2000-07-07 Planning Report
N
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO:
Albertville Mayor and City Council
Albertville Planning Commission
FROM:
Cindy Sherman
DATE:
July 7, 2000
RE:
Albertville - Towne Lakes PUD
FILE NO:
163.06 - 00.06
BACKGROUND
Contractor Property Developer Company (CPDC) has submitted an application for
rezoning from R-1A to PUD, CUP/PUD preliminary plat, and variance under the
Shoreland Regulations.
The plat proposes 150 single family home sites designed in a "traditional neighborhood"
fashion on 85 acres for a density of 1.76 units per acre.
The site is located on property between School Lake and Mud Lake in the northeast
quadrant of Albertville.
APPLICATIONS
The proposal includes applications for rezoning from R-1A to PUD, CUP/PUD,
preliminary plat, and variance under the Shoreland Regulations. This report will
summarize the applications based on the zoning regulations and Comprehensive Plan
guidelines.
Attached for reference:
Site Location Map
Project Summary and Narrative
CQIQ..,d Map Packet
Black and White Map Packet
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
7/7/00
Planning Commission
Findings of Fact and
Recommendation
Applicants Name: Contractor Property Developers Company (CPDC)
Homer H. Thompkins III. President
Request: CPDC has submitted plans for development of 150 single family lots in a
neighborhood called Towne Lakes PUD. The property includes 85 acres located
between School and Mud Lakes in the northeast quadrant of Albertville.
The application requests a rezoning from R-1A, Low Density Single Family Residential
to PUD, Planned Unit Development; a CUP/PUD and variance under the Shoreland
Regulations and a preliminary plat.
Planning Commission Meeting Date: July 12, 2000
Findings of Fact: Based upon review of the application and evidence received, the
Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact and recommendation:
1. The legal description is attached as Exhibit A.
2. The planning report, dated July 7, 2000, prepared by Northwest Associated
Consultants, Inc. is incorporated herein.
3. The requirements of Sections 400, 500, 4800, and 4900 of the Albertville Zoning
Ordinance have been reviewed in relation to the proposed plan.
4. The proposed development will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property.
5. The proposed development will not unreasonably increase the congestion in the
public street.
6. The proposed development will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the
public safety.
7. The proposed development will not unreasonably diminish or impair established
property values within the neighborhood, or in any way be contrary to the intent
of this Chapter.
8. The proposed development does not violate the intent and purpose of the
Comprehensive Plan.
9. The proposed development meets the criteria for variance in that the land is
encumbered by wetlands and utility easements that limit the location of buildable
property. The developer intends to protect a large stand of trees which is a
unique feature on the property.
10. The developer is proposing a plan that creates a single family residential
neighborhood with park and open space amenities that exceed the ordinance.
Recommendation: Based upon the findings and applicable ordinances, the Planning
Commission recommends approval of the rezoning, PUD/CUP, preliminary plat and
variance under the Shoreland Regulations subject to the following conditions:
1. All actions on this item are contingent upon successful completion of the EAW
process. Any required modifications to the plan will require resubmittal to the
City. No final approvals should be granted until the EAW is complete.
2. The plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
3. A PUD agreement shall be drafted by the City Attorney and shall incorporate all
items related to the design flexibility and the responsibilities of the developer and
the City regarding improvements.
4. Homeowners Association documents shall be submitted and are subject to the
review and approval of the City Attorney.
5. The Plans are subject to review and comment of Wright County and the DNR.
6. The plans are contingent upon issuance of a permit by the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers and a permit under the Wetland Conservation Act.
Adopted by the Albertville Planning Commission this
2000.
day of
City of Albertville
By:
Jim Brown, Chair
ATTEST:
By:
Linda Goeb, City Clerk
pc: Linda Goeb, Mike Couri, Pete Carlson
~mm '-1 ~, ~ . ~~~ R_1>-.. r ~
~~..<<'>J::,...--"r- ' ....... .... .,,,..- 1 ~ 1000 2000
~~ i[Bj, /' ~'~ :CALE IN FEET
,':' _~ 1- " r ~ f;' :
>:~,~. ( L ~IL SC~ ~
uu._.uununu j 'f'.... ~;~<:',:.- _, S..B _
T '- "'-" "'. - "
,J:. :--;..: -: .,- Plt:::::::::::_,:~ '\r: !,41
flfJ$ 7 T-.. ~~~""!iR"----":'''''::::::::::;::;~: It
~ PUD ..~..> . .' ,,:::~~;;:~~:~~ t-- ,'OTH STREET NE CSAH 37\
lIT B_3 .- I -"'" ". -'-.<-_\____~>\,;:::~\B-3 bI -- 2
"= 7-j ::UpjE: '--L,~:-("7r ,'::'::-\~:':::..: --<' Allr-'r-
i));l; ~'...... '&.'-1 ! ~"- ..' '^->\ )... ,/
R~1A ".. R' ; 0'\','1~_ 1 ~ '-1 . :~R
STREE NE 6L.."T \
......... ; B-2:N V [j
J /~~:...i.....~ ~P" R-1 ~mm - ~ ~ n
. .~ a' :,: ,PA" ::r
:: ~~, 'I 'Li; R-A!-UH
A-1 : SWIWf>,"
. .;' i LN<E R~1~""\ il!;:.i;i,~\";1 l_ -
\......mr......~. I. . ' , . ~
.. flJ@.,~ rllQ ~"I : C '.~
--T'*'ne~lce~ tii+e
REVISED 2-15-00
D
D
D
D
[;8J
[;8J
[;8J
D
A-1, Agricultural Rural
A-2, Agricultural Transitional
R-1A, Low Density Single Family
R-1, Single Family
R-2, Single & Two Family
R-3, Single & Two-Family
R-4, Low Density Multiple Family
R-5, Medium Density Multiple Family
~
R-1A
~~
-
~~o,~""
::---;: s
~~
~~ "1(
R- ~'( ~\\\ \~
PUD
R-1
~
':ir
R-1A
~
A-1
OFFICIAL ZON'ING MAP
i:SJ R-6, Residential High Density
rg] R-7, Special Purpose High Density
D
rg]
D
D
D
D
~
o
R-B, Mixed Housing ~
R-MH, Manufactured Housing ResidentialD
B-1, Neighborhood Business D
B-2, Limited Business D
B-3, Highway Commercial LJ
B-4, General Business D
B-W, Business Warehouse
1-1, Light Industrial
1-1A, Limited Industrial
1-2, General Industrial
PUD, Planned Unit Development
PII, Publicllnstitutional
S, Shoreland Overlay
W, Wetland Overlay
A-1
r-
r-
I--
L
'---1
~m
I
~~
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE - WRIGHT COUNTY - MINNESOTA
N
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
COMMUNITYPLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Contractor Property Developers Company
FROM:
Deb Garross
DATE:
June 6, 2000
RE:
Albertville - Towne Lakes PUD
FILE NO:
163.06 - 00.06
The purpose of this memorandum is to advise you that the City of Albertville is currently
in the pro,cess of reviewing its 1997 Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan. Within
the existing plan, there is a proposed park indicated for the subject site currently included
within the PUD proposal for the Towne lakes project. The facility is located on the
northeasterly shore of School lake.
This park facility is indicated as Hamburg Park which is identified in the plan as a
proposed neighborhood park. The purpose of the park according to the 1997 plan, is to
provide or serve the majority of the northeast portion of the City. The park is shown to
encompass a portion of the School lake shoreline in order to provide more diversity in the
City's recreation system with potential development of a fishing pier, wildlife observation
point, or some other water oriented activity/facility.
You should be advised that the Planning Commission and City Council recently held a joint
workshop and discussed this particular park site. Pursuant to the negotiations that have
occurred to date on the Towne lakes project, the City will not be pursuing this park
(Hamburg Park) within the project area of the current Towne Lakes PUD proposal.
However, the Council did want the developer to be put on notice that staff has been
directed to identify a comparable park facility elsewhere either on School lake or Mud
lake, which may impact future phases in the Towne lakes master planned development.
In the event that the Towne lakes project is completed and you are able to acquire
additional lands to complete the overall master plan that has been identified, you should
anticipate the introduction of a neighborhood park consisting of five to ten acres of land
with substantial frontage on School lake.
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST, LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55416
PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 612-595-9837 E-MAIL NAC@WINTERNET.COM
J
Again, this information is forwarded to you so that future phases of the Towne Lakes
development project will include a lakeshore neighborhood park as indicated herein.
It is our suggestion that you be involved in the future update of the park and trail system
plan as the concept for Towne Lakes includes a larger land area including lands adjacent
to both School and Mud Lakes and that the City has indicated its desire to continue to
show a neighborhood park facility in this area of the community.
If you have questions or comments concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me
at 952/595-9636 or you may contact City Administrator Linda Goeb at City Hall.
pc: Linda Goeb
Planning Commission
Mayor and City Council
Towne Lakes - pun Awlication
Site Data:
Site Area: 85 acres (above OHWL) +/-
Existing Zoning: RI-A (Low density residential)
Proposed Zoning: PUD
Proposed Units: 148 (includes 17 future lots)
Variances Required:
() r ..~
Lot Size - Riparian Lots 40,000 s.f. minimum 9,000 s.f. minimum
10,000 s.f. average
Non-riparian Lots 20,000 s.f. minimum Same as above
Lot Width 125' min. 75' min.
(within shoreland overlay district)
Shoreland Impact Zone 75' -
Front Setback 30' 15' House, 20' Garage (facing
street)
Side Setback - interior lots 15' 5'
Side Setback - Comer lots 30' 20'
Rear Yard Setback 25' 25'
Building Height 35' 35'
Maximum Building Lot coverage 25% 25%
Allowable Density - 1 s, Tier 61 units (2,459,251 sf /40,000) 96 (includes 8 future lots)
(320' per Shoreland Ordinances)
Allowable Density - 2DU Tier 62 units (1,249,258 sf /20,000) 52 (includes 9 future lots)
Average Overall Density 1.45 units/acre 1.74 units/acre (gross)
Parkland Dedication 10% 21% (18e ac.+/-)
(includes neighborhood greens,
parklands, trail linkages, & entry
corridor)
Cory Meyer Page 1 04/19/2000
.
Albertville Builders - Invitation List
Timber Creek Homes Jay Posthumus
, / 11862 Cottonwood Street NW
V Coon Rapids, MN 55448
763-754-7087
F 763-757-1913
Oakridge Builders, Inc. Mike Hillesheim
15235 65th Palce
Maple Grove, MN 55311
763-551-1644
F 763-557-4506
Andreen Construction, Inc. David Andreen
7845 Brooklyn Blvd. #205
II Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
763-566-3554
F 763-566-3554
Vision Builders, Inc. Randy Stangler
_ / 6737 LaBeaux Ave.
v Albertville, MN 55301
763-497-5234
F 763-497-5226
Mega Homes. Inc. Meg Dehn
13601 Balsam Lane
/ Dayton, MN 55327
763-427-8391
F 763-427-8397
Hanson Builders, Inc. Dean Hanson
13432 Hanson Blvd.
\/" Andover, MN 55304
763-421-5435
F 763-754-6397
Williams Development Jeff Williams
102 W. 5th Street, #1
V Chaska, MN 55318
952-361-2244
F 952-368-2915
Goulet Homes Tony Goulet
I 12 Second Avenue South
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
877 -4GOULET
F 1-320-253-8161
V Kingman Builders Dave Kingman
P. O. Box 684
Wayzata, MN 55391
763-473-4696
F 763-473-4697
Design Images
. /13971 Holly Street
V Andover, MN 55304
763-754-0229
F 763-754-0229
Donald L. Johnson Homes
,/ 2213 Great Oaks Drive
Burnsville, MN 55337
952-997-2270
F 952-953-3219
Swanson Homes, Inc.
8557 Wyoming Avenue N.
y Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
763-424-8420
F 763-424-8042
LDK Builders, Inc.
P. O. Box 67
V Rogers, MN 55374
763-428-5357
F 763-428-5360
RVC Homes, Inc.
4700 Creekwood Trail
Orono, MN 55359
612-328-1421
952-476-9835
Ziegler Construction Co., Inc.
V 11469193rd Avenue NW
Elk River, MN 55330
763-441-2153
F 763-441-2326
MJB Custom Homes, Inc.
.(6438 Riverdale Drive
Ramsey, MN 55303
612-701-5404
F 763-767-0861
Windwood Homes
'\ /14311 Ewing Avenue South
V Burnsville, MN 55306
952-895-8448
F 952-736-9174
Darrin Aufderhar
Jim Galbrecht
Curt Swanson
Larry Kuperus
Rick Vogelgesang
George Sanford
Sean McDonald
Stephen Ayers
EXHIBIT A
BX1STING LEGAL DBSCRlPTIONi
Government Lot 4; also Govt. Lot 3 except the North 32 rods thereof; also the West 1 rod of the
East 10 acres of Government Lot 8 in Section 36-121-24 and that part of Government Lot 8 and
any accretions and refictions to Government Lot 8, Section 36. Township 121, Range 24, Wright
County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of the Townsite of
Hamburg; thence on on assumed bearing of West along the north line of the Townsite of Hamburg
distance of 3.3.00 feet; then;ce on a bearing of North, a distance of 11.70 feet to the actual
point of beginning, said point of beginning being on the northerly right of way tine of
Interstate Highway 94; thence continue on a bearing of North a distance of 48.30 feet; thence
North 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 198.00' feet; thence on a. bearing of
rth a distance of 228 feet. more or less, to the shore line of School Lake; thence
"vrtheasterly along said shoreline 0 distance of 80 feet, more or less, to a point on the
easterly extension of the north line of Govemment Lot 7; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 26
seconds East along said easterly extension of the north line of Government Lot 7 a distance of
30 feet, more or less, to a point distant 2057.49 feet easterly from the northwest corner of
Government Lot 7; thence continue South 89 degrees 57 minutes 26 seconds East a distance of 1:
feet, more or less, to the shore line of Mud Lake; thence southerly, southeasterly, and
easterly along said shoreline a distance of 340 feet, more or less, to 0 point" which bears
North 00 degrees 16 minutes 33 seconds West from said northeast corner of the Townsite of
Hamburg; thence South 00 degrees 16 minutes 33 seconds East 0 distance of 180 feet, more less,
to said northerly right of way line of Interstate 94; thence North 81 degrees 03 minutes 23
seconds west along said northerly right of way line of Interstate Highway 94 0 distance of
33.37 feet to the point. of beginning.
EXHIBIT A.
BXlSTlNG LBGAL DBSCRIPTIONI
Government Lot 4; glso Govt. L.Qt 3 except tho North 032 ,ods thereot; also the West t rOd of the
~a$t 10 acres of GOV<<nment Lot 8 in Section 36-121-.24 and that part of Government Lot B OI"Id
any accretlons and reliction I to Government Lot S. Section .36, Township 12.1, RanCJe 24. Wright
County. MJnnellotCl delllcrib\'fd as follows: Commencing at the northea:rl cornl!ll'" of the Townsite of
Homburg; thenQItI on an aS8Wned bearing of West along the north I/ne ot the Townsite of Homburg
di,tance of :53.00 feet; then.... on 0 beerinc; of North, a distance of 11.70 feet to the actual
point of beginning. acid poil'tt af b~jnning being on the northerly rigMt of way tine of
Interstate Highwoy 9~j thence continue on a bearing of North Q distance of 48.30 feet; thence
North ....5 degreelS 00 mlnui_ 00 seconds West 0 distance ~f , 98.00 feet: thence on g' bearing of
North a dlstanee of 228 fte.t., 'more or I..s, to the shore ITne of School Lok8: thence
northecster1y gleng ,gid shan:iine a distance of 80 teet, more QI'" le.;I~, to c point on the
easterly extension of the notth line of Government L.ot 7: thence South 89 del;lreea 57 minute:!! 26
seconds East along acid eoatl!Jl"ly extl!lnsion of tne north tine of Government Lot 7 (2 distance of
:30 feet. more 'or Ie.., to Cl point distant 2057.49 feet easter1y from the northwest comer of
::;overnmlll"1t Lot 7; thence t:Q"'Itinue South as!) degnllilS S7 minutes 26 seconds East Q distance of 1:
feet, mOl"'e or less. to the shor. line of Mud l..alee; thence southerly, southeClsterly. and
egsterly olong sard shor8line CI distonce of :540 feet. more or les., to a point whiCh beara
North 00 degree. 16 mlnut.. 33 :seoonds West from said northeast cr,)lTler of the Townslte of
Hamburg: thene. South 00 dagrees 16 mlnutl' JJ seeonds East a distance of 180 feet, more less,
to said northerly right of vt~ line of Interstete 94; thence North 81 degrees 03 minutee 2.3
stlQond:; \\'est 0101"19 sold northerly right of way line of Interstate Highwoy 94 a distance of
33.37 feet to the pOrl"lt, of CiegiMing.
TOTAL P. 02
RECOMMENDATION
The requested approval of the preliminary plat, rezoning, CUP/PUD and variance under
the Shoreland Regulations requires that the Planning Commission and City Council
consider the application in relation to established Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance
review criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. The decision to approve, deny, or
approve the project subject to conditions is viewed as a policy decision to be made by
the City Council. Should the Commission/Council find the submitted plans acceptable,
it is recommended that the following conditions be imposed:
1. All actions on this item are contingent upon successful completion of the EAW
process. Any required modifications to the plan will require resubmittal to the
City. No final approvals should be granted until the EAW is complete.
2. The plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
3. A PUD agreement shall be drafted by the City Attorney and shall incorporate all
items related to the design flexibility and the responsibilities of the developer and
the City regarding improvements.
4. Homeowners Association documents shall be submitted and are subject to the
review and approval of the City Attorney.
5. The Plans are subject to review and comment of Wright County and the DNR.
6. The plans are contingent upon issuance of a permit by the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers and a permit under the Wetland Conservation Act.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Rezoning. The property is currently zoned R-1A and is proposed to be rezoned to
PUD to allow flexibility in the development regulations specifically as they related to lot
size, lot width, lot depth, and street design.
From a planning perspective and as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance, the PUD process
is intended to result in the following:
· Innovations in development; higher standards of site and building design.
· More convenience in location and design of development and service facilities.
· Preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics.
· Creative and efficient use of the land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and
streets.
· A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Comprehensive
Plan and a more desirable and creative environment than might be possible
through strict application of zoning and subdivision regulations.
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 2
The applicant has submitted a narrative that explains their view of the benefits to the
City and the future residents by allowing PUD design flexibility. A summary of the
benefits identified include:
· Preservation of trees in public space.
· Dedication of more public park land than required by ordinance.
· Installation of sidewalk/trail and park improvements.
· Additional planting of trees and native vegetation.
· High quality design in a traditional neighborhood design (TND).
Comprehensive Plan. In the land use sections of the Comprehensive Plan, it is noted
that the area north of 1-94 has residential development potential. The plan anticipates
that development in this part of the City will be low density based on the environmentally
sensitive nature of the area (Land Use Plan, Revised Development Framework, pages
21-22).
The land use designation is further defined as part of Land Use Planning District Eight
(Land Use Planning District Eight, Revised Development Framework, page 81).
The plan calls for low density (less than five units per acre) residential development with
a park land component. The proposed development appears to be consistent with the
recommendation for Planning District Eight which states in part "to promote residential
development between ... School and Mud Lakes."
Shoreland Regulations. The area of land proposed for development is within the
Shoreland Overlay District of School and Mud Lakes. Both of the lakes are identified as
natural environment lakes. The Shoreland Ordinance is more restrictive than standard
residential regulations and requires a more restrictive view under the ordinance.
The application includes several variances under the Shoreland Regulations and the
variances impact the ability to process the application as a PUD/CUP under the
shoreland regulation. The variances must be granted in order for the project to be
eligible for PUD.
Variances from the Shoreland Regulations related to PUD (Section 4908.0, page 4900-
24):
Section 4908.53. Density Increase Multipliers:
The applicant is requesting use of multipliers but the plan proposed does not meet the
dimensional standards (40,000 square feet with 125 foot width or 20,000 square feet
with 125 foot width) as required and the setbacks are proposed to decrease to 45 feet,
when the ordinance requires an increase of 50 percent or 25 percent when other impact
reducing measures are applied.
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 3
Section 4908.53. Residential PUD Density Evaluation:
This provision outlines the procedures for determining the base density for PUD. There
is not an issue with the initial analysis but the ordinance restricts transfer of density to
tiers further from the waterbody and in this case, they are proposing to transfer it
towards the waterbody.
Section 4908.62 (8) reauires that 70 percent of the Shore Impact Zone (75 feet from
OHW) be preserved in its natural or existing state.
The site is currently farmland and most of the Shore Impact Zone is cultivated. The
developer is proposing an easement to enhance the areas adjacent to the lakes. The
developer has requested the variances and the justification for variance is provided on
page 7 of the attached narrative. Additionally, the Shore Impact Zone is discussed on
page 9 of the narrative.
The ordinance states that in reviewing variance requests, a finding of fact must be made
that the action will not:
a) Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property.
b) Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street.
c) Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
d) Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the
neighborhood, or in any way be contrary to the intent of this Chapter.
e) Violate the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan.
t) Violate any of the terms or conditions of Item (2) below.
Item 2 states that:
(2) A variance from the terms of this Chapter shall not be granted unless
it can be demonstrated that:
a. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the
existence of special conditions and circumstances which are
peculiar to the land, structure or building involved.
1. Special conditions may include exceptional topographic
or water conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel
of record, narrowness, shallowness, insufficient area or
shape of the property.
2. Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and
circumstances may not be solely economic in nature, if a
reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of this
Chapter.
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 4
3. Special conditions and circumstances causing undue
hardship shall not be a result of lot size or building location
when the lot qualifies as a buildable parcel. (Also see
Section 1000.3(c) of this Chapter.)
b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other
properties in the same district under the terms of this Chapter, or
deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to a
reasonable use.
c. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue
hardship do not result from the actions of the applicant.
d. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant
any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other lands,
structures or buildings in the same district.
e. The request is not a use variance.
f. Variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to
accomplish the intended purpose of the applicant.
The attached findings of fact for the development address the criteria outlined. If the
variances are deemed appropriate then the plat can be processed as a Shoreland PUD.
Shoreland PUD. Under the PUD regulations of the Shoreland Regulations, the
developer is requesting flexibility in lot width, lot size, all setbacks, street widths, and in
the maximum building coverage.
Required Regulation Requested Flexibility
Lot Size* 40,000 1 20,000 25,407 square feet maximum
square feet 12,135 square feet average
8,575 square feet minimum
Lot Width* 125 feet 75 foot to 85 foot average
65 foot minimum
Street Setback 30 feet 15 foot house 1 20 foot garage facing
street
Side Setback -Interior Lots 15 feet 5/10 feet-15 feet total between units
Corner Lots 30 feet Same as street setback
Rear Setback -Interior 25 feet 25 feet
Riparian 150 feet 45 feet
Street Widths/R.O.W. 36 feet 1 60 feet 52/28 feet or 50/24 feet
Maximum Building Coverage 25 percent 25-30 average - up to 45 percent
* Minimum lot sizes and widths are flexible under the PUD provided density is not exceeded
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 5
The justification for the PUD flexibility is outlined on pages 8-10 of the developer
narrative. The City needs to determine if the benefits proposed to the City adequately
mitigate the design flexibility proposed.
Preliminary Plat. The site is 85 acres in size with 150 lots proposed for a density of
1.76 units per acre. The plan consists of 150 building sites, 29.4 acres of public park
and open space, which includes wetland areas.
There is a 75 foot wide NSP easement that cuts diagonally across the property. The
plat has been laid out to minimize the effects of the easement on individual lots. It
appears that the easement will only encroach slightly on Lot 1, Block 12; Lot 4, Block
17; and Lot 5, Block 6. The balance of the easement falls within public or private open
space.
Streets. The roadways are all proposed to be public and are proposed with narrow
rights-of-way and narrower pavement. Under the PUD, they have requested 28 foot
streets and 52 foot rights-of-way and 24 foot streets in 54 foot rights-of-way. The City
Engineer should review and comment on the proposed streets.
Drainage/Stormwater Management. The applicant is proposing a series of
treatment/retention ponds and piping to accommodate drainage on the site. The City
Engineer should review and comment on the request.
Utilities. The proposal is to extend water and sewer service to the parcel. The City
Engineer should review and comment on the adequacy of the proposed plan.
Wetlands. A wetland delineation has been completed on the property and several
wetlands were identified totaling 10.55 acres of the 85 acre site. The submitted plan
anticipates filling approximately .51 acre of wetland and excavation of approximately .88
of wetland. Permits are necessary from the Army Corp of Engineers and under the
Wetland Conservation Act prior to any work commencing on the property.
EAW. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA) is required for the site based on
the number of lots proposed. This document has yet to be finalized but will be prepared
and reviewed pursuant to the process established by the Environmental Quality Board
(EQB). Prior to EAW review periods and process, no final approvals may be granted for
the site. The staff review and any conditions are subject to change based on the EAW
process or issues raised.
If the EAW process results in significant plan modifications, the plans will be
reprocessed through the City. Any action by the Commission or Council should be
subject to completion of the EAW process and any plan changes subject to City Council
review.
Park Dedication. The plat has been designed incorporating park/open space adjacent
to the lakeshore in five locations with three other internal park areas. There are
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 6
approximately 20 acres of park and open space excluding wetlands. In addition to the
land dedication, the developer has indicated that they will construct the majority of the
park amenities at their cost and will dedicate the improvements to the City. The details
of the improvements and installation would be spelled out in the PUD agreement to be
drafted by the City Attorney.
CONCLUSION
The proposed development is a unique concept in the City of Albertville that proposes
design elements that have not traditionally been part of recent subdivision design in the
City.
The decision to approve, deny, or conditionally approve the requested rezoning,
CUP/PUD, preliminary plat and variance under the Shoreland Regulations is viewed as
a policy decision to be made by the City Council. The Recommendation section of this
report outlines recommended conditions of approval should the Council determine that
the plan should move forward.
Towne Lakes PUD
Page 7
~ ':' 3! "-I'" I:'
--- ~ ~ ~s 1"1
'Sf l"" l" 21'..... <
tf ..;.:. < 11"1
~ "0 ::i l" ;.. P'"
~ S. U'J,,~ Z 0
G 3~~ .,.
~ ~~c"'l
.~ s~ ~ !: 1"1
'^ 1Il~'l"~Z
. "g-ZZ'"
t'l . Z
~. ifill
III --
""...:cZ ::
~~6~tD
:::J .. III t\
~ 3~":
~~I:' 0
__ 1:1
~ (nUl
ClOU'J"'''
-01:>0--
\ O~ 1:1
~-Z t\
NO\ ·
\/)
01
~
:::l
Z
(b
05'
::r
g-
...,
16
o
0-
-II
I~~
0.. (j)
c~
fd (b
fZ~
(t R
(b
i~~
D1
r1-
0'
i ~
-..
i
~J:'
_\ r
i! f-
.J
Q(ln
~ 0-0
~< ;::.. \:]
0----""1 n
CUt
n
~M-
..0
C/\.
(lV
0"
.0
-0
~
..
M-
<..s::
~~
~ '.
f~
it
t'.
~I
~;j
~i.
1t{.
~
~
I t~
I~~
::-l
.
~ ~ 3! ;j:! ~
-.... ~ 0 ,c:.... f'I'I
_% -t<
i !:'1~lf'I'I
":\ " :: '" >' ...
~ s..!!!~ Z ~
~ :3 ul'" ,
\j l>>l90;! ja
i,-~ >' f'I'I
'~ ~~"'z!j
. l>>~Z
,f) (\~: Z A
... tD.- _=
~~~~~
;~O,. ...
~ :::z: 0-
\11~~ =:I
......_f'I'I III
w <1'''
00\11.
-,c:._-
I 0'" =:I
O\-Z '"
000\ .
N
\0
l~
8':0: (f)
ccJ
~ Cl>
-n
Zo
^ =:J
U"n
Cl>
g-~
3-~
'i~,
~~
-"
Q(ln
aO\)
<:J \:1
~n
OD.ll
(l
art"
.0
(JI.
(l1J
00
'-0
a
.
rt"
~
li~
IH
it i
r [
~ \":! ;::f''1 ~
-...... ~o,&:or: f'I'I
~ i=~ -t<
~ ";.:..~J:f'I'I
'0 "ol~ ~ ...
c: ~~ Z 0
a g--g ."
~ ~~o'" J:
~ ......2!!:: f'I'I
. -~<III""'Z
~~~l"z
l>>~Z -t
~~; Z a-
lii --
.......xZ..
e: ~ 6 t:" tt
'''\11 '"
;......0,....
...."olZ -
..... 0
~~~ III
l,aI-f'I'I {II
OOUl"'''
....,&:0--
lOt:" III
O\....Z '"
000\ .
N
\0
:z:>
~?f
(/)g.
13 (I>
Q, Vi
= M:
i cs-l ~
I~~~
Ii: 1~~OI
@- tfj
8- 100
i~
~Ul
0' rl-
~~
-()
Zo
fU
~;
~~
i~,
\J~
~,
I
I
Q(l(l
00-0
< ::J \J
o;::f(l
ODJl
(l
ort"
,0
(1\'
nIJ
0'
.0
-0
o
,
rt"
<..s::
I~g
~~
~~
::-l
.
)> Z
~ 6>
~ ~'
:J~..
:::::...' ..
~ .~.""
(1) .~
.PJ.8"
.~ ..'
.~ ~0
~..~.~4
~.Z,$: .el
o '7\J ..~
.~gg
~ '~.'~
.tr.tr.
0"'0
~ .~:8
o~'~
z~ .'fJ)
~,O~
~.t:*
~~,t5'
~...w-..~
OJ VI'~ .ty "JiN -+A r /"\ ""?' ->
o ....Q.:...~ ~ .~ -t Q)~) .~ ;(r'~
.~.o CtlCl I:o .700 .d r.ii\ ,.~
.(b.......~...... 0.. ti). 0 tll .~..... ^. )iJ+.,. ............,...."
.,~Q) ':'1':1 ,<0' \.);;';';,{''''-:-'
.......... -, ",., ~
OJ,..... ....'X""""'...C1i..........tll.....3..... ~.' ........ ..~.... '.. ..0.....'......., "."".....:--...,....... '
~f'm-CJ9. (1) ,...J '.. .~ .... .. .0
:~~ 0 (1) ViCJ9. ~ .. . o.~
~ '7~/'t.. ..~....,
.At '~ '. ! ~JI ^. ..' ..~ ,...;'. ,~
~'" m- \ ...,..... -
n.....w......... .~. '. '~.'.'}' ~.........8......... .'H",.''''
\'v-\ ,rT ~ -- '\.
C)) :J w- tllt).
tr""..... .' -,.,ti)(i ~
^ ~(i~ .~ f"'\
\.'" . ,0 .r:- s.n · ...~
.~ 0 {Jl
:J """\
~
o
c:
0<
~-
.~.....
,..J..
o
.!3........
~
r...fjj.~..'....
Y..l3 (fl
T .,,~ 1'"\
.'~.."" .~"'1)>... .~
o ..~ .~.t::
'.... '.f":\ .~,' 0 ~
.el .,~.....~ .~e: .~
n De. g' ~~
,~O .~ .~." ".(}
~ .~ .~C.> .~
2..
o
~
~
~
\
"
\