Loading...
1999-11-02 Comp Plan Amend, Rezoning, CUP/PUDNORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Albertville Mayor and City Council Albertville Planning Commission FROM: Deb Garross DATE: 2 November 1999 RE: Albertville - Albert Villas Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezoning CUP / PUD (Concept PUD & Development PUD) Preliminary Plat FILE: 163.06 - 99.08 BACKGROUND The purpose of this item is to continue consideration of the above referenced applications for K.C. Land Company. This item was scheduled for public hearing on September 14, 1999 however the applicant requested that the applications be removed from the agenda and considered on October 12, 1999. At the October meeting, the Planning Commission gave direction to the applicant to revise the PUD and preliminary plat drawings to address the items outlined in the Planning Report dated 8 September 1999. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to November 9, 1999 for a final review. The focus of this memo will be to outline for the Planning Commission the revisions that have been incorporated into the PUD and preliminary plat since the last meeting. Please refer to the Planning Report dated 8 September for additional reference to this matter. DISCUSSION The developer has submitted a series of applications requesting the City to consider changes in its land use objectives, policies and standards, to allow for a more intense development pattern within the southwest part of the community than has been planned by the City. Early this spring, the applicant requested the City to consider an R-1 zoning classification for the subject site. Following careful review and consideration by both the Planning Commission and City Council, the developer was directed to plan according to the R-1 A Zoning standards which were felt to be more suitable for the subject site. The revised plan is closer to the R-1A standards than the original submittal and a number of the outstanding conditions have been satisfied. However, it is ultimately the decision of the City as to the degree of flexibility to grant within the context of a PUD. The subject site is an extremely difficult piece of property to develop in that it is severely constrained by natural and man-made features. Further complicating matters is the fact that the access points into the subject site were predetermined based upon the accesses permitted to the townhome project to the north. At this point the City needs to determine whether or not the proposed residential project satisfies the desired development goals of the community. Implementation of the project will allow for the completion of infrastructure development within this area of the City. The infrastructure improvements are desired at this time by the developer 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6 PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@WINTERNET.COM if of the Golf Course project to the north, in order to allow him to complete the townhome elements of the Cedar Creek South project. The City based upon its current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance can also determine when this area should develop. If the City feels that the time is appropriate to consider development of the subject site then the current agricultural/rural zoning and land use designations should be changed accordingly. It is however incumbent upon the developer to demonstrate to the City that the timing is appropriate and that the proposed development project is not premature. ISSUES This project required that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared and reviewed pursuant to the process established by the Environmental Quality Board. The EAW was published on August 25, 1999 and comments were submitted from the Department of Natural Resources and State Historical Society. The EAW process specifies that the City may not grant any project approvals until such a time as the City Council adopts a negative declaration (a finding that the project will not result in major environmental impacts). This being the case, recommendations for approval of the various applications should be contingent upon completion of the EAW process. 2. Is the time right to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the designation of the site from Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential? The Planning Commission will need to forward a recommendation to the City Council indicating that either the Comprehensive Plan should be amended or that development is premature and the amendment should be denied. 3. If the Comprehensive Plan amendment is recommended, the Planning Commission should forward a recommendation to the City Council to rezone the subject site from A-1 Agricultural to R-1A Low Density Single Family to bring the Zoning Ordinance into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Does the proposal meet the intent of the PUD elements of the Zoning Ordinance? The Planning Commission will need to forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve, deny or approve the CUP/PUD with conditions. Depending upon the outcome of the discussion, the appropriate findings of fact and decision should be drafted and provided to the City Council. Staff has prepared two draft findings of fact (attached to this memorandum) to assist the Planning Commission in making its recommendation to either approve or deny the CUP/PUD application. 5. In the event that the three items above are recommended for approval, the Planning Commission will need to forward a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed preliminary plat. The attached findings of fact and decision documents are provided to assist the Planning Commission in this regard. T PUD/PRELIMINARY PLAT REVISIONS K.C. Land Company has submitted plans for development of 338 single-family lots as part of the Albert Villas project. The subject site contains 235.17 acres of land. The PUD concept plan covers the entire land holdings of the applicant. The developer desires to preliminary plat the part of the site (approximately 136.75 acres located north of County Ditch #9) into 177 single-family lots. The original proposal consisted of 182 single-family lots located north of the County Ditch. The revised plan indicates that 5 lots have been deleted from the preliminary plat. The plan has been modified relocating Kahl Avenue further to the east to increase the buildable area of lots adjacent to the NSP easement. In addition, 50t" Court (a cul-de-sac originally proposed in the southeastern part of the site) has been deleted from the plan. The cul-de-sac removal resulted in a decrease in the number of lots, the provision for 65 feet of right-of-way for CSAH 18 (as opposed to the 60' originally proposed) and an increase in the amount of parkland to be dedicated to the City (approximately 8 acres). However, the revised plan proposes 51 st Street be constructed with a right-of-way width of 50' versus 60' required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The reduction in right-of-way width will need to be specifically cited as an area of PUD flexibility (provided the plan is acceptable to the City Engineer and approved by the City). With regard to the other roads within the PUD, the majority of the streets have been shifted slightly to increase buildable lot areas throughout the project area. The developer did indicate to staff that he has negotiated an option for the triangular parcel located east of proposed Outlot E. This development is positive with regard to the preliminary plat and PUD circulation system because it will provide for a secondary street connection that was the subject of concern at the time of the original proposal. However, to date, the developer has not provided documentation that he has control of the land. As such, the secondary access issue still exists and therefore 52"d Street should continue to be planned with a temporary cul-de-sac at its eastern extent (to Lot 1, Block 7 and Lot 4, Block 5). The developer will need to amend the preliminary plat and PUD plan at some future date, to incorporate the legal description of the newly acquired parcel into the project. (This action will require publication and public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council). The revised plan indicates that more wetland mitigation is required than that which was planned in the original preliminary plat. It should be noted that the amount of wetland impact in the proposed plan is relatively slight considering the size of the parcel and the number of wetlands (and County Ditch #9) that exist on site. The following table demonstrates the amount of filling/mitigation proposed in the original and revised plans. Area to be filled Area to be Mitigated Storm Water Ponds Original Plan Revised Plan Original Plan Revised Plan Original Plan Revised Plan 1.87 2.84 4.22 3.45 6.63 6.44 With regard to the Shoreland Management Ordinance PUD requirements, the concept PUD plan indicates a schematic layout that appears to be consistent with Ordinance requirements. Additional land has been shown for a park area adjacent to Swamp Lake and the number of lots shown within each Shoreland PUD Tier are consistent with the Ordinance requirements. The revised plans indicate screening and berms along the rear of the lots which are located adjacent to CSAH 18. The proposed screening and berms are consistent with that suggested by staff during the review of the original proposal. With regard to the lot arrangement, layout, area and width requirements the applicant supplied the data which in incorporated into the following two tables: Table 1. Lot Area, Setback, Height and Coverage Requirements. III -A District Required Original Proposal Revised Proposal Density (Units per Acre) 2.9 1.34 1.36 (including Outlot E) Minimum Lot Area 15,000 sf 80 lots (44%) 12,524 Range of Lot Sizes 15,000 sf 12,505 — 35,647 sf 12,524 — 36,671 Required Minimum Useable 12,000 sf 30 lots (16% < 12,000 Upland lot area above O-H- 12,000) W (80% of required lot area must be above O-H-W) Lot Width 100 feet 80 —150 feet (143 or 85 feet minimum 79% of the lots are 95.04 feet average less than 1 00'wide) Lot Width Corner Lot 120 feet 90 —130 feet 100 feet minimum 2 Lots (10%) conform (except 2 lots are 95 feet" to requirement Average Lot Width Corner 101 feet 105.1 Lot Buffer Yard Lot Depth (lots 170 feet 165 feet* 170 feet except Block 9 which adjacent to arterial or major has 150 foot lots collector streets) Buffer Yard (lot width 25 feet 10 feet 10 feet requirements for side yards) Setback (PUD Periphery) 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Setbacks (front) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet (side -interior) 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet (side -corner) 30 feet (side 20 feet 20 feet yard abutting a public street) (rear) 25 feet 30 feet 30 feet Wetland setback from O-H- 20 feet Unknown ** 20 feet W Building Height Maximum 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Maximum Lot Coverage for 25 percent of Unknown 25 percent of lot area Structures lot area Minimum Floor Area per 600 sf first Unknown 600 sf first floor plus 100 add'I Dwelling Unit floor plus 100 sf for each bedroom add'I sf for each bedroom i a * The lot depth calculations are based upon the Wright County Highway Department requirement to dedicate 65' of R-OW for CSAH 18. Wetland and Ditch #9 setbacks are measured from O-H-W,which has not been provided. Table 2. ALBERT VILLAS/GOLF COURSE COMPARISON Standard Albert Villas Albert Villas Revised Cedar Creek Golf Original Plan Plan Course/PUD # Lots 182 177 278 # Lots < 15,000 sf 100 55% 14 7.9% all 12,500 16 (6%) all 12,500 min. Lot Area Range 12,505 — 35,647 12,524 — 36,671 12,510 — 43,481 sq ft sq ft Average Lot Area 16,039 sq ft 18,039 16,855 sq ft % Lot 100' — wide 21 % 25.4% 62% Lot Width Range 80-150' 85 —180' 80 —188' Average Lot Width 92.27' 95.4' 95.72' Comer Lot Width Range 90 — 130' 95 —132' (only 2 are 95 —140' 95' the rest are >100 Corner Lot Width Average 101, 105.1 109, % Corner Lots comply w/ Width 10% 9.5% 12.5% standard PUD Periphery Setback 35 30' 35' 30' Front Yard Setback 30' 30' 30-90' Covin Side Yard Setback Interior Lots 10, 10, 10, 15' Side Yard Setback Corner Lots 30' 20' 30' Rear Yard Setback 30' 30' 25' Maximum Site Coverage 25% Unknown 25% 25% Maximum Building Height 35' Unknown 35' 35' Trail Access (30') 20' 20' 30' Density — Units per Acre 1.34 1.52 Park Dedication (1 Q%) * 9.35 Acres 8.08 acres (42% land) (13.5 = 10% 58% cash ($265,200) dedication Amenities . Parks . Parks . 18 — Hole Golf Course • Open Space . Open Space (117.29 acres) • Trails . Trails • Homes on Golf Course 1/3 brick • Garages 480 sq. ft. • Resident % discount for golf fees • Coving lot/setback design • 8' Trail (Karstan Ave) • 8' Trail (CSAH 18 through Center Oaks) * Land area calculation above O-H-W for natural wetlands, storm water management ponds, Swamp Lake and County Ditch #9 required to verify park dedication amounts. , t CUP/PUD & PRELIMINARY PLAT PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Lots with Easement Constraints: There are a number of lots within the proposed development that are encumbered by easements which severely restrict the building envelops, future home design and options for accessory structures such as decks, sheds, gazebos etc. The lots located along the western edge of the NSP easement are large in area however the existence of the easement results in a limited building envelope for these lots. The applicant has provided a number of house plans and foot prints that can fit within the resulting building envelopes (however it should be noted that these are general examples and are not necessarily representative of the type of homes that will be built within the development). The Planning Commission should be aware that future owners on these lots are going to have little if any yard area to construct accessory structures, which are typical in single family neighborhoods. Furthermore, the reduction of lot width flexibility requested on these lots also restricts the ability to construct oversize or three stall garages. Please note that many of the building plans submitted contain one stall garage units. To address this issue the following are suggested: 1. The applicant file deed restrictions with the Wright County Recorder of Deeds for all lots adjacent to or containing NSP and/or Amoco pipeline easements indicating that no structures can be built within the easement areas. 2. The applicant provide information with lot sales literature identifying the NSP and Amoco easement restrictions. 3. The PUD plan and preliminary plat be amended to provide the R-1A (100') minimum lot width for all lots containing said easements or a minimum building pad area of 6,650 square feet (the building pad size for standard lots within the R-1A Zone) for each lot. Lots with Wetland Constraints: The proposed project contains areas with relatively shallow lots which are encumbered by the large wetland area in the middle of the site (Outlot D). Similar issues will present themselves on these lots as that which was described above. To address this issue the following are suggested. The applicant provide information with lot sales literature identifying the building envelope and 20' required wetland setback area where no structures can be constructed. 2. The PUD plan and preliminary plat be amended to provide the R-1A (100') minimum lot width for the lots within Block 7 or a minimum building pad area of 6,650 square feet (the building pad size for standard lots within the R-1 A Zone) for each lot. Roads: The proposed project contains 51 st Street, which is shown with a 50' right-of-way as opposed to the required 60' right-of-way. A second issue pertains to the Subdivision Ordinance requirement for the provision of temporary turn around facilities for streets that will not be extended with current projects. To address this issue the following are proposed. 1. , The City Engineer review and comment on the proposed 50' right-of-way width flexibility for 51 st Street. If the proposed 50' right-of-way width for 51 st Street is acceptable to the City Engineer and City of Albertville, the PUD plan/agreement should specify that flexibility was granted for this matter. In the event that the right-of-way width reduction is found to be unacceptable, the PUD plan and preliminary plat should be amended to increase the width to the required 60 feet. 2. The preliminary plat should be amended to provide for temporary turn -around facilities at the following locations: • The east and west limits of proposed 52"d Street • The north limits of proposed Kalenda Avenue • The west limits of proposed 53rd Street • The southern limits of Kagan Avenue • The southern limits of Kaiser Avenue 3. The stub street within Block 8 located north of 51 st Street should be renamed 52"d Street as they will ultimately connect to form one road. Parks & Trails: The proposed plan dedicates additional parkland above and beyond that which was proposed in the original plan. Although the largest park within the preliminary plat consists of approximately 8 acres, the long, narrow configuration of the park is not very conducive to use for active recreational purposes. The site is too narrow for a ball field however a minimum size soccer field and basketball/volley ball courts could be constructed within the park. Complicating future park design options, is the long, narrow, storm water management pond proposed along the north side of the park and the County Ditch to the south. The second park area located southwest of the intersection of Kahl Avenue and Kaler Avenue is extremely narrow and of little public recreation value due to the storm water pond and County Ditch constraints. The proposed trail system is an attractive amenity for the development and will provide for pedestrian circulation throughout the project area. The City will need to determine if the proposed trail system is adequate to serve the needs of the future population (approximately 700 people) of this area of the community. The Planning Commission should be aware that the preliminary plat shows 20 foot access easements for some of the trail connections as opposed to 30' outlots or platted "park" connections required by the Subdivision Ordinance. As an alternative and/or a means to augment the trail system, the City may wish to require the developer to construct a sidewalk along Kahl Avenue. As mentioned in the original Planning Report, Kahl Avenue is a street with numerous driveways that will carry traffic from this neighborhood (as well as residential areas to the south in Albertville and St. Michael). The long straight sections associated with this street combined with the amount of traffic may signal the need for a sidewalk to separate pedestrian from vehicle traffic. To address the aforementioned issues the following are suggested: The preliminary plat should be amended to show a 5 foot concrete sidewalk along the entire length of (and the south side of) Kahl Avenue, the north side of 52"d Street, the north side of 51st Court from the extension of 52"d Street to Kahl Avenue and along the east side of Kaiser Avenue. 2. The preliminary plat should be amended to provide 30' wide platted "park" or "outlots" for all areas where trail connections are shown. 3. The preliminary plat should be amended to delete the trail sections located adjacent to the west boundary of the site, within Block 5 and along the south side of 52"d Street. 4. The preliminary plat should be amended to delete the park and trail located south of Block 12. 5. The preliminary plat should be amended to include a bituminous trail along the south side of CSAH 18. 6. The preliminary plat should be revised to relocate or change the configuration of the storm water pond within the park to provide enough land area to accommodate the trail and a soccer field of a minimum size (195' x 330'). Outlots: There is no apparent need to plat the large wetland in the center of the site as an outlot. Rather, the developer should provide drainage easements pursuant to the recommendation of the City Engineer and extend the property lines into the wetland area. Similarly, a number of outlots are proposed over the NSP easement area. Again, there is no need for the City to retain these areas and/or end up with the outlots in the event of tax forfeiture. To address this issue the following are suggested: The preliminary plat should be amended to show drainage easement(s) over the wetland area as required by the City Engineer. The property lines for those lots adjacent to the wetland should be extended into the wetland area. 2. The preliminary plat should be amended to show the applicable drainage easements over the storm water ponds as required by the City Engineer. The property lines for those lots adjacent to the NSP easement should be extended to the west boundary of the plat. In addition to the items outlined above, the following conditions identified for the original application should be addressed: The EAW process shall be completed prior to City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, CUP/PUD and preliminary plat. 2. The City must determine if the degree of flexibility is consistent with the R-1A standards and acceptable as requested. 3. A Planned Unit Development agreement is prepared which includes all development plans and specifications, shall set forth specific land use and performance standards which must be adhered to throughout the life of the PUD, and shall be approved by the City Attorney. � 1 1 4. The preliminary plat should be amended to include a bituminous trail along the south side of CSAH 18. 5. The preliminary plat should be amended to show temporary turn -around facilities at the end of all streets, conforming to the cul-de-sac requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and as required by the City Engineer. 5. The number of building permits which will be issued to the project will be limited to 50 until such a time as the entire length of Kahl Avenue/47th Street/Kallard Avenue is installed to provide a secondary access to the development. 6. The City Engineer provide comments and recommendations on the following: a. Status of the EAW b. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan c. Water and Sanitary Sewer Plan d. Wetland Mitigation Plan e. Easement location and sizes on preliminary plat f. Right-of-way flexibility proposal concerning 51 st Street g. 100-year flood elevations for County Ditch #9 and all wetlands/storm water ponds and low structure elevations 7. The preliminary plat is amended to provide access to all storm water management ponds as required by the City Engineer. 8. The applicant submits letters from NSP and Amoco identifying that each entity has reviewed the preliminary plat and PUD and that the storm water management ponds, trails, roads and other improvements proposed within the respective easements are acceptable to each entity. 9. Deed restrictions are prepared subject to review and approval of the City Attorney identifying the building pad locations for all lots adjacent to or containing the NSP and Amoco pipeline easements. The deed restrictions shall identify that said lots contain restrictions precluding future building additions, decks, accessory buildings, and play equipment behind the homes within said easement areas. Sales information and a deed restrictions will be required as part of the PUD approval disclosing this development restriction to future homebuyers. 10. The applicant provides the proposed means to disclose the location of all parks to future, prospective lot owners. 11. The developer indicates the timing and method for removing and/or relocating the existing buildings located on the subject site consistent with Sections 1400-1 and 900 of the Zoning Ordinance. 12. The developer indicates the proposed use of model homes consistent with Section 2200 of the Zoning Ordinance. 13. Any other conditions as set forth by the City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission or City Council. Park and Trail Dedication. Under the City's current Ordinance a 10% park land and/or cash dedication is required. A land dedication of 23.5 acres for the entire project, cash or combination of land and cash will be required for this development. Specific acreage calculations for the amount of park land (above the O-H-W of wetlands, lakes, storm water management ponds and the County Ditch) along with trail acreage/length estimates will be needed from the developer in order to more accurately identify the actual amount of park land that is proposed. The cash dedication for a single-family development is $1,300.00 per lot which in this case would result in $439,400 dollars for the entire PUD (338 lots multiplied by $1,300.00 per lot). The cash dedication for the preliminary plat would be $236,600.00 (182 lots multiplied by $1,300.00 per lot). The park dedication for the development will be required at the time of final plat approval for each phase of the development. Trail dedication standards require the developer/owner to construct trails as shown on the Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan. The cost for installation of trails shall be counted as credit toward the above mentioned park dedication requirement. Trails and/or sidewalks, if required, may be located within the public right-of-way and shall be constructed to city standards as is required by the City Engineer. CONCLUSION The proposed development has several outstanding issues that should be addressed by the developer in order for the Planning Commission to have a full and accurate understanding of the proposal. The decision to approve, deny or conditionally approve the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, and Conditional Use Permit / Planned Unit Development is viewed as a policy decision to be made by the City Council. This memorandum outlines recommended conditions of approval should the decisions be made in favor of the developer. To assist the Planning Commission in its formulation of recommendations for the various applications the attached findings of fact and decision are provided. ACTION REQUESTED A separate motion for each of the following items is in order: 1. Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation of the subject site from Agriculture/Rural to Low -Density Residential land use. 2. Rezoning to change the designation of the subject site from A-1 to R1-A. 3. CUP/PUD to allow for development of the Albert Villas project as identified on the attached plans and allowing flexibility for certain lot width, area, setback and/or right-of-way width reductions. 4. Preliminary Plat approval for Albert Villas. Attachments: Exhibit A Site Location Map Exhibit B Revised Plan Sheets Exhibit C Draft Findings of Fact for project Approval Exhibit D Draft Findings of Fact for project Denial pc: Linda Goeb, Mike Couri, Pete Carlson, Kevin Mealhouse, Matt Davitch, Chuck Plowe, Keith Harsted, Ron Rotelle R- 11-9-99 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE Planning Commission Findings of Fact & Recommendation Applicant Name: K.C. Land Company, Keith Harstad —Albert Villas Request: K.C. Land Company has submitted plans for development of 338 single-family lots as part of the Albert Villas project. The subject site contains 235.17 acres of land which is bounded on the east by Swamp Lake, the north by CSAH 18, the south and west by the City of St. Michael. The PUD concept plan covers the entire land holdings of the applicant. The developer desires to preliminary plat the part of the site (approximately 136.75 acres located north of County Ditch #9) into 177 single-family lots. A Comprehensive Plan amendment will be necessary to allow the low density residential proposal in an area guided for agriculture and rural development. The property is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural/Rural. Rezoning to R-1A, Low Density Single Family, will be necessary to accommodate the proposal. A Conditional Use Permit / Planned Unit Development will be necessary to allow flexibility from the strict provisions of the Zoning Ordinance related to setbacks, lot area, and width. A preliminary plat for development of the north 136.75 acres of the site will be necessary to allow development of single family lots as proposed. Planning Commission Meeting Dates: 14 September 1999 (the application was withdrawn from the agenda pursuant to a request by the applicant), 12 October 1999 and 9 November 1999. Findings of Fact: Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the Planning Commission now makes the following findings of fact and recommendation: 1. The legal description of the subject property is attached as Exhibit A. 2. The Planning Report, dated 8 September 1999, and Memorandum, dated 2 November 1999, prepared by NAC, Inc., are incorporated herein. 3. The memorandum from Pete Carlson dated October 8, 1999 is incorporated herein. 4. The Planning Commission finds the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation of the subject site from Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential acceptable. 5. The Planning Commission finds the requested rezoning from A, Agricultural/Rural to R- 1A Low Density Single Family acceptable and in conformance with the rezoning criteria contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. 6. The Planning Commission finds the requested CUP/PUD to allow flexibility of lot width, area, setback and minimum building/upland lot area requirements acceptable and in conformance with the PUD criteria contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. 7. The proposed lot area, setback, height and coverage requirements identified on Exhibits B and C are acceptable. 8. The proposed actions have been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and have been found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. EXHIBIT C • G. ' The proposed development will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. 10. The proposed use conforms with all applicable Zoning Ordinance performance standards. 11. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. 12. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. 13. Traffic generated by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 14. The requirements of Sections 300, 400 and 2700 of the Albertville Zoning Ordinance have been reviewed in relation to proposed plans. Recommendation: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, conditional use permit/planned unit development and preliminary plat based on the most current plan and information received to date subject to the following conditions. 1. The EAW process shall be completed prior to City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, CUP/PUD and preliminary plat. 2. The Albertville Comprehensive Land Use Plan is amended to allow the low density residential proposal. 3. The property is rezoned from A-1 Agricultural to R-1A Low Density Single Family. 4. A Conditional Use Permit Planned Unit Development is approved to allow flexibility for lot width, area, buildable area, and setbacks as outlined in attached Exhibits B and C and right-of-way width reduction for 51 st Street. 5. The preliminary plat of Albert Villas is approved subject to the conditions outlined herein. 6. A Planned Unit Development agreement is prepared which includes all development plans and specifications, shall set forth specific land use and performance standards which must be adhered to throughout the life of the PUD, and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 7. The number of building permits which will be issued to the project will be limited to 50 until such a time as the entire length of Kahl Avenue/47th Street/Kallard Avenue is installed to provide a secondary access to the development. 8. The City's park and trail dedication requirements are satisfied as discussed herein. a. Under the City's current Ordinance a 10% park land and/or cash dedication is required therefore, a land dedication of 23.5 acres for the entire project, cash or combination of land and cash will be required for this development. b. The applicant shall provide specific acreage calculations for the amount of park land (above the O-H-W of wetlands, lakes, storm water management ponds and the County Ditch) along with trail acreage/length estimates will be needed from the developer in order to more accurately identify the actual amount of park land that is proposed. The park dedication for the development will be required at the time of final plat approval for each phase of the development. C. Trail dedication standards require the developer/owner to construct trails as shown on the Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan. The cost for installation of trails shall be counted as credit toward the above mentioned park dedication requirement. d. The preliminary plat should be amended to show a 5 foot concrete sidewalk along the entire length of (and the south side of) Kahl Avenue, the north side of 52"d Street, the north side of 51 st Court from the extension of 52"d Street to Kahl Avenue and along the east side of Kaiser Avenue. e. The preliminary plat should be amended to provide 30' wide platted "park" or "outlots" for all areas where trail connections are shown. f. The preliminary plat should be amended to delete the trail sections located adjacent to the west boundary of the site, within Block 5 and along the south side of 52"d Street. g. The preliminary plat should be amended to delete the park and trail located south of Block 12. h. The preliminary plat should be amended to include a bituminous trail along the south side of CSAH 18. The preliminary plat should be revised to relocate or change the configuration of the storm water pond within the park to provide enough land area to accommodate the trail and a soccer field of a minimum size (195' x 330'). The applicant submit park and trail area calculations so that the park dedication fees and/or credits may be determined. k. The applicant provide park dedication in the form of land, cash or combination thereof based upon the requirements of City Ordinances and City Council. The applicant provides the proposed means to disclose the location of all parks to future, prospective lot owners. 9. The City Engineer provide comments and recommendations on the following: a. Status of the EAW b. Water and Sanitary Sewer Plan c. Wetland Mitigation Plan 10, All grading, drainage, utility, wetland mitigation and transportation issues shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 11. The preliminary plat should be amended to show drainage easement(s) over the wetland area as required by the City Engineer. The property lines for those lots adjacent to the wetland should be extended into the wetland area. 12. The preliminary plat should be amended to show the applicable drainage easements over the storm water ponds as required by the City Engineer. The property lines for those lots adjacent to the NSP easement should be extended to the west boundary of the plat. 13. The preliminary plat is amended to provide access to all storm water management ponds as required by the City Engineer. 14. The City Engineer review and comment on the proposed 50' right-of-way width flexibility for 51 st Street. If the proposed 50' right-of-way width for 51 st Street is acceptable to the City Engineer and City of Albertville, the PUD plan/agreement should specify that flexibility was granted for this matter. In the event that the right-of-way width reduction is found to be unacceptable, the PUD plan and preliminary plat should be amended to increase the width to the required 60 feet. 15. The stub street within Block 8 located north of 51st Street should be renamed 52"d Street as they will ultimately connect to form one road. 16. The preliminary plat should be amended to show temporary turn -around facilities at the end of all streets, conforming to the cul-de-sac requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and as required by the City Engineer. 17. A complete set of revised plans (1" — 100' scale and one copy reduced to 11" x 17") of the entire preliminary plat are submitted, prior to submittal of a final plat, incorporating all items addressed herein. The preliminary plat will serve as the guide for all future final plat applications for this project. 18. The applicant file deed restrictions with the Wright County Recorder of Deeds for all lots adjacent to or containing NSP and/or Amoco pipeline easements indicating that no structures can be built within the easement areas. 19. The applicant provide information with lot sales literature identifying the NSP and Amoco easement restrictions and identifying the building envelope and 20' required wetland setback area where no structures can be constructed. 20. A property maintenance agreement and property owners association covenants are prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval subject to the requirements of Sections 1100 and 2700 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The agreements, covenants, and restrictions are to be filed with the Wright County Recorder" office as a deed restriction against the title of each lot. 04, 21. The PUD plan and preliminary plat be amended to provide the R-1A (100') minimum lot width for all lots containing said easements or a minimum building pad area of 6,650 square feet (the building pad size for standard lots within the R-1A Zone) for each lot. 22. The PUD plan and preliminary plat be amended to provide the R-1A (100') minimum lot width for the lots within Block 7 or a minimum building pad area of 6,650 square feet (the building pad size for standard lots within the R-1A Zone) for each lot. 23. The applicant submits letters from NSP and Amoco identifying that each entity has reviewed the preliminary plat and PUD and that the storm water management ponds, trails, roads and other improvements proposed within the respective easements are acceptable to each entity. 24. The developer indicates the timing and method for removing and/or relocating the existing buildings located on the subject site consistent with Sections 1400-1 and 900 of the Zoning Ordinance. 25. The developer indicates the proposed use of model homes consistent with Section 2200 of the Zoning Ordinance. 26. The applicant provide proof of title in the form of an abstract of title or registered property abstract currently certified and showing the petitioners have legal ownership of the property. 27. Any other conditions as set forth by the Planning Commission or City Council. NOTE: The Subdivision Ordinance specifies that final plats must be submitted within 100 days of preliminary plat approval or the preliminary plat will become null and void. Adopted by the Albertville Planning Commission this 9th day of November1999. Attest: Linda Goeb, City Clerk City of Albertville Jim Brown, Chair PC: Linda Goeb, Mike Couri, Pete Carlson, Kevin Mealhouse, Matt Davitch, Chuck Plowe, Keith Harsted, Ron Rotelle tf EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ALBERT VILLAS The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter: the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and Lot One, all in Section Eleven, and the South 10 rods of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section Two, all in Township 120, Range 24: also the South 10 Rods of that part of the East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 120, Range 24, lying East of County Ditch, according to the recorded plat. Me The Northeast % of the Southeast % in Section 3 and the West'/ of the Southwest % in Section 2, all in Township 120, Range 24. TIM Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter except that part lying Northeasterly of County road 118. Also Except that part lying Easterly and Southerly of County Ditch No. 9, Section 2, Township 120, Range 24. That part of the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter lying South of County Road 118 and West of County ditch No. 9, Section 2, Township 120, Range 24. EXHIBIT B Lot Area, Setback, Height and Coverage Requirements. RI -A District Required Original Proposal Revised Proposal Density (Units per Acre) 2.9 1.34 1.36 (including Outlot E) Minimum Lot Area 15,000 sf 80 lots (44%) 12,524 Range of Lot Sizes 15,000 sf 12,505 — 35,647 sf 12,524 — 36,671 Required Minimum Useable 12,000 sf 30 lots (16% < 12,000 Upland lot area above O-H- 12,000) W (80% of required lot area must be above O-H-W) Lot Width 100 feet 80 — 150 feet (143 or 85 feet minimum 79% of the lots are 95.04 feet average less than 1 00'wide) Lot Width Corner Lot 120 feet 90 — 130 feet 100 feet minimum 2 Lots (10%) conform (except 2 lots are 95 feet" to requirement Average Lot Width Corner 101 feet 105.1 Lot Buffer Yard Lot Depth (lots 170 feet 165 feet* 170 feet except Block 9 which adjacent to arterial or major has 150 foot lots collector streets) Buffer Yard (lot width 25 feet 10 feet 10 feet requirements for side yards) Setback (PUD Periphery) 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Setbacks (front) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet (side -interior) 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet (side -corner) 30 feet (side 20 feet 20 feet yard abutting a public street) (rear) 25 feet 30 feet 30 feet Wetland setback from O-H- 20 feet Unknown ** 20 feet W Building Height Maximum 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Maximum Lot Coverage for 25 percent of Unknown 25 percent of lot area Structures lot area Minimum Floor Area per 600 sf first Unknown 600 sf first floor plus 100 add'I Dwelling Unit floor plus 100 sf for each bedroom add'I sf for each bedroom The lot depth calculations are based upon the Wright County Highway Department requirement to dedicate 65' of R-O-W for CSAH 18. ** Wetland and Ditch #9 setbacks are measured from O-H-W,which has not been provided. **' Wetland and Ditch #9 setbacks are measured from O-H-W,which has not been provided. EXHIBIT C ALBERT VILLAS/GOLF COURSE COMPARISON Standard Albert Villas Albert Villas Revised Cedar Creek Golf Ori final Plan Plan Course/PUD # Lots 182 177 278 # Lots < 15,000 sf 100 55% 14 7.9% all 12,500 16 6%) al! 12,500 min. Lot Area Range 12,505 — 35,647 12,524 — 36,671 12,510 — 43,481 sq ft sq ft Average Lot Area 16,039 sq ft 18,039 16,855 sq ft % Lot 100' — wide 21 % 25.4% 62% Lot Width Range 80-150' 85 — 180, 80 —188' Average Lot Width 92.27' 95.4' 95.72' Comer Lot Width Range 90 — 130' 95 —132' (only 2 are 95 —140' 95' the rest are >100 Corner Lot Width Average 101, 105.1 109, % Corner Lots comply w/ Width 10% 9.5% 12.5% standard PUD Periphery Setback (35') 30' 35' 30' Front Yard Setback 30' 30' 30-90' (Coving) Side Yard Setback Interior Lots 10, 10, 10, 15' Side Yard Setback Corner Lots 30' 20' 30' Rear Yard Setback 30' 30' 25' Maximum Site Coverage 25% Unknown 25% 25% Maximum Building Height 35' Unknown 35' 35' Trail Access 30' 20' 20' 30' Density — Units per Acre 1.34 1.52 Park Dedication (10%) * 9.35 Acres 8.08 acres (42% land) (13.5 = 10% 58% Cash ($265,200) dedication Amenities . Parks . Parks • 18 — Hole Golf Course • Open Space . Open Space (117.29 acres) • Trails . Trails • Homes on Golf Course 1/3 brick • Garages 480 sq. ft. • Resident % discount for golf fees • Caving lot/setback design • 8' Trail (Karstan Ave) • 8' Trail (CSAH 18 through Center Oaks) Land area calculation above O-H-W for natural wetlands, storm water management ponds, Swamp Lake and County Ditch #9 required to verify park dedication amounts. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE Planning Commission Findings of Fact & Recommendation Applicant's Name: K.C. Land Company, Keith Harstad Request: K.C. Land Company has submitted plans for development of 338 single-family lots as part of the Albert Villas project. The subject site contains 235.17 acres of land which is bounded on the east by Swamp Lake, the north by CSAH 18, the south and west by the City of St. Michael. The PUD concept plan covers the entire land holdings of the applicant. The developer desires to preliminary plat the part of the site (approximately 136.75 acres located north of County Ditch #9) into 177 single-family lots. A Comprehensive Plan amendment will be necessary to allow the low density residential proposal in an area guided for agriculture and rural development. The property is currently zoned A-1, Agricultural/Rural. Rezoning to R-1A, Low Density Single Family, will be necessary to accommodate the proposal. A Conditional Use Permit / Planned Unit Development will be necessary to allow flexibility from the strict provisions of the Zoning Ordinance related to setbacks, lot area, and width. A preliminary plat for development of the north 136.75 acres of the site will be necessary to allow development of single family lots as proposed. Planning Commission Meeting Dates: 14 September 1999 (the application was withdrawn from the agenda pursuant to a request by the applicant), 12 October 1999 and 9 November 1999. Findings of Fact: Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the Planning Commission now makes the following findings of fact and recommendation: 1. The legal description of the subject property is attached as Exhibit A. 2. The Planning Report, dated 8 September 1999, and Memorandum dated 2 November 1999, prepared by NAC, Inc., are incorporated herein. 3. The memorandum from Pete Carlson dated October 8, 1999 is incorporated herein. 3. The requirements of Sections 300, 400 and 2700 of the Albertville Zoning Ordinance have been reviewed in relation to proposed plans. Recommendation: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the Planning Commission recommends DENIAL of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, conditional use permit/planned unit development and preliminary plat based on the most current plan and information received to date. The project was denied for the following reasons: 1. The Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for agricultural/rural land uses which are reflective of the development constraints associated with this property. The proposed project does not conform to City environmental ordinances and does not adequately address the need for lift stations to serve the area with sanitary sewer facilities. The proposed project is therefore inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. EXHIBIT D 2. Due to the fact that the proposed project is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the subdivision is deemed premature pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance A-400.2(e). 3. The rezoning application requests R-1A zoning, however, the proposal contains lot dimensions, areas and required buildable lot areas are less than those required in an R-1A district. The proposed development plan is inconsistent with the requested R-1A Zoning District standards and is therefore inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The applicant requests CUP/PUD approval to obtain relief from the standards of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, in order to develop a site that contains several natural and man-made constraints. The Zoning Ordinance [Section 2700.1, (g)] expressly states: "The PUD is not intended as a means to vary applicable planning and zoning principles." The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The degree of flexibility requested to accommodate the proposal far exceeds that granted by the City to other projects and circumvents the purpose and intent of the PUD standards of the Zoning Ordinance and is therefore inconsistent. Adopted by the Albertville Planning Commission this 9th day of November 1999. Attest: Linda Goeb, City Clerk City of Albertville In Jim Brown, Chair PC- Linda Goeb, Mike Couri, Pete Carlson, Kevin Mealhouse, Matt Davitch, Chuck Plowe, Keith Harsted and Ron Rotelle 2 10/26/1999 Albert Villas Lot Data Block # Lot # Width Area Block # Lot # Width Area 1 1 180 24,127 2 2 85 17,852 1 2 95 13,166 " 2 3 85 17,850 1 3 98 12,524 � 2 4 85 17,850 1 4 90 12,896 - 2 5 85 17,852 1 5 86 14,037 - 2 6 85 18,632 1 6 87 17,478 2 7 85 21,473 1 7 88 18,698 2 8 85 19,373 1 8 88 16,435 6 20 85 17,917 1 9 90 15,368 7 8 85 19,125 1 10 10Q 17,866 7 9 85 19,124 2 1 A5 20,504 7 10 85 18,838 2 2 85 17,852 7 11 85 17,647 2 3 85 17,850 7 12 85 16,512 2 4 85 17,850 7 13 85 16,035 2 5 85 17,852 _ 7 14 85 16,214 2 6 85 18,632 ' 7 15 85 17,052 2 7 85 21,473 7 16 85 18,391 2 8 85 19,373 7 17 85 19,082 9_ _ 95 20,056. 7 18 85 19,125 _2 3 1 102 16,255 7 19 85 17,358 3 2 95 15,200 7 20 85 13,823 3 3 95 15,133 7 22 85 12,564. 3 4 100 15,284 11 2 85 16,959 a 35 105_ 15,804 11 10 85 15,290 3 6 90 18,246 11 11 85 15,290 3 7 90 16,241 11 12 85 15,652 3 8 90 15,519 11 13 85 15,530 3 9 112 15,407 12 8 85 16,002 3 10 127 16,621 12 9 85 17,167 3 11 132 16,972 12 10 85 18,010 3 12. 88 17,144 1 5 86 14,037 4 _ n 1 123 36,671 7 35 86 21,488 4 2 95 27,035 7 36 86 21,609 4 3 95 24,838 7 53 86 22,235 4 4 95 22,632 1 6 87 17,478 4 5 95 20,758 7 38 87 19,377 4 6 90 16,288 7 39 87 19,402 4 7 98 15,043 11 6 87 15,005 4 8 132 15,064 11 7 87 15,469 4 9 128 15,062 11 8 87 15,742 10 108 15,324 11 9 87 15,820 5 1 98 13,377 1 7 88 18,698 5 2 90 13,812 1 8 88 16,435 5 3 90 15,126 3 12 88 17,144 5 4 90 16,770 7 21 88 12,658 6 10 0 21 000 11 3 88 15,919 6 2 89 18,585 11 4 88 16,197 EXHIBIT E 6 3 89 18,585 11 5 88 15,475 6 4 89 18,585 6 2 89 18,585 6 5 89 18,613 6 3 89 18,585 6 6 89 19,231 6 4 89 18,585 6 7 89 20,662 6 5 89 18,613 6 8 89 21,620 6 6 89 19,231 6 9 89 21,781 6 7 89 20,662 6 10 89 21,150 6 8 89 21,620 6 11 89 19,783 6 9 89 21,781 6 12 89 18,740 6 10 89 21,150 6 13 89 18,585 6 11 89 19,783 6 14 89 18,585 6 12 89 18,740 6 15 89 18,585 6 13 89 18,585 6 16 89 18,585 6 14 89 18,585 6 17 89 18,585 6 15 89 18,585 6 18 120 25,899 6 16 89 18,585 6 19 90 21,544 6 17 89 18,585 6 20 85 17,917 7 37 89 19,100 6 21 102 20,770 11 16 89 15,079 7 1 91 15,013 11 17 89 15,526 7 2 91 15,013 1 4 90 12,896 7 3 91 15,013 1 9 90 15,368 7 4 91 15,013 _3 6 90 18,246 7 5 91 15,013 3 7 90 16,241 7 i___r__ _ 3-. -94 60 16,571 3 8 90 15,519 7 7 1.66 19,125 4 6 90 16,288 7 8 85 19,125 5 2 90 13,812- 7 9 85 19,124 5 3 90 15,126 7 10 85 18,838 5 4 90 16,770 7 11 85 17,647 6 19 90 21,544 7 12 85 16,512 7 30 90 32,310 7 13 85 16,035 7 40 90 25,104 7 14 85 16,214 7 41 90 26,055 7 15 85 17,052 7 42 90 27,563 7 16 85 18,391 7 43 90 26,233 7 17 85 19,082 7 44 90 26,404 7 18 85 19,125 7 45 90 25,655 7 19 85 17,358 7 46 90 21,948 7 20 85 13,823 7 47 90 22,018 7 21 88 12,658 7 48 90 21,659 7 22 85 12,564 7 52 90 21,260 7 23 101 12,546 7 57 90 15,908 7 24 150 15,036 7 63 90 14,784 72_5 102 15,046 7 65 90 13,892 7 26 100 15,000 8 2 90 17,127 7 27 102 13,594 10 2 90 15,635 7 28 95 13,085 10 3 90 15,259 7 29 91 24,484 10 4 90 15,369 7 30 90 32,310 10 5 90 15,000 7 31 91 15,561 12 2 90 15,985 7 32 98 18,481 12 3 90 15,985 7 33 100 15,000 12 4 90 15,988 74 _ 102 15,300 12 5 90 21,081 7 35 86 21,488 12 6 90 21,081 7 36 86 21,609 7 1 91 15,013 7 37 89 19,100 7 2 91 15,013 7 38 87 19,377 7 3 91 15,013 7 39 87 19,402 7 4 91 15,013 7 40 90 25,104 7 5 91 15,013 7 41 90 26,055 7 6 91 16,571 7 42 90 27,563 7 29 91 24,484 7 43 90 26,233 7 31 91 15,561 7 44 90 26,404 7 64 91 13,828 7 45 90 25,655 7 51 92 22,390 7 46 90 21,948 7 56 92 17,619 7 47 90 22,018 7 58 93 16,438 7 48 90 21,659 11 15 94 15,067 7 49 100 21,267 1 2 95 13,166 7 50 100 21,563 2 1 95 20,504 7 51 92 22,390 2 9 95 20,056 7 52 90 21,260 3 2 95 15,200 7 53 86 22,235 3 3 95 15,133 7 54 100 17,825 4 2 95 27,035 7 55 15,142 4 3 95 24,838 7 56 92 17,619 4 4 95 22,632 7 57 90 15,908 4 5 95 20,758 7 58 93 16,438 7 28 95 13,085 7 59 95 15,697 7 55 95 15,142 7 60 95 19,031 7 59 95 15,697 7 61 105 26,263 7 60 95 19,031 7 62 95 21,729 7 62 95 21,729 7 63 90 14,784 1 3 98 12,524 7 64 91 13,828 4 7 98 15,043 7 65 90 13,892 5 1 98 13,377' 7 . _ - 6 100 14,147 7 32 98 18,481 ,8 1 17,582 1 10 100 17,866 8 2 90 17,127 3 4 100 15,284 8 3 102 18,061 6 1 100 21,000 9 1 915 15,801 7 7 100 19,125 4-' 106 16,483 7 26 100 15,000 9 3 110 16,500 7 33 100 15,000 9 4 110 16,500 7 49 100 21,267 9 5 145 21,375 7 50 100 21,563 15,807 7 54 100 17,825 10 2 90 15,635 7 66 100 14,147 10 3 90 15,259 8 1 100 17,582 10 4 90 15,369 10 6 100 15,187 10 5 90 15,000 11 14 100 15,530 10 6 100 15,187 7 23 101 12,546 11 1 111 16,173 3 1 102 16,255 11 2 85 16,959 6 21 102 20,770 11 3 88 15,919 7 25 102 15,046 11 4 88 16,197 7 27 102 13,594 11 5 88 15,475 7 34 102 15,300 11 6 87 15,005 8 3 102 18,061 11 7 87 15,469 3 5 105 15,804 11 8 87 15,742 7 61 105 26,263 11 9 87 15,820 12 7 105 17,902 11 10 85 15,290 13 2 105 18,803 11 11 85 15,290 9 2 106 16,483 11 12 85 15,652 4 10 108 15,324 11 13 85 15,530 9 3 110 16,500 11 1a inn 15,530 9 4 110 16,500 11 15 94 15,067 10 1 110 15,807 11 16 89 15,079 11 1 111 16,173 11 17 89 15,526 3 9 112 15,407 11 18 115 22,479 9 1 115 15,801 12 1 126 19,106 11 18 115 22,479 12 2 90 15,985 12 11 115 18,010 12 3 90 15,985 6 18 120 25,899 12 4 90 15,988 4 1 123 36,671 12 5 90 21,081 12 1 126 19,106 . 12 6 90 21,081 3 10 127 16,621 12 7 105 17,902 4 9 128 15,062 12 8 85 16,002 3 11 132 16,972 12 9 85 17,167 4 8 132 15,064 12 10 85 18,010 13 1 132 20,488 12 18,010 9 5 145 21,375 13 20,488 7 24 150 15,036 13 2 105 18,803 1 1 180 24,127 Average 96.04 18,039 0 0 s• •' � .l -L- . • �„ �.:.,.ir Ste: •� -�• -. _ \' is H' a'� �•�: �� .��. .'•�-°--�r ���"fin .:�Z.:�.Z:.�._ DEE iA , "Aw k 4e; ,_. �; k-j�1-r ..., N�y�� Z'"� �c•,'r�:a�'tisa�Ir.l,'�t�� MUR _ �.r �:F!l1 .r.'�_i,••� Inn • ��.�'.... ; c:� l•.Z� rZ� .:�j:. �j:•?•• �1b`i�; �EWE �•� �����s��r��,\ _ -4.0 �i�•. ••_'`. ��i.'1��P.�1-L. �lI A��` c t ^ `fir•, yid, :L,.Yrffir,: ..a. — =, �: s-•: ' r r=:�i �•c rC„l'lA'ijA.;T' 1� f �� i•.r�r •��, �r�= ��:.:T•{'� IJ :•.6 L� •. i �. �• / r�r.�u/rrrr , r —Ti,. \ �� �ii•' \ ,�� � ✓ryg .�r�i 1 ^•� �.�. L F F7w r i./ � ���i � i � i.� .i.=, �•�r��� K'y'ti ttr•ti Ir . J. t { L �///II�rIrI� � • � � ' rrr,r00.11,11- .N r� • s` I� I%/I II►II��II/�'�/I N� v Me -� - jGC r Yfi' i • ji. jpq �. TH • tea. r6�i- a ualiiiii ; „ ice,.�+� 1AMJ �I -_ !lC3 r ..........uv: uun..i ;L �f•.�'llill'• /_ 'I IIIiL'�.'�Irl: AISL RAI it. i" il ... ..... . ... nn is w go-owt 0 W169 % art, � :�•�'; �,,,���44y�•t 'C 1 i h/�,a 1. _ .fl , ' p j1, �� � // I. � III ,. ?�`� ' � 1 .��f ; r.. IN,i Xt��. III ' Ill��jn --•�� •�. 2 r 1► f ,F�� �`�!/ `"�l}� y/ �'� r I ' I I IpA'ilnp n 1 m 11 ul 1 u 1 I I n'-a •S,..i : „�_� 1 I' , Y.• '� alma / uNl .7 Sr . --•�•� � i \t � � I' i. I 1 "I ,'ll�l _A%2 . � I = � '1Y• Yt IN.IIIMN I HOD ___ __ 11' o. • i { 1 JL ' = i. • I 3 .� ,�. I��n .. ai` r� �_i� ����•ne�Mn „. � �m nuuau�} Y ■ v � •.• ' it, _ Ml,li :� _ = �1T �_____ � 11 I.I,N1111� M11111111111111111111 Illllil ��-I'�� I�—�-� r �:t• ....................... � I. ' ww �,_ — +• 1 r {. J 911NIIIIIIIIIIIIU�� � .J�� • � �i' �•• muNllinluu '1•./rr I' •�•._ _-.________. _fi..�� _�sI-Zi�s�vw�� �JYJ!• •�••�. - �i w� 10 i����'�iR�.�j'����IM t.7 CERTIFICATEOF SUR\/W1t' E-- 'e — DEtJ�T�_< FL"GEQL�A�21�11G � caN5r, — - — — Dt10O74�5 ;AXIS T/al6 CONTOUR{ FOR: HANS HAGEN HOMES 1000. DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. X989.6 DENOTES EXIS7ING ELEVATION. NXTE 2:) _56pe ar_-as ma% 2$% W,a� f DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. YEcu1Yc trG%Gtr,ylg a tJ�� ® DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. IJotl I 4", A-) f IandsdQ��n�/ J PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: O GARAGE FLOOR = TOP OF BLOCK = 81io.7 5+ _ \ p9e & p)O—� LOWEST FLOOR = 80g.0 — "ZZ _ (\ \ U . TOP OF FOOTING = 708.7 App,f edy c o� \� �' Fo / DIA: 74.0x50.3=89.48 �Z , ( i � I —: 1� ` •- �� � of �� �S �� 3 0 PROF N / >> ++ o HO OSED 5 8.9 N L 12�2 7� o coo z of 9 N � � �0 moo" O v ? :r SC S 'OO l �O / RAVEL CDovST. DQIvE A 4AQo't/�" 0=7013 16" R-50.00 � 6.30 \ Lot 5, Block 3, STONEPINE FIRST ADDITION St. Croix County, Wisconsin Scale 1"= 30' O Denotes Iron Monument Set • Denotes iron Monument Found Job No. 2031 Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Drown BY: dano Book Page Disk _ We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of G. ����' INC a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, LAND 8URYWrOR8 if any, from or on said land. E. G —RUD &ON,�, NC. %1W LEW114TON A1/!• NIL 3,a�� CIRCLE PINtS, MN Sb014-3625 Dated this I=rNday of _MAY____ 199B Wisconsin License No.Z;fi(o TEL lab-55" PAX'196-b00'1 >a HANS HAGEN HOMES 612 572 9417 P.02i02 ' 1+ — MAbM1AAY CRT W'd O 7] DI✓f'XA1A IIIW" pp yy �1 7�>r IAG MTV Isla eft IL 1 n • I Cx@ tP , 111A1. 6P 1 d A I I a�• w Y TTj � I � � a � ® � a�• 70 E I I D p I �� 1. rX I I I r°�iiii \1 jL_ J 1 i I I W I I l a 1 -A" 0 LA W Iz I I - m � z 1 I W J —+m a �__ I �g�'Z � I m r E b y r r I L3 I ni � �I II1 : • QD I I I v I 41 DID I I iJ L------ — — — — --------� ---- J�� 27 Z- 72'•3 in, 7't'•8 in. ui ® f�" So vl A r � p RI I' m Z BUYER, HOSTETLER JOB 2¢31 LA6* FQVIND iRE DDR�+u+i BY: J6 Hans I> r G 7_ mADDITION, STONEPINE FIRST 9 H e1 1 O m m DaTE. 0-4-1a-w BLOGK, 3 Homes N D MICATrZ OF SUR\/rZ*T0 .ATIr .?'OR. HANS HA GEN HOMES Tb c,S, / 57 RC-c-"r LOT /�AOE U i�v !99Zv PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: GARAGE FLOOR = 870-3 TOP OF BLOCK = 870,i LOWEST FLOOR = $q0.7 TOP OF FOOTING = DI AG: 64X65. 3=91.43 � DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. XM.6 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. ,w-- DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. fu 1 NORTH DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. K[vi"e� i�o� sG g 3i ly S% Lot 32, Block 2, STONEPINE THIRD ADDITION , St. Croix County, Wisconsin Scale 1"= 3d Q Denotes Iron Monument Set Denotes Iron Monument Found Job No. 2112 Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Drawn By: conic Book Page Disk We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of E. �. IQ Mi/ 1M.,� 4 SONS, INC. a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the ocation of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encrocchments, LAND 8URAF'rORS f any, from or on said land. E Ci N TM L VNGTON A),% NX / CIRCLi PINXB, MN 8bm14-362b Dated this�day of U/��- 199. Wisconsin License No. ZD8(� Tau— ��-s�i�+ PAX i�-b�� r1997 09:33AM FROM HANS HAGEN HOMES, INC. TO 16127666bbY r.Ue TOW i �+ amous r 1G �� i i S �d � i � S � t• � � `� hS40TER &IITE T Room Sig g a v � t � SW Wnr+ues V, I i� ' AgaveW-Apm4 ROOM 101 ra ! OALL ra 1 0 � •.� . , . ( ! IV.d W I •t e � • � r � O j , E s9ess��pme a S. woos j ± i I I • j I wtN JOB 2t[2 Hens z Hagen LOT;ss v 1► A=rrCN: :BTO v� 9RD - m \\ PATE, -g-9� BLOM 2 Homes l Cq r !�1 TOTAL F.02 TO'd -iHJAl {i I I 3 A i 111111 . { t ------ --- - - - - rIll lot n g L --t 17 ti At I I I l i • I o I ! { In r- '_ y i k 211M Hans LAST F� aeaw BY: �s _ �•� m AL?DiTTQI, 570NpPRrE 7 9. Hagen S I ,�RTIFIC�4TE OF_SURVEY_ FOR. HANS HAGEN HOMES PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: �' O 6n GARAGE FLOOR = 87-Q (DL'DP 1 >✓Le--Ir) TOP OF BLOCK = r7J,7(r-r7Ai<AC,1) �o LOWEST FLOOR = TOP OF FOOTING = 'rL q' 7 Z 7 TOP BLo61e-AT HSGE 87F,-7 p G�� DIAG: 6�X42.3= 7G,71C\60.4ji Aa i— 'xi % J gG . pEC 5 1, 7f�y3 '9.7� 2234ji PP or - lie CAR MaV SED �F � N S.0 a 19S 6 g�a 4 0) r DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. X�S� ReviSPd �Q�¢� L,ou4e XM.e DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. f DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. 9 • ►7 97 ® DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. Lot 23, Block 2, STONEPINE THIRD ADDITION , St. Croix County, Wisconsin Scale 1 "= 30 Q Denotes Iron Monument Set Denotes Iron Monument Found Job No. 2103 Bearings shown are on on assumed datum I Drawn By: dano Book Page Disk _ We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of oil buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encrocchments, if any, from or on said land. E CL RIM ♦ SONS, INC. B y: Dated this day of "i. ry 199-. Wisconsin ! ; ense No. ;. G. RUM 4 SONS, INC LAND SURV E1'ORS S1W LEXiNGTON AVE. NE. CIRCLE PINTS, MN 55014-3625 TEL. 18b-5556 FAX 186-6001 2 5— 2 ,45rF �� SURY Y CSM VOL 5, PG 1444 NORTH ' HANS HAGEN H MES �g� �! S89"59'10"W 91.>3 \v e PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: GARAGE FLOOR = 896.3 TOP OF BLOCK = LOWEST FLOOR = M.� 30 o�e,.�._ . TOP FOOTING�\ L11 to� DIAG. = 69.3x66.5=96.05 �. — �SO J �5 19 $c os 0 a 23.5 `° gg� •• J �, b� L 'pl oPosed p fi House rn 152 , 8.0 0 -- OLpG t` L 5' �? P4D o 30.3 1 j o � w o �g•. `3 2.0 F e "ba g8 o_ o -___ 2 9.0 N 30 m cV be.a o i_ _ gBD �8v,3 T BF�i,7 9 -79. 3 TL 70.46 20.06 - =10054' EAST 9 DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FT. �0 00 a _ — OFFSET. NG i � � I 1 ® 93021 DENOTES PRDENOTES OPOSED ED ELEVATION, ON. DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. LOT 18, BLOCK 1, STONEPINE EIGHTH ADDITION, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. Scale 1 "=30 Drawn By: dano Disc: Job No.: 2413 i o Denotes Iron Set • Denotes Iron Found Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of M. CX. QLZt 4 SON$, INC a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the LAND SURVE'i'OR5 location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, S180 LEXINGTON AYE. NO. if any, from or on said land. ,r CIRCLE PINE5, PIINNE50T,4 Dated this 29rN day of ,QrR)- 1998 Wisconsin Lic. No. 2086 55Ca14-3625 TEL. �5�0-�✓55C-� �d 16:45 HANS HRUEN Huff=) (3) 2XIG HEADERS 2M2V 30 (AGOvEJ 28" 34 91 1/M'XD� lln6• (3)?XIO NEAOEW -M 2X)v HEADERS (2) 2)(10 HEADERS 26le 1/1 !t 13n6" O 1/S" 37 13A ' 0 -1/0" 4 Y ' N OD VWX 60 1/8' iD..s. 51YER: KAISER JCM2A19 cvtlGD DRAW`IBYi JD Hans ;Hagen LOT: )D d ADDITIONS 15TONEPINE BTH I m DATL. ©a.20-9C DLOGKi I H o m p s l 7_ m Om m �p N i— I I 832x3 ` - CERTIFICATE OF SUR1EY - Nso�oo'oo"E FOR: HANS HAGEN HOMES 75.99 o xsu NORTH _ s x�— — — — — — — — — — -- I E Mq GF; 6; 66 1 SETBAQZ LINE- 14.3 -pp ®" 8/5.3 DECK Z` s p � Pf�OPOSED� .. �, `vim l 7p 8 (0 HODS `nk, O 1.0 CO GAR 0 o L. _ 52.3 o p------- --- -- �_-- 11 c� 21.0 �C ��� / �9 �5' $ o I 52.0 - y _------- f o�' 80� -' }.-60.052 :�-- ------51.SXYo33 I �wb o �"° � ��°� � " o � � � � gy• 2' y3 a L p4 / 60 51 71a9'',, �y- �10 y� o .92 LOT MAS 5 GRADeL) i v /996 L $ ' 304°14'50" R = 525.00 S T ONEPINE DIAG. = 47.3x65=80.39 BA Y 0 DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FT. OFFSET. PROPOSED ELEVATrONS: 934x1 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. GARAGE FLOOR = 8073 02 DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. TOP OF BLOCK = 9'16.0 DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. LOWEST FLOOR = -F07.7 TOP FOOTING = g076t�?1lse ¢Co fa c (Er r Pt �res t LOT 53, BLOCK 2, STONEPINE EIGHTH ADDITION, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. Scale 1 "=30 Drawn By: dano Disc: Job No.: 2417 o Denotes Iron Set • Denotes Iron Found Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of F.. Cx. RIND 4 EPOjvS INC c survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the LAND SURVEYORS location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, g150 LEXINGTON AVE_ NO_ if any, from or on said land. � CIRCLE PINES, MINNESOTA By. u Dated this � ; h l day of it ,1998 Wisconsin Lic. No. 2086 55�D14-3625 TEL. 7S�o-5556 IK-11-1yyti �d• i I-HNn rlHUCIN iiUl'IC5 01t J f G J•til 1 CJG VJ ,r•o- 1 D OU` eR: MLOUPE�i9ER410B 2411 Hans "s•.e�eeo �� n —+n IU(11�1111JII DRAUN Br, P5 a Loss m ADDrrfphlr STOriEPME ATN Homes i N \� DATE: 1-1.9D CLOCK 7 �. � ... r-- aR-11-1999 09:27 HANS HAGEN HOMES 612 572 9417 P.01iO3 0 D Y 1�.p. F� �--� aD�ans _or, 5.3 Hagen � ��� � O n u,�� sra�_=�,N 8.N�od tri A D47E 9-�_5) O;�JC f JA D rn i Homes �' , , 1 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: HANS HAGEN HOMES P f�� j tc LA gy�'� EAST ,O—:— / 6 Z D0.2 i a C� 0 3 7 N CIO 10L I �s n` . I 3x3 wJ ^ �' t 3x3 0 i ° / 25.0 co 2 70 o xyp?l. N O x11 177. 22 gb . c, x87L.(. Ln O 32.3 0 0 T GARAGE �r 0 11.0 21.0 ,,; kg9l.le�� to N87028'44"EI --- B��G 16.4.-.7_Q--..__-� t DD 55'�' •c•• --w i 8.1 NORTH ^AAk DIAGIONAL: xxxx X xxxx = xxxx 02 DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. PROPOSED GARAGE ELEVATIONS: FLOOR = XXXF 872• .2 -E--� DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. TOP OF BLOCK = X-Xn $ 23 2- DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. LOWEST FLOOR = XXXX (xxcrs w/o) LOT 37, BLOCK 2, STONEPINE e7i TorF1r5: ADDITION A,9,,S' CT. CRIOX COUNTY, WISCONSIN ,51 X'rr; SCALE : 1 INCH = 30 FEET I Drawn By: CWS Book: XXX Pg. :XX Disc: XX I Job No.: 2303 o Denotes Iron Set • Denotes Iron Found Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of E. Co_ RUD E 3ONg, INC o survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the LAND &AVWYORS location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. IBIW LEXINGTON Al/E. NO. Dated this da CIRCLE PINES, P''iINNESOTA 1997 29 By. 6bm14-3625 TEEL. 7I5&-5556 y of (�C, ,Wisc. License No. —� y.- `� 00 t J 1 � �F iro _ v x t I f i I 4� 9. �I PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: �` GARAGE FLOOR = P25, s FOR: HANS HAGEN HOMES TOP OF BLOCK = 82(0.2 LOWEST FLOOR = 8i8 5 Y3Yf TOP OF FOOTING = 91 F.2 s6,o gAA�sFs .� 100111 Doti S � s a' �6'<s /Rpm MASS GRR a A0 6 �37 -61 �' cry i' aSS `1 /° Q 6' F� ; S� O \�-0 p WPc -r 7 •s G'¢27 / �0 i• I3 �u�. �cP � / � � ^ ' i J DIA: 42.3 x 79.0 = 89.61 DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. CV`Pzs X989.6 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. 9 DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. i 0 DENOTES WOOD NUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. Lot 1, Block 3, STONEPINE FIRST ADDITION St. Croix County, Wisconsin Scale 1"= 30' O Denotes Iron Monument Set • Denotes Iron Monument Found Job No. 2027 Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Drown By. dano Book Page Disk _ We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of G. �u� SONS, SON M� INC a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, LAND SURvE1'ORe if any, from or on said land. E. G RUD INC. SW LEXINGTON AVE. NE. By CIRCLE PINS, MN b6m14-3628 Dated this /2/da of anuAr 199 9 Wisconsin License No. 2086 mil'' "18b-858b FAX i8b-bmmi Y �- _ _ TOTFL P.04 ilsZ� ce�TiF�c�ar� _oa su��Y_. FOR: HANS HAGEN HOMES 1V6� 9 �� �3 000. DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. x989.6 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. ® DENOTES WOOD HUB AT 11 FOOT OFFSET. o4 eA, NORTH CO g15 3 / �-_77� l �l 10.0 a, c':' / k p` I✓ l+ g62 ' � PROPO D VATInN�• GARAGE FLOOR = ,F TOP OF BLOCK = 8772 LOWEST FLOOR = SG 9. S TOP OF FOOTING = 8, 9,2 DIAG: 60.3 x 67 = 90.14 Lot 16, Block 2, STONEPINE FIRST ADDITION , St. Croix County, Wisconsin Scale 1"=Q' Q Denotes Iron Monument Set • Denotes Iron Monument Found I Job No. 2023 Bearings shown are on on assumed datum. Drawn By. SJL Book ___. Page _ Disk We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and of the E. G. RWD 4 SONS, INC. location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, 1.ANa WRVVIrORB if any, from or on said land. E. G. UD IN SIM LSXINGTON Avg NE CIRCI.i PINW, MN 55014-3625 Dated this of _z. 199.,/, Wisconsin License No. LpBL 71L i86- S" PAX i86-60011 a� z E_______..________l I IU . A all (PZ - - �, � tlTY a ANT YIGIAFL � 3 o- 71, � � I or _, Q O. r a � •fit,' _L f l yA 1 I it i r --------------- ----- ------------- I I s 1 - I I / a I r p tcp /1{y'�^:Twra�nuxLLEMr-=� ,n trot wl,ILumrt-�-� �--- -r-- �- �Ir�n--S. 1 � � u j 3)•s BOB'BB'BB'/ 41128 II i — ------------- I xanaw sr.m rwu m.wr us•an—� , II` e _ A r •�' �:.o,. ,.o. un, 1, t.. 'J I u c aP \ 1/ , ' 1 -� m I 1 • 1 aA / — I it t Will ow w , i • k ' 4'------L� I---------------- II / I — \ -- 4" OUAB-- Y i D o i iRli=M rr -{ v lb dui q..^QT•f,'`I� C'i'�'L`Ni 2 I — i Y 3tip:Ir �$$ ad ' 6xr� I `s il '[i il i R *R D e •FO All aaaaa aa�aa ! i tcl —,5v CJA-o firOm m A z Fa r-z t— P (P y 1 I 44 6 a ti^'' �" �r���ttartttrrr� pQp� 4 &- N-, � I' �T-17e SO ------cn BaAmuE --- 1�IPA / Willi //; FF - - om I N rn I p . 3 p