Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda Packet 02-16-1993 SpecialJ.o, AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COM 1MION Tuesday, February 16, 1899 - 7 p m Members: Cindy Lemm, Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Richard Carlson, Brian Stumpf Call to order. 2. Public Hearing --Consideration of approval of the preliminary plat of the Oak Ridge subdivision. Applicant, Tony Emmerich. DM f 6 3. Adjournment. •AAO '5 J � Planning Commission Agenda - 2/16/93 2. Public Hearina—Consideration of annroval of the oreliminary plat of the Oak Rldae subdivision. Aoulicant. Tonv Emmerich. (J.0.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous meeting of the Planning Commission meeting, the first draft of the Oak Ridge preliminary plat was reviewed. Planning Commission elected to table making a recommendation pending input from the Parks Commission and pending completion of various adjustments to the plat. Subsequent to the previous meeting, the Park Commission reviewed the plat thoroughly at their meeting on February 3, 1993. Parks Commission recommendations can be found in the attached draft of the Park Commission meeting minutes. Also, since the previous Planning Commission meeting, the engineer was given a copy of the Parks Commission meeting minutes and city staff also met with him to discuss other issues relating to the plat. The developer's engineer then revised the plat and grading plan and submitted a copy of the revised plat to city staff late on Thursday, February 11. The following is my review of the latest revision of the preliminary plat and associated issues. Other staff members including the Public Works Superintendent, Building Inspector, and City Engineer have not had an opportunity to review the plat at this time. Therefore, additional issues may arise prior to Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING AND ZONING Setback and Yard Requirements 1 reviewed the revised plat for adherence to city minimum standards relating to lot width at setback and lot size. It appears that the plat has been updated to meet the minimum requirements. lnd 1. Block 2 The plan has been modified to show a road extension eastward along the powerline corridor toward the Floyd Paterson property. This road extension provides road access to tho Floyd Peterson property to the cast of the Oak Ridge plat. Without this road, the Peterson's property would be landlocked. The plan revision has resulted in creation of a lot that does not have full street access, therefore it does not meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance. Planning Commission Agenda - 2/NW As you can see, Lot 1, Block 2 will not be developable until Ridge Drive is extended into the Floyd Peterson property. The engineer representing the developer has indicated that a deed restriction can be prepared which would not allow this property to be sold for development until the road serving it is completed. ,f Easement Lines The drainage and utility easements as outlined on the preliminary plat need to be corrected to show 12 ft easements in the front and rear of the individual properties. Wedand/Storm Pond Svstem The updated plan shows significantly more detail regarding the extent and design of the wetland mitigation plan and now shows areas that will be utilized for storm water detention and sedimentation. The wetland area impacted by the plat is .78 acres. The wetland area created as mitigation for the wetland -impacted area is 1.09 acres, and the storm water detention area created amounts to 1.25 acres useable. Upland area remaining atter completion of storm water detention and wetland mitigation amounts to approximately 1 acre. It appears, for the most part, the wetland areas located on the site have been avoided. However, there is a wetland pocket at the entrance to Oakview Court which could have possibly been avoided. According to the spirit of the Wetland Conservation Act, the first approach in developing near wetland areas is to completely avoid the wetland. Mitigation should be the second choice if at all possible. It could be argued that this pocket wetland could be easily avoided, therefore the preliminary plat needs to be adjusted accordingly. This issue was discussed at the previous meeting. It was generally determined at that time that impacting the wetland was not a significant issue. However, after further review and a visit to the site, staff' is more inclined to believe that avoiding this wetland is possible and should be seriously considered. It appears that 2 Iota will be lost if the wetland is not allowed to be filled. The City Engineer has requested that the high water mark in the development area be shown along with flood elevations and all run-off calculations. This information will enable city staff to determine the proper elevation of building foundations. Plat approval should be contingent on the determination that all foundations will be above flood levels. Planning Commission Agenda - 2/16/93 According to the original planned unit development concept for the Meadow Oaks area, all areas within the Oak Ridge plat are to be connected to the trail system to the north. In order for this to be accomplished, the lots at Meadow Oak Circle need to have access to a path leading to the north. At some point, this path must cross a wetland area. The boundary of the wetland impact area created by this path needs to be identified on the plan and the mitigation area needs to be adjusted accordingly. The City Engineer has not had a chance to review the plan and, therefore, all approvals relating to the storm drainage and wetland mitigation plan at this point will need to be subject to city engineer approval. Finally, the developer will need to submit the grading and drainage plan to the Army Corps of Engineers for their review. Site grading will not be allowed to commence until an approved permit is in place. v JMact on Forest The grading plan as proposed calls for removal of approximately 60 percent of the trees in the forested areas. The grading plan calls for mass grading of the property from the rear of the building pads on one side of the roadway to the rear of the building pads on the opposite side of the roadway. This is a most efficient method for development of the roadways and buildable lots. However, it results in the highest impact on vegetation. Parks Commission was concerned that no effort is being made to save any of the trees that could possibly be saved in front and side yard areas. The developer's engineer argues that attempting to save trees in the front and side yard areas is inefficient and would not likely be successful given the impact of construction activities. The City Engineer indicated, however, that it is possible to prepare building pads on individual lots and save trees in front and side yard areas. I hope to have the City Engineer at the meeting to discuss the implications of the grading plan and the feasibility of maintaining forestation in front and side yard areas. f _NbIl Mnin/Sanitary Sower It appears that installation of utilities is feasible; however, precise design will require additional study. Preliminary plat approval can be subject to review and approval of sewer and water plans by the City Engineer. Planning Commission Agenda - 2116/93 Street Svstems As requested by the Planning Commission, Meadow Oak Drive and Oakview Lane have been realigned to make Meadow Oak Drive the major throughway for the development. The original plan would have resulted in considerable through traffic traveling down Oakview Lane. This would have a problem because Oakview Lane road surface is 32 ft wide whereas the Meadow Oak Drive road surface is 36 ft wide. yt It is suggested that Meadow Oak Drive be renamed to Ridge Drive between County Road 118 and Meadow Oak Court. -Y According to the preliminary plat, Meadow Oak Circle, Oakview Court, and Meadow Oak Court will be developed with a 50 ft right of way and 32 ft face- to-face curb. This design meets the minimum for the city ordinance. However, it should be noted that in the recent past the city has been developing cul-de- sacs and marginal service streets with a 60 ft right of way and 36 ft road surface. The developer's engineer supports this design because it meets the minimums required by the city ordinance. The City Planner supports the concept of making the subject's street 32 ft wide. He indicated that he does not know of a city that requires a 36 ft road surface and 60 It right of way for marginal streets or cul-de-sacs. It would, therefore, appear reasonable to allow the roadways mentioned to be developed as proposed. f The original planned unit development concept called for an island delineator at the entrance to the area. As you know, on the north side of Meadow Oak Drive, there is an island delineator that helps frame the entrance to the development area. City staff suggests that a similar island delineator be installed at the entrance to Meadow Oak Drive. The intersection of Meadow Oak Drive and Meadow Oak Court could be improved by creating a 90 degree alignment. This could be accomplished by shifting Meadow Oak Drive slightly to the north where it meets the intersection. i WALKWAY/PARK DEVELOPMENT: As noted at the provions meeting, the original planned unit development concept called for creation of 3 parks in the Meadow Oaks development area. The 2 major parks were located on the north side of the development area and were connected to the balance of the development Planning Commission Agenda - 7116/93 area via local roads and walkways. A small park was noted in the original plans for the planned unit development. As time went on and the development faltered, the requirement for the third park was abandoned. It was determined that the total park area provided with the 2 lots to the north (17 acres) was sufficient to cover the park dedication requirement for the entire 171 acre site. ffI • The new plan as submitted provides an opportunity for reestablishment of the small park area conceived with the original plat. The plat shows a trail leading from Meadow Oak Drive between Lot 12, Block 3 and Lot 1, Block 6 to an upland area that is slightly larger than 1/2 acre. The Parks Commission reviewed the original plan for the site and was supportive of the concept of maintaining the entire area encompassed by Outlet A (12.16 acres) for public use. Their review of the plat was completed prior to preparation of the new plan which shows greater encroachment of wetland and pond mitigation in the public area than was originally anticipated. Planning Commission needs to review this plan carefully and determine whether or not it really makes sense to make this area available for public use. Fortunately, the Parks Commission will be meeting at a special meeting prior to the Planning Commission meeting. I will be giving them another chance to review the plan and determine whether or not the Parks Commission continues to support the concept of maintaining Outlet A as park dedication area. It could be argued that the "park" area remaining after development of the pond mitigation and storm ponding areas will be relatively small, cut up, and difficult to use. Furthermore, development of building lots along the entire perimeter of the public area will block the view of the park from the roadway which could result in a security problem. According to the City Planner, ideally the entire public area should be visible from the roadway so that police patrols can easily check the area. The Planner noted that he has seen parks like this one with poor visibility from the street become hangouts for teenagers and a headache for the neighborhood. The present design for the plat would appear to create this risk. As an alternative to accepting Outlet A as a park area, it is possible to identify a walkway easement area extending from Meadow Oak Circle through the open area all the way to Meadow Oak Drive. Except for the trail, the area would become private property. Planning Commission Agenda - 2/16/93 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat with conditions as noted by the Planning Commission. Under this alternative, the preliminary plat would be submitted to the City Council at the next meeting, February 22, 1993. 2. Motion to deny approval of the preliminary plat. This alternative should be selected if the developer or engineer is not comfortable with making changes as required by the Planning Commission. 3. Motion to table recommendation pending adjustments to the preliminary plat. As noted earlier, the City Engineer has not had a chance to make his final review of the plan and, perhaps, the Planning Commission will request that changes be made to the plan that need to be reviewed again. If so, this alternative should be selected. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIOIJ: Staff reoommends that the preliminary plat be approved subject to modifications to the plan as deemed necessary by the Planning Commission. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of rough draft of Parks Commission meeting minutes; copy of grading plan and preliminary plat of Oak Ridge development.