Planning Commission Agenda Packet 03-28-1994 SpecialAGENDA
SPECIAL MEFMG • MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, March 28, 1984. 5:30 p.m.
Members: Cindy Lemur, Richard Carlson, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Brian
Stumpf
1. Call to order.
2. Public Hearing --Consideration of approval of the preliminary plat of the
Eastwood Knoll residential subdivision. Applicant, City of Monticello.
3. Public Hearing --Consideration of rezoning Outlots C and D of the Meadow
Oak subdivision from R -PUD to R-1. Applicant, City of Monticello.
4. Adjournment.
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
z. Public Hearing—Consideration of approval of the nreliminary plat of
the Eastwood Knoll residential subdivision. Aoolicant. City of
Monticello. W.O. )
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you know, Outlots C and D of Meadow Oak Estates are being platted in
conjunction with City acquisition of the property through a mortgage
foreclosure process. Planning Commission and City Council are asked to
review the preliminary plat of the site and consider its approval. Following
is a description of the plat followed by a review of certain issues that
deserve special attention.
�IIltl��`�IS3 1�J
As you know, the original plan for this property under the PUD design
called for development in conjunction with a planned unit development.
Under the original proposal, 43 lots were to be developed following the
design on the attached pathway map. As you can see, the design
maximized the property in terms of lot density with little attention given to
integrating the subdivision design into the natural characteristics of the
property. The new plan for the area as outlined in the Eastwood Knoll
subdivision design is much more sensitive to the natural characteristics of
the property. It results in development of fewer lots; however, the lots that
result should have a much higher value due to preservation of trees and
minimization of impact caused by site grading.
STREET SYSTEM
The subdivision calls for two access points to the subdivision, one at
Meadow Oak Lane and one at Woodcrest Drive. Meadow Oak Lane will be
the only method for exiting and entering the site until the Briar Oakes
development to the south is completed. Woodcrest Drive will be connected
to the Briar Oakes subdivision, which will allow Eastwood Knoll traffic to
access 118 through the Briar Oakes development. Conversely, traffic from
the Briar Oakes area will be allowed to access the County Road 75 right-of-
way via Meadow Oak Lane. This traffic pattern is consistent with the
original planned unit development; however, under the original plan, there
was another outlet to Meadow Oak Avenue via what is shown on the plat as
Oakwood Court. Under the present plan, Oakwood Court is a cul-de-sac
and not a through street; therefore, all traffic from the neighborhood must
go through Meadow Oak Lane.
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
It should be noted that the length of Oakwood Court is 800 ft. Our general
guidelines state that cul-de-sacs should not exceed 600 ft. The extra
distance is mitigated by the fact that the lots are large, thereby resulting in
lower than normal lot density within the cul-de-sac. In addition, a
pedestrian outlet at the end of the cul-de-sac has been provided.
The subdivision is designed without a second outlet to Meadow Oak Lane to
add to the value and exclusivity of the lots on Oakwood Court. It is felt
that the added value created by establishing a cul-de-sac as proposed offsets
the negative impact of the additional traffic resulting along Meadow Oak
Lane.
In terms of street width and construction design, due to the fact that
Meadow Oak Lane and Woodcrest Drive will eventually become through
streets and because they incorporate the internal walkway system, they are
being constructed to a width of 36 tt. Eastwood Court and Blackwood Circle
are both being constructed to the width of 32 ft. Both circles will feature a
landscaped delineator in the middle of each circle. The delineator improves
the aesthetics of the circle without increasing maintenance. To further
illustrate this concept, I have taken a video of a similar design in the city of
Mahtomedi.
PARKS AND PATHWAY SYSTEM
In the design of the subdivision, a strong effort was made to integrate the
site into the original concept supporting the planned unit development. As
you can see, two pathways are proposed which link residents living within
Eastwood Court and Blackwood Circle to the future park to be developed at
Outlet A. These pathways also provide access to Oudot A for area residents
passing through the subdivision on their way from the Briar Oakes and Oak
Ridge neighborhoods. The Eastwood Knoll plan differs from the original
plan in that the primary way through the development uses on the public
right-of-way, whereas under the original plan a pathway extended along
rear lot lines.
Pathway construction plans do include development of tho pathways
between lots leading from the cul -do -sacs to Outlot A. Planning
Commission and Council may wish to consider adding an additional
pathway segment extending along the southerly boundary (power line
easement) of the property to the park located at Outlot E. This pathway
would provide direct access to a park facility for residents living in this
area, which could improve the value and marketability of the property. As
you can see on the attached plan, this segment is included in the overall
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
pathway plan for the area. Planning Commission and Council need to
determine if development of the pathway at this time is premature.
Perhaps it could be done at a later time in conjunction with completion of
the entire pathway system, with the cost of the pathway assessed evenly
over all of the properties benefiting. The approximate cost of this additional
segment is $11,500.
POTENTIAL. CONNECTION OF COUNTY ROAD 118 TO
COUNTY ROAD 78 VIA MEADOW OAK AVENUE
From time to time, there has been discussion of connecting Meadow Oak
Avenue to County Road 118, thus providing a direct link to the freeway for
traffic generated by the Chelsea Corridor and Cardinal Hills area and
points west. The potential of making this connection should be discussed at
this time, as the prospect of the increased traffic at this location could have
an impact on the sale of lots at Eastwood Knoll. Perhaps it is impossible to
predict at this time whether or not Meadow Oak Avenue will be extended
through. The main purpose of raising this issue is to determine how the
City will represent the situation to prospective buyers. Perhaps the best
that we can say is that connection of Meadow Oak Avenue to 118, though
not planned at this time, remains a possibility for the future.
On the other hand, the possible connection may have little bearing on the
livability of the subdivision because Meadow Oak Lane is separated from
Eastwood Knoll. In all reality, due to the fact that Meadow Oak Avenue is
well separated from the development area, whether or not it becomes a
through street may have no bearing at all on the desirability of the lots at
Eastwood Knoll.
l�I�l��i7
One of the interesting characteristics of the site includes the presence of a
multitude of young oak trees that could be easily transplanted to other
locations within the city. City staff is looking at options to preserve these
young oak trees and perhaps replant them at various locations within the
city.
UTILITY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
The City Engineer is completing a feasibility study which outlines the cost
to extend sower, water, roads, storm sewer, etc. According to the work
completed to date, it appears that it is feasible to serve the site. It should
be noted that the sanitary sower line will include a service stub that would
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
allow the potential connection of a service line to the property to the west of
the site. Please see the feasibility study and grading plan for more detail.
If is not included in the packet, it will be presented at the meeting on
Monday.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve or approve and modify the preliminary plat of the
Eastwood Knoll.
Under this alternative, Planning Commission and City Council are
satisfied with the development concept and its design in terms of the
original planned unit development concept for the area.
Potential modifications to the plan could include connection of the
Eastwood Court circle through to Meadow Oak Avenue, thus reducing
the length of the cul-de-sac and providing an outlet to Meadow Oak
Avenue. This would also decrease the amount of traffic expected on
Meadow Oak Lane. On the other hand, making this connection
would reduce the exclusivity of the homes on Eastwood Court. In
addition, in the event that Meadow Oak Avenue is connected to 118
to the west, Eastwood Court would become the most direct route to
Meadow Oak Avenue for traffic going westerly on Meadow Oak
Avenue.
Also as part of the discussion, Planning Commission and Council
should review the pathway system in detail and determine to what
extent pathway development should occur beyond the extension of the
pathways connecting the cul-de-sacs to the park at Oudot A. Is it
appropriate at this time to extend the pathway along the southern
boundary of the property to the park at Outlot E? If further pathway
development is desired at this time, and if Planning Commission and
Council believe that the cost of the pathway should be assessed to all
benefiting property owners, then a public hearing would need to be
called on a public improvement. The timing of the public hearing
would coincide with awarding of the contract.
Motion to deny or table approval of the Eastwood Knoll plat.
Planning Commission and Council should select this alternative if it
is not comfortable that the plan as proposed will meet the goals of the
City or the intent of the original planned unit development.
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff reoommends that Planning Commission and Council select alternative
#1. With regard to connecting Eastwood Court to Meadow Oak Avenue, for
reasons outlined in the discussion above, staff supports approval of the plat
as presented. With regard to extension of the pathway to the existing park
at Outlot E, it is our view that the pathway should be constructed now. It
is our view that the added cost to construct the path is justifiable, as it adds
value to the subdivision by providing direct access to the park, thereby
avoiding the need to walk a significant distance around the existing
developed Meadow Oak Estates area.
The balance of the Meadow Oak area pathway construction should be done
sometime in the next two to three years and financed via an area -wide
assessment program. It is our view that the internal pathway system
benefits each parcel equally and could be fairly assessed accordingly.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the Eastwood Knoll plat; Copies of the original PUD and proposed
pathway development plans for the area; Copy of proposed restrictive
covenants; Feasibility study in packet or to be provided at the meeting.
M7DDL E
SCHOOL-
EASTWOOD KNOLL PATHWAY PLAN AMENDMENTS
1. Relocate Briar Oakes access point
to avoid trees
2. Extend pathway through both culdesacs
3. No change to east -west pathway along
pewerline easement.
+11
;Ve
oK
EASTWOOD KNOLL
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS
Whereas, the City of Monticello, a municipal corporation under the laws of the
state of Minnesota (the "Developer"), is presently the owner of lots in the
Eastwood Knoll platted subdivision located in the city of Monticello, county of
Wright, and state of Minnesota, according to the plat and survey thereof on file
and of record in the office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for said county and
state (hereafter referred to as "Subdivision") declares that all of those lots still
owned of record by said developer in the Subdivision are, and for the period of
time hereafter stated shall be, subject to the following protective covenants,
restrictions, and conditions, and that every subsequent owner of said lots shall be
bound to said covenants, restrictions, and conditions, and shall accept title subject
thereto.
1. Land Use and Building Tyne. Each lot shall be used exclusively for
residential purposes. No building shall be erected, altered, placed, or
permitted to remain on any lot other than one detached single family
dwelling, together with appurtenant garage, fence, swimming pool, or
accessory structure.
2. Architectural Control. No building shall be erected, placed, or altered on
any lot until the construction plans and specifications and the plans
showing the location of the structure have been approved in writing by the
architectural control committee as to the quality of workmanship and
materials, harmony of external design with existing structures, and as to
the location with respect to topographic and finished grade elevation. In the
event the Developer, or its designated representative, fails to approve or
disapprove such design and location within 30 days after said plans and
specifications have been submitted to it, approval will not be required, and
this provision will be deemed to have been fully complied with.
3. Quality arld 5iae. No dwelling constructed on any portion of the Developer
property shall contain less than 1,400 sq ft on the ground floor in the case
of a single story structure, not less than 1,350 sq ft on the ground floor in
the case of a split entry/modified two-story structure, and not less than
1,000 sq ft on the ground floor in the case of a structure containing two or
more stories, provided that the aggregate square footage for all levels is not
less than 2,000 aq ft. Finished basements below the ground level will not be
counted for meeting the square footage minimums except that a one-story
structure can use up to 600 sq ft of finished basement area toward meeting
the 2,000 sq ft minimum if the one-story structure is a walkout. Each
single family dwelling shall contain a three -car garage. Unless otherwise
waived by the architectural control committee, all building structures shall
be designed with a minimum 8/12 roof pitch.
EASTWOOD.COV: 3/14/94 Page 1 DP ')
Temporary SIMSIUM. No structure of a temporary character or nature,
trailer, tent, or shack may be used on any lot at any time as a residence,
either temporarily or permanently. All structures shall be completed and
finished on the exterior within nine months after commencement of the
excavation or construction thereof, and before the structure shall be used as
a residence. No dwelling shall be constructed of concrete blocks or blocks of
similar type on any lot unless the outer or exterior walls above and below
grade are stuccoed or painted within six months of the time of
commencement of construction.
Nuisances; No accumulation of junk, gauge, or debris may be maintained
on any lot. No trailer house, travel trailer, buses, trucks, camper trucks, or
junk cars are allowed to be stored on premises unless properly garaged.
,Architectural Control Committee. The architectural control committee shall
consist of the City of Monticello Building Official and/or a designated
representative of the Developer. The Building Official and/or the
Developer's designated representative shall review all building structure
plans and specifications for adherence to the covenants and restrictions that
relate to minimum building standards along with the harmony of the
exterior design and location in relation to surrounding structures.
Term. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions of this declaration shall
run with and bind the land comprising the Developer property and shall be
enforceable by the declarants, the owners, and the respective legal
representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns for a term of ten years from
the date this declaration is recorded, after which time said covenants,
conditions, and restrictions shall be automatically renewed for successive
periods of ten years. The provisions hereof shall be deemed independent
and several, and the invalidity or partial invalidity or unenforceability of
any one provision or portion thereof as may be determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any of
the other provisions hereof. This declaration may only be amended by a
written instrument signed by Developer and all owners of the Developer
property.
EASTWOOD.COV: 3/14/84 page 2 �„
A
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands this _ day
Of 1994.
DEVELOPER
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By
Mayor
By:
City Administrator
State of Minnesota)
County of Wright )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1994, by , the Mayor, and
Rick Wolfateller, the City Administrator, of the city of Monticello, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of said municipality.
Notary
EASTWOOD.COV: 9/14% Page 3 ��
Special Planning Commission Agenda - 3/28/94
Pgblic Hearing—Con$idergtion of rezoning Outlots C and D of the
Meadow Oak subdivision from R•PUD to R.I. AoollcanL Citv of
Monticello. W.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
If Planning Commission and City Council agree that the R-1 design of
Eastwood Kno9 is in harmony with the original PUD, then it is appropriate
at this time to consider rezoning the site from R -PUD to R-1. The R-1
zoning designation is necessary because the site itself features R-1
characteristics. Furthermore, the site meets all R-1 density, yard, and
in6astructure design requirements; therefore, the R-1 zoning designation is
more appropriate than the R -PUD designation.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve rezoning of Outlots C and D of the Meadow Oak
subdivision from R -PUD to R-1. Motion is based on the finding that
the subdivision design of the Eastwood Knoll is consistent with R-1
standards, and the design of the Eastwood Knoll is also consistent
with the original intent of the R -PUD plan originally proposed for the
Meadow Oak area.
2. Motion to deny rezoning request.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of zoning map.
0
��rre�,�
7o►LL n9.
'Bro posed area
�
re gone,
%