/vegetated swale, a 20 -30 -foot wide permanent drainage/utility
easement is required. This construction would be the responsibility of the Dayton Utility/Street
project.
• A 50' platted radius for right-of-way shall be provided in the southwest corner of 62nd
Lane/Richardson Avenue.
• Due to the sewer depth/utility construction in Richardson Avenue/62nd Lane and the staging
associated with construction, its proposed to construct a temporary gravel access road and staging
area within Ranch Acres (temporary easements will define these areas).
• Ranch Acres will be responsible for utility/street improvements similar to other properties in the
Dayton Historic Village project. Dayton City Council must confirm this proposal. Once details are
better known, an agreement between Dayton/Otsego will be prepared for all properties in Otsego to
be served by the Dayton Utility/Street project.
If you have questions, please contact me at this office (651-604-4838).
MAH/crw
EXHIBIT B
2335 West Highway 36 0 St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636-4600 ■ Fax: 651-636-1311
Preliminary Plat
i\ Of IN
Ranch Acres
_ _ Ilfll
f 2nd ane_
any sc---
1 0-! =9—�JI 4--------
r- T- l --n -- T__ �-
42 1
/
M I / ioAE
a es fCve—
ZO
Vdenotes Poposed
f` •!\\ \��. \ \\ I f - - - i �� � \• / � _ � �,���r.IV •T { I 1 Y House Location.
r
LO trSo.IA-
i o 3' II I \ \ l/// i�llil/1l (/ l\ d / 1 I , I •�^� -c.. I f yrw..._ R..n!-a/-M. c........
c.l. S& -t - W tjo•
i c.cr Sr«t- JS' a'
cvo.s«ay..s,
1111 `
tlpl �i�l lfr/1tIl/I/I/IIF li
_' I � II ( ,11111 lI1 lilt � , !" .�", � �w,:,;,,`~',•:'.,::::'�,.:_
lb
(♦ - • Quo u ---
00
' /// t(\\ \\ 1\ 111 \ / / � � / � cSc•',%� � �...:�.;..e:::' ...� � :~ �: -
• ..•.......� m.,,,,,...... P/wi—no/y Plot
ma :: w ,°�:..:,.3� RICK GRUPA
_ ..�
• a.ro... ... oo.-y
Ranch Ac/ef
City �( Of -2. •. -• N 177 -r -
..w N
0 ...,,... o..d..b.. ,... w/�anr ,.�wr.. UN - i�c /c„ - � _ �.. 7 r,
\1 ,
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
NINC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 14 March 2000
RE: Otsego - Ranch Acres; Preliminary Plat
FILE NO.: 176.02 - 00.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Mr. Rick Grupa has submitted a proposal for a single family residential preliminary plat
consisting of six lots on 11.8 acres at the southeast quadrant of CSAH 36 and 62"d Lane.
The subject site is adjacent to the "Slabtown" area and is proposed to receive sanitary
sewer and water service from the lines that the City of Dayton is extending to serve the
area, with sanitary sewer capacity that was purchased from Otsego.
The subject parcel is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural Rural Service District. The parcel
is within the Urban Service Area Reserve and is planned for agricultural/rural uses at a
density of four units per forty acres until such time as urban services may be available.
As such, the proposed development requires amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to
expand the Sanitary Sewer Service District (SSSD) and designate the property for low
density residential uses, rezoning to R-4 District and preliminary plat.
Attached for Reference:
Exhibit A:
Site Location
Exhibit B:
City of Dayton review letter
Exhibit C:
Preliminary Plat
Exhibit D:
15 -Lot Concept Plan
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 61 2-595-9636 FAX 61 2-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
RECOMMENDATION
Decisions regarding expansion of the SSSD and amendment to the land use plan are
policy decisions that need to be made by City Officials. The proposed expansion of the
SSSD to include the subject parcel satisfies the criteria in the Comprehensive Plan for
such actions. Further, the proposed low density residential use is consistent with and
likely compatible with the existing character of the area. If the Planning Commission and
City Council reach similar conclusions, the proposed amendments would be appropriate.
Zoning map amendments are also decisions that are to be made by City Officials. With
regards to the rezoning and preliminary plat, finalizing a service agreement with Dayton
must be complete to ensure services prior to approval to avoid creating lots without
services. Specific to the preliminary plat, access, potential re -subdivision of the large lots
and stormwater drainage are issues. Until these issues are resolved, approval of the
Zoning Amendment and preliminary plat is premature. As such, it is our recommendation
that action on the rezoning and preliminary plat application be tabled. Further, our office
recommends that the applicant be directed to revise the preliminary plat based upon the
15 -lot concept plan. Actions for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider
with specific conditions are outlined below.
Decision 1 - Comprehensive Plan
Motion to approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to expand the
Sanitary Sewer Service District to include the subject parcel and designate it for low
density residential use based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Motion to deny amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to expand the Sanitary
Sewer Service District based upon a finding that such action is inconsistent with the
established criteria.
3. Motion to table the application. (Specific direction should be provided to the
applicant and/or staff regarding changes or additional information to be provided.)
Decision 2 - Zoning Map Amendment
Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject parcel R-4
District based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 2
2. Motion to deny a Zoning Map amendment to rezone the subject parcel R-4 District
based upon a finding that the action is inconsistent with the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan regarding adequate access, adequate waste disposal and
adequate stormwater facilities.
3. Motion to table the application until such time as the Cities of Otsego and Dayton
reach agreement on providing sanitary sewer and water service to the subject
parcel.
Decision 3 - Preliminary Plat
1. Motion to approve the preliminary plat of Ranch Acres, subject to the following
stipulations:
a. Sanitary sewer and water service shall be acquired at the applicant's cost
from the City of Dayton and no on-site systems shall be permitted.
b. Access to CSAH 36 shall be subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer and Wright County Highway Department.
C. The preliminary plat is revised to illustrate a 65 foot setback from CSAH 36.
d. The existing drainage issue at the southwest corner of the parcels is
corrected and all grading, drainage and easement issues shall be subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer.
e. Park dedication fee in lieu of land is paid at the time of final plat approval,
equivalent to $1,075 per lot.
f. The applicant enter into a development contract with the City and post all
required securities, subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
g. Comments of other City Staff.
2. Motion to deny the preliminary plat of Ranch Acres based upon a finding that the
application is inconsistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan regarding
adequate access, adequate waste disposal and adequate stormwater facilities and
that it is premature as defined by the Subdivision Ordinance.
3. Motion to table the application until such time as the Cities of Otsego and Dayton
reach agreement on providing sanitary sewer service and the proposed plat is
revised based upon the 15 -lot concept.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 3
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The subject parcel is within the Urban Service Area Reserve
designated by the Comprehensive Plan. This area is intended to be a holding zone to
accommodate future expansion of the SSSD, with interim densities limited to 4 units per
40 acres. To allow the subject parcel to be served with urban services, expansion of the
SSSD must be considered. The Comprehensive Plan outlines nine specific criteria that
must be satisfied in order to expand the SSSD:
a. Land to be included in the sanitary sewer service district is not "green acred" or
enrolled in an agricultural preservation program.
b. The land lies within one-quarter mile of the sanitary sewer service district boundary
or presents environmental problems that can be alleviated by delivery of City water
and sewer service.
C. The land is located within the designated urban service area reserve.
d. The potential sewer discharge of the land area to be included is within available
capacity limits.
e. The developer shall hold the City harmless should limitations on sewer hook ups
be imposed.
The developer and/or benefitting property owners assume the significant majority
of improvement/service costs.
g. The land does not qualify as a premature development or subdivision as regulated
by the City's Subdivision Ordinance.
h. Inclusion of the land in the sanitary sewer service district is necessary to achieve
a five year supply and respond to a shortage of land to which service is available.
Of these criteria, the primary consideration should be the location of the plat within one
quarter mile of an existing service area. Satisfaction of this criteria means that this project
is an orderly expansion of urban growth areas and not leap -frog development. The
Slabtown area to be served by the City of Dayton may be considered a sanitary sewer
service district. Aside from that consideration, the proposed plat would have little impact
to Otsego's service capacity as the services are to be provided by the City of Dayton. As
such, expansion of the SSSD to include the subject parcel is likely appropriate. In
consideration of the location of the subject parcel and surrounding land uses, low density
residential land use is also likely to be the most appropriate land use.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 4
Zoning. In considering the request to rezone the subject site, the Planning Commission
and City Council must consider the criteria outlined in Section 20-3-2.f of the Zoning
Ordinance, with their decision based upon (but not limited) to the following:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: Provided that the SSSD is expanded to include the subject property and
it is designated for low density residential use, the application of R-4 District Zoning
would be appropriate. The action should be made only at such time as the Cities
of Dayton and Otsego have finalized agreement ensuring that service will be
provided however, consistent with the interim land use plan outlined in the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: Surrounding land uses consist of low density residential uses to the east
and rural or agricultural uses to the north, south and west. The proposed use of the
subject property is anticipated to be compatible with these uses, which are planned
to continue.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment. The proposed use of the subject parcel will be required to conform with
all applicable performance standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment. As the use is adjacent to an existing service area, it is a logical growth
area expansion that is not anticipated to cause any negative impacts to the area.
However, the proposed preliminary plat does have potential long term impacts
regarding access, re -subdivision and stormwater drainage that should be
addressed.
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.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 5
Comment: The proposed use is served by public streets. But, the proposed use
includes access to CSAH 36 for two lots, which is strongly discouraged by the
Comprehensive Plan because of potential future traffic conflicts.
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 provided that sanitary sewer and water services are obtained
from the City of Dayton and the applicant bear all costs associated with serving the
parcel.
Utilities. The preliminary plat is proposed to be served by sanitary sewer and water
service from the City of Dayton, which is extending trunk service lines to the Slabtown area
to the east. As part of this arrangement, the applicant will be responsible for all costs
associated with acquiring services including all construction of lateral lines, SAC/WAC
fees, easements, etc. The capacity to serve the subject plat should also come from that
Mich the City of Dayton purchased from Otsego, as Otsego has sufficient commitments
for it's own capacity.
While servicing the subject parcel has been agreed to conceptually, no specific agreement
has been made between Otsego and Dayton. Until such an agreement is finalized to
guarantee that the plat will receive services, approval of the Preliminary Plat is premature
pursuant to Section 21-4-2.D of the Subdivision Ordinance. For this reason, it is our
recommendation that action on the rezoning and preliminary plat be tabled until such an
agreement is finalized.
Access. The lots of the proposed preliminary plat are to have access via existing streets.
Lots 1-3 and Lot 5 have access to Richardson Avenue or 62"d Lane, which are local
streets. Lots 4 and 6 are proposed to have access to CSAH 36, which is designated as
a collector street by the Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with the Comprehensive
Plan, direct lot access to CSAH 36 is to be strongly discouraged. The applicant had
previously met with staff regarding a concept plan that would have provided a cul-de-sac
street for access. This street would eliminate the direct lot access to CSAH 36 and is a
preferred alternative.
The City of Dayton is also recommending that additional right-of-way be provided at the
62nd Lane and Richardson Avenue intersection to improve the curve where these two
streets meet. All street issues are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
The proposed access to CSAH 36 is also subject to review by Wright County.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 6
Lot Standards. The R-4 District requires a minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet, 75
foot lot width and 100 foot lot depth. All of the proposed lots greatly exceed these
requirements, which raises the potential for future re -subdivision. However, the
configuration of the proposed lots would make re -subdivision difficult in most cases and
result in illogical lot designs. Further, any re -subdivision of Lots 4 or 6 would require
additional accesses to CSAH 36.
The preliminary plat illustrates the required setbacks of the R-4 District. All of the lots
would have an adequate building envelope within required setbacks. The only comment
is that the preliminary plat should be revised to illustrate a 65 foot setback from CSAH 36,
for Lots 4 and 6, as the road is designated as a collector street.
Grading Plans. The preliminary plat indicates existing grading, but not proposed. The
City of Dayton's engineer has reviewed the preliminary plat and is recommending swales
to address area drainage. There is also a drainage issue at the southwest corner of the
property remaining from when the property was filled during construction of CSAH 36. As
part of this plat, the existing drainage issues should be corrected. The filling on Lot 6 also
will likely limit potential building locations, which The applicant will be required to prepare
grading and drainage plans in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance and
Engineering Manual, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
Easements. The preliminary plat illustrates required lot perimeter drainage and utility
easements. These easements are required to be 10 feet wide, although they may overlay
adjoining lot lines (5 feet each side). The plat should be revised to overlay the perimeter
easements of adjoining lots five feet on each side. There is also a proposed 10 foot utility
easement for North Central Public Service Company.
The City of Dayton is recommending drainage and utility easements to allow for service
extension and stormwater drainage. It must be noted that the approximate location of this
easement is where the cul-de-sac street would be installed for the 15 -lot concept plan.
Utilities and stormwater facilities could be constructed within the right-of-way of such a
street serving the lots fronting it. All easement issues are subject to review and approval
of the Otsego City Engineer.
15 -Lot Concept. The applicant had initially approached City Staff with a concept for
dividing the subject parcel into 15 that would be accessed via a cul-de-sac street off of 62nd
Lane. In discussions with the applicant, Staff indicated that the 15 -lot concept was the
preferred alternative. Providing a cul-de-sac street such as proposed provides for
maximum utilization of the subject site and addresses the problems of access to CSAH 36,
re -subdivision and stormwater drainage cited against the proposed six lot subdivision. It
is our understanding that the primary reason for not pursuing the cul-de-sac street is cost.
Economic factors should not be used as justification for compromising basic planning
considerations. Further, the applicant should be able to easily fund the cost of the street
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 7
through the sale of 14 -lots. If the cul-de-sac street cannot be provided at this time solely
based on economic factors, the City may find that the preliminary plat is premature
pursuant to Section 21-4-2.0 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Because of the long term
implications associated with not providing the street, we strongly recommend that the
proposed preliminary plat be revised based upon the submitted 15 lot concept plan.
Park Dedication. The applicant is not proposing dedication of any park land. As such,
a fee in lieu of land of $1,075 per lot would need to be provided. The dedication is subject
to review by the Parks and Recreation Commission and approval of the City Council.
Development Contract. If the applications are approved, the applicant will be required
to enter into a development contract with the City and post all required securities. The
development contract is subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
CONCLUSION
Decisions regarding expansion of the SSSD and amendment to the land use plan are
policy decisions that need to be made by City Officials. The proposed expansion of the
SSSD to include the subject parcel satisfies the criteria in the Comprehensive Plan for
such actions, primarily by being adjacent to an existing service area. Further, the
proposed low density residential use is consistent with and likely compatible with the
existing character of the area. If the Planning Commission and City Council reach similar
conclusions, the proposed amendments would be appropriate.
Zoning map amendments are also decisions that are to be made by City Officials. With
regards to the rezoning and preliminary plat, finalizing a service agreement with Dayton
must be completed. It would be unadvisable for the City to approve these applications
until the agreement is finalized and it is guaranteed that services will be available.
Hypothetically, should the two City's not reach an agreement these lots would exist without
sanitary sewer. Such a situation could lead to a request to utilize on-site systems, which
would not be consistent for lands now included within the SSSD.
Specific to the preliminary plat, access, potential re -subdivision of the large lots and
stormwater drainage are issues. The applicant had originally discussed with staff a 15 -lot
concept that would have provided an internal local street and full utilization of the property.
The internal street would have also provided a means of handling stormwater drainage.
In that the reasons for not pursuing this concept are primarily economic and because of
the potential long-term implications, our office recommends that the applicant be directed
to revise the preliminary plat based upon the 15 -lot concept plan.
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 8
Staff had originally advised the applicant to pursue the proposed development in two
stages. The first would be the Comprehensive Plan amendments to determine if
expansion of the SSSD is appropriate. Approval of that application would be enough for
the Cities of Dayton and Otsego to move forward to establish an agreement for service to
the property. The second application for rezoning and preliminary plat approvals would
have been made after an agreement was reached between the two communities to
guarantee services. Until such an agreement is concluded with Dayton and the
preliminary plat is revised, it is our recommendation that action on the rezoning and
preliminary plat applications be tabled, provided that the applicant provide a waiver of the
60/120 day requirements. If no waiver is provided, we would recommend that the rezoning
and preliminary plat be denied based upon the finding that the action is premature.
pc. Mike Robertson
Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andy MacArthur
Rick Grupa
Planning Report - Ranch Acres
Page 9
N/. C
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
Preliminary Plat
of N
Ranch Acres
I I I r I
a62nd
\ Lane- .----I I
1
St.—
/ I
r--r-�—�--T---
I
I I I I I r.a I I 2 1 / t\\ti cc k Ye_ t
l� \\
1.0 A. l l� 1 I
l y I I /
a/
I // /10 AC tj I� �/ I II III I I I I I
—'c' --F J � _ _IT ---- �,. _—� aes A e—
op
,°�1
r I I I I
i � � i � 11 11 I .. _ _ ,r_. ,,:.. _ � IJ�,_r-{1�_ y - r► =�i rL� � I I
J" I I I
JJ1 L I �fi I I I
����.>•�I---f—r-�--I-;'?I--I-------
1
denotes Prop.scd
I! � \ \ \ ✓. �\ \ `111\ C -- —' // / / ` �� i Y � I I I I I douse Location.
I �• I \\ \ _ 1 � I I I I i
ft—.w Z—.' - RJ
iRr su. r
.w. U n. n�
63'
y.oJ5,
I i �17'r
1 11 1 •I : 111 I I 11 i //:`._,..;...�`..�."..::. ='=
II 111 'f� �W;�`?'1�l�II:I�IIlI1111 1 I \ •1 / ..ww.....
' II III 11{11 Fl�lll rI1111/11 �lllll—�"'
Cv_
Preliminary P/al
RICKGRUPA , :..rz•" ow,oq RoncA Acres su. wQp?
o ..,.a.. o..,owuw� r..r n„�. City of Otsego a.. w.-. �: a.: o..w...wri nt Counr eev 99 �,w, ,.
v r• 10/25 KDK 1 "_ 50' ✓> �. �Z , :, r,.,........ .,..,,.,, .. ;iI?n
` Concept Plan IA11
Se ✓✓eyed Lots
\ vfir7mum i o t Size _ 72,000 S. F.
• '\��, T'-"�•-=.-__62nd Lan — - - -- �]�.�.:r •-- - 1 ' I i i ! 1
''1` i ; / / r y i / I_ � 1, i:,,�.� - ''• I i I '_ I
I / // -15r" T t, ---
i
f
t '' 11•!i, r f Lc. _ _✓a +, }�<I}� ! l +^moi""• � .-r--'-�- -. -_
• I' 1! -..� I c. �
i I`t! 134
! !)-I � 16G? Ss 11. � I % I 1 /4 \\•�. ; • ar`• � I '1 � ! a I .' I I \�!
! I i :! 1 i__ �' r+^'ice .^J ` !` + •. i '•�O;' j I fr'2 I I \" I
13 % I t tri---f--t—�J �---- --
i I ' s.:!r+ Y I .�; • • 1 -.S � ; Y 1•�'..' J ( r;
171
_� � x-•�-" --1.4�.`_`xJ 'J ��\\ � I I'41� �" ! I I i !
.+�' J / � GSC' \�7 � I urus�/! p•.6779r�i I \� `+�! `� ,----L- � �----------
bis _'— — Ave
!I,C �-1�:•'c1•.'I ��` � i i \ u•..w.a ,� `.,.a l.. (. /'� i �i�'_ r_ _ .I__ - f. _._-1 _. _ .f— . _ _..... -_
'o �':;� '� ! z \ ; d ! `� •r'..cr,�•,`: �Lw `R w
!Z �:'•� !- - + 1,1'_:..r - ,r7 lr.asrs- i "_M_ 1 _ . I}rllT\IL
is ' j; t. 1 ! �+` :«;�v«.'. : i ' .� s-• :'� j�•;;�J I ' �:�;y'�� ,o � i I L I !
liil 3 I / l y 1 8 < i ��� •1 ;., I 1 !
b.I I t 1 I
p I i ill 1. r'!:7l�1' I j Ill ,i \ '.+., i •` % I I
iU' I II .1 I't/,�/,/,.%%�..!i.r� •1 /. ••. I , I tr I I i I
� till I',I rl•'€' ' II;•ilil'�+\I l ail `,' S +�/. ,.
r i ' -� , '� •\. � • l//%: /; /' ': ' �/ \. ` - %: ' :
NOV
I. / MN sea..r•.a lyar •Jwa
i�, ( 11 ' - t / t: `/'. ' /• ..7 `\ ! % '' .i
ir—a - tJD k.! F:w Cw:e.:-.+e a! :: aa:y •+;eO
•try
4.1 ,a C .a n
i y . •{ [ , t' %,/•{ % /i/ ' i // / : / ter`
.emu. _ .o n'n
! i'IF. I :. i.. is /, • .::ul` _a+' _. o" .. �.
00
..�. F'
X91
/ , ar
I I•`
' II.v: Ia �._.rr.r• TIh✓✓i �ia't •,,ear / .
.a.•
............
;;� ti. •ia;s°
r.•
RICK GRUPA
.... �.
orr rwwW u...
T'ii1 Sul
-�
saoturp r... w.wa
_
99429
H NAR. . 15 . 2000 11 45Ah1
TO: OTSEGO
Hakanson
Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
evil & Municipal Engineering
Land Surveying
March 14, 2000
Mike Robertson, Administrator
City of Otsego
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
RE: Ranch Acres
[Gear Mike,
NO. 995 P.1 j
3601 Thurston Avenue
Suite 101
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
612/427-5860
612/427-0520 r -ax
We have reviewed the above-mentioned preliminary dated 2/16/00, and have the
following comments or concerns:
Street Access
We have assumed from the drawing that Lots 2 & 3, Block 1 would access to 62"d Lane,
Lots 1 & 5 would access Richardson Ave., and Lots 4 & 6 would access CSAH #36. It
is apparent that Lot 6 is far enough away from the intersection at 800 feet between CR
36 and 62nd Lane not to be a concern for traffic control. Lot 4 appears to cause some
concern also at a distance of 350 feet from that intersection. If a tum lane were
installed on 62nd Lane, the minimum taper begins at about 300 feet from the
intersection.
Although we recommend that accesses from new development use internal street
systems, we would refer this condition to the Wright County Highway Department for
access control determination, since it is their jurisdiction. Additional ROW will be requird
by the county along the County Road.
Storm Water
The City has a policy in the Engineer's Manual relating to storm water runoff. The
developer's engineer will need to prepare a Storm Water Management Plan for the
proposed site.
The water from 62nd Lane needs to be diverted to the south. A number of years ago the
house just north of 62nd Lane, adjacent to the river, was threatened by the river being
washed away. A CMP was installed west of the home to divert the runoff to the west
side and into the river. The old concrete pipe under the street should be removed.
\\Ha01\Sharod poc3\MunlclpaMOTSEGO=15\ot2215mr1.doc
MAR. 15. 2000 11:45AN
Mike Robertson
Page 2
March 14, 2000
NO. 995 P.c .31
It would appear that a drainage easement, along with the appropriate ponding, be
provided on-site with ultimate overflow into the Crow River. This system may require
outlet flow control in the form of structure. Water quality is required to be considered in
the Storm Water Management Plan.
Streets
62nd Lane from CR 36 to Richardson Ave. belongs to Otsego entirely, whereas
Richardson Ave, is a border street between Dayton and Otsego. If sewer and water are
installed in the streets, the street construction should be restored according to City
standards. However, if sanitary sewer and watermain are not installed from Dayton,
then it is our opinion that the developer be obligated to construct a 2" overlay on the
existing bituminous surface.
Environmental
The developer has shown the old landfill area in Lot 6. There have been concerns by
the adjacent property owners that the remediation performed by Wright County in
closing the landfill was not completed. The concern was primarily due to erosion and
sedimental control having not been implemented to the satisfaction of the neighbors.
This issue would need to be discussed and solved prior to a new resident purchasing
Lot 6. Disclosure of the existence of a landfill needs to be made in the application and
discussion of its current status. This also applies to the entire site should solid waste or
any other debris be buried on site.
Septic Tank Drainfield
If individual treatment systems are used, the soils must be undisturbed and meet the
requirements of the city ordinance. We did not have access to any soil borings or soil
reports for the area. Drainfield location, if issued, will need to be located on the plans.
Easement
Easement needs to be provided for drainage and utilities along lot lines and in drainage
ways. If sanitary sewer is installed, additional easements for installation will be
necessary.
Concept Plan dated 10/25/99
The Concept Plan of sewered lots shown on the 10/25/99 drawing would be, in our
opinion, the better approach to platting in this area. The plan provides better usage of
MaMShared Docs\Municlpat\AOTSEGO\2215bot2215mr1.doc
Hakanson
Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
NAR.15.2000 11:46AN
Mike Robertson
Page 3
March 14, 2000
NO. 995 P. j
the sanitary sewer services, and the street access issue is from an internal street which
is a much more acceptable method of access.
Recommendations
Preliminary Plat dated 2/16/00 reflects poor use of future Public Utilities such as
sanitary sewer. More lots, of course, puts additional pressure on existing streets that are
not up to city standards.
Drainage Plan must be provided along with soil data to insure that if sanitary sewer is
not available to the site, a standard individual treatment system could be used,
We recommend that this preliminary plat not be approved due to
However, the 10/25/99 concept is acceptable, and as shown
address most of the concerns shown in the 2/16/00
If you have further questions, please call me.
Yours truly,F
HAKANSQ-W NDEF�SON ASSOCIATES, INC.
LK:
cc: Elaine Beatty, Clerk
Rich Grupa, Developer
Ran Licht, NAC
Andy MacArthur, Attorney
\\14 01\8hared Docs\MunlclpeAAOTSE40\2215\ot2215mrl.doc
lack of data available.
appears to be able to
Hakanson
10,11 Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
NAR -15=00 WED 05;45 PM WRIGHT CO, PUBLIC WORKS FAX NO. 6126827313
D WRIGHT COUNTY
z
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
M Wright County Public Works Building
to 1901 Highway 25 N<)rth
dya Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
�$5
At. T.H. 25 and C.R. 138
Telephone (612)682-7383
Facsimile (612) 682-7313
March 15, 2000
Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego City Planning Commission
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
RE: Proposed Ranch Acres Development, Access to CSAH 36
City of Otsego
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Planning Commission:
F, 02
WAYNE A. FINGAL80N, <..
Highway Engieear
t;8273"
vIRGIL G. HAWKINS. i'.�.
Assistant Highway 1!nKirc..,
63&7387
RICIIARu L. MARQUL-rr;
Right of Way Ag"t
6827388
We have reviewed the preliminary plat, prepared by Otto & Associates, Inc-, for the
above mentioned development that is proposed to be located along CSAH 36 in
Otsego. We offer the following comments.
1) Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5 will not have direct access to CSAH 36.
2) Direct access to CSAH 36 from lot 4 and lot 6 will be
permitted- However, compliance with the County's driveway
access requirements must be followed & a completed permit
application for each driveway must be obtained from our
office. Access permits should be sent to the attention of
Richard Marquette of our office.
3) There are two (2) existing field accesses along lot 6. The
most northerly access could be used for a driveway access
location, possibly without the need for a driveway culvert, as
the ditch drainage appears to break each way at this
location. The second field access will be required to be
removed as a requirement of the driveway permit.
4) Mailbox support applications will be required so that the approved
"swing -away" mailbox supports are installed at these new driveway
locations (unless these residents will have a post office box in lieu
of a mailbox).
Eq -1 Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
Page Two
City of Otsego
March 15, 2000
The City Engineer for Otsego should review the plat with regard to conformance to ci',r
standards. We trust that this information Is helpful to you. Please call me or Wayne
Fingalson, County Engineer, if you have any questions for concerns regarding the
above comments.
Sincerely,
�.t.Q
Virgil G. Hawkins, P.E.
Assistant County Engineer
cc: Wayne Fingalson, County Engineer
Richard Marquette, Engineering Assistant
Larry Koshak, Hakanson Anderson, Inc.
Michael Robertson, City of Otsego
Elaine Beatty, City of Otsego
Otto & Associates, Inc.
Rick Grupa, 19026 Zane St. NW, Elk River
File
MAR 1
•'rr .
Jf�
�i
,p S
C U.c v ,cam
pkc
71-; lfae
- eZ.17
u "I'L
CK
vxc
lt�L a� AV-
� (,v�—']
\J/zueC)
OJNT Y
v �,
� 2
I Z
M
�d O
Zj ,dY
7855
May 22, 2000
Office of
PLANNING AND ZONING
WRIGHT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
10 Second Street NW, Rm. 140, Buffalo, AfN 55313-1185
(763) 682-7338
Fax # (763) 682-7872
Mr. Rick Grupa
19026 Zane Street NW
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: Old Dump Site on PID #118-500-364400
Dear Mr. Grupa:
The old dump site on the above mentioned parcel number was cleaned up to the satisfaction of
Wright County. Some inert material remains, but to retrieve it would only cause more damage to
the river bank and would be counterproductive.
Sincerely,
Charles Davis
Environmental Health Officer
Printed on recycled paper.
Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
Bonestroo
0 Is
Anderlik &
Associates
Engineers & Architects
_ icy' t. • ',
1r .
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity
Employer and Employee Owned j 0 2CM '
Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. P.E. • Marvin L. Sorvala. PE. • Glenn R. Cook, P.E.
Robert G. Schunicht, P.E. • Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. 1 ;
r -
Senior Consultants: Robert W. Rosene. PE. • Joseph C. Anderlik, PE.Richard E. Turher'P.E--
Susan M. Eberlin, C.P.A.
-- --�
Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford, P.E. • Keith A. Gordon. P.E. •Robert R. Pleflerle, P.E.
Richard W. Foster. P.E. • David O. Loskota. P.E. • Robert C. Russek. A.I.A. • Mark A. Hanson, P.E. • —i—
Michael T. Rautmann, PE. • Ted K.Field, P.E. • Kenneth P. Anderson. PE. • Mark R. Rolls, PE.
David A. Bonestroo. M.B.A. • Sidney P. Williamson, PE.. L.S. • Agnes M. Ring, M.B.A. • Allan Rick Schmidt. P.E.
Offices: St. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester and Willmar, MN • Milwaukee. WI
Website: www.bonestroo.com
To: Mike Robertson — Administrator, City of Otsego
cc: Shirley Slater — City of Dayton
George Hoff - Dayton Attorney
From: Mark Hanson — Dayton Engineer
Subject: Historic Village — Utility/Street Improvements Update
File No. 174-98-053
Date: April 6, 2000
The purpose of this memo is to update the City of Otsego regarding the status of the above
project.
GRANT FUNDING/SCHEDULE:
The City of Dayton has submitted its application for a grant/loan to the Minnesota Public
Facilities Authority (MPFA) for the above project. The application, as determined by PFA
assumes a $2,640,000 grant. Non PFA revenue sources for the entire project are also required to
be a part of the application. Once the legislative session is over in April and Dayton has received
its construction bids for the project (or engineer's estimate), the agreement between PFA and
Dayton can be finalized. Therefore, in May, Dayton could award contracts for those projects,
which have been bid to begin construction. The bid dates for the three contracts and the
approximate month the CSAH 12/13 would be bid are as follows:
Contract No. 1
Residential Area
Contract No. 2
Well No. 1
Contract No.3
Pump House No. I
Contract No.4
CSAH 12/13
Bid Date Low Bid
March 29, 2000 $3,187,308.70
April 4, 2000 $ 69,750.00
April 18, 2000
July, 2000
Contractor
LaTour Construction, Inc.
E.H. Renner, Inc.
If the Dayton City Council wants to begin construction in June, the PFA agreement will be based
on bids received for Contracts No. 1-3 and an engineer's estimate for CSAH 12/13.
DAYTON/OTSEGO AGREEMENT
The City of Otsego has four parcels, which have been included in the project. One parcel
(Grupa) is presently proposed to be subdivided into six lots. At this time, the Dayton City
2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311
Mike Robertson
Historic Village — Utility/Street Improvements Update
Page 2
April 6, 2000
Council is proposing to determine Otsego participation based on assessing the Otsego parcels the
same as Dayton's, which is summarized below.
Otsego
Residential — Parcel Nos. Area
Equivalent
Assessment
Total
(sq. ft.
Units (EU)
Per EU
Assessment
364100* 60,400
1
$16,335.00
$16,335.00
364101* 199,515
1
$16,335.00
$16,335.00
364400* Grupa (Otsego) 182,960
4
$16,335.00
$65,340.00
36400** Grupa (Otsego) 387,937
2
$3,720.00
$7,440.00
364401 * 55,489
1
$16,335.00
$16,335.00
9
$121,785.00
City of Otsego (50% Street Not Assessed)
7
$4,775.00
$33,425.00
$155,210.00
* Does not include treatment plant assessment ($1640/unit)
** Rate includes only trunk sewer, trunk water.
The above estimate is based on bids received and a PFA Grant in the amount of $2,640,000.
Therefore the agreement between Dayton and Otsego would provide for cost participation from
Otsego in the amount of $155,210, based on the above assumptions. In addition, the conditions
previously discussed for the Grupa subdivision would have to be finalized. The proposed
assessment breakdown is attached.
ASSESSMENT BREAKDOWN
HISTORIC VILLAGE
CREDIT CALCULATION
PROJECT
BENEFITTING
COST/
LESS
ASSESSMENT
COST
EU
EU
CREDIT
PER EU
I. Sanitary Sewer
BENEFITTING
ASSESSMENT
COST
LESS CREDIT
Treatment Plant
$573,980
200
$2,870
$1,230
$1,640
Trunk Sanitary Sewer
759,960
200
3,800
1,630
2,170
Lateral Sanitary Sewer
720,140
164.68
4.380
1,890
2.490
Subtotal
$2,064,060
$11,050
$4,750
$6,300
II. Street Eligible - Residential
$1,630,340
153.68
$5,305
$2,280
$3,025
- Non Residential
Credit (60% @ $2,640,000)
$10,610
$4,560
$6,050
III. Water
• STREET NON -ELIGIBLE
Trunk Water (Well/Pumphouse)
$541,890
350
$1,550
------
$1,550
Lateral Water
$832,355
155.68
5.350
------
5.350
Subtotal
$6,900
$6,900
IV. Street Non -Eligible Residential
$712,480
153.68
$2,320
$570
$1,750
Non -Residential
$4,640
$1,140
$3,500
Total Residential
$25,575
$17,975
Total Non -Residential
$33,200
$22,750
CREDIT CALCULATION
• SANITARY SEWER/STREET ELIGIBLE
PROJECT
PROJECT COST
BENEFITTING
ASSESSMENT
COST
LESS CREDIT
UNITS
PER EU
Treatment Plant
$573,980
$327,215
200
$1,640
Trunk Sanitary Sewer
759,960
433,239
200
2,170
Lateral Sanitary Sewer
720.140
410.538
164.68
2,490
Subtotal
$2,054,080
$1,170,992
$6,300
Street Eligible
1,630.340
929.428
153.68
$6,050')
Total
$3,684,420
$2,100,420
Credit (60% @ $2,640,000)
($1,584,000)
• STREET NON -ELIGIBLE
Street
$712,480
$537,480
153.68
$3,50011)
Credit (1 year Dayton MSA)
($175,000)
�'� Residential Assess 50%, Non -Residential Assess
100%
\C'.
S ��
\0
\_DAYTON
OTSEC01
(364101) I
i
(364100) i
62n
d (,qNe i
I
I
(364400)
CROW RIVER
(26010)
COUNTY ST
Q:
i
zzo
U)
cl-
c:
T I
E,
i (1020)
i o (1030)
i
i
i
i
i
U
(41040) v
(44030) '- j
w
(31010)
z
0
(31060)
(40010)
(40090)
N
I
0 200 400
Scole in feet
k—(4401 1)
CROW RIVER
LEGEND
(26010) Porcel Identificotion
ASSESSMENT AREA - WEST OF CRL LER
Bonestroo
O� Rosene
DAYTON. MINNESOTA FIGURE 13 Anderllk ';
HISTORIC VILLAGE UTILITY/STREET IMPROVEMENTS Associates
17453F31.WC NOvEmBER 1998 COMM 17453
4
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
NINC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 13 June 2000
RE: Otsego - Stonegate Estates; Preliminary Plat
FILE NO.: 176.02 - 00.18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Tollefson Development, Inc. has submitted plans for a residential development consisting
of 15 single family lots and 164 townhouse units (179 total units) on a 34.2 acre parcel
located at the southwest quadrant of CSAH 42 and 85th Street. The subject site is
currently a tilled agricultural field and zoned A-1, Agricultural Rural Service District. The
Comprehensive Plan includes the subject site within the Sanitary Sewer Service District
and suggests low and medium-high density residential development. The proposed
development plan requires consideration of the following applications:
• Land Use Plan Amendment to mirror the proposed mix of uses.
• Zoning to R-6, Residential Low Density Multiple Family District and R-4, Residential
Urban Single Family District
• PUD -CUP Concept Plan for platting townhouses in a unit/base lot configuration.
• Preliminary Plat.
Attached for Reference:
Exhibit A:
Site Location
Exhibit B:
Preliminary Plat & Site Plan
Exhibit C:
Grading Plan
Exhibit D:
Utility Plan
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 16
PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC @WINTERNET.COM
Recommendation
Decisions as to the appropriate use of land as guided by the Comprehensive Plan and
implemented by the Zoning Ordinance are policy issues that must be determined by City
Officials. If the Planning Commission and City Council make a finding that the proposed
development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the requested
Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning applications may be approved. If these
applications are approved, our review of the preliminary plat and PUD -CUP concept plan
finds that they are consistent with the applicable performance standards of the City's
development regulations. As such, we would recommend approval of these applications
as outlined under Decision 3.A.
Decision 1 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Motion to approve a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan such that the
uses indicated on the Land Use Plan mirror the proposed development plan based
upon a finding that the request is consistent with the following policies:
Whenever possible, changes in types of land use shall occur either at the
center or rear, mid -block points so that similar uses front on the same street,
or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers.
(Policy Plan, p. 39)
Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses shall be
accomplished in an orderly fashion which does not create a negative impact
on adjoining developments. (Policy Plan, p. 39)
2. Motion to deny the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment based upon a
finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (A specific
finding or policy supporting denial of the application should be cited.)
3. Motion to table the application. (specific direction should be provided to the
applicant and/or City Staff regarding additional information to be presented.)
Decision 2 - Zoning Map Amendment
Motion to approve an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map to designate the parcel
within the R-4 and R-6 Zoning Districts as illustrated by the development plan
based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the following policies of the
Comprehensive Plan:
Whenever possible, changes in types of land use shall occur either at the
center or rear, mid -block points so that similar uses front on the same street,
or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 2
(Policy Plan, p. 39)
Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses shall be
accomplished in an orderly fashion which does not create a negative impact
on adjoining developments. (Policy Plan, p. 39)
A balance in the availability of quality housing choices throughout the City
shall be maintained.
2. Motion to deny the requested Zoning Map amendments based upon a finding that
the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (A specific finding or
policy supporting denial of the application should be cited.)
Decision 3 - PUD -CUP Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat
Motion to approve a PUD -CUP Concept Plan and preliminary plat of Stonegate
Estates, subject to the following conditions:
a. Approval of the preliminary plat shall not guarantee access to sanitary sewer
service. The City shall only guarantee sanitary sewer service to approved
final plats with signed contracts or through a financial commitment for such
services to assure the City of timely development.
b. The design and construction of all pubic streets and private drives (which
shall include curb and gutter) shall be subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer.
C. The preliminary plat is revised to designate the townhouse base lots as
outlots with overlaying drainage and utility easements and numerate the
blocks within the development.
d. The developer shall apply for a development stage PUD -CUP as provided
for by Section 36 of the Zoning Ordinance and provide all required
information.
e. A homeowners association shall be established for the maintenance of
common open space and facilities subject to review and approval of the City
Attorney.
The site plan shall be revised such that no private driveway is within 15 feet
of a public right-of-way or 5 feet of a property line.
g. Townhouse structures shall be set apart not less than one-half the sum of
the adjacent building heights.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 3
h. The landscaping plan is revised as part of the development stage PUD -CUP
application to specify the type, quantities and size of all proposed plantings,
to provide additional plantings adjacent to CSAH 42 and 85th Street and
provide typical planting designs for landscape areas adjacent to the
townhouse structures.
Park and trail dedication shall be provided through a combination of land
and cash in lieu of land, subject to review by the Parks and Recreation
Commission and approval of the City Council.
The trail bisecting the center townhouse block is relocated to the south to
provide a crosswalk at 83rd Street intersection and a second trail is provided
on the east and south sides of the looped public street.
k. All grading and utility issues and plans shall be subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
The applicant shall be required to enter into a development contract with the
City and pay all applicable fees and securities upon approval of a final plat,
subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
M. Comments of other City Staff.
2. Motion to deny the requested Zoning Map amendments based upon a finding that
the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (A specific finding or
policy supporting denial of the application should be cited.)
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the subject parcel for low density
land uses on the west half of the parcel and medium-high density uses on the east half.
The overall density of the project is approximately 5.2 units per acre, which would be
considered medium density by the Comprehensive Plan. Excluding the single family lots
and the park, the townhouse portion of the project has a density of 6.2 units per acre.
The suggested land uses are intended to serve as a transition between the existing one -
acre residential subdivision to the west of subject parcel and traffic on CSAH 42 and
industrial development to the east. The need for an amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan is basically to ensure that the Land Use Plan mirror's the development pattern. So
long as the single family lots abut the west property line and have matching single family
uses on the opposite side of the street, the intent of the Comprehensive Plan suggested
transition is satisfied.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 4
Zoning. The subject parcel is zoned A-1 District. Development of the project will require
rezoning to R-4 and R-6 District to accommodate the proposed single family and
townhouse uses. Section 20-3-2.F and .20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance must be
considered as factors in the rezoning and PUD -CUP applications:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment. The subject parcel is guided for residential development at urban low
and medium to high densities. The location of single family and townhouse
elements of the project are generally consistent with the land uses suggested by the
Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Plan for this parcel. Further, the following policies
may be cited in support of the proposed use:
Whenever possible, changes in types of land use shall occur either at the
center or rear, mid -block points so that similar uses front on the same street,
or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers.
(Policy Plan, p. 39)
Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses shall be
accomplished in an orderly fashion which does not create a negative impact
on adjoining developments. (Policy Plan, p. 39)
A balance in the availability of quality housing choices throughout the City
shall be maintained.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. The proposed use has been anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan as
a transitional land use at the edge of the Sanitary Sewer Service District. As such,
the planned land uses were determined based upon compatibility with existing and
planned uses of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The proposed development plan will be required to be consistent with all
applicable performance standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: Development of the subject project represents infill of a vacant parcel
within the Sanitary Sewer Service District. As the development provides a transition
between large unsewered residential lots and planned industrial uses, no negative
impacts are anticipated.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 5
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 proposed development is adequately served by 85' Street, which
is designated as a collector street based upon the City's functional classification
system. This street has adequate capacity to carry the potential 1, 790 daily trips
generated by the proposed development.
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.
Preliminary Plat. The following paragraphs address issues relevant to the submitted
preliminary plat. The plat itself will need to be revised so as to be suitable for recording
with revised lot and block designations to avoid the duplication attributed to the phasing
plan.
• Access. The preliminary plat will have primary access to 85th Street, which is
designated as a collector street by the Comprehensive Plan. The spacing of the
proposed intersection with 85t" Street is sufficiently spaced from CSAH 42 or
Parnell Avenue so as not to cause traffic conflicts. A secondary access to the
development is provided by a connection to 83`d Street in the Country Ridge
subdivision to the west. This connection was anticipated at the time Country Ridge
was platted and a temporary cul-de-sac constructed.
Principal circulation within the project is by public street. The right-of-way for the
public street is consistent with the requirements of the Engineering Manual and
Subdivision Ordinance. The design and construction of the local street is subject
to the provisions of the Engineering Manual and approval of the City Engineer. The
public street will be named in accordance with the City policy of using the County
grid pattern.
Access to several of the townhouse units will be via private driveways extending
from the public street. The layout of the private drives is adequate given the
limitations on public streets presented by the project and limited to a serving
minimum number of units. The design of the private driveways will be subject to
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 6
City standards and approval of the City Engineer. Curb and gutter should be
provided along the main driveway aisles, except for the pavement that is head -in
to the individual garage stalls, subject to further comment by the City Engineer.
• Blocks. Section 21-7-3 of the Subdivision Ordinance limits block length to not
more than 1,200 to provide for circulation within and to/from a development.
Because of the access limitations to 85th Street and CSAH 42 and Otsego
Elementary to the south, the loop street exceeds this requirement. However,
because of these physical limitations, the excess block length is acceptable. A trail
has been provided through the center block for pedestrian access.
• Single Family Lots. The development plan includes 15 single family lots on the
eastern edge of the project. These lots are intended to buffer the existing
residential uses to the west from more intense urban uses planned to develop with
the availability of sanitary sewer. The single family lots are all at least 12,325
square feet with at least 85 foot lot width. This exceeds the minimum lot
requirements of the R-4 District, which is 12,000 square foot minimum and 75 feet
minimum width. The excess size is appropriate given the transitional purpose of
these lots against the large one -acre lots to the west.
• Townhouse Units. The project includes 164 dwelling units consisting of seven
structures with six row units, 14 structures with eight units back-to-back and one
four unit back-to-back structure. The townhouse element of the project provides
5,279 square feet of lot area per unit, consistent with the minimum lot area per unit
requirement within the R-6 District of 5,000 square feet per unit. Further, these
structures are consistent with the requirements of Section 20-17-10.A of the Zoning
Ordinance regarding the number of units allowed per structure. Because a builder
has not been selected by the applicant at this stage, detailed plans regarding the
building type and design are not available.
Section 20-17-10 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that owner -occupied townhouse
structures be platted in a unit/base lot configuration through a planned unit
development. Each of the townhouse units has been provided a unit lot within the
larger base lots and blocks. The base lots have been platted as buildable lots on
the preliminary plat. The other two townhouse projects approved by the City have
platted the base lot as an outlot with an overlaying drainage and utility easement.
For consistency, this project should be platted in the same manner.
The use of a PUD -CUP is intended to provide for a more detailed site and building
plan review, as well as ensure that adequate provision is made for maintenance of
common open space and facilities. The townhouse element is being considered as
a PUD -CUP concept plan. A more detailed PUD -CUP development stage
application, including building architectural designs, will be required for the
townhouse element as part of a subsequent final plat application.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 7
The Zoning Ordinance also requires that a homeowners association be provided
for to address the issues of property maintenance. These documents must be
provided as part of the development stage review and include provisions dealing
with property maintenance, building maintenance and architectural controls, snow
plowing, street maintenance and repair, etc. The homeowners association
documents are subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
Setbacks. Required setbacks within the project are as outlined below.
Front: 35 ft. Local Street / 65 ft. Collector/Arterial Street
Side: 10 ft. Interior Lot / 35 ft. or 65 ft. Corner Lot
Rear: 20 ft. interior lot / 35 ft. or 65 ft. Through Lot.
Townhouse
Buildings: '/ of the sum of the adjacent building heights.
Driveways: 15 ft. from any street/ 5 ft. from any lot line.
The preliminary plat illustrates the appropriate setbacks for the single family lots.
The townhouse structures are located consistent with the setbacks required at the
perimeter of the base lot. As building plans have not been provided for the
townhouse structures, compliance with the internal setback requirements cannot be
verified. Submission of the building plans as part of the development stage PUD -
CUP application will allow verification that no two structures are closer than'/ of
the sum of their respective heights.
One private driveway is within 10 feet of 85 h Street, one is abuts CSAH 42 , and
one encroaches within the required setback from the south lot line. These
driveways, and possibly building locations, will need to be adjusted to
accommodate the required setback. Within the project, the townhouse structures
should be setback from the private driveways at least 25 feet to provide parking and
ensure visibility. Based on the site plan, some adjustments may be necessary to
meet this requirement as part of the development stage application.
Landscaping. The developer has provided a landscaping plan for the entire
project. The landscaping plan illustrates two trees for each of the single family lots
(as required) and a variety of trees for the townhouse structures. The plan also
includes berms between the single family and townhouses and adjacent to CSAH
42. No information is specified regarding the size or type of planting material. In
addition, our office would recommend additional plantings within the townhome area
adjacent to CSAH 42 and 850' street to minimize traffic noise and visual impact from
the planned industrial area to the east. The landscape plan should also provide
detail as to plantings to be installed around and directly adjacent to the townhouse
buildings. A revised landscape plan, specifying size, type and location of all
plantings will be required as part of the development stage application.
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 8
• Guest Parking. The development plan includes guest parking within the townhome
area at a ratio just over 0.5 stalls per unit. The number of guest parking stalls
provided should be adequate to address any off-street parking demand.
• Park Dedication. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates that development of this
parcel will include dedication of land for a neighborhood park to serve it and the
surrounding development. The need for park in this area was planned due to the
potential interchange between the facilities at the School, access to existing trail
corridors providing access to surrounding development and additional land
available on the pump house site.
Section 21-7-7 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that land be dedicated for
development of the City's park and trail system. The minimum requirement of land
is equal to 10 percent of the gross area of the plat. Based upon the 34.2 acre area
of the subject parcel, 3.4 acres of land is required to be dedicated for parks. The
developer is proposing to dedicate Outlot A, which is a 2.0 acre site adjacent to the
City's pump house property. Because the developer is only providing 2.0 acres of
the required 3.4 acre dedication, a cash contribution in lieu of land will be
necessary to account for the difference. The amount of the cash in lieu of land will
be determined as part of the development contract.
The dedication of Outlot A will result in a park size of approximately 3.6 acres in
combination with the existing City property. The Parks and Recreation Commission
has been provided concepts for development of the park to determine if the
dedication is adequate, subject to their recommendation and approval of the City
Council.
No public trails are proposed as part of the project. A private trail has been
proposed through the center block between the townhouse units. Access to the trail
near the 83`d Street intersection should be relocated farther south so as to create
a crosswalk to the planned neighborhood park. We would also suggest that a side
walk be provided along the south and east side of the loop street to provide
pedestrian access to the park. The reason for the sidewalk is primarily due to the
number of dwelling units and driveway access points along this street.
• Grading Drainage and Utility Plans. The applicant has provided preliminary
grading and utility plans. All of the necessary utilities are in place to serve the
subject site, so no extensions or City construction should be required. Also, there
is an existing electrical transmission line crossing the property. The preliminary plat
does not indicate an easement for the transmission lines and there is no indication
if the line is to be relocated. Additional information should be provided regarding
the developer's intent for the transmission line. These plans are subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer. This project does not require any special c
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 9
Phasing Plan. The materials provided by the applicant indicate a phasing plan for
build -out of the project. Although such plans are not considered binding, they do
assist the City in planning for it's services. The phasing plan indicates initial
construction of 15 single family dwellings and 50 townhouses. The second and
third phases consist of 52 and 62 townhouse units respectively. No time frame for
build out of the project has been provided.
The City has approved final plats for 388 units to date and preliminary plats for 929
lots. Based upon an initial capacity for potential development of 450 residential
units, the first phase of the subject plat would absorb the remaining residential
capacity. There would be adequate capacity for this first phase, provided no other
final plats are approved prior to a final plat for this project.
Development Contract. Upon approval of a final plat, the applicant must enter into
a development contract with the City and pay all fees and securities. It must be
emphasized that approval of the preliminary plat does not guarantee access to
sanitary sewer service. Only those projects that have received final plat approval
and paid the applicable fees will be allocated capacity for sanitary sewer service.
CONCLUSION
The Comprehensive Plan anticipated the development of this parcel with a mix of
residential uses in order to provide a transition between existing one -acre lot development
outside of the Sanitary Sewer Service District to the west and planned industrial uses to
the east. The proposed development is generally consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan, including the guidance for how such transitions are to occur.
Further, the single family lots satisfy all of the applicable performance standards of the
Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. At a concept plan level, the Townhouse
element of the project is also consistent with the applicable performance standards of the .
City's development regulations. More specific information will be required as part of a
development stage application to confirm compliance. A specific recommendation and
options for Planning Commission and City Council actions are outlined in the executive
summary of this report.
PC. Mike Robertson
Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andy MacArthur
John Anderson
Gary Harris
Planning Report - Stonegate Estates
Page 10
m
x
D
NM, C
Nw- v v vv`/`/`/`/
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
iii: S CgF i -,i4 t •-.4eaiiiii e>f !ii! } a�'y�-• a^ ',, P3. i i - :, ee
qd� dG :rg € v =1 34 ; i £
i ':F•'i 47 i•s +'c,:rt.:ey qua•§�gelE dRi
191.48 Aim liza Y e 1S;tiP
z. -r �c r. rrr�rrr "„rrrrrrr•
`r -j ; '^°_°• 17a # dN S Ya "j5
^ y :�• �:�s6� � f�sY�i? Fsg
.w t r�. a t„ itiR 2i
s»,iic � 1
j!3� �..
5M2
=t
_E S
STONEGATF:--
ES—rnr�-.._.,._.._.... —
—
olc�r,cl, JoM 06'vrr .t Aasuf;Jefes. Ar, 1/�- — ,.
TOILF.FSON .,�DF.AL(il'M'.N! :hl+. I »".;r � � F .I --
, r•L:.. (,��,f:-1. .r,.� _. _ .. ..
F'RELIMINAF'i I'i A i A-
;jl �E �q�a3S zA@ RP my MA,
IT
H 4l;9; ill'f5�3pwp8raar" gip
p 3A G j f3 Q 7S� gA i Q B�,y p! p
a
S7ONECA'ICCw'fAY......... ....... ......
_.. -----....�..._..._
UIl:ll:ll Mk .iu/MI l ,N AYalcKaulB�, Ji7L'. -•t •n:. - _..._1[.8.58
TOLLF.FSON UEVF.l.CN1MFN1 IN(.'
. rl-......:.,..'�.. 1�R` i •u,o Yr .,Nldll
UMINARY STORM 'XWFR, 1�2f.I111Jr. �' : ��w '"r (��, -•-- elge
•ir«x_r�►�ar�
6_i
:9 0
---:....'..: .. • Ra........«.. 7 .3W
N1 LNdf N SJ3llOJ.
�NVIa i�IVY1.l,i.1VAh71f`�
..«.••., xa •x ::.•.-.•;.___ ...n YP.wl.w •�f.N •ii/iioUccy y ienllp uyup
S3 33NO1S
•.H �_. Mal �. .... .. .rt V•a..F•�. _�I ,"
XFsgsi a� 7i.tY•�
SSt
pf�i�� RR3 ryay yet: eo
ORM
i. i 'Ce
a � 1 11 I 1 11 11 11,
t I I � •t 1 1 1 1 w 1 1 n I 1 • I 1 •; 1 )
I" 1 IL
JI I 1 1 I I
-I I L_�J L__L
FFes- � � =♦,
IL
i l i 1...�-'l l •� 1 .- l�r--'l r - I r � 'I -~ •� . ''l11^ i
i 1 1 1 1• 1 1 11 •1 1 1• .;
1 11 ;1 w 11 • 11 • 1; 1: � y11
____. __._. _—._ _.... ..._ _—.- I 11..1. __—+-•_.._ .__•__�_ . _3'-__ _—.. _�. ^._..-.:�- *:
i
�
1
It
g �a
e J �
•,
XFsgsi a� 7i.tY•�
SSt
pf�i�� RR3 ryay yet: eo
ORM
i. i 'Ce
a � 1 11 I 1 11 11 11,
t I I � •t 1 1 1 1 w 1 1 n I 1 • I 1 •; 1 )
I" 1 IL
JI I 1 1 I I
-I I L_�J L__L
FFes- � � =♦,
IL
i l i 1...�-'l l •� 1 .- l�r--'l r - I r � 'I -~ •� . ''l11^ i
i 1 1 1 1• 1 1 11 •1 1 1• .;
1 11 ;1 w 11 • 11 • 1; 1: � y11
____. __._. _—._ _.... ..._ _—.- I 11..1. __—+-•_.._ .__•__�_ . _3'-__ _—.. _�. ^._..-.:�- *:
i
�
1
It
CITY OF
OTSEGO
PLANNING COMMISSION
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA TRAINING AND ORIENTATION
A. The decision making process and the roles of the Planning Commission, City
Council and City Staff.
B. Comprehensive Plan
C.
S'if�-fLT
D
1. Legal requirement.
2. Use.
Zoning Ordinance
1. Legal requirement.
2. Ordinance
text and map.
_ a.
Administration
b.
Performance Standards
C.
Districts.
3. Mechanisms
a.
Permitted uses.
b.
conditional uses,
C.
interim uses.
d.
Uses by administrative permit.
e.
Variances.
f.
Planned unit development (PUD).
i. Zoning district.
ii. PUD -CUP.
4. Procedures
a.
60 day rule.
b.
Pubic hearing notification (newspaper / mail / posted).
C.
Recommendations and findings of fact.
Subdivision Ordinance
1. Legal requirements.
2. Ordinance.
3. Processing.
E. Engineering Manual