Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda - 09/03/2024 (Joint Workshop)AGENDA JOINT MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Tuesday, September 3, 2024 — 5:00 p.m. Monticello Community Center Planning Commissioners: Chair Paul Konsor, Vice Chair Andrew Tapper, Teri Lehner, Melissa Robeck, Rob Stark City Councilmembers: Mayor Lloyd Hilgart, Charlotte Gabler, Sam Murdoff, Tracy Hinz, Lee Martie Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman, Rachel Leonard, Ron Hackenmueller 1. Call to Order 2. Concept Stage Planned Unit Development Submittal for an approximately 150 mixed - unit single-family residential development located within an R-1 (Single-family) Residential District.) PIDs: 155500231200 Legal Description: Lengthy — Contact City Hall Applicant: JPB Land, LLC 3. Adjournment r(7 "�N it an Consulting Ilc Steve.GrittmanConsulting@gmail.com MEMORANDUM Planning, Zoning, Land Use TO: Angela Schumann Mayor Hilgart and Monticello City Council Monticello Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: August 28, 2024 MEETING DATE: September 3, 2024 (Workshop Meeting) RE: Monticello — JPB Land/"Meadowbrook" — Concept PUD Review GC FILE NO: 120-01— 24.16 PLANNING CASE NO: 2024 - 037 PROPERTY ID: 155-500-231200 Site Context and Proiect Descri This memorandum reviews the elements of a proposed concept plan for a Planned Unit Development on a parcel east of Edmonson Avenue, a portion of the original Preliminary Plat for Hunters Crossing. Hunters Crossing was platted for a mixed arrangement of single family detached and townhouse units in 2004-2005. The easterly half of the original plat area was completed and developed, extending to Fallon Avenue on the east, and included a 5-acre public park at the corner of Fallon Avenue and 851" Street NE. The Hunters Crossing development halted during the recession, with the remaining 56 acres unplatted and undeveloped. With that pause, the original preliminary plat approval expired. The development area is a single parcel, previously annexed to the City. The parcel is transected by a powerline corridor of just under 10 acres. Additional right of way for Edmonson Avenue will leave approximately 44 acres of development land. 1 The developer for the Meadowbrook project now before the City has laid out a proposed development of a series of single family detached parcels of varying sizes. The applicant has met with staff and worked to update the proposed layout addressing several of staff's earlier comments. The unit count in the concept plan is proposed at 147 lots, distributed between three lot sizes. The majority of the proposed lot sizes are smaller than the City's current base R-1 (Single - Family) Residential regulations. Over the developable acreage, this project would result in a residential density of approximately 3.4 units per acre. Comprehensive Plan Guidance The Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan (Comprehensive Plan) guides the entire parcel as "Low Density Residential". This land use classification is designed to accommodate primarily single- family housing on lots of 6,000 to 14,000 square feet, and at densities of 3-6 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the R-1 and R-A zoning districts as correlating districts, but clearly anticipates denser development than those districts accommodate by ordinance. Increased density is currently achieved in Monticello through Planned Unit Development, commonly allowing for smaller lots than the R-1 standard, with a PUD expectation of additional amenities or design features that support the zoning flexibility below the common R-1 regulations. The City has also adopted the T-N (Traditional Neighborhood) District, which does allow narrower lots. This development proposed to use PUD to mix the variety of lots sizes while meeting the 2040 Plan's density guidance. Per the Comprehensive Plan, the Low Density Residential land use category is as follows: "By 2040, the Comprehensive Plan envisions low density single-family uses and conservation style development in these areas of the City and contiguous to the MOAA. Generally, an average density of 4 housing units per acre characterizes single-family neighborhoods but these areas could likely be developed between 3-6 units per acre depending on utility infrastructure, sensitive natural resources, conservation style development, developer preferences and project specifics. Other types of single-family housing styles, including small -lot development and attached single-family homes is encouraged in this and other residential land use designations." Further, the 2040 Plan's growth strategy states: • "Encourage growth which creates a strong and vibrant place to live, work, shop and recreate, with focused infill development and redevelopment to create a vibrant downtown and core community; development which provides a range of housing, employment and economic opportunity; development which provides both a walkable community and safe multi -modal transportation options; and development which sustains and enhances the natural amenities of Monticello. • "Support investment and reinvestment within the existing city boundary of Monticello, directing development into areas of Monticello already serviced or planned to be serviced by roads and utilities, while also thoughtfully designing and limiting development within and around sensitive natural areas." Residential development of this parcel, which was previously annexed to the City and served with municipal infrastructure directly adjacent to the parcel, is in direct alignment with the adopted growth strategy. PUD Consideration For residential subdivisions with lots below the common R-1 development size, the City has implemented its PUD review most often through the some combination of the following elements: 1. Retention of valuable natural features; 2. Creative neighborhood design to avoid repetitiveness; 3. Mixtures of architectural styles and materials; 4. Residential buildings that maintain a strong street -facing presence; 5. Additional landscape and streetscape elements; 6. Management of infrastructure to minimize prominence of needed structures and utility elements; 7. Enhancement of trail and non -vehicular transportation opportunities; 8. Additional attention to stormwater element visual impacts. 9. Other features dependent on the unique attributes of the specific site. PUD Concept Review Criteria The first stage of PUD consists of an informal Concept Plan review which is separate from the formal PUD application which will follow the Concept Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as follows: (1) Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. The City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re -apply under the standard applicable zoning district. PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows: (a) PUD Concept Proposal Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work session, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The purpose of the Concept Proposal is to: 1. Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City Council, 2. Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a requirement for extensive engineering and other plans. 3. Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and review. The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the proposed land use, and identify potential issues that may guide the City's later consideration of a full PUD application. The City Council and Planning Commission meet in joint session to provide feedback to the developer, and may include an opportunity for informal public comment as they deem appropriate. The current proposal is for a PUD Concept Plan review, which is not a formal zoning application, but is intended to provide the applicant an opportunity to get City feedback on a potential development proposal prior to more formal zoning review and the extensive supporting materials that such reviews require. The Planning Commission and City Council will have the opportunity to review the project, ask questions of the proposer, and provide comment as to the issues and elements raised by the project. Again, the applicant is also looking for specific feedback in the areas of PUD flexibility noted in their narrative. The neighboring property owners have been notified of the meeting, but it is not a formal public hearing. This memorandum provides an overview of the project and will serve as an outline for the discussion. No formal approval or denial is offered for a Concept Review. :] However, it is vital that Planning Commission and City Council members engage in a frank and open discussion of the project benefits and potential issues. The Concept Review process is most valuable when the applicants have the opportunity to understand how the City is likely to look at the project, its development details, and the potential issues it presents. In this way, the subsequent land use and development specifics can be more finely tuned to address City policy elements. Future Review and Land Use Application Process Further land use approvals would include the following: o Development Stage o Final Stage PUD o Preliminary Plat o Final Plat o Rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development Staff Preliminary Comments and Issues For this proposal, the primary considerations evident at this point in the process include the following elements: i. Land Use. As stated above, the proposed land use is currently guided for Low Density Residential land uses, suggesting "R-1, Single Family Residential" zoning designation, but with an expectation that variable lot sizes below the R-1 District are appropriate. The resulting density of the proposal is solidly within the lower range of the City's expected density for this land use category. Moreover, the density is reasonably similar to that of the original preliminary plat for this area, although that project anticipated a mix of traditional R-1 lots and attached townhouses. The current plan is actually more consistent with the updated Comprehensive Plan direction. ii. Lot Sizes. As noted above, the project proposes 147 lots, with three different single family lot sizes based on width — a. 68 units - 62' wide lots with 50' wide building pads b. 52 units - 52' wide lots with 40' pads c. 27units - 42' lots with 30' pads All 52' and 62' parcels anticipate side yard setbacks of 6 feet. The R-1 standard is a minimum of 6' with a total side yard dimension, counting both sides, of 20'. The applicant notes for comparison purposes that a number of the models proposed for I: the 62' lots have been constructed in the nearby Edmonson Ridge subdivision, where minimum lot widths are typically 65 feet. In the current concept, the applicant has proposed the 42' width lots with a building pad of 30 feet. This setback is consistent with the City's requirement for a 6' standard of distance between building walls. This requirement also meets the City's subdivision ordinance requirement for 6' lot perimeter easements, and adequate setback for the fire code's minimum building setback. Staff's recommendation is to remain consistent with the 6' minimum sideyard setback for the 42' lot width area. Front yard setbacks are not delineated on the plan, however the applicant has indicated that the dimension for all lots is a minimum of 25 feet. The R-1 front yard setback standard is 30 feet. The City has occasionally accommodated lower setback standards from public streets, provided the garage setback is no less than 25 feet. Along with this front yard building setback minimum, the City has enforced a standard that encourages front -facing entry and living spaces (or usable covered front porch areas) to be no more than 5 feet behind the garage facade (this will be discussed more fully below). The front -setback issue will require clarification both as to intent of the applicant, and any flexibility to be granted by the City, if appropriate. Another aspect of the subdivision is that of lot depth and rear yards. The standard City requirement for rear yards is at least 30 feet of usable rear yard (unaffected by slopes, wetlands, etc.). Lot depth is not separately regulated but is typically a function of lot width, length and area. In this subdivision concept, lot areas have not yet been identified, and depths appear (visually) to provide for a minimum rear yard. The lot depth should be a point of discussion in terms of usability for future accessory uses by residents. In the 42' width lot area, the applicant has noted that a Homeowner's Association will be in place, regulating any ability to construct accessory structures, along with their size and design. Circulation. The overall PUD project gains its access from several street locations. One is from Edmonson Avenue NE, continuing 89th Street NE from the Featherstone neighborhood to the west. A second east -west connection continues 87th Street NE, also from Featherstone to its connection into the original Hunters Crossing neighborhood. The primary north -south component connects with the Klein Farms residential neighborhood to the north, and continues south, to a future extension across undeveloped land, eventually to 85th Street NE. North of the powerline corridor, Park Drive is integrated into the project as well. Each of these access points is reasonable and expected for the site. They provide adequate connections to the City's major collector system (Edmonson Avenue in this case), and interconnection between neighborhood areas to help all traffic disperse along several routes, ultimately reducing traffic past individual property. As with any such project, project phasing will also be an issue to work with to ensure adequate access as the project is built out. If the project proceeds, the developer will be required to conceptually illustrate access and lot configuration on the adjacent southerly parcel to ensure road alignment provide for adequate lot depth and necessary circulation patterns. This is a requirement of the subdivision ordinance. iv. Building Materials and Architecture. The applicants have provided an extensive series of architectural depictions of homes for the various lot sizes. The concept plan package shows two examples of homes to fit the 42' wide lots, with 2-car garages and front entry porches. An item for discussion relates to the front porch setback behind the garage facade, given the City's common 5 foot maximum for this dimension. The home designs do not appear to meet this minimum requirement. The City has in the past accommodated a 6 foot distance (in Haven Ridge West), or has accepted other architectural treatments (such as a pergola structure over the front walkway in the Country Club Manor twinhome project) in lieu of a full porch. The project presentation illustrates a variety of stone base materials on most model illustrations across the three lot varieties, which has been a requirement in Monticello for many years. While there are some models that do not appear to include this standard, the City has been consistent in applying this enhancement, with the base zoning standard of 20% of such materials on the front -facing building wall. Some variation has been accommodated when other enhancements have been made, but only with a requirement that other fagade and building material enhancements are made. The applicant should address this aspect of the City's requirement, particularly in the context of PUD design. The presentation materials indicate that LP Smartside is the planned materials used on porch pillars and window wrapping. This, along with other composition materials such as cement board ("Hardie") siding is acceptable. The City has also most often imposed a requirement that no vinyl front -facing material is used given a poor history with its durability, especially under PUD conditions. The plans do not detail siding materials but do indicate a wide variety of siding and detail options, including shakes, dentils, board -and -batten, and others. With regard to unit size, the applicant's model examples in the submission appear to comply with the City's general requirement for at 1,050 square feet of initial finished floor space. However, a small number of the units do not meet the City's standard for 2,000 square feet of "finishable" space — areas of the home that can eventually be finished for additional living area. These areas are most often unfinished walk- out or look -out basements but may also include unfinished "bonus room" areas on upper levels, or similar spaces. In other subdivisions, the City has accommodated a modification to the finishable square footage, based on the PUD request, and findings that the PUD balancing of amenities and design justify flexibility to unit sizes. Not unexpectedly, the smaller home sizes tend to occupy the smaller, narrower lots. The City will need to address this issue as an aspect of the PUD discussion. Staff notes that the flexibility supports the City's goals encouraging a wider range of housing affordability, integrating those options into neighborhoods of mixed size and values. V. Future Site Planning. The proposer has provided a street connection to the south, an undeveloped parcel that separates the Meadowbrook area from 85th Street. The plan will require study to ensure that this access point will accommodate a reasonable extension of the proposed street through this undeveloped parcel and allow development. The Monticello Town Hall property is in the vicinity and could raise some design issues with the planned layout for the adjoining property owner. vi. Connectivity and Open Space. The site plans provide sidewalks along one side of most streets, per City requirement. Included in this design is an extension of sidewalk along Park Drive in the north portion of the property, extending west to the cul-de-sac, and then to the proposed park area. The exception is the cul-de-sac street serving the narrowest lots. This area will need to be reviewed according to the City's Safe Routes to School policies, and whether the sidewalk policy should apply to this portion of the project. Staff supports the extension of sidewalk through the length of this cul-de-sac. As noted above, front setbacks have not been defined, but it will be important to understand how layout of the smaller -lot area will be detailed, as sidewalk installation can often impact the layouts when setback issues arise. The City Engineer has also noted the need for an additional 5' of right of way along Edmonson, which may shift or otherwise impact the depth of the 42' lot area. The proposed park area consists of approximately 3.5 acres and is located under the powerline corridor. While the City does not commonly accept powerline areas for park dedication this area has been identified by the Parks, Arts & Recreation Commission as a potential youth bicycling area for BMX bicycles (non -motorized). The applicants have been working with the PARC and City staff on this concept and are seeking park credit for this land donation in that regard. Staff notes that the attraction of this park use will support limited parking supply, and therefore it is recommended that the concept be revised to provide head -in parking for several vehicles from 89t" Street NE. The cost of construction of these street improvements are generally eligible for construction -cost credit to the applicant's park dedication. Other areas of the powerline corridor will be used for stormwater ponding. As a long-term component of non -vehicular connection, the Parks department would also encourage the use of the powerline corridor as a potential trail connection. The trail would travel through the park, and then continue through the stormwater pond portion, which will require rough grading to support a trail corridor. The City Engineer will have additional comment in this regard. Additional landscaping along the edge of the proposed parkland area is recommended to buffer the space from the residential units. Staff would note that this area, often relegated to abandoned space, could provide a creative way to make use of this land resource, and is one aspect of PUD enhancement that the project can provide. There are few other existing natural environmental features on this site. Finally, while the proposed concept has shown sidewalks along most streets, the project will be required to provide additional pathway as a part of the right of way for Edmonson Avenue. vii. Landscaping and Streetscape. It would be expected that the development provide enhanced landscaping features as part of any PUD flexibility. The City has sought enhanced streetscape planting to supplement residential projects using PUD flexibility. Street tree planting would be one such recommended enhancement element. While streetscape presence is important in all of the project, it becomes an even greater visual aspect in the 42' lot neighborhood. Driveways for these residents will typically consume at least 50% of the curb line, resulting in an equal significant percentage of pavement in the front yard spaces. Moreover, the remaining green space is often interrupted with utility cabinets and other necessary structures. This results in little curb -line left for the parking of visitor vehicles, and the narrow areas remaining can make it difficult for neighbors when backing out of driveway when on - street parking is utilizing all of the space between driveways. While this is a function of lots of this size, staff will seek a coordinated development design by the applicants to ensure that every aspect of the subdivision will be accounted for, and open spaces are maximized to the extent possible in the remaining areas. These issues will be exacerbated around the proposed cul-de-sac for the 42' width lot area. In these areas, the geometry of the lots reduces frontage even further. Finding space for mail -box clusters is also issue in narrow -lot neighborhoods. Mailboxes blocked by on -street parking result in undelivered mail, an issue that the City only has authority over at the subdivision design stage. The applicant proposes two mail -box clusters for this area, one at the entrance to the neighborhood, and one at the end of the street, on the cul-de-sac. It is unclear how such a facility could be located near the cul-de-sac area. Staff would suggest consideration of a stronger solution, perhaps taking advantage of the homeowners' association proposed for this area. As noted above, staff would note that where the park portion of the project abuts new residential lots, the applicant should provide a landscaped buffer edge along the residential property line. There are just a few of these common lot lines. Buffering of existing residential lots would be an aspect of park development. An entrance monument is proposed for the development. These features can be attractive and create neighborhood identity, but long-term maintenance of these features is critical. It would be recommended that the homeowner's association for the narrow lots include this area for future maintenance. Additional detail will be reviewed as the Development Stage PUD and Preliminary Plat phase is considered. Other Details. The Development Stage PUD phase of review will consider these elements, as well as signage, lighting, accessory uses and structures (if any), service needs, utilities, and all other aspects of the project. It is presumed that for the three lot types proposed by this plan, there is likely to be some consistent treatment of these elements as would be typical of a PUD. The proposers have noted flexibility requests from parking, circulation, and common front and rear setbacks, which would appear to be sensible and positive for a project of this nature. Summary As noted, the Planning Commission and City Council provide comment and feedback to the developer at the Concept Review level. City officials should identify any areas of concern that would require amendment to avoid the potential for conflict, as well as any elements of the concept that the City would find essential for eventual approval. 10 The proposed project would further several of the City's housing goals with a mix of single family residential units, in an infill residential site. Development that concentrates on existing City property with utilities is a priority for the Comprehensive Plan. Specific comment should address the following items, with the notation that the applicant is looking for specific direction with regard to the Commission and Council's support of PUD flexibility for lot size and other elements. Those items are listed in bold below. 1. Site Planning — a. Front setbacks are yet to be clarified. b. Maximum spacing distances between garage and front living space/porch should be discussed. c. Notes related to enhanced streetscape and minimized pavement are of particular importance in the narrowest -lot portion of the project, but applicable in all areas of the subdivision. d. The area designated for 42 foot wide lots should be verified to accommodate the City's requirement for 6' side yards. e. Additional clarification of lot depth and rear yard size (and any impact on accessory uses or structures) should be discussed. f. Review and require a concept sketch for the extension of the north -south roadway to adjoining property, ensuring that the extension is reasonably located, and can connect to a planned street intersection being designed into the Haven Ridge West project south of 85th Street NE. 2. Building Design and Materials —The City has applied a common standard for brick and stone on the front fagade, and composite siding materials for residential structures. Additional clarity should be reviewed and discussed as necessary. 3. On -street Parking — On -street parking is a component of any residential neighborhood when property owners have several drivers, or more often, when visitors are present. Narrow lots raise issues with ensuring that such parking does not interfere with other safety and access needs of neighbors. This aspect is most concentrated in the 42 foot wide lot neighborhood, but can be an issue throughout the project. In the 42 foot lot neighborhood, the lots should be spaced out around the cul-de-sac to add green space, avoid conflicts with adjoining driveways, and avoid the extensive pavement impacts of too many lots and too little space. 4. Mailbox Locations/Utility Structures — For all areas of the subdivision, it can be important to address these streetscape elements up -front as a part of subdivision design, particularly in a PUD environment where flexibility in other areas of the City's zoning is to be balanced by development amenities or features. This is more important 11 the narrower lots become. Planning for these structures can help avoid this aspect of subdivision development become too prominent a visual feature of the streetscape. 5. Landscaping —This will be an aspect of Development Stage PUD design, with the streetscape landscaping a consideration throughout the project area. Other landscape components for consideration include the green space in the narrow -lot area, and stormwater areas to enhance the public views of these spaces, and buffering where appropriate. Due to the powerline requirements, any additional planting in the power corridor itself will have to comply with easement requirements, which may include shrubs native grasses and wildflowers. 6. Circulation and Access — Access issues for this project will primarily relate to phasing of the project, and provision of non -vehicular circulation, including sidewalks, the pathway along Edmonson, and consideration of sidewalk in the narrow lot cul-de-sac. 7. Open Space and Connectivity —A portion of the site is reserved for park dedication and use. This area should be supported by pedestrian connectivity throughout the public areas of the project. Sidewalks should be incorporated along one side of all streets, including that of the narrow -lot cul-de-sac street. 8. Engineering comments and recommendations as provided separately. The notes listed above acknowledge that a significant amount of detail will be added as the project proceeds to a more advanced stage of review. SUPPORTING DATA A. Aerial Site Image B. Applicant Narrative & Concept C. Excerpts, Monticello Housing Needs & Demands Study D. Excerpts, Monticello 2040 Vision + Plan E. BMX Park Research F. Prior Preliminary Plat, Hunters Crossing G. City Engineer's Comment Letter H. Chief Building Official's Letter 12 I cfpi 1 1 I1 ' LILIJ ° El s .. � TFFF �, 71 F 0 LL`C p J^ I-, �• r a -..:...err �^ �, - C[[ III �C� �����n �l( . o �� .gin • CC[ E� PSI TA r �J L. r-I 9^OFFFI -F .n C �D CDn 1 I 1 4VLI UO C �LLLCCCL - _ E: �Cl-'L1 ® f - `[�']j l l 1 1 1I 11.. JPB LAND IP Brooks BUILDERS AUGUST 28, 2024 MEADOWBROOK M 0 N T I C E L L 0 0AJ ABOUT THE BUILDER / DEVELOPER �i• JP Brooks JPBLAND BUILDERS JPB Land, LLC I JP Brooks Builders, locally owned will be the developer and homebuilder ensuring the vision is consistent from start to completion OUR MISSION IS SIMPLE: TO BUILD QUALITY HOMES AT AN AFFORDABLE PRICE JP Brooks has been in business since 2013 Over 850 homes constructed in 40+ communities since 2013 Currently building in 18 locations throughout the metro Average number of homes closings 2022-2023 = 150 homes annually Ranked Top 25 Builder in revenues for 2023 in the Twin Cities market Minnesota Green Path Certified Builder 2 OVERALL CONCEPT PLAN MEADOWBOORK, MONTICELLO �i• 1 JP Brooks JPB LAND BUILDERS LLC I OVERALL CONCEPT DATA 42' Single Family = 27 lots Gross Site Area: 56.45 Acres Net Developable Area: 54.46 Acres Edmonson Ave ROW: 1.99 Acres Overall Net Density: 2.7 Units Per Acre - 52' Single Family = 52 lots Open Space: 10.54 Acres Ponding Area: 4.16 Acres Proposed Total Residential Lots: 147 - 62' Single Family = 68 lots 3 CONCEPT PLAN MEADOWBROOK, MONTICELLO APPROVAL RATIONALE FOR PUD — PUBLIC BENEFITS — OUR PLAN • Our plan meets many of the stated goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan �i• JP Brooks JPBLAND BUILDERS • We offer a variety of lot sizes (3) and home styles providing choices to serve all demographics of residents • Dedicates approximately 1.99 acres of land for expanded Edmonson Ave ROW • Provides a trail easement along the Edmonson Ave ROW • Dedicates 10.54 acres of public open space (including 3.5 acre park) • Provides 3.5 acres of dedicated public park space for city desired "BMX" park • Utilizes existing infrastructure for water and sewer that "pays its own way" • Provides street connectivity on all four perimeters of the site to existing or proposed neighborhoods • Provides HOA (snow + mow) maintenance on all 42' Villa home lots • Provides sidewalk and trail connectivity to existing neighborhood network and proposed community and park area 7 0 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVES ACHIEVED A!! P, ^P JPB LAND JP Brooks B U I L D E R S A City that prioritizes growth inward by concentrating development activities within the existing city boundaries and grows or develops into the Orderly Annexation Area only when development is proposed or planned contiguous to city boundaries, sensitive open space lands are protected and thoughtfully incorporated into the development pattern, and the land is serviced by appropriate utility and transportation systems. A City that prioritizes growth inward by concentrating development activities within the existing city boundaries and grows or develops into the Orderly Annexation Area only when development is proposed or planned contiguous to city boundaries, sensitive open space lands are protected and thoughtfully incorporated into the development pattern, and the land is serviced by appropriate utility and transportation systems. An open space "frame" around and woven through Monticello, complemented by the Mississippi River, Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional Park, other local and regional parks, trails and recreation areas which together protect the City's natural resources, lakes, wetlands and woodlands, and provide opportunities for recreation, enhance visual beauty, and shape the City's character. 1.1 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN KEY THEMES ACHIEVED �1. SUSTAINABILITYJ • Provides infill development • Utilizes the land efficiently • Provides a linear park • Provides trails and sidewalks for pedestrians and cyclists • Preserves open space �i• 1 JP Brooks JPB LAND BUILDERS LLC • Provides a new community park within walking distance of residents • Preserves open space • Provides access to other neighborhoods and commercial areas of the city nearby • Promotes pedestrian and bicycle use of trails and sidewalks encouraging a healthy lifestyle for residents • A variety of housing types and price points provided to serve all demographics of home purchasers within one community C.1 PRODUCT SUMMARY 1 JPBrooks JPB LAND BUILDERS LLC Size Type Plan Name Bedrooms The Bradford 2-3 Bathrooms Garage Stalls 2 2 2 2 Sq. Ft. Villa 1394-1492 ' Villa The Oxford II The Augusta 2-3 2 1584-1721 Villa 2 2 1355-1499 Villa The Madison 3 2 2 1596-1740 Villa The Windsor 2 2 2 1731 Villa The Lakewood 2-3 2 2 1794-1830 Villa The Waterford 2-3 2 2 1948-2068 Villa The Bradford 2-3 2 3 1394-1492 Villa The Oxford II 2-3 2 3 1584-1721 Split The Weston 3-5 2-3 2 1440-2251 Rambler The Augusta 2-4 2-3 3 1355-2534 Rambler The Madison 3-5 2-3 3 1596-2919 Rambler The Windsor 2-4 2-3 3 1731-3070 Rambler The Somerset 2-5 2-3 3 1846-3025 Two Story The Preston 3-4 3-4 3 1804-2612 Two Story The Highland 4-5 3-4 3 2120-2821 Two Story The Brookview 4-5 3-4 3 2295-3082 Two Story The Summit 4-5 3-4 3 2539-3482 Split The Oak Ridge 2-4 2-3 3 1138-1994 Split The Weston 3-5 2-3 3 1440-2251 Multi Level The Maplewood 4 4 3 2289 Multi Level The Crestview 4 4 3 2562 II ARCHITECTURAL DISTINCTIONS • Front porches with (SmartSide) LP pillars • Stone base pillar upgrades • Varying heights and quantities for stone • Built out gables • Coach lamps at garage door • LP SmartSide window wrapping • Transom or sidelight windows at front entry door • Different siding options in gables (Board and Batten, Shakes, Built Outs, Dentils, Brackets) • Garage door is an upgraded short raised panel garage door with grooves. Also allows for windows to be added Multiple colors, including wood grain to provide higher quality look • Stone address plaque upgrade option. • All homes Minnesota Green Path certified �i� JP Brooks JPBLAND BUILDERS • Included front door is an upgraded fiberglass door with a wide array of color options and wood grain options. (Most builders don't do the wood grain because of the cost, we include standard due to positive feedback from customers.) • Full time designer on staff with over 25 years of experience planning out exterior packages for large, quality communities • In house design studio where customers can choose their selections • We are intentional with a self imposed anti - monotony code about not allowing the same elevation or color palette next door, on either side, or directly across the street 42'LOTS - 30'HOUSE PAD - 6'Sl DE YARDS 0 i a OVERVIEW 42' LOTS - 30' HOUSE PAD - U SIDE YARDS OVERVIEW The Augusta VILLA FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 2 Bathrooms: 2 Garage Stalls: 2 Square Feet: 1,355 - 1,499 69-. T JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 11 The Madison VILLA FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 3 Bathrooms: 2 Garage Stalls: 2 Square Feet: 19596 - 19740 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S _I 12 The Windsor VILLA FLOOR PLAN rl"f Bedrooms: 2 Bathrooms: 2 Garage Stalls: 2 Square Feet: 1,731 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 13 52' LOTS - 40' HOUSE PAD - U SIDE YARDS OVERVIEW i The Waterford VILLA FLOOR PLAN ` !'M I°511 T M i Bedrooms: 2-3 Bathrooms: 2 Garage Stalls: 2 Square Feet: 1,948 - 2,068 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 15 52' LOTS - 40' HOUSE PAD - U SI DE YARDS OVERVIEW c � Y.4 M 1 . e 52'LOTS - 40'HOUSE PAD - USIDE YARDS OVERVIEW NINO, IR The Weston SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ". W-� '%, *Mom Bedrooms: 3-5 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 2 Square Feet: 19440 - 2,251 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S f R� f im 62' LOTS - SO' HOUSE PAD - &SIDE YARDS t I1 1 i OVERVIEW The Madison RAMBLER FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 3-5 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 1,596 - 21919 JP Brooks BUILDERS 20 The Windsor RAMBLER FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 2-4 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 11731 - 31070 JP Brooks BUILDERS 21 The Somerset RAMBLER FLOOR PLAN J, JP Brooks BUILDERS Bedrooms: 2-5 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 1,846 - 3,025 ''" r;-d 22 The Preston TWO STORY FLOOR PLAN wr+' v. - Bedrooms: 3-4 Bathrooms: 3-4 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 1,804 - 2,612 JP Brooks BUILDERS 23 The Highland TWO STORY FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 4-5 Bathrooms: 3-4 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 2,120 - 2,821 IwW4 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S The BrookvieW TWO STORY FLOOR PLAN , TIVwwIM4M" Bedrooms: 4-5 Bathrooms: 3-4 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 2,295 - 3,082 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 1 25 TheSUMMit TWO STORY FLOOR PLAN M Bedrooms: 4-5 Bathrooms: 3-4 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 2,539 - 3,482 JP Brooks BUILDERS 26 The Oak Ridge SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 2-4 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 19138 - 11994 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 2 The Weston SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 3-5 Bathrooms: 2-3 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 19440 - 2,251 .,M.-. .-Am JP Brooks B U I L D E R S L AV M 62' LOTS - SO' HOUSE PAD - &SIDE YARDS OVERVIEW 6 The Crestview MULTI LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Bedrooms: 0 Bathrooms: 0 Garage Stalls: 3 Square Feet: 21562 JP Brooks B U I L D E R S 30 APPROVAL RATIONALE SUMMARY + ESTIMATED PHASING PROPOSED PHASING Phase 1 - 50 Lots: 2025-2026 Phase 2 - 50 Lots: 2027-2028 Phase 3 - 47 Lots: 2029-2030 JPB Land, LLC's vision for Meadowbrook is to partner with the City of Monticello to create a neighborhood that will be attractive to residents and offer a community with multiple home style options for buyers. As such, we hope this PUD will establish standards of excellence while allowing for flexibility that will consider changes in the market and consumer preferences over time. We have built many homes in Monticello over the years and have really enjoyed being a great partner with the city in the past. We look forward to working with the city on the Meadowbrook development and provide wonderful homesites for the residents of Monticello for years to come! Thank you for your consideration. �i• 1 JP Brooks JPB LAND BUILDERS LLC 31 A JP Brooks JPB LAND BUILDERS DEVELOPER / BUILDER JPB Land, LLC. I JP Brooks, Inc. = 13700 Reimer Drive North, Suite 100 Maple Grove, MN 55311 Art Plante Cara Schwa h n Otto (763) 682-4727 M www.ottoassociates.com 1 WETLAND CONSULTANT Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company, 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 130 Orono, MN 55331 Mark Kjolhaug (952) 401-8757 www.kjolhaugenv.com 64 ENTRY-LEVEL AFFORDABILITY LOWER -INCOME HOUSEHOLDS that own their housing commonly occupy what is referred to as the "starter home" market. For purposes of this study, this is tracked as the "Bottom Tier Home Value" and is the median of the 511 to 35'" percentile of all home values within the City. These homes followed the same general trend both going into and coming out of the recession - showing consistent steady increases in cost over the past decade. Amongst peer communities, Monticello still has the lowest -cost entry point into the ownership market, even considering appreciation. However, the "starter home" market is still becoming increasingly unaffordable for those who live in the City. As of the most recent data and estimates (2023), the median starter -home cost is just out of reach of the affordability limit for a City household earning 80% of the median income ($269,000 home entry cost vs. $263,000 purchase limit). As housing costs continue to rise throughout the market, Monticello households below the AMI will be increasingly precluded or "priced -out" of ownership opportunities in the City, consistent with occupancy and consumption records. STARTER HOME VALUE $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 000�% $50,000 OCCUPANT INCOMES OF HOUSES AFFORDABLE TO 50% AMI HOUSEHOLDS Household Income 0% - 50% AMI With Mortgage 200 Without Mortgage 330 51 % - 80% AMI 265 85 81%- 100% AMI 215 45 > 100% AMI 429 11 a� > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Monticello Buffalo Becker —Big Lake Saint Michael Source: Zillow Data and Research (MLS Aggregator) City of Monticello Housing Needs and Demand 65 HOUSE AVAILABILITY SINGLE -UNIT HOME AVAILABILITY as tracked by the Multiple listing Service is often inversely related to prices - as inventory decreases, prices increase. As the local housing market was coming out of the recession, there was a market slowdown - though this slowdown (as represented by months' of supply) still indicated a balanced market. Months' supply is generally considered to be balanced when there are 4-6 months' of inventory in the market. As that lessens, it is indicative of increased competition for available homes in what is often referred to as a "seller's market". Since peaking in 2011 at more than three months, the average days on market has dropped to a steady 2-3 weeks on market over the past 4 years. There is seasonal variation within the data that reflect common market periods, but time on market has generally decreased to a point where during peak real estate season, houses have averaged less than 3 weeks since 2016. SINGLE-FAMILY AVAILABILITY 140 120 100 U1 `7 cT G 80 0 a m 0 60 40 20 This increased sales activity is directly reflected in the months of supply metric, as it is the balance between inventory and demand (number of sales). Together, these metrics indicate a competitive market with increased competition among buyers that is causing cost inflation well beyond the 2% average U.S. inflation rate. A slight increase in months supply in recent years may be due to the increase in units coming online within the City which can signal a return to a more balanced market. 5-YEAR AVERAGE APPRECIATION RATE ON MEDIAN SF HOME: 9.3% ANNUALLY 5-YEAR APPRECIATION ON MEDIAN SF HOME (BY SALES PRICE): $130,450 Source: Multiple Listing Service 0 0 'Y� ti� titi 1ti ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� tirO ti� ti1 ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� titi titi titi titi ti� >ac >°\ _10 >°> >ac >°> >ac >°> >a� >°\ >a� >°\ >a� >°\ >1 >J\ " >�> 1,1 >�> >ac >°> >ac >;> >ac >°\ Source: Multiple Listing Service -Days on Market -Months Supply Ownership Market 66 HOUSE AVAILABILITY INVENTORY of single-family houses for sale slowly decreased from 2015 to 2021, with a slight increase in the last two years. As inventory decreased, the median sales price showed steady corresponding increases - with fewer homes available, and steady demand, markets shift toward favoring sellers through increased competition and appreciation. As available supply has slightly increased over the past two years, there was still a marked increase in the median sales price due to the skyrocketing demand for home buying coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic amid very low interest rates. With recent high interest rates, the sales price should stabilize. From January 2015 to January 2021 during the period of decreasing inventory, the median home appreciated at a rate of 10.2% annually. The recent slight increase in inventory has correlated with appreciated price at a rate of 5.2% annually for the median home. This shows that increasing inventory helps to ease pressures on the market that cause cost increases, though the months of supply metric indicates there is still demand for units in the market that will further shift buyer/seller indices toward a more balanced market. MONTHLY INVENTORY 3.7% 4.5 % 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 TOWNHOME AVAILABILITY AND COST $250 $200 $ $150 $100 $50 6 5 T 4 a 3 0 2 1 $ 0 do tit titi ti3 ti° tih ti� ti� tiro ti� ,yo titi titi ti'' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Price/Sq. ft. -Months Supply Source: Multiple Listing Service 2.7% O 5.5% 6.8% 00 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 0 111111-I� 111111111111111 lJJ LU 11 111 111 I I 1 ICJ 1 I LLL.0 I11I I1I 11 LI I IJ-LLLN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ILW hLl tih ti( ti�b ti� ti� ti� ti0 tiC ti0) Monthly Inventory Median Sales Price Source: Multiple Listing Service City of Monticello Housing Needs and Demand 67 HOUSE SALES SALE TO LIST PRICE RATIOS also display trends in the ownership market that indicate increased competition on an year-to-year basis - though stabilizing as inventory of units on the market has also stabilized. Since coming out of the recession, sellers have generally accepted offers that have been more than 95% of the asking price for single- family homes in the City. The greatest peak in this ratio came amid the COVID-19 pandemic in the summer of 2021 when sellers accepted offers that were nearly 105% of their list price. With increasing supply coming in 2022, the sale to list price ratio dipped slightly, tracking with the slight decrease in median sales price. This is consistent with growth in number of units and indicative of a healthy market. MEDIAN SALES PRICE COMPARED TO LISTING 105% 100% 95% 90% TOWNHOME PCT OF ORIGINAL PRICE (AUGUST 2023) 100% for 3 consecutive months SINGLE-FAMILY PCT OF ORIGINAL PRICE (AUGUST 2023) 100% or over for 4 consecutive months Source: Multiple Listing Service 85% do do titi titi titi titi ti� ti� tior ti� ti`' tih ti° ti° ti� ti� ti� tiw ti° ti° ,yo ,yo titi titi ,yti ti� ,y'' ,y3 Townhome Single -Family Source: Multiple Listing Service Ownership Market 68 HOUSE SALES REGIONAL SALES TRENDS largely indicate a tightening (increased demand) of the market for many peer communities as well. Though Monticello's market was slightly slower to see increased competition and increasing offers post -recession (when tracked through sale:listing ratio), it then increased to become the second community to see the median sale cost meeting asking price, behind only Big Lake. Monticello has the highest current sale:list price ratio among its peer communities, though many have shown a consistency through the past year. Off-peak sales without a large percent decrease in sales price indicates that growth potential for the region is strong, and demand is shifting into other areas. It also likely indicates that Monticello (as the community with the largest ratio) is seeing demand that it cannot fill with the existing stock, which has spillover into other regional communities (both peer communities and others), although this is impossible to tell solely from data. 105 % 100% 95% 90% 85% TOWNHOME PCT OF ORIGINAL PRICE IN PEER COMMUNITIES (.JULY 2020) 99% in July 2020 SINGLE-FAMILY PCT OF ORIGINAL PRICE IN PEER COMMUNITIES (JULY 2020) 100% for 4 consecutive months Source: Multiple Listing Service 1", 1, 1a 1�` 1h 1y lac ��\ 1ac ��\ 1'°c ��\ Monticello -Big Lake -Buffalo -Saint Michael 102 UNIT DEMAND Findings & Recommendations 104 OWNER DEMAND -LOW ESTIMATE Growth projections for the City of Monticello indicate that current household growth rates will continue - and may have the potential to increase. More commuters are looking to call Monticello home. More area residents would like more options in the housing market. This demand analysis identifies a need to increase the number of ownership units in the City - creating more opportunity for ownership that can serve residents and newcomers alike. There are two pages of demand analysis per housing tenure type (ownership and rental) - this is done to illustrate the range of potential growth that the City may undergo. In general, low estimates are based on 1.7% household growth, and high estimates are based upon 2.9% household growth. Some assumptions in each are the same - such as the need to bring vacancy back to healthy levels, and decrease the rapid speed of cost increases on housing. Other estimates differ based on current best projections. Final unit estimates are broken down by total projection of unit need from 2020 to 2028, projected unit need subtracting out permitted units (units constructed or under construction), and projected unit need subtracting out permitted units and units with land use and land division approval (anticipated units). The low estimate should be used as a baseline - a minimum threshold for unit construction, not just plats. New Ownership Housing D- Demand from Household Growth Within the City - Household Growth from 2020 to 2028 644 additional households New Household Ownership Rate 50% Demand for New Construction 322 ownership units Demand from Existing Resident Households Current Owner Households 3,082 households Current Owners Actively Looking for New Housing 10.0% Increased Demand from Existing Residents 308 ownership units Desire for New Construction 56% Existing Resident Demand for New Construction 173 ownership units Total Demand for New Construction Ownership Units = 495 units Preference for SF -Detached 70% Preference for SF -Attached 30% 347 units # 148 units Additional Need for Vacancy 54 units Additional Need for Vacancy 23 units Total SF -Detached Need 401 units Total SF -Attached Need= 171 units Total Ownership Unit Need = 572 units Total Need minus Permitted Units = 401 units Total Need minus Permitted Units & Approved Units = 284 units City of Monticello Housing Needs and Demand 105 OWNER DEMAND -HIGH ESTIMATE This high estimate should be used as a goal - a measure of units that could be constructed in the market to provide additional housing choice - in location, type, and price point for buyers at any given point in time. Community feedback through this process indicated the desire that there be multiple areas under different stages of development at the same time, so that buyers who want to move to the City have areas to choose in where to call home. This estimate would likely require multiple active subdivisions in order to have the demand met and fully constructed by 2028. Development interest and demand drive the housing market. Due to lending requirements and market analyses needed for large-scale developer investment, if there is developer interest, there is also likely demand. New Ownership Housing D- Demand from Household Growth Within the City - Household Growth from 2020 to 2028 1,159 additional households New Household Ownership Rate 50% Demand for New Construction 579 ownership units Demand from Existing Resident Households Current Owner Households 3,082 households Current Owners Actively Looking for New Housing 10.0% Increased Demand from Existing Residents 308 ownership units Desire for New Construction 56% Existing Resident Demand for New Construction 173 ownership units Total Demand for New Construction Ownership Units = 752 units Preference for SF -Detached 70% Preference for SF -Attached 30% 526 units # 226 units Additional Need for Vacancy 54 units Additional Need for Vacancy 23 units Total SF -Detached Need 580 units Total SF -Attached Need= 249 units Total Ownership Unit Need = 829 units Total Need minus Permitted Units = 658 units Total Need minus Permitted Units & Approved Units = 541 units Unit Demand & Recommendations 106 OWNERSHIP FINDINGS GENERAL CONDITIONS IMPACTING THE HOUSING MARKET: • Average household size has remained stable (p• 8) • Families and home -office preferences sustaining need for larger units (p. 8) • Aging households are the fastest increasing demographic since 2010 (p. 9) • Aging households will be a significant portion of households through 2050 (p. 12) • Monticello residents have lower average incomes compared to peer communities (p. 13) • Monticello residents have lower degrees of educational attainment compared to the County (p. 14) • Common occupation groups in the City indicate a need for affordable housing, especially for entry-level positions (p. 16) • Large shares of residents (48% as of 2020) commute into metro counties daily for work. Forty-eight percent of community survey respondents indicated Twin Cities or a suburb as place of employment (p. 18) • Housing unit production has not kept pace with new households moving to the County, decreasing vacancy and increasing cost (p. 19) • Rising costs and interest rates have made the development process more difficult (p. 97) • Vacancy rates continue to be low in the City and region, despite strong unit production (p. 104) WHAT RESIDENTS WANT: • Increase in zero -entry, patio, and rambler style homes • Detached, accessory, missing middle, and townhome units • Affordable starter -home development in proximity to amenities • Areas with different development options to build in MAJOR OWNERSHIP MARKET FINDINGS: • Ownership units have made up 25.3% of planned or constructed developments since 2020, well below historic building trends (p. 6) • Though the majority of ownership housing is single-family detached, there are also many attached ownership units (p. 51) • Owners make up a smaller portion of the overall housing market than in most regional communities (p. 53). Now at 70% of housing market as of 2021. • Though affordable homes exist in the market, residents still identified the largest negative aspect of the market as lack of affordability, with more than half of survey respondents indicating that affordable housing is becoming harder to find (p. 58) • There are generally more affordable ownership opportunities in the city core, though attached ownership units are affordable in many areas (p. 60) • Many households are remaining in their housing longer than the 7-year national average (p. 61) • Since 2014, home costs have drastically outpaced income growth with single-family home value reducing affordability and access for potential homebuyers (p. 62) • The median single-family home value is now greater than the median income affordability limit (p. 62) • The median home cost has more than doubled since 2010 (p. 62) • Among its peers, Monticello has the lowest - cost entry point for a median starter home (p. 64) • The median starter home in the City is no longer affordable to households earning 80% AMI (p. 64) • Monticello has the current highest Sales:List price ratio among peer communities (p. 68) • There is demand for ownership townhomes (p. 70) City of Monticello Housing Needs and Demand FUTURE LAND USE MAP LOW -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) The Low -Density Residential designation corresponds to the majority of Monticello's single-family residential neighborhoods. These areas are characterized by subdivisions of detached homes, usually on lots from 7,000 to 14,000 square feet. Housing in this designation includes single-family detached residential units as well as detached accessory structures. Other compatible uses, such as schools, nursing homes, private parks and religious facilities may also locate in this designation. Residential • Single -Family • Other Low -Density Residential uses Public/institutional • Schools Recreational • Parks/Playgrounds Open Space • Sensitive Habitat Primary Mode Vehicular (slow speeds) Secondary Mode Pedestrian paths !1 and trails Bicycle facilities and parking 1F Transit or Shuttle Service • Density - 3-6 units/acre ♦ 2018 Correlating (Low -Density Zoning District Residential) R-A • Height - Residential 1-2 stories Amenities District • Lot Area - R-1 Single -Family 6,000-14,000 Residence District sq. ft. per unit MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 71 GROWTH STRATEGY Monticello's growth strategy balances land use development needs with real estate market demand, and transportation and infrastructure improvement requirements to ensure an orderly and efficient use of land and resources. There is a significant amount of development potential within Monticello's existing municipal boundary and even greater potential in the surrounding MOAA. Therefore, for the next 20 years, the general growth strategy prioritizes development of remaining available vacant land within existing boundaries and the downtown and surrounding area before substantially developing and annexing land within the MOAA. The growth strategy has three objectives: Encourage growth which creates a strong and vibrant place to live, work, shop and recreate, with focused infill development and redevelopment to create a vibrant downtown and core community, • development which provides a range of housing, employment and economic opportunity, development which provides both a walkable community and safe multi -modal transportation options, and development which sustains and enhances the natural amenities of Monticello. • Support investment and reinvestment within the existing city boundary of Monticello, directing development into areas of Monticello already serviced or planned to be serviced by roads and utilities, while also thoughtfully designing and limiting development within and around sensitive natural areas. Ensure the managed development of appropriate and compatible land uses which is resilient to shifts and changes in the economy, real estate market and consumer demand, and responds to a changing tax base. Briar Oakes Residential Property, Source: City of Monticello Another aspect of the growth strategy is the designation of significant portions of the MOAA as a Development Reserve. This is land reserved for an extended, longer -term growth horizon beyond 2040 and the time horizon of this Comprehensive Plan. However, some development in the MOAA is likely to occur before 2040 and Monticello should adjust its land use policies and decision - making with some measure of flexibility to accommodate new development proposals as they occur. As long as development proposals meet the overarching land use planning goals presented in this Comprehensive Plan, an amendment to the Plan is the proper procedure for consideration of such projects. Consideration for projects in the MOAA and annexation requests will follow the current annexation agreement parameters, or any future amendments to the agreement. Growth and development within the MOAA would naturally follow the existing roadway network and its potential for expansion as well as the availability of utility infrastructure, specifically sewer and water lines provided as City services. Specific projects will require analysis of utility and infrastructure needs, roadway network capacity, as well as land use compatibility. Given the MOAA's existing land area and its growth potential, its full development build -out would occur over a much longer time period, extending beyond the 20-year timeline of this plan. Land in the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area 50 41«4[<M 419« � LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION IMPLEMENTATION CHART: LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION SHORT- I LONG- ONGOING THEME TERM TERM I Policy2.1: Neighborhood Strategy2.1.1-Adopt zoning regulations Diversity & Life -Cycle Housing •• that allow for a wider diversity of housing types, identify character defining features and O O . • • • • • Sustain a diverse array of encourage a center of focus for • - • • • neighborhood character and each neighborhood. • • • . - housing types throughout • • • • - • • • Monticello. These will range from • • • • • . • estate residential to established Strategy2.1.2- Encourage opportunities for residents to stay in Monticello, with additional • - • • • • • • • • traditional neighborhoods, to options for estate residential, senior living, and • • . - • • • • new planned subdivisions and other life -cycle options. Strategy2.1.3 - Amend zoning regulations as • • • . - • • • conservation development, and • . - • - • • • • • neighborhoods oriented around • . • • • • • • a center or activity generator. necessary to allow for small -lot single family homes, neo-traditional housing styles, cottage • - • • • . • • The unique design elements that homes, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and • • • . • • • • define each neighborhood should mansion style condos. • • • • be protected and enhanced in the future including its housing stock, Strategy2.1.4 - Encourage housing options which incorporate Universal Design to promote parks and public infrastructure. equity in housing choice. Strategy2.1.5 - Consider allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). ) Monticello's neighborhoods help define the city's form and sense 0place. The city's neighborhoods will continue to evolve in the years ahead. In areas where the basic development pattern is already established continued reinvestment in the housing stock and infrastructure is encouraged with an emphasis on sustainable design in terms of private property improvement and investment, as well as capital improvements. In the outlying areas of the city where the development pattern is still evolving, new neighborhoods will be safe, healthy, attractive with a diverse population and housing stock. The planning objective for all Monticello residential areas is to make each neighborhood "complete" — with a variety of housing choices, proximity to neighborhood- scaled commercial services, community services, and neighborhood parks that serve as an identifiable center and gathering place for its neighbors and future residents. MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 199 IMPLEMENTATION CHART: LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION SHORT- I LONG- ONGOING THEME TERM TERM Policy2.2: Neighborhood Centers Strategy 2.2.1- Encourage and support location of public facilities including schools and parks close to neighborhoods to make them easily ) Enhance or create identifiable accessible by walking or bicycling. "centers" in each neighborhood Strategy2.2.2 - Ensure all neighborhoods have which serve as local gathering places. Neighborhood centers may access to healthy food, including community O take a variety of forms as public gardens and farmers markets, through a food uses such as parks, community security assessment. Small scale food stores and centers, Or schools; neighborhood neighborhood markets should be a permitted shopping districts; or any other use in the Mixed Neighborhood designation. public space where residents Can Congregate. Strategy2.2.3-Design sidewalks and pathways that enable safe crossings of major roadways in getting to and from nearby points of designation. Poiicy2.3. Strategy2.3.1- Establish incentives and Neighborhood Reinvestment allowances to facilitate design improvements to buildings and properties in the Traditional Encourage continued reinvestment Neighborhood designation and alder areas of in Monticello's neighborhoods the city. by private property owners and through capital improvements. Strategy2.3.2- create gateways and While the basic land use pattern incorporate other urban design elements in in many neighborhoods is already residential or mixed neighborhoods with new set and will be maintained, their signage and streetscape features such as branded street signs and streetscape amenities. continued improvement and evolution should be viewed an important part of the City's sustainability initiatives. t(«(«(«(« IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION CHART: LAND USE, GROWTH AND ORDERLY ANNEXATION SHORT- I LONG- ONGOING THEME TERM TERM Policy 2.7. Locations for Higher Stmtegy2.7.1- Amend the Zoning Map to be Density Housing consistent with the Future Land Use Map and Generally, locate new higher identify areas where mixed -density residential density housing and mixed uses are appropriate. use development in proximity to Downtown where there is good access to parks and open space, proximity to local -serving commercial uses, and proximity to the transportation network. Consider impacts to over concentration of multi -family uses in specific locations. Conversely, the City should discourage the use of vacant sites with these attributes for new low employee intensity or low value land uses. Policy 2.8. Equitable Planning 4ft Ensure that no single neighborhood or population group is disproportionately O a impacted by flooding or environmental burdens, city services, incompatible uses, neighborhood constraints or potential hazards. Policy2.9 - Neighborhood Design Strategy2.9.1- Integrate open space, parks, Support the development of street trees, landscaping, and natural features neighborhoods with a strong set of into Monticello's neighborhoods to enhance their visual quality, create inviting and safe amenities which enhance quality spaces, and improve access to nature of life, retain residents and support and recreation. continued investment. Strategy2.9.2- Create and maintain a Neighborhood Conservation Overlay zoning district to identify areas that should O be developed in a manner consistent with conservation style development. 202 IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION CHART: PARKS, PATHWAYS AND OPEN SPACE SHORT- LONG- ONGOING I THEME TERM I TERM • • Policy 1.9. Park Master Plan and Design Standards Strategy 1.9.1- Include funding to prepare a Parks and Pathways Master Plan into the City's Five Year Capital Improvement Program. O Maintain a Parks and Pathways Master Plan that more specifically describes the standards and guidelines for park and pathway Strategy 1.9.2 - Ensure that the Master Plan design and development and incorporates design standards for all city includes detailed procedures for acquisition, development, operation parks and pathways including linear parks and innovative amenities. O and maintenance and all City park and pathway facilities. Policy 10. Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission • Maintain the Parks, Arts and Recreation Commission as the primary advisory �a body that discusses and reviews plans for the acquisition and development of parks and recreational facilities, develops recreation programs, reviews parkland dedications for new subdivisions and makes recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council. Policy2.1. Connectivity Strategy2.1.1-Annually evaluate, update and adopt the Pathway Connection map, which throughout the City and MOAA identifies and prioritizes segments and loop )) • • - Provide pathway connections connections for completion. • • • • • " " • • between parks and recreation • " • • • • • • • • - areas, open spaces, neighborhoods, Strategy2.1.2- Ensure trail connections across barriers, such as the Interstate and �a schools and commercial and Highway 25, are included in all street, roadway • • " employment Centers. and infrastructure projects including a future • • " • • • • • • interchange with Orchard Road or new • . • • • • - • . - • intersections on Highway 25. Strategy2.1.3- Incorporate segment completion as part of annual Capital • ' - ' • • • • • • • Improvement Plans. 234 <(� IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION CHART: PARKS, PATHWAYS AND OPEN SPACE SHORT- I LONG- ONGOING THEME TERM TERM • • Policy 5.1. Open Space and Strategy5.1.1- Designate lands as Open • • Resource Conservation Land Use Space and Resource Conservation as needed to identify, protect and preserve natural open Maintain an Open Space and space and sensitive habitats in and around • • - - Resource Conservation land use Monticello consistent with 2008 Natural - - Resource Inventory and Assessment and park designation to recognize lands that dedication policies. - should be permanently protected �a - as natural open space, which later - - my be protected through park - dedication, easements or other tools. • • • • • • •• Policy 5.2. Strategy5.2.1- Continue to utilize and • Open Space Preservation implement strategies from the City's 2008 Natural Resource Inventory and Assessment Seek opportunities to expand and and/or develop a Natural Resource Management add to the open space system Plan to provide restoration, vegetation surrounding Monticello whenever management and protection for valuable open N possible as a means to preserve space resources. The 2008 Natural Resource Assessment identified Monticello's natural character. Recognize the many wetlands, a variety of sensitive areas as having ecological value warranting protection, these include the Pelican Lake creeks, lakes and water features Watershed, Ditch 33 Watershed and Wetlands, within and surrounding Monticello Oak Savanna and Prairie located near Xcel and promote their protection as a Energy and Montiview Hill, among others. Protection could be accomplished through valuable Community resource. public acquisition of an area or through conservation easements. Strategy&Z2- Continue to protect Otter Creek and its water quality by controlling development near the creek, monitoring water quality and preventing unlawful discharges into the Creek. ■111111111111TICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN IMPLEMENTATION CHART: COMMUNITY CHARACTER, DESIGN AND THE ARTS SHORT- I LONG- ONGOING THEME TERM TERM • - Strategy 1.1.1- Pursue neighborhood Policy 1.I. Neighborhood Design conservation approaches that promote • " • _ Pursue traditional neighborhood • • • • - • • - • appropriate housing rehabilitation and new construction responsive to Monticello's • conservation and preservation traditional neighborhood character and ((( approaches that encourage visual diversity. ))) property improvements, Strategy 1.1.2 - Explore and offer incentives reinvestment and promote quality neighborhood design. which provide financing mechanisms for improvements and reinvestment in the neighborhoods. Strategy 1.1.3 - Identify the physical characteristics and qualities — built and natural — that define the existing traditional neighborhoods and subject to conservation measures and used to enhance new infill development. A historic resources survey 1J1 and inventory may be one method to identify individual homes or blocks worthy of recognition and preservation. Strategy 1.1.4 - Consider options for establishing a neighborhood conservation district through a zoning overlay or new design standards. Strategy 1.1.5 - Create distinct neighborhood gateways and public art used as community design elements unique to each neighborhood ) J ))) or area of the City. Strategy1.1.6- Focus capital and right-of-way improvements on urban design and streetscape improvements that enhance neighborhood ))) walkability and visual qualities. MONTICELLO 2040 VISION + PLAN 241 BMX PARKS Initial Research Cottage Grove Bike Park, MN 7050 Meadow Grass Ave S, Cottage Grove, MN 55016 • The 2.4-acre bike park includes a pump track, dirt jumps, a mountain bike skills area and a four - cross (mountain cross) track. A tot track and slope style course are in the master plan, but not currently built. Once complete it will be the largest park (to -date) in Minnesota Taft Park Bike Park, Richfield, MN 62"d Street and Bloomington Avenue Located on the west side of Taft Park • The park features off -road bike experiences like berms, rollers, jumps, rock features, sloped wood decking, and pump tracks (including a main track and one for younger riders and adaptive bikes). The park is a partnership between the City of Richfield and Three Rivers Park District. • Size of a baseball field? SKILLS FEATURES _ Q m L Q belml el (' II rtCI I Q i� "� — i Q LINEt EGWN NLEVEL �I, I,y © bcrn 1 Y al Q F J u y L Q I , o0 W O do r Ire Q berm FN:re Q Rhm 11 tl:l¢ r � j, �Q�! ThreeRivers ��THFINDGA PANE PIlTRIGT Eagan BMX Park, MN • .75-acres • Moved roughly 3,000 yards of dirt to add amenities to the pre-existing bike track Crow Rover BMX Park, St. Michael, MN • National Caliber technical BMX Race Track. 1 • 1300' long with a downhill dragstrip 1st Straight. Carver Lake Bike Park in Woodbury, MN • Approximately the size of football field • The bike park playground will be maintained by volunteers from the Minnesota Off -Road Cyclists organization • The bike park playground is located at Carver Lake Park in the open field area just off the main park entrance road. The bike park playground has four designated areas to provide a full progression of riding and learning including: Bicycle playground, Tot track, Pump track, and Advanced skills loop with technical trail features Perkins Hill Park, MN 300 34th Ave. N Minneapolis, MN 55411 • Asphalt Pump Track • This is the longest asphalt pump track in Minnesota • Pump TrackApprox 900' / Park itself 3.31 Acres https://www.minneapoLisparks.org/ asset/9pzrrt/phpi nsamp.pdf N�WSur/au T.W.g T,..: `= ' Fulun PMss - ;��� Keene Creek Bike Park, Duluth, MN • Roughly 1-acre near, and partially underneath, Interstate-35 • The conceptual design calls for a dirt jump plaza, pump track, and bicycle playground area with wooden features designed to increase rider handling skills and competency 2 F OUPAM Rotary Natural Play Hill & Bike Park, Moorhead, MN N Al IIO�MIMN! • 1.26-acre Rotary Play Hill is located at Moorhead's Riverfront Park - 600 1 Ave N • The Bike Park has been included, with features including a teeter totter, log roller, tabletop plank, bridge deck, mounds, rock patch and bike sidewinder ramp Minneapolis Bike Parks, MN • Perkins Hill Park (Asphalt Pump Track) - 300 34th Ave N, Minneapolis o This is the longest asphalt pump track in Minnesota o Park itself 3.31 Acres / Pump Track Approx 900' • Bryn Mawr Meadows (Bike Skills Course) - 601 Morgan Ave S, Minneapolis — • Hall Park (Bike Skills Park) - 1524 Aldrich Ave N, Minneapolis — Pineview Park BMX, St. Cloud, MN Pineview Park BMX is a non-profit, BMX racing facility. It is sanctioned by USA BMX and the property is leased from the City of St. Cloud Blue Lake Bike Park, California • Though the park is less than 5 acres, Blue Lake is a small community of just over 1200 residents • This park will bring together participants of all ages and abilities. There is a designated area for kids and small children riding small bikes and striders. There will be a paved pump track to serve youth and developing skateboarders, scooter riders, roller skaters, bike riders, and wheelchair users. Also, there is a moderately difficult bike park area for parents and advanced bicyclists. • The facilitywill include a USA -BMX -sanctioned racetrack, jump flow lines and a pump track. 3 BLUE LAKE BIKE PARK Resources: Bike Park Examples: Bike parks come in all different shapes and sizes. It is also likely that bike parks mean something a little different to each person. Below are some additional examples of existing bike parks in different cities. Bike Park and Pump Track Builders: These are a few professional trail builders and manufacturers who build bike parks, pump tracks, and park features. Click the names of the companies to see some of their work in action and let your imagination run wild. • Velosolutions • Progressive Bike Ramps • Pathfinder Trail Buildings • Rock Solid Trail Contractors • Pumptrax USA • Clark & Kent Contractors • Action Sports Construction • Aldine Bike Parks • Fast Racks 4 Other Resources: https://www.mpLsbikeparks.org/resources https://pages.qbp.com/rs/796-XAK-811/images/2023 QBP_ Impact_ Report. pdf?version=0 How many acres are needed for a BMX race facility? 2-3 acres will support a full-scale BMX track which is located in an existing park or complex which already includes parking. 3-5 acres will be required for a facility which will need to incorporate parking and additional amenities. https://www.usabmx.com/site/sections/349 What are the dimensions of the track area itself? A typical track will take up a space of 150' x 350'. To include spectators, you will need a total area of approximately 400' x 500'. https://www.usabmx.com/site/sections/349 The size of a BMX bike park can vary depending on its intended use: • Full-scale BMX track - A full-scale BMX track can be built in a park or complex that's 2-3 acres in size. • BMX freestyle park - A BMX freestyle park that can host local and national events should be at least 15 meters wide and 25 meters long. It should also have basic elements like quarter pipes, hips, a jump box, ledges, and walls. • BMX bike park for all ability levels - A BMX bike park that's designed for riders of all ability levels can be 25,000 sq ft, like the Chandler Bike Park in Arizona. Other considerations for BMX bike parks include: • Parking: A facility that can attract people from outside the city should have enough parking for daily use, plus overflow parking for large events. • Support infrastructure: A BMX bike park should have restrooms, shade structures, picnic areas, and a spectator area. 5 Revisions Date: Description: By: Date: Description: By: 01 06 D4 DOITIONAL EX. TOPO/PROP, STORM CS n 0 200 $ 400 600 SCALE IN FEET ■ t / — BIG LAKE TOWNSHIP .s the k _ lei MONTI^C�ELLO`(' .( Y z000 POP 7.18 r� PROJECT- LOCATI /N 0 y --1 i'r$�A� {zg't ,vua'sy a• Y MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP 20BB P(IP. 4.139 LOCATION PLAN NOT TO SCALE x� SHEET INDEX SHEET DESCRIPTION 1. COVER f 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS -SE r 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS-NE 4. EXISTING CONDITIONS -SW _ - - �..-, S. EXISTING CONDITIONS -NW 6. PRELIMINARY PLAT -SE 7. PRELIMINARY PLAT -NE 3+ $. PRELIMINARY PLAT -SW I;14I 9. PRELIMINARY PLAT -NW 10. PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL -SE 11. PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL -NE 12. PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL -SW 13. PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL -NW 14. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN -SE 15. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN -NE 16. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN -SW 17. PRELIMINARY UTILITYr-PLA __ 18. TYPICAL DETAILSrY I 19. BOUNDARY SURVEY JAN 1 3 Z004 CITY OF iaCt !T;'.;ELL0 Client: Project Name/Location: Date: I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under Designed By: I SchoG11 & Madsc)n, Inc. Bison Development, Inc_ my directcup—mionand that[ ama Licensed Professional KA 91]4 IMN 5T. 9 HUNTERS CROSSING n/To/oa Engineering a Surveying a Planning BLAINE,7631 MN 55449 Montle all o, Minn... I. Eng nder N laws of the Slat I Min O. Drawn By: �^ - _ 1]631 ]96-fill] ��s° _ $oil Teslinvg W Environmental Services Sheet: _ CB - ,ehoe,,,,,aa=n„=om Sylvia .Development, LLP Sheet Title: Ke tt,Adolf 1nBa0wayzaraaoueva.4 6525 Edlnbrook Croeeing COVER -� of 19 Dale. 11/10/03 R 9 N. 12046 981\00 W \�I��(�\CO R.dwg, 1!9/2004 1:24:1.>°,r1 e�N � .,ra 5530St525 9ROOKLYN PARK, MN 55443 -. 45z)5<6 'Isot r: (.12)5e59065 17631786-6177 SMI Project Number 63981-001 t -o} 0 U (7 Z w m U) 0 0 00 M 0 L0 L0 z ui J 0 IL a w z z 0 M W D U) U) W D z w a a z w x 0 wsb August 23, 2024 Matt Leonard City Engineer/Public Works Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: JP Brooks Residential Subdivision - Concept Stage PUD Plan Review City Project No. 2024-37 WSB Project No. 026477-000 Dear Mr. Leonard: We have reviewed the JP Brooks Residential Subdivision conceptual stage PUD site plans dated August 5, 2024. The applicant proposes to construct a 142-unit single-family residential development on a 56 acre parcel. The documents were reviewed for general conformance with the City of Monticello's general engineering and stormwater treatment standards. We offer the following comments regarding these matters. General 1. City staff will provide additional comments under separate cover. 2. Edmonson Avenue right of way width shall be 55' wide. 3. Verify the project concept will work with the existing utility easements on the property. Show the locations of existing easements on future submittals. 4. The plat will require 12' perimeter drainage and utility easements and 6' easements in the side -yards. 5. With future submittals provide soil borings and full geotechnical evaluation to verify soil conditions, groundwater elevations within the site, and the proposed pavement section meeting City design requirements. Site, Street, & Utility Plans 6. With future submittals, provide a full civil plan set that includes an existing/removals plan, utility plan, more detailed site/paving plan, grading plan, erosion/sediment control, and standard details plan. 7. Streets and utilities shall be designed in accordance with the applicable City Subdivision Ordinances and the City's General Specifications and Standard Details Plates for Street and Utility Construction. M:\026477-000\Admin\Docs\2024-08-09 Submittal (Concept)\_2024-08-23 JP Brooks Residential Subdvision Concept Stage PUD - WSB Engineering Comments.docx JP Brooks Residential Subdivision Concept Stage PUD — WSB Engineering Plan Review August 23, 2024 Page 2 8. The plan includes trails, sidewalks, and pedestrian facilities. See additional comments on pedestrian access and mobility requirements provided by City Staff under separate cover. A more detailed review will be provided with future submittals, but initial comments are as follows: A 10' bituminous trail will be required along Edmonson Avenue. Add a 6' wide concrete sidewalk to the cul-de-sac. Connect the 6' wide sidewalk on 871h to the existing sidewalk to the east. 9. The Fire Marshall and/or building department will review required fire hydrant location(s) and emergency vehicle access/circulation. Fire truck circulation will need to accommodate the City's ladder truck. Provide a turning movement exhibit to show that a fire truck can access all building structures, cul-de-sacs, roundabout areas, and parking lots as applicable. Additional comments may be provided under separate cover. 10. With future submittals, provide a utility plan showing the existing and proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer serving the site. Below are initial concept level comments: a. Watermain looping may be required through the site to provide adequate fire flow supply. Oversize watermain to 12" in connection from 87th to 891n b. Additional utility stubs to adjacent properties may also be required to accommodate future looping connections. Add a watermain stub to the south. c. See initial comments on concept plan markups. Stormwater Management 11. Below are General Stormwater Requirements for the Site: a. The applicant will be required to submit a stormwater management plan for the proposed development in accordance with the requirements in the City's Design Manual. b. Infiltration is required for new developments. If infiltration is not feasible provide documentation on the rational before moving to additional BMP's. It appears the plans show wet stormwater basins. Provide soils report or rational why infiltration is not feasible onsite. c. The new site will need to provide onsite volume control for runoff of 1.1" over the new impervious area, Pre-treatment measures are required prior to discharging to the volume control BMPs. d. Water quality requirements will be considered met if volume control is achieved for the site. If volume control cannot be met then the development will need to show a no net increase of TSS and TP. e. Rate control will be required for the new development. All rates must be equal or less than existing rates for each discharge location. f. An operation and maintenance plan for all stormwater BMPs is required and should be submitted with the stormwater report for review. g. The site is within the DWSMA and is subject to requirements of the City's Wellhead Protection Plan. 12. Two feet of freeboard is required for the HLW of a basin to the low opening of a structure. Two feet of vertical separation is also required from an area's EOF elevation to the low opening. 13. Include storm sewer sizing calculations with future plans. Refer to the City design guidelines for Storm sewer requirements. a. All flared end sections 12 inches in diameter and greater shall include trash guards per City detail JP Brooks Residential Subdivision Concept Stage PUD — WSB Engineering Plan Review August 23, 2024 Page 3 The minimum full flow velocity within the storm sewer should be three fps. The maximum velocity shall be 10 fps, except when entering a pond, where the maximum velocity shall be limited to six fps. Vaned grate (3067V) catch basin castings shall be used on all streets. The maximum design flow at a catch basin for the 10-year storm event shall be three cubic feet per second (cfs), unless high capacity grates are provided. Catch basins at low points will be evaluated for higher flow with the approval of the City Engineer. 14. The last structure prior to discharge to a stormwater BMP is required to be a 4' minimum sump structure. 15. The proposed project will disturb more than one acre. Develop and include a SWPPP consistent with the MPCA CSWGP with future plan submittals. Provide calculations showing disturbed area, proposed impervious, and future impervious for the site. 16. An NPDES/SDS Construction Storm Water General Permit (CSWGP) shall be provided with the grading permit or with the building permit application for review, prior to construction commencing. 17. A detailed review of erosion control BMP's will take place with future submittals. Provide redundant perimeter control around all wetlands onsite. Traffic & Access 18. The applicant is proposing five access points, one extending Country Avenue to the south, one extending 87th Street to the west, one extending Park Drive to the west, and two becoming the east legs of existing intersections along Edmonson Avenue (at 87th Street and 89th Street). Verify that offset intersections are not being proposed along Edmonson Avenue at 871h Street and 891h Street. Street access spacing, grades, and sight lines will be reviewed with future submittals. 19. The site would generate approximately 1,424 daily trips, 106 AM peak hour trips and 143 PM peak hour trips. The existing Average Daily Traffic on Edmonson Avenue for 2023 is drafted to be near 3,400 and is 6,200 on School Boulevard west of Edmonson Avenue.. The addition of the proposed traffic is expected to have an impact on roadway capacity and operations. 20. Provide a traffic study for this development including impacted intersections, turn lane recommendations, and traffic control mitigation measures if needed. Wetlands & Environmental 21. A wetland delineation should be completed for the project area and approved by the Local Government Unit (City of Monticello). Wetland boundaries should be included in future plans. The City requires that wetland buffers be provided around existing wetlands and the width is based on the wetland function. 22. Any permanent or temporary impacts proposed as a result of the development must be permitted via the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) through a replacement plan application. The construction of stormwater ponds within wetlands is considered an impact, and if proposed, will need to follow the state rules outlined in the WCA. JP Brooks Residential Subdivision Concept Stage PUD — WSB Engineering Plan Review August 23, 2024 Page 4 A more detailed review of the development plans will be completed when the applicant submits complete civil plans and a stormwater management report. Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Feel free to contact me at 612-419-1549 if you have any questions or comments regarding the engineering review. Sincerely, James L. Stremel, P.E. Senior Project Manager -44 � ciry of Monticello August 29th, 2024 JP Brooks Concept State PUD Planning Number 2024-37 General Comments PHONE:763-295-2711 FAx:763-295-4404 505 Walnut Street I Suite 1 I Monticello, MN 55362 The city is not responsible for errors and omissions on the submitted plans. The owner, developer, and engineer of record are fully responsible for changes or modifications required during construction to meet the City's requirements. After review of the most recent land use application for the proposed development in the city of Monticello, we have determined the following based on the MN State Fire Code: • Provide Fire truck turning radius throughout development on civil plans. • Provide locations of all fire hydrants on civil plans. (locations must meet fire code and city code requirements) • Verify cut -de -sacs meet the city code requirements, and fire truck turning requirements. • May need a turn around or a hammer head at the end of the south dead-end road. These items are subject to the approval of the Monticello Fire Chief and Fire Inspector. This is a preliminary list of items that would need to be addressed. Sincerely, v �� MM�W� Chief Building Official/Zoning Administrator www.ci.monticello.mn.us