10-01-01 PC"olikxI111MRST ASSOCIATRO co"sukTANTS* 1"C,
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 554416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - Anderson Building Relocation CUP
REPORT DATE: 09-27-01 APPLICATION DATE 09-10-01
NAC FILE: 176.02 - 01.27 CITY FILE: 2001-33
BACKGROUND
Mr. Tanner Anderson is proposing to relocate an existing single family dwelling to14292
NE 82"d Street (Lot 1, Block 1 Walesch Estates 1"Addition), which is presently developed
with a manufactured home and accessory buildings. The subject site is zoned R-3,
Residential - Long Range Urban Service District (General) and is also within the
Shoreland Overlay District of an unnamed recreational development lake (#86-331W).
Single family uses are a permitted use in this District. However, Section 19 of the Zoning
Ordinance requires consideration of a conditional use permit (CUP) for relocation of
existing buildings to lots within the City.
Attached for Reference:
Exhibit A: Site Location
Exhibit B: Site Plan (Sketch)
Exhibit C: Photos
ANALYSIS
Existing Structures. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing manufactured
home and accessory buildings from the property. Removal of the existing structures will
be required prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the relocated dwelling.
Building Relocation. The relocation of existing structures to lots within the City of Otsego
requires compliance with the performance standards outlined in Section 20-19-2, below.
A. Upon relocation, the building shall comply with applicable requirements of the State
Uniform Building Code.
Comment: A building permit is required prior to relocation of any structure.
Conformance with the Uniform Building Code should be made a condition of any
approval, subject to review and approval of the Building Official.
B. The proposed relocated building shall comply with the character of the
neighborhood in which it is being relocated as determined by the City Council.
Comment. The neighborhood is fully developed with single family dwellings
consisting of a mix of manufactured housing and stick built structures. The
structure to be located on the property is stick -built and will be consistent with this
character.
C. The relocated use will not result in a depreciation of the neighborhood or adjacent
property values.
Comment: Provided the structure has a similar character and site improvements
as adjacent dwellings and is in conformance with applicable performance standards,
no depreciation is anticipated.
D. The relocated structure shall be similar to the market valuation of adjacent principal
structures as determined by the City or County Assessor.
Comment: The structure currently on the property has an assessed value of
$39, 900. The Hennepin County Assessor has valued the structure to be located to
the site at $68, 700. Additionally, The applicant is also proposing improvements to
the structure, including re -siding, re -roofing and the addition of a basement, which
may add value. For reference, the average value of the properties (land and
buildings) within the general area of the subject site is $89,350. Therefore, the
relocated structure may be expected to have a value at least comparable to, if not
higher than, other properties in the area.
E. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months from the
date of location on site.
Comment: This requirement should be made a condition of any approval.
Lot Standards. The following table illustrates required performance standards for single
family lots and dwellings in the R-3 District. These standards are more restrictive than
those required by the Shoreland Overlay District except for impervious surface, because
the lot does not have riparian frontage. As indicated, the subject property and proposed
location of the relocated single family house will conform with applicable performance
standards.
Page 2 of 5
Lot
Area
Lot
Width
Lot
Depth
Lot
Cover
Building
Height
Setbacks
Front Side Rear
Required
1.0 ac.
150 ft.
100 ft.
25%
2.5 stories
35 ft. 35/15 ft. 20 ft.
Proposed
1.0 ac.
150 ft.
270 ft.
3%
1 story
140 ft. 70/50 ft. 65 ft.
Single Family Dwelling Standards. Section 20-17-11 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines
minimum design standards for single family uses, which apply to this application. The
basic requirements are for a perimeter foundation, minimum dimensions of 30 feet by 24
feet, a shingled roof, and minimum overhangs of 1 foot. Based upon the photo exhibits
and other information provided by the applicant, the existing structure is in conformance
with these requirements.
CUP Criteria. In considering CUP applications, the Planning Commission and City
Council must also take into consideration the possible adverse impacts of the building
relocation based upon (but not limited to) the following factors outlined in Section 20-4-2.F
of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The following policies may be cited in support the applicant's request.
The character of individual neighborhoods shall be reinforced, maintained
and upgraded. (Policy Plan, pg. 40)
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. The area is developed with low density single family residential uses,
which are planned to continue by the Comprehensive Plan. As such, the proposed
use will be compatible with present and future land uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: As noted above, the subject site and relocated structure conform with all
applicable performance standards. A certificate of survey is necessary to document
compliance.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The relocated dwelling and single family use of the property may be
considered an improvement of the property from its existing condition and therefore
anticipated to have a positive effect on the neighborhood.
Page 3 of 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 relocated structure will access off of Ochoa avenue and will not
generate traffic beyond the capabilities of streets serving the subject property.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
Utilities. The applicant will be required to upgrade or replace the existing septic system
and well if found to be failing or non -conforming. These systems are subject to review and
approval of the City Building Official.
Security. Section 20-19-3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a security to be posted
for the relocation of existing structures. This security is required in part to cover any costs
that may be incurred due to damage during the relocation as well as encourage completion
of the project. Such a security as determined by the building official should be required
as a condition of approval.
CONCLUSION
The proposed relocation of an existing single family dwelling to Lot 1, Block 1, Walesch
Estates 1 st Addition is generally consistent with the requirements for building relocations.
The request is positive in that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's direction to
supporting and encourage neighborhood improvements. As such, our office recommends
approval of the requested CUP, subject to the following conditions:
A building permit is applied for and approved by the Building Official prior to
relocation of the structure.
2. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six {6} months from the
date of location onsite, subject to approval of the Building Official.
Page 4 of 5
3. An occupancy permit for the relocated structure shall not be issued until such time
as all existing structures and debris are removed from the property.
4. The applicant is to submit a certificate of survey identifying the building, septic
system and well locations.
5. The design of an on-site septic system and well are subject to review and approval
of the Building Official.
6. A security as required by Section 20-19-3 of the Zoning Ordinance as determined
by the building official is posted.
7. Comments of other City Staff.
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Jerry Olson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Tanner Anderson
Page 5 of 5
N/. C
vvvvVVVVV
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
az N� s EXHIBIT B
41111411111F IPIIPI17
• � 41J. »m^rt �i111P.8" .r,�2af � .
•MMS'' _ 1 ^ _ _. a �vre .� -..... .
IAIL-a
L�zzgg
{ 'co
3..2,
"GINTIM1113T ASSOCIATI14 CONSULTANTS" INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - JKO Holdings/5781 Queens Ave Expansion
REPORT DATE: 09-26-01 APPLICATION DATE: 09-12-01
NAC FILE: 176.02 - 01.29 CITY FILE: 2001-34
BACKGROUND
Ebert Construction Inc., on behalf of JKO Holdings LLC., is proposing a 70 x 40 expansion
on to the existing industrial building located at 5781 Queens Avenue, which is northeast
of T. H. 101 and CSAH 36. The purpose of the expansion is to provide four loading docks
on the building to accommodate a new tenant, Builders Carpet, a wholesale carpet sales
warehouse. The building was previously occupied by Pioneer Marine.
The subject property is guided for industrial development by the Comprehensive Plan and
is located within the Sanitary Sewer Service District. The site is zoned 1-1, Limited
Industrial District and is also subject to a PUD -CUP for multiple principal uses. The
applicant is requesting a rezoning to 1-3, Special Industrial District to allow the expansion
of the building with metal siding consistent with the existing structure. Expansion of
existing industrial buildings to add loading docks requires consideration of a CUP per
Section 20-22-2.E of the Zoning Ordinance, in addition to site and building plan review.
Exhibits
A. Site Location
B. Site Plan
C. Building Elevations
ANALYSIS
Zoning. The property is zoned 1-1 District. Wholesale showrooms such as the proposed
tenant are a permitted use of this District. Based upon the character of the area
surrounding the site, which was annexed from Frankfort Township, the City established the
1-3 District to allow for a continuation or expansion of existing uses in this area. Whereas
the existing building is non -conforming under 1-1 District standards, metal building facades
and post -beam construction are allowed within the 1-3 District. As such, the applicant's
request to rezone the property to 1-3 District to allow for the proposed building expansion
was anticipated and provided for by the Comprehensive Plan.
Building Addition. Due to the shape of the property and location of existing structures,
options for providing loading facilities with on-site circulation and access are limited. The
applicant is proposing a 70 -foot by 40 -foot (2,800 square feet) addition to the northwest
corner of the existing building. The expansion provides four south facing loading berths
for semi loading/unloading. Adequate circulation areas have been provided to ensure that
no backing of semi -trucks from the public streets is necessary to access the loading areas.
The CUP should limit use of the existing loading doors on the east side of the building to
those vehicles that have adequate access without backing off of the public street.
The building expansion is proposed with vertical metal siding that matches the existing
building. Metal exterior building materials are allowed within the 1-3 District by Section 20-
17-4.B.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. No color has been specified for the building expansion,
but it is assumed to be the same as the existing building. The height of the proposed
building expansion's flat roof is 21 feet, which is within the height limitations of the 1-3
District.
Lot Requirements. The following table illustrates the lot requirements of the 1-3 District.
As shown below, the proposed site and proposed buildings conform with all applicable
standards.
Lot Area
Required 1.0 ac.
Lot Width
Setbacks
Bldg.
Cover
Front Side Rear
200 ft.
35 ft. 10 ft. 65 ft.
30.0%
Proposed
3.3 ac.
617 ft.
35 ft. I loft. 65ft.
14.2%
Off -Street Parking. The change in building occupancy requires that off-street parking
facilities be re-evaluated. No floor plans have been submitted to provide a breakdown of
uses within the building. The applicant will be required to provide a breakdown of
warehouse, office or showroom floor space within the building. The applicant will also be
required to stripe the required number of parking stalls, including an additional five stalls
onto the parking surface and provide ADA accessible stalls.
Page 2 of 6
With the expansion of the loading area, the applicant is proposing to extend the asphalt
surface and curb as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Landscaping. No landscaping plans have been submitted. Because this site is at the
gateway to Otsego, a row of evergreen trees should be provided along the west edge of
the loading area/parking lot to screen the view of this area from T. H. 101. The site plan
should be revised to show the location and number of trees, which should be a minimum
height of six feet.
Signs. No signage plans have been submitted. Under Section 37 of the Zoning
Ordinance and the PUD -CUP regulating the property, the building tenant is limited to two
wall signs. One free standing sign is allowed for the entire property. Prior to installing
any signage, the applicant must obtain a sign permit.
Trash Storage. A fence enclosure exists on the southeast corner of the building for trash
containers. In the past, trash containers have not been kept within the enclosure. A
condition should be included with the CUP requiring that trash containers be kept within
the building or within the enclosure as required by Section 20-16-5.13 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Grading Plan. The loading area expansion will require grading and increase the amount
of surface on the west side of the building. All grading and drainage issues are subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer.
Utilities. The loading area expansion will require relocation of the existing well on the
property, which is to be paved over. All utility issues are subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
Criteria. In considering the rezoning and CUP applications, the Planning Commission and
City Council must evaluate the criteria listed in Sections 20-3-2.17 and 20-4-2.F of the
Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan anticipates a continuation of industrial uses in
this area of the community consistent with the existing character of the area. This
strategy is to be implemented through the 1-3 District established following the
Comprehensive Plan process. The request to rezone the property and expand the
existing building with loading facilities is consistent with these goals and the City's
broader goals for sustaining commercial and industrial uses.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Page 3 of 6
Comment. The subject parcel is surrounded on three sides by existing industrial
uses. The only concern for compatibility is the appearance of the loading facilities
from T.H. 101 at the City's southern gateway. These concerns may be mitigated
with installation of recommended landscaping.
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 is required to meet all performance standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed rezoning and CUP will allow for re -utilization of a vacant
building adding sustaining industrial uses in this area.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
Comment. Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: The streets serving the property are anticipated to have adequate
capacity to serve traffic generated by the proposed use.
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.
CONCLUSION
The request to rezone the subject site from 1-1 to 1-3 District to allow for the proposed
building expansion is generally consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan. While some additional information is required to determine off-street
parking requirements, the proposed building expansion conforms with all other applicable
performance standards within the Zoning Ordinance. As such, our office recommends
approval of the applications as provided for below.
Page 4 of 6
Decision 1 -Zoning Map Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the subject site from 1-1
District to 1-3 District based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the request based upon a finding that the action is inconsistent with
the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. (Specific findings should be cited.)
C. Motion to table the request. (Please provide specific direction as to additional
information to be submitted.)
Decision 2 - CUP/Site and building plans
A. Motion to approve a CUP and site and building plans for expanding an existing
building to include loading docks, subject to the following conditions:
1. Use of the loading doors on the east side of the building is limited to those
vehicles that can access the area without backing off of a public street.
2. The site plan is revised to provide six-foot tall evergreen trees along the
west edge of the parking area/loading area, subject to City Staff review and
approval.
3. The exterior color of the building expansion match that of the existing
structure.
4. Off-street parking stalls are provided per Section 21 of the Zoning Ordinance
regarding number, size and stripe requirements.
5. Any signs will conform with Section 37 of the Zoning Ordinance or the PUD -
CUP as applicable and a permit will be obtained prior to installation.
6. Trash containers must be kept within the building or within the existing
exterior enclosure.
7. All grading, drainage and utility issues are subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
8. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the request based upon a finding that the action is inconsistent with
the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. (Specific findings should be
cited.)
Page 5 of 6
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Jeff Ophovan
Greg Ebert
Page 6 of 6
8
NAC
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
i
0 'o ao
SCALc' IN ?E�'
®NOTES
v • mni wuotvmru
CITY OF
OTSEGO
Z_ mn.o -
BL[LDERSCARPET
OTSEGO. MN
AIL
LANDFORM
EXHIBIT B
R
Z
O
Q
rd
n
B
C--
ELS
a
I
SEP.26.2001 2:46PM
NO. 218 P.6/9
ENGINEERING REVIEW Review No, 1
Hakanson Preliminary Plat Review
Anderson Residential Subdivision
Assoc
.,lnc. for the City of Otsego
by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to:
Mike Robertson, Administrator
cc:
Judy Hudson, City Clerk,
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Greg Ebert, Ebert, Inc,, Developer
Jeff Ophaven, JKO Holding, LLC, Owners
Landform, Developer's Engineer & Surveyor
Reviewed by:
Lawrence G. Koshak, PE
Shane M. Nelson, EIT
Date:
September 26, 2001
Proposed
Development:
Builders Carpet
Street Location
of Property:
5781 Queen Avenue NE
Applicant and
Ebert, Inc,
Developer:
23350 County Road 10
Corcoran, MN 55357
Owners of Record:
Jeff Ophaven
19315 County Road 30
Corcoran, MN 55340
Purpose: Convert existing building site to a carpet retail business.
Carpet storage and loading dock facilities will be added with
pavement,
Jurisdictional
Agencies:
(but not limited to):
Permits Required
(but not limited to):
City of Otsego
Mn/DOT Hydrologist
G:1MunIdp@MOTSEG012245%ot2246PreplatR\ N1.doc
.�EP.26.2001 2:46PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
SITE EXISTING CONDITION CIA
PRELIMINARY SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C3.1
OTHER COMMENTS
G:\Munlcipal\AOTSEGO\2246loU245PrePletR\AAll.doc
N0.218 P.7/9
SEP.26.2001 2:46PM 1
N0.218 P.8i9
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Site Plans of Builders Carpet, 9M01 by Landforms.
Development Application
Wetlands Report by Kjolhaug Environmental
City of Otsego Engineering Manual, 3/99 w/revisions date 2/27/01.
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, February 1991.
EXISTING SITE DRAWING CIA
1. The culvert under Queens Avenue just south of this south and north along Mr.
Ophaven's property on the east side of Queens Avenue needs to be shown with
elevation size, location and inverts.
2. The street name is Queen Avenue instead of as shown,
3. Is the topographic information current? What was the last date of the topo?
4. Note in upper right hand corner mentions the "City of New Hope", Why?
5. North arrow appears in the wrong direction.
6. Bench mark for the site is not shown.
7. Drainage arrows would be preferred to identify the direction of flow.
PROPOSED SITE PLAN SHEET 3C.1
1. The Developer's Engineer must provide Stormwater Management Plan on the
present site with the proposed changes. The additional imperious surface appears to
be approximately 0.4 acres, This proposal does change the hydrology off the site,
Subsequently the increased runoff will affect downstream conditions. Downstream
culverts and detention ponds capacity must be evaluated
2. All pipe size and type shall be shown. Any ponding area shall also be designated,
3. A catch basin and pipe should discharge storm water off site to the Mn/DOT ditch on
TH 101 from the new pavement areas. The depressed curb will not be adequate.
4. As indicated in Kjolhaug Environmental Services letter dated September 7, 2001, the
site wetlands have been field located in the vicinity of the building expansion. The
wetland boundary needs to be surveyed and shown on the grading plan.
Page 2
G;1MunicfpaMOTSEGO\224,bt224BPrePlatRVWI .doc
SEP.26.2001 2:47PM N0.218 P.9/9 1
DRAINAGE
1. Each water quality pond must be sized to hold the runoff from a 2.5" rainfall event &
have a skimmer structure, The water quality ponds and skimmer structures must
meet the standards in the Otsego Engineering Manual. Design calculation showing
how the pond sizes were obtained is required.
2. The peak flow & runoff volume should be checked for both impervious area only &
the weighted curve number for each drainage basin. In many instances with large
lots, the peak flow & runoff volume is larger using only the impervious area and curve
number. The larger runoff volume/peak flow must.be used in the storm water design.
3. A copy of the plans must be submitted for review and approval by the DNR.
SEWAGE TREATMENT
1, The Developer's retained Mr. Art Dunn to determine the suitability of the soil for
sewage treatment according to the City's ordinances. Mr. Dunn stated in his report
that all lots will need to construct mound system. Although mound systems are an
altemative method of treatment, the extended life of the system is limited.
This particular area of the City is zoned as Reserve Agriculture and may not have a
central treatment in the future. Allowing the mound system may find these homes
lacking adequate treatment in the future.
WT
1, Potable water will be provided by individual wells.
STREETS
1. The Developer is providing a looped street system to be built to the City's standards.
The distance between accesses to Jaber Avenue are adequate at over 1200 feet.
Jaber Avenue is a rural paved street in adequate condition for the Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) that uses it now. The addition of this plat will not add significant ADT to
the street, The ADT is projected at about 80 per day. The street perhaps is less than
500 ADT presently. The street is owned and maintained by both the City of Otsego
and Monticello Township, Approval of any additional plats on either side of the road
may cause officials to consider improvement to the street.
WETLAND
1, Wetland issues will need to be reviewed and an impact or no impact determined by
the Developer and report to the City.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Subject to the completion of the issues above, we recommend approval.
Page 3
G:Wunfa1paNAOTSEG012245kat2245Pre PIetRVWl .doc
3.3,
HOIRT"WtST ASSOCM*Tt4 ca"S iLTANTS4, 1144.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - Otsego Farms; Rezoning-Preliminary/Final Plat
REPORT DATE: 26 September 2001 APPLICATION DATE: 10 September 2001
NAC FILE: 176.02 - 01.28 CITY FILE: 2001-34
BACKGROUND
Stern Real Estate Services Inc. has submitted an application for a residential -hobby farm
development entitled Otsego Farms. The subdivision includes 13 single family lots on
81.3 acres of land located south of CSAH 39 on Jaber Avenue. The property is currently
developed with one single family dwelling.
The property is within the Agriculture Preserve defined by the Comprehensive Plan and
is zoned A-1, Agriculture - Rural Service District. The Comprehensive Plan guides the
property for continued agricultural land uses with residential densities not to exceed four
units per 40 acres for parcels with existing street frontage.
The application requires consideration of a rezoning to A-2 District to allow for
implementation of additional development rights and a PUD -CUP for keeping horses on
each lot within the A-2 District. The applicant has requested concurrent processing of the
preliminary and final plat as allowed by Section 21-3-3 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Site Plan
C. Grading Plan
D. Preliminary/Final Plat
ANALYSIS
Zoning. The property is currently zoned A-1 District, which allows for residential
development at a density of one unit per 40 acres. To develop the four units per 40 acres
allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, amendment of the Zoning Map to A-2 District is
required. The applicant is also requesting pre -approval of CUPs for each lot to allow the
keeping of horses within the A-2 District per Section 20-26-4.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Rezoning and PUD -CUP applications are evaluated based upon the criteria established
by Section 20-3-2.F and 20-4-2.17 of the Zoning Ordinance respectively. The decision of
the Planning Commission and City Council on the request is to be based upon (but not
limited to) the following factors:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan encourages creating opportunities for hobby
farm uses at the perimeter of the agricultural preserve area. This property is at the
northwest corner of the Agriculture Preserve and planned for continued agricultural
use. The proposed development is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive
Plan regarding development potential with the allowance of four units per forty
acres density with street frontage.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. The subject property is surrounded by agriculture or rural intensity uses,
The proposed subdivision will be consistent with these existing uses and the
planned continued agricultural character of the area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The project will be required to conform with all applicable performance
standards of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed use is of a rural intensity and character that is consistent
with the area in which it is proposed.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
Page 2 of 7
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 property currently has access to Jaber Avenue, which is in
substandard condition. The City Engineer has determined however, that this street
can accommodate the rural intensity development proposed with this 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: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity as it is at an intensity guided by the Comprehensive Plan.
Density. The Comprehensive Plan prescribes a maximum density of four units per 40
acres for parcels with street frontage within the Agriculture Preserve area. The A-2
District, based upon the direction of the Comprehensive Plan allows for the same. Based
upon the 81.32 acres size of the parcel, the maximum number of lots allowed by the
Comprehensive Plan and A-2 District is eight. As such, the preliminary and final plats are
consistent with density allowances.
Access. Access to the subdivision is to be provided by Jaber Avenue, which connects to
CSAH 39 to the north and 70'hStreet to the south. The street is in substandard condition
and with its foundation likely dating back to pre -automobile times. However, in that this
is a rural density project, the traffic impacts will likely be minimal. The City Engineer
determined that the street will be adequate for the anticipated traffic. .
All of the lots will have access to the internal street the internal street, including the
existing residence. The applicant has designed the internal street based upon a rural
section design. The design and construction of the local street is subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
The City typically requires that street connections be made to adjacent properties.
However, topography and wetland issues with the property make such considerations
difficult for this project.
Lot Requirements. The table below illustrates the lot requirements of the A-2 District as
well as the proposed preliminary/final plat's conformance with them.
Page 3 of 7
Lot Area
Lot
Width
Setbacks
Front Side Rear
1 ac.
150 ft.
35 ft. 30 ft. 50 ft. �]
The lots range in size from 7.6 acres to 14.13 acres in size, with an average lot size of 9.5
acres. All of the lots and building pads shown on the submitted plans conform with these
minimum requirements. We have the following additional comments regarding the lot
design:
Consideration should be given to platting the narrow remnant portion of Lot 1, Block
1 as an Outlot. This parcel could potentially be combined with the abutting parcel
to the north allowing additional development that would access off of proposed 92" d
Street.
The side lot lines of several lots include angles that create irregular lot shapes. Sid
lot lines should be straight wherever possible. We would recommend that the
preliminary/final plats be revised to eliminate the angled lot lines between Lots 1
and 2, Block 1, Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Lots 4 and 5 Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2, Block
2.
The side lot line between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 should be revised to intersect the
subject property's corner and eliminate the 25 foot "jog" on Lot 3, Block 1.
Keeping of Horses. Keeping of horses within the A-2 District is allowed as a conditional
use and being considered for the overall project as part of a PUD -CUP. The minimum lot
size for keeping horses within the A-2 District is 2.5 acres, which all of the proposed lots
exceed. Additional considerations are as follows:
• Buildings for stabling horses may not be closer than 200 feet to any property zoned
R-1 District. There are no properties zoned R-1 within 200 feet of the subject site.
• The maximum number of horses stabled on each lot may not exceed one horse per
acre or ten horses, which ever is least.
• Shelter equal to 100 square feet of area per horse is required.
• Hobby farm uses are subject to the accessory building size and material regulations
for residential uses outlined in Section 20-164 of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Manure may not be stockpiled or applied within 300 feet of an adjacent residence,
300 feet from ditches, lakes and creeks or 200 feet from a private well as regulated
by Section 20-27-10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 4 of 7
Conditions should be included with any approval outlining these requirements. The City
should also require a manure management plan for the project stating how manure is to
be handled and spread for any horses.
Park Dedication. The Comprehensive Parks and Trails Plan does not identify any future
park locations within the subject property. As such, park dedication requirements must be
satisfied with a cash fee in lieu of land dedication as provided for by Section 21-7-18 of the
Subdivision Ordinance. Based upon seven new dwelling sites and the current cash fee
of $1,075 per lot, the total park fee in lieu of land dedication is $7,525.00.
Easements. Section 20-7-15 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires 10 foot perimeter
drainage and utility easements for each lot, which may overlay common side lot lines. The
easements have been provided on the preliminary/final plat. The Subdivision Ordinance
also requires that drainage and utility easements be provided over all wetlands, which
have also been provided. All easements are subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
Grading and Utility Plans. The application submission includes proposed grading and
drainage plans. The grading plan show proposed building locations and one drainfield
location for each lot. The grading plan is required to demonstrate a primary and
secondary septic drainfield locations for each lot. As such, the grading plan will need to
be revised to identify secondary drainfield sites for each lot. All grading, drainage and
utility issues are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
Development Contract. Upon approval of a final plat, the applicant will be required to
enter into a development contract with the City and pay all fees and securities. The
development contract is subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In reviewing the application, the Planning Commission and City Council must first evaluate
the policy issue of rezoning the property to allow for the development density allowed by
the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development of a hobby farm oriented residential
subdivision is consistent with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan for long-term rural
areas. If City Officials make a similar finding, our office would recommend approval of the
Zoning Map amendment.
From a technical standpoint, the proposed subdivision is generally consistent with
applicable performance standards. A few modifications need to be made to the lot design
to eliminate some irregular angles and secondary septic drainfield sites must also be
identified. Subject to resolution of these issues, we would recommend approval of the
PUD -CUP and preliminary/final plat subject to the conditions outlined below.
Page 5 of 7
Decision 1 -Zoning Map Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the subject site from A-1
District to A-2 District based upon a finding that the action is consistent with the
direction of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the application based upon a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. (Specific findings should be cited.)
C. Motion to table the application.
Decision 2 - PUD -CUP and Preliminary/Final Plat
A. Motion to approve a PUD -CUP and Preliminary/Final Plat for Otsego Farms,
subject to the following conditions:
All access and street design issues are subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer.
2 The preliminary/final plat is revised to eliminate angled side lot lines as
recommended by the City Planner in their report of 26 September 2001.
3. Keeping of horses shall be allowed on all lots subject to the provisions of
Section 20-26-4.13.2 of the Zoning Ordinance and the following:
a. The maximum number of horses stabled on each lot may not exceed
one horse per acre or ten horses, whichever is least.
b. Shelter equal to 100 square feet of area per horse is provided.
C. Manure stockpiling and application is regulated by Section 20-27-10
of the Zoning Ordinance. A manure management plan for the project
shall be submitted, subject to review and approval of City Staff.
4. The applicant is to pay a cash fee in lieu of land dedication of $7,525.00 to
satisfy park and trail dedication requirements.
5. Grading, drainage and easements are subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer.
6. The applicant is required to enter into a development contract with the City
and pay all fees and securities, subject to the review and approval of the City
Attorney.
Page 6 of 7
7. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the request based upon a finding it is inconsistent with the policies
of the Comprehensive Plan. (Specific findings should be cited.)
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Michael Stem
Kathleen O'Connell
Page 7 of 7
NAC
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
� J
p BLOC I
Uwclwr
rI----��_-------r-------- - - - - -- ° 1
LOT 2
It
LOT z
,N
LO 6
.nTM'a.rN�.
INN' O` P
LOT 5
w2
DMLOMMI NOIES.
a ya u..r• Uuw nrwr •� v ra.a
Nr a•,a . r 1, ."—•
wa,a. rwu r ua • y
r. r,un ••.^"•rN rr Krory, .ur . NO N,ur
r.r Yyr NuVy NM . Nr N µ
1-: W a Nr
w.nac ra.«, No aN+. M ii.
N aWrOpwla fWrl ,Wrr w Wl rt
rr rruruar W ru �� „l •r -Mare
LEM GESCRWMN
NORTH
rlzr
baa � N
r. l..�'��. WY• YIa�Y
Ltr
ra
IZF EXHIBIT B
El �LANQ
21 sq.ft
.4
tsEPTICAREA (TYP.)
BLQC
- .. — ' v ;dl -
K
,.Pond
Nr4F—IM
pm 6-
'
PAO (YYP.)'
HOUSE
LOT- I
71 7'
To
JR
'jll D &JONAL
L40T 2. ET 'LANg-Na-3—
-.Do acre
47 -t:
—777
. . .. t.; I t -�-
fDr
%
JYRISDICTIONAL
WE TLANDI 011: - 4
1 1.448 Aq.tL
0.0 06as
LOT
9 Of'ocros
K
7--
1 �n i
-own
AIDS" raNrsuL
'E�g "T
TYPICAL SIKILET SECTION
2.715 "At.
LEGEND
N01E5: -
NORTH
PRA
: EA -Mi. U& W
IZF EXHIBIT C-1
(1•'U'`._..
f
LO 2
' �,jl :
r..
�'' r •� Y.:
EXC TAON
I
µ
......
7.62 acree,
10
. . .. t.; I t -�-
fDr
%
JYRISDICTIONAL
WE TLANDI 011: - 4
1 1.448 Aq.tL
0.0 06as
LOT
9 Of'ocros
K
7--
1 �n i
-own
AIDS" raNrsuL
'E�g "T
TYPICAL SIKILET SECTION
2.715 "At.
LEGEND
N01E5: -
NORTH
PRA
: EA -Mi. U& W
IZF EXHIBIT C-1
3 tY
�Ipp�
M.L[.Z LOS
aA
•
Ilia
00 C"
cm �� .\ �,--• �'
a
UU o
D
= I�
X y
w N
LL
yyy
Q
N¢ N
Q W
01 S
O N
Oo
Yh
m
0
U
M.L[.Z LOS
aA
li
M.9 t.Z LOS
LU
LO
cn
C14
m
OI
-----------
__�
I
00 C"
cm �� .\ �,--• �'
a
UU o
D
= I�
X y
w N
LL
yyy
Q
N¢ N
Q W
01 S
O N
Oo
Yh
m
0
U
LL.
MIMI F",
if;
9:Of acres a...r.r
ipoRA
.JQRibiTaCTIl3RAL7 .
2.715 sq.ft.
35'
_AB* -BUCK 2 I
LOT i'.
� I �'vS t .16.13 acres � I / ``• "' It. L � 1•
3aI I JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND Hl
:r 306.391 sq. ft. \ r l 1 it �,! !1'i //' / ��_/� r1r '. — t il•
f{ 7.03 acres �\ X 1 ' 1'' i r.. LOT 4
9.04 acres
54.2`--_. — \ .� , `•__. ./ �r
35' TYPa z'
i HK 934.5
1
}�v.. 'y. \ t. �/ / j•('RE�� �—� ` Il ,� 1 Y\ , � i, � `\ •, `,• \ 1' IHOUSE;)"AD (T+.)
LOT" 5
:� m 1 �. •\ _ _ / 9.25 acres S PTIC AREK'•(TYP.)
34.9
LOt
1 9i1)4 acres
S J, JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND 92 1 `+`` ,' '+ �,`• ,s;.. '\\ i• — `/• /'/. Jn _
72.751 sq.ft.
1-67 acres—
[
S YP
NOTES'
•- °- --® v .•w.a o.-..-...wo u_e.. +nvuur.r wpm i��w� m.'i�s w: u -i. a -m i1 �wWe wuMs .rla �s[�Os I,�
®—.s.r...a e � m m ae•�a � r m � ®.�.. uw Mo.Ga
m..,.. m m e - LEGEND
rraarr. sr ®' rwuwuu�_mmv—s..� r...rruw—nwwr..a am +e orm .._rs v _m _ 'mm rygm imr tn. xR �p� .—�
_ - -.r - _r__.........�. NORM EXHIBIT C-2
IIEXDER TION
OTSEGO FARMS
623.49 1 s^�
>w
�i 4
GRAPHIC SCALE
150 75 150 J00
( N F )
• O161E9 1/S MOI R 1! MOI ROI PfF .M]•aENT /OMD
O ODRRS 1 6116 MDmOE IIG .� MMM O[ 1G111�0<
VWA/D ARA F EA.SC f
ARE S W DR/S
II
roa r¢i�w �nt� roar e'�incl�mt
MCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOC C V HIIC
ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEY.
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS
TD
P.26.2001 2 45PM
NO. 21e P.2/9
ENGINEERING REVIEW Review No. 1
Hakanson Preliminary Plat Review
1 Anderson Residential Subdivision
Assoc., Inc. for the City of Otsego
by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to: Mike Robertson, Administrator
cc: Judy Hudson, City Clerk,
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Stem Real Estate Services, Inc„ Developer
McCombs Frank Roos Assoc., Inc., Developers, Engineers
& Land Surveyors
Reviewed by:
Lawrence G, Koshak, PE
Shane M. Nelson, EIT
Date:
September 24, 2001
Proposed
Development:
Otsego Farms
Street Location
of Property:
Part of the SW % of Section 15 Township 121 Range 23
Applicant:
Michael Stern
1500 S. Highway 100, Suite 245
Minneapolis, MN 55416
P:(763) 525-1455 F;(763) 5250382
Developer:
Stern Development Corp.
Owners of Record:
Henry and Carolyne Blonigien
9250 Jaber Avenue
Otsego, MN 55362
P;(763) 295-4023
Purpose: Rezone from A-1 to A-2 for Development of 8 single family
Lots.
Jurisdictional Agencies:
(but not limited to): City of Otsego
Permits Required
(but not limited to):NPDES
DNR
G, WlunicipaNAOTSEG0%2244�ct2244PmPIatRVWl .doe
SFP.26.2001 2:45PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
TITLE SHEET (SHEET 1)
PRELIMINARY PLAT (SHEET 2)
SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (SHEETS 3 & 4)
OTHER COMMENTS
G:Wu nlc1pallAOTSEG0122441oQ244proplatRV W1.doc
NO. 218 P.3/9
SFP.26.2001 2:46PM N0.218 P.4i9
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Preliminary Plat of Otsego Farms, 8/31/01, by McCombs Frank Roos Assoc., Inc.
Site Plan and Preliminary Grading Plan of Otsego Farms, 3/23/01, by McCombs Frank Roos
Assoc., Inc.
City of Otsego Engineering Manual, March 1999 w/revisions date 2/27/01
Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 — EAW Requirement
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, February 1991
National Wetland Inventory Map, 1991
TITLE SHEET (SHEET 1)
1. Include name, address, and phone number of record owner(s), (Section 21-6-2.A.3)
PRELIMINARY PLAT (SHEET 2)
1. Label & show soil boring locations on Preliminary Plat.
2. Show existing zoning classifications for land in and abutting the subdivision. (Section
21-6-2.B.2,)
3. Show boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land, identified by
name and ownership, (Section 21-6-2.B.6.)
4. Submit a complete Geotechnical Report.
SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN (SHEETS 3 & 4)
1. Statement certifying the environmental condition of the site. (21-6-2.13.10).
2. Bituminous must be in accordance with Mn/DOT 2350. Class 5 must be 100%
crushed,
3. Cross slope depicted in typical street section shall be 1/3" per foot (2.78%).
4. Storm Ponds — Sedimentation basins must have skimmer structure.
5. Garage floor, first floor, and basement floor elevations shall be depicted.
(Section 21-6-2.C.10.)
6. Permanent pool MIN. depth is 4' for sedimentation basins. A 10' bench at 10;1 slope
is required at the NW!_. (See Standard Plate No. 404)
Page 2
G:(Munk!paNAOTSEGO\22441ot2244PrePlatR1/w1,doc
SEP.26.2001 2:46PM N0.21e P.5i9
7. Front yard setback required is 35' from ROW. Side yard setback required is 301
,
S. Call out size, material, and class of culverts.
DRAINAGE
Each water quality pond must be sized to hold the runoff from a 2,5" rainfall event &
have a skimmer structure. The water quality ponds and skimmer structures must
meet the standards in the Otsego Engineering Manual. Design calculation showing
how the pond sizes were obtained is required.
2. The peak flow & runoff volume should be checked for both impervious area only &
the weighted curve number for each drainage basin, In many instances with large
lots, the peak flow & runoff volume is larger using only the impervious area and curve
number. The larger runoff volume/peak flow must be used in the storm water design.
SEWAGE TREATMENT
The Developer's retained Mr. Art Dunn to determine the suitability of the soil for
sewage treatment according to the City's ordinances. Mr. Dunn stated in his report
that all lots will need to construct mound system, Although mound systems are an
alternative method of treatment, the extended life of the system is limited.
This particular area of the City is zoned as Reserve Agriculture and may not have a
central treatment in the future, Allowing the mound systems may find these homes
lacking adequate treatment in the future unless the lots have additional future sites
available.
WATER
1. Potable water will be provided by individual wells.
STREETS
1, The Developer is providing a looped street system to be built to the City's standards.
The distance between accesses to Jaber Avenue are adequate at over 1200 feet.
Jaber Avenue is a rural paved street in adequate condition for the Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) that uses it now, The addition of this plat will not add significant ADT to
the street. The ADT is projected at about 80 per day. The street perhaps is less than
500 ADT presently. The street is owned and maintained by both the City of Otsego
and Monticello Township. Approval of any additional plats on either side of the road
may cause officials to consider improvement to the street,
WETLAND
Wetland issues will need to be reviewed and an impact or no impact determined by
the Developer and reported to the City.
Page 3
G:WMunicipal\AOTSEG0\2244\ot2244PrePlatRVWI Am