Loading...
02-05-01 PC5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 nac@winte,rnet.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council Otsego Planning Commission FROM: Daniel Licht DATE: 31 January 2001 RE: Otsego - Meadowlands PUD; Concept Plan FILE NO.: 176.02 - 01.04 BACKGROUND S&Z Investments and Bulow Incorporated have submitted a concept plan for development of 75 single family lots and one outlot entitled Meadowlands" on 99 acres located east of Nashua Avenue, across from City Hall. The residential lots are proposed to be served by a community septic system and individual wells. As part of this project, the applicant is proposing to install storm water drainage facilities that would correct flooding from the pond on the subject site to developments to the east. This property was the subject of a similar concept plan for 50 residential lots submitted by Bridgeland Development, which was approved by the City in 1999. Bridgeland Development never pursued the necessary development stage applications. The subject site is within the Urban Service Area Reserve designated by the 1998 Comprehensive Plan Update and is zoned A-1, Agricultural -Rural Service District. the property is also within the Shoreland Overlay District as the on-site pond is designated as a natural environment lake identified by the DNR. Implementation of this project requires an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, base district rezoning and PUD -CUP to accommodate development within the Shoreland District. The applicant is only requesting PUD concept plan approval at this time. Exhibits: A. Subject Site B. Project Narrative C. Shoreland Tier Analysis D. Concept Plan ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The subject parcel is currently within the Urban Service Area Reserve, which allows a maximum density of four units per 40 acres. To allow the proposed project, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is required. Because the project does not include sanitary sewer or water, designating the property as being within the Sanitary Sewer Service District is likely not appropriate. The other alternative is to include the property within the Long Range Urban Service Area, which is designated over existing one acre unsewered developments. The subject parcel abuts the Long Range Urban Service Area on a portion of its north boundary and the length of its east boundary. Because of the financial commitments to developing a municipal sanitary sewer system, the 1998 Comprehensive Plan Update is specific that all new residential development should occur within the sanitary sewer service district and connect to municipal services. The Comprehensive Plan did not anticipate further expansion of the Long Range Urban Service Area, but did expect that remaining large parcels within these areas may be subject to further development pressure. Further development of the Long Range Urban Service Areas was only to be allowed if at least one of the following criteria could be satisfied. These criteria may also be used to. determine if it is advisable to expand the Long Range Urban Service Area to accommodate this project: a. Completion of an unfinished street network. Comment. The proposed development would allow for the extension of 90th Street from O'Brien to Nashua Avenue. The project may also allow for the future extension of 87th Street from Vassur's Oak Grove Addition. b. Such development shall have the result of the correction or improvement of a demonstrated area drainage problem. Comment. There is an existing drainage problem during high rainfall seasons where the lake on the subject property overflows and floods existing residential areas to the east. As part of this project, the applicant is proposing to correct this issue by paying for and installing storm water drainage facilities on the subject property and Nashua Avenue, as previously recommended by the City Engineer. C. The dedication of lands to a legitimate public purpose (i.e., desired parks, public facility structures, right-of-way dedication, etc.). Comment. The project provides for the dedication of necessary storm water drainage facilities and right-of-way for the extension of public streets. Planning Report - Meadowlands PUD Concept Page 2 The potential benefits of the project are listed above following each criteria. The Planning Commission and City Council must evaluate the public benefit of the storm water improvements and right-of-way extensions in determining if the proposed development is appropriate in terms the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan regarding development outside of the Sanitary Sewer Service District. Zoning. The DNR has indicated that this project may be considered to be "sewered" under the Shoreland Ordinance, based upon the community septic system. The Shoreland Ordinance requires that sewered lots have a minimum lot size of 40,000 or 20,000 square feet (riparian/non-riparian). None of the proposed lots are riparian, or have frontage directly on the waterbody. The Shoreland Ordinance also allows utilization of PUD flexibility for lot size and width standards provided that the overall project density is consistent with certain criteria. The Shoreland Ordinance specifies a process for calculating density within the District by defining development tiers within set distances from the Ordinary High Water Mark. The maximum number of dwellings allowed within any given tier is calculated by dividing the area of the tier by the minimum lot size. The number of dwelling units allowed within a tier may be transferred to other tiers that are farther away from the waterbody. Based upon a tier analysis of the subject property, the City could allow as may as 340 units (Exhibit C) based on a schedule of bonuses. The proposed development would require an amendment to a zoning District that would allow for single family uses and the proposed density. Because the DNR is considering would consider the site to be sewered and the design is based upon the PUD provisions of the Shoreland District, staff suggests use of a PUD District. The applicant has indicated that all lots would be at least approximately 20,000 square feet in size with 100 foot minimum lot width. Our office's expectation is that the setback requirements within the PUD would be the same as imposed by the R-4 District. Section 20-3-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance outline the specific criteria to be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council relative to the PUD Concept Plan and pending rezoning application: The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the official City Comprehensive Plan. Comment. The Planning Commission and City Council must evaluate the benefits of the PUD flexibility based upon the concept plan. The main issue to be resolved is the number of lots that the City may allow. Although the PUD District will allow significantly more lots, the City must balance the number of lots with its policy of encouraging the majority of development within the sanitary sewer service district. The previous concept plan approved by the City Council for the subject property was specifically limited to approximately 50 lots on this basis, which is 25 less than proposed now. Although no specific reason was given for why that developer did not pursue their project further, development costs, including park dedication and the cost of the storm water drainage improvements, were likely an issue. Planning Report - Meadowlands PUD Concept Page 3 From a design standpoint, the concept plan responds well to the layout of the property and its limitations. The proposed street layout provides maximum exposure for lots backing up to the lake, while not locating within the first tier. Further, the proposed street layout will serve to minimize through traffic and calm speeds within the neighborhood. The use of the community septic system is certainly positive as it eliminates the need for additional lot area to accommodate primary and secondary septic sites on every lot. This results in a more efficient use of the land, which will also likely have less of a future environmental impact than if the project were proposed with 80, 000 sq. ft. lots and standard septic systems. Further, the use of the community utility would allow for efficient connection to municipal sanitary sewer, should that service ever become available to the area. 2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area. Comment: The subject property is surrounded to the east and northeast to by one acre, non-sewered development, which are in the Long Range Urban Service Area. Properties to the north and south are designated for continued agriculturaUruralland uses as part of the Urban Service Area Reserve. City Hall is west of the subject site. The development of single family lots on the subject site would be compatible with these existing and planned uses. 3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.). Comment: The proposed project will be required to meet all applicable provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. One issue identified at this concept stage is that the blocks including lots 1-34 and 61-75 exceed the maximum 1,200 feet allowed by the Subdivision Ordinance. The lengths of the blocks are due to physical barriers created by existing development and the lake making conformance with this requirements not possible. 4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed. Comment: The proposed development may be expected to have a positive effect on the area by correcting the existing drainage problems, completing the existing street networks. Potential negative impacts to the area involve potentially siphoning development interest from the Sanitary Sewer Service District. 5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed. Comment: Although no study has been completed, no negative impact to area property values is anticipated to be caused by the project. Planning Report - Meadowlands PUO Concept Page 4 6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets serving the property. Comment: The concept plan provides for all lots to access of an internal public street that intersects with Nashua Avenue across from the south City Hall access. The concept plan also provides for an extension to O'Brien Avenue, which the applicant will be required to pay for and construct across the City owned parcel. A future connection to 87th Street is also possible from the terminus of the cul-de-sac. It must be noted that this cul-de-sac extends longer than the 500 foot limit allowed by the Subdivision Ordinance. However, based upon the natural limitations of the property and the possible extension to 87th Street in the future, its length is likely acceptable. A short street has been extended to the north property line of the subject site. This street will provide for future intra -neighborhood connections. The previous developer had submitted a sketch plan illustrating how the design of a subdivision of the adjacent parcel to the north could accommodate a future street extension to the rear lots of the Great River Acres subdivision, allowing for potential re- subdivision. 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. Of primary concern in allowing development outside of the sanitary sewer service district is the potential future need for municipal sanitary sewer service. The proposed community septic will allow for potential future connection to the municipal systems. Further, the applicant and staff have discussed that the system would be turned over to the City after the project is nearly built out, which will ensure on-going maintenance. An equally important consideration is that the development is located in close proximity to other developed areas requiring City services such as street maintenance, park facilities, police/fire protection, etc. Park Dedication. Based on the proximity of the subject site to Prairie Park, the City is likely not interested in land dedication as part of this subdivision. As such, the applicant would be required to make a cash fee dedication in lieu of land at the time of final plat approval. Park and trail dedication issues are subject to further comment from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Historic Preservation. At their meeting on January 25, 2001, the Historic Preservation Commission discussed information that there may be grave sites on the subject property. Apparently, portions of the subject site were used as a cemetery prior to relocation to the present site of the Otsego Cemetery. Additional information will need to be obtained regarding this issue prior to submission of a development stage application. Planning Report - Meadowlands PUD Concept Page 5 Utilities. A narrative describing the proposed community septic system has been submitted (Exhibit B). The applicant is proposing that water service would be obtained from individual wells. The design of all utilities is subject to reviewand approval of the City Engineer. Grading and Drainage Plans. No grading and drainage plans have been submitted as part of the Concept Plan. These plans will be expected as part of a subsequent development stage application and will be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The decisions regarding the necessary Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning applications will be made at the time of a future development stage PUD. The intent of the concept plan PUD application is to give the developer input regarding the general nature of the project. As such, approval of a PUD concept plan should be granted if City Officials believe that the intended project, including the proposed number of lots, is appropriate and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The primary issue with the project is the expansion of the Long Range Urban Service Area to allow additional urban scale development outside of the Sanitary Sewer Service District. The proposed concept plan is does satisfy policies of the Comprehensive Plan for further development within the Long Range Urban Service area. Use of PUD flexibility for this development may also be appropriate depending on the perceived value of the proposed public improvements and the use of common septic utilities, which would provided for efficient land use and future connection to municipal utilities. If the Planning Commission and City Council make a similar finding, our office would recommend approval of the application as outlined under Option A below. A. Motion to approve a PUD -CUP Concept Plan for development of 50 single family lots with communal septic and water systems, subject to the following conditions: 1. An application for rezoning, preliminary plat and development stage PUD approvals shall be submitted within six (6) months from the date of concept plan PUD approval. 2. All lots shall conform to the performance standards of the R-4 District and Shoreland Overlay District. 3. The long term ownership and maintenance of the community septic system shall be the responsibility of the City of Otsego. Planning Report - Meadowlands PUD Concept Page 6 4. The Historic Preservation Commission research addition information regarding possible grave sites on the subject property and report on the potential significance to the City Council. 5. Park and trail dedication shall be subject to review by the Parks and Recreation Committee and approval of the City Council 6 A utility plan is submitted for the design of the proposed septic systems, subject to comment by the DNR and approval of the City Engineer. 7. Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted as part of the development stage PUD application, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 8. Comments of Other City Staff. B. Motion to deny the requested concept plan based upon a finding that the application is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. Motion to table the application (specific direction should be provided to the applicant regarding necessary revisions and/or action). pc. Mike Robertson Judy Hudson Andy MacArthur Larry Koshak/Ron Wagner George Sanford Chris Bulow Myrtle LuConic Planning Report - Meadowlands PUD Concept Page 7 A- N/. C ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD MEADOWLANDS PROPOSED WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM In general, the proposed system is to consist of a municipal sanitary sewer system followed by an onsite central treatment facility. The sewer system will be designed to accommodate a future connection to the City's wastewater infrastructure. The onsite treatment facility is three part system consisting of a series of septic tanks, a Recirculating Sand Filter (RSF) and an in -soil dispersal field. The residential units are connected to the sewer main by means of 4 inch service lines. The gravity sewer main conveys sewage to a lift station. From the lift station, the effluent is pumped through a force main to the onsite treatment facility. Pre-treatment of the effluent occurs in a series of septic tanks which facilitate settlement of solids and grit screening in addition to providing for flow attenuation. The next phase of treatment is the Recirculating Sand Filter. The Recirculating Sand Filter consists of a network of perforated drain pipes placed in a bed of select graded sand. The effluent is periodically dosed through the upper portion of the pipe/sand bed structure on a time controlled frequency by means of duplex recirculating pumps. As the effluent flows through the sand media, aeration and aerobic biological activity leading to purification of the wastewater takes place. Gravity collection pipes at the bottom of the bed capture the filtered liquid to be returned to the recirculating tank. The recirculating tank provides an anoxic environment wherein bacterial activity breaks down nitrates in the stream. After several cycles through the sand filter and tank, the effluent is discharged to an in -soil dispersal field. Design of the Recirculating Sand Filter system size and cycle frequency is dependent upon the volume and strength of the wastewater flow. A properly designed and operated Recirculating Sand Filter system will provide a high degree of wastewater treatment that will meet or exceed current Environmental Protection Agency standards. In addition, significant nitrogen and phosphorous removal takes place during the anoxic segment of the treatment. This benefit is not available in a standard in -soil treatment system installation. EXHIBIT B Oak Ridge Pond Preliminary Plat, Otsego square feet/lot size base units. allowed max. density increase total units Tier 1 1,029,333/40,000 25 50% 37 Tier 2 1,033,333/20,000 51 100% 102 Tier 3 1,100,000/20,000 55 200°x6 165 Tier 4 1,072,000/20,000 12 200% 36 TOTAL 143 340 EXHIBIT C-2 EXHIBIT C-1 « r N.nw .� . � . \a . N us -N rw.»t\\Nv nl� >v wMN W nM� INv N'll N N w Yy y YYId16\�wNnMYtiN(fNl\Miw� NNIu1\ Jt;N.31.2001 4:22PN N0.326 P.2 Hakanson Anderson 3601 Thurston Avenue, Suite 101, Anoka, MN 55303 Assoc., Inc. Phone: 763/427-5860 Fax: 763/427-0520 January 30, 2001 Chris Bulow Bulow, Inc. PO Bax 506 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: Meadowland; PUD Concept Plan Dear Chris: We have the following comments on the Concept Plan for Meadowland; P.U.D. in Otsego, Minnesota: 1. The cul-de-sac in the northwest corner of the plat must have the roadway centered on the bulb of the cul-de-sac. 2. Both connections toward the existing development should be shown. The 87th Street connection in the southeast corner of the plat should be dashed in and labeled as a possible future connection. The 90th street connection must be shown as a road to be constructed as part of this plat by the developer of Meadowland. 3. Wetland issues were addressed in my letter to you dated January 24, 2001. 4. The wastewater treatment system will need to be reviewed to determine compliance with City Ordinances and MN PCA Permit Conditions. The concept appears to be acceptable, however, the secondary site location is a considerable distance from the proposed treatment site. Failure of the #1 site would cause additional infrastructures to be installed for the relocate. We assume that only a drain field would be necessary for the alternate site, Distance set back from the DNR wetland needs to be considered in placing the system, Civil cf"MHnicipal �� Engineering Land Sxn+rying for JAN.31.2001 4:23PM N0.326 P. �{ We also assume the sewage collection system will be In the streets and will comply with the City's Engineering Manual for details of pipe and manholes. 5. Stormwater overflow from the DNR pond must be re -directed to Otsego Creek Watershed. The major portion of the site is now in the Otsego Creek Watershed. The rest of the area in the northeast of the property flows to the North Mississippi Watershed. If you have any questions or comments you may contact me at 763/427. 5860. Sincerely, Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc. cc: Mike Robertson, Admin. Judy Hudson, Clerk Lawrence G. Koshak, City Engineer Jon Bogart, PE, Bogart, Pederson & Assoc, Dan Licht, NAC Hakanson Page 2 Anderson 1Wa0119hara4 DOCSIMunictpar%AOTSE!GO12231,pt2231cb1.doo Assoc., Inc. JAN.31.2001 4:23PM January 24, 2001 Chris Bulow Bulow, Inc. PO Box 506 Elk River, MN 55330 Re: Meadowland's Wetlands Dear Mr. Bulow: NO. 326 P., 4 I have reviewed the Wetland Conservation Act and have determined the following information to help you in your Wetland Mitigation Plan for the above - referenced project. If the wetlands that are impacted as part of the 9& Street construction are wetland type 1, 2 or 6 and are outside of the shoreland wetland protection zone, you would have 2000 sq. ft. of de minimis. Assuming that 90th Street impacts more than 2000 sq. ft. of wetland, you would be required to mitigate (In kind) everything at a 2:1 ratio. A rough approximation by myself has determined a mitigation need of approximately 0.7 acres. (You would need to verify these numbers) In order to allow this fill, you will be required to foilow the Wetland Replacement Plan sequencing as shown in Minnesota State Rules, Chapter 8420. Sincerely, Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc. Ronald J. Wagner, PE RJW:dlc cc: Lawrence G. Koshak, PE %%HaollShared Ooca%MunicipaM+OT3EG012231bf2231cb.doc