Planning Commission Agenda 01-05-1999
.
.
.
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 5, 1999
Members:
Dick Frie, Robbie Smith, Roy Popilek, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten
Council Liaison:
Clint Herbst
1 . Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held December I, 1998.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizens comments.
5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Commercial Preliminary Plat for "River
View Square" within the R-2 Zoning District. Applicant: Richard E. Williamson.
6.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use
Permit for a Development Stage PUD approval within the Monticello Orderly
Annexation Area. Applicant: Gold Nugget Development, Inc.
7. Adjournment.
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 1, 1998 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten, Dick Frie, Roy Popilek and Robbie Smith.
Also Present:
Council Liaison Clint Herbst
Absent:
None
2. Consideration of approval of minutes of regular meeting held November 2. 1998.
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGS TEN AND SECONDED BY ROBBIE
SMITH TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 1998 REGULAR
MEETING. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
The following items were added to the agenda: 7a: Planning Commission Liaison to
MCP; 7b: Update on the West Bridge Park concept plan; and 8. Lighting at entrance to
Par West.
4.
Citizen comments.
There were no citizen comments.
5. Consideration of a request for an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit (PUD) within
the PZM Zonim! District, and a variance to front yard setback from 30 feet to zero feet to
allow a PUD Site Plan revision. Applicant: Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital
District.
Steve Grittman presented the staff report on the proposed amendment to the PUD. The
original PUD required the vacation of Hart Boulevard from the eastern boundary of the
Hospital campus to Hart Boulevard's intersection with County Road 75 on the west. In
lieu of getting all parties to agree to access easements instead of frontage on a public
street, the hospital was requested to provide indemnification to the City. While the
parties involved were trying to meet these conditions, the hospital was allowed to work
on construction of their improvements. It now appears that the hospital will not be able to
meet the original conditions set forth by the City. The Monticello-Big Lake Community
Hospital District is requesting approval of an amendment to their PUD which would
allow them to change the street vacation of Hart Boulevard so that Hart Boulevard from
the Hospital entrance to the Dental Clinic would remain public right-of-way. The
-1-
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/98
Hospital was also requesting that the proposed entrance to County Road 75 be dedicated
public right-of-way.
The construction of the hospital improvements included a canopy which would have
complied with setback requirements had Hart Boulevard been vacated as was originally
intended. However with Hart Boulevard remaining as public right-of-way in this area the
canopy now encroaches into the front yard setback. The Hospital is requesting a variance
of the 30 foot front yard setback to allow the entrance canopy to extend to the lot line.
Steve Grittman advised the board to consider whether denying a variance in this case
would deny the property owner a right given to other property owners. If the Planning
Commission grants the variance it should be noted in the findings of fact that this project
has not changed its physical nature and also that there was some precedent in this area for
setback variances. If the Planning Commission approved the variance request, the staff
would recommend approval of the amendment to the Pun. The PUD amendment would
not change the physical design of the project. The only difference would be that the
helipad area would be in the public right-of-way. If the PUD amendment is not approved
the earlier PUD which required the vacation of Hart Boulevard and indemnification to the
City would be in effect.
.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing. Barb Schwientek and Steve Munstenteiger,
attorney for the hospital were present to explain the hospital's request. Barb Schwientek
stated that while the hospital had attempted to comply with the conditions set forth by the
City, the hospital felt that this proposal was the best way to resolve the problem without
incurring additional costs to the City or to the hospital district. Mr. Munstenteiger added
that complications arise during the course of construction that are not anticipated and he
hoped that the Planning Commission would understand the hardship this situation posed
for the hospital. To leave the public right-of-way in front of the dental office was a
reasonable solution since the dental clinic was reluctant to work on an alternate solution
to the problem.
.
Fred Patch noted that there may be some long term effect if the Planning Commission
approves the variance and suggested that a possible contingency could be included. The
contingency would be that if and when the hospital would acquire the dental clinic site,
they would be required to purchase the remaining public right-of-way of Hart Boulevard.
It was suggested that this condition be attached to both the variance request and PUD
amendment. Chairman Frie asked if it was the intent of the hospital district to purchase
the clinic site. Barb Schwientek replied that while the hospital would be interested in the
land and buildings they were not interested in operating the business. Ifthis acquisition
would take place it would not occur until a later phase in the hospital development.
Phase I of development would be completed in mid summer or early fall of 1999.
Chairman Frie then closed the public hearing.
-2-
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/98
Since the helipad area would be in the public right-of-way, Robbie Smith asked about the
frequency of its use. Barb Schwientck replied that the helipad was not used frequently
and since it is the safety zone around the heIipad that would be in the right-of-way area
the hospital didn't feel it would interfere with the use of the public right-of-way.
There was discussion on the access to the dental clinic, the number of accesses the
County would allow onto County Road 75 and proposed plans for improvements to
County Road 75. Richard Carlson questioned how the vacation of the balance of Hart
Boulevard would impact the Dental Clinic and whether a perception of a change in access
because of the street vacation could generate any legal implications that the City need to
be concerned with. Steve Grittman responded that the location of Hart Boulevard was a
City decision.
Roy Popilek asked how long the hospital knew about the problem and yet allowed
construction to continue. Barb Schwientek stated that the hospital didn't recognize they
had a problem until the canopy was constructed. She also noted that since it is the state
and not the city that reviews the building plan, the state would not catch an item like a
setback problem. Roy Popilek stated that he felt like the Planning Commission was being
forced to approve the variance and he was not comfortable with that.
.
Steve Munstenteiger stated he felt it would be an invitation to lawsuits if the hospital
indemnified the City and the better alternative was to leave the right-of-way for the dental
clinic as it is. Chairman Frie asked if the hospital was set on the entrance being located
where the canopy is. Barb Schwintek responded that the location of the entrance was set
up to align with the school entrance with the possibility of lights eventually being located
at that area.
.
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH AND SECONDED BY DICK FRIE TO
RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF THE PUD AMENDMENT ALTERING THE PLAN
FOR VACATION AND STREET DEDICATION ON THE HOSPITAL CAMPUS,
SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE
ENTRANCE CANOPY, SUBJECT TO A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
INDEMNIFICA TION FOR DESIGN AND MAINTENANCE OF THE REMAINING
RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND SUBJECT TO IF AND WHEN THE HOSPITAL SHOULD
ACQUIRE THE DENTAL CLINIC SITE, AND PRIOR TO THE REDEVELOPMENT
OF THE DENTAL CLINIC SITE, THE HOSPITAL MUST PETITION FOR THE
VACATION OF AND PURCHASE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OF HART
BOULEV ARD EXTENDING FROM THE HOSPITAL ENTRANCE TO THE
FURTHEST WESTERLY PROPERTY BOUNDARY OF THE DENTAL CLINIC
PROPERTY. THIS IS BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PHYSICAL AND
OPERA TIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOSPITAL PUD DO NOT CHANGE
"
-,)-
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/98
UNDER THE REVISED PUD. THIS MOTION ALSO INCLUDES PREVIOUS PUD
APPROV AL CONDITIONS INCLUDING THE OPTION FOR THE HOSPITAL TO
CONTINUE TO PURSUE WRITTEN DENTAL CLINIC APPROVAL OR
INDEMNIFICA TION. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH AND SECONDED BY ROD
DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE TO THE FRONT
YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FROM 30 FEET TO ZERO FEET, SUBJECT TO
THE CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE PUD AMENDMENT, AND SUBJECT
TO THE HOSPITAL PURCHASING THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OF HART
BOULEVARD FROM THE HOSPITAL ENTRANCE TO THE DENTAL CLINIC
PROPERTY IF THE HOSPITAL SHOULD ACQUIRE THE DENTAL CLINIC
PROPERTY AND SUBJECT TO A PROPERTY SURVEY. THIS IS BASED ON THE
FINDING THAT THE VARIANCE DOES NOT ALTER THE ULTIMATE DESIGN
OF THE PROJECT AND THAT THERE IS PRECEDENT IN THE HOSPITAL
CAMPUS AREA FOR SIMILAR SETBACK CONSIDERATIONS. Motion carried
unanimously.
6.
Public Hearing - Consideration of Preliminary Plat for an 80 lot residential subdivision
known as Rolling Woods and Rezoning from A-O (Agricultural Open Space) to R-l
(Single Familv Residential). Applicant: G.P. Land Corporation.
Steve Grittman presented the staff report pointing out that the 40 acre parcel is connected
with the Wildwood Ridge development to the north. Troy Marquette Drive will provide
access into the Rolling Woods development. Since a portion of the development area is
wooded the City was looking at preservation of the trees and had suggested the option of
having Deer Street end in a cul-de-sac in the approximate area of Lot 7, Block 1. Park
dedication, drainage, and the location of pathways and sidewalks were also covered in
the staff report.
Chairman Frie opened the public hearing. Pat Simondet questioned whether Garrison
A venue was proposed to be eliminated. He noted that the road has been at times closed
off during construction of the Wildwood Ridge development and is in a deteriorated
condition because of the work being done in the development. He also asked why he had
not received notice of any public hearings even though he is adjacent to the project areas.
Ted Holker also spoke on the condition of the road and informed the Planning
Commission that the Township had sent a letter to the City addressing the maintenance of
Garrison A venue. Mr. Holker also questioned why the township roads and cartways were
not incorporated into the developments. The staff indicated that the City was trying to
eliminate situations where there were shared roadways. Questions were raised on the
design of the roads, volume of traffic on the roads and the location of arterial roads. Mr.
-4-
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/98
Holker stated that the county is looking to improve County Road 1 18 in the spring of
1999.
Ted Holker asked to see some elevations so he could determine how the drainage would
run. Jon Bogart, engineer for the developer, explained the drainage plan for the proposed
development. Drainage will be through a 15" pipe to the north thus bypassing County
Ditch #33. The wetland mitigation will be reviewed by the LGU. Ted Holker noted that
the cartway runs through this area and asked if the developer was aware of that. Jon
Bogart indicated that a diversion would be in place that would separate the runoff flows
from the proposed development. Chairman Frie then closed the public hearing.
.
Fred Patch pointed out that the proposed Lots 1-7, Block 4 are double fronting lots with
frontage on both Garrison Avenue and Troy Marquette Drive. It was suggested that it be
made a condition of plat approval that the lots have driveway access only on Troy
Marquette Drive. Mark Woolston, the developer, indicated that the Bakkens residence
which is currently situated on Lots 1 and 2 would like to have Garrison A venue as their
street access. Rod Dragsten asked whether it could be noted in the title work that these
lots would not have access to Garrison Avenue. Mark Woolston indicated that there will
be covenants for the development. Chairman Frie then closed the public hearing.
Rod Dragsten asked why sidewalk was included as part of the development rather than a
bike path. Steve Grittman replied that the pathway plan didn't include anything in this
area. The Planning Commission also addressed concerns about having just one main
access into the development. The developer was asked for his reaction to the suggestion
of having Deer Street end in a cul-de-sac in order to preserve some of the trees. Mark
Woolston responded that the cul-de-sac would actually require more area. The street loop
would take out less trees which the developer thought would be preferable. Chairman
Frie noted that the proposed Rolling Woods development and the Wildwood Ridge
development appear to complement each other and that some of the infrastructure costs,
such as the booster pump for the water tower, could be shared by the developers.
.
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH AND SECONDED BY ROD
DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ROLLING WOODS
PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH THE CONDITION THAT ALL LOTS WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF THE BAKKEN HOMESITE HAVE VEHICULAR AND
DRIVEWAY ACCESS ONLY OFF OF TROY MARQUETTE DRIVE, WITH SOME
TYPE OF BERM OR OTHER APPROVED PERMANENT LANDSCAPING BEING
UTILIZED TO PROHIBIT VEHICULAR AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO
GARRISON AVENUE, AND THAT APPRO V AL OF THE CITY ENGINEER IS
NEEDED ON ALL ENGINEERING, GRADING AND RELATED ITEMS. Motion
carried unanimously.
-5-
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/98
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN AND SECONDED BY RICHARD
CARLSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST FROM
THE A-O DISTRICT TO THE R-I DISTRICT SUBJECT TO ANNEXATION AND
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. THIS IS BASED ON THE FINDING THAT THE
PROPOSED LAND USE MEETS THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE
ORDERL Y ANNEXATION AREA LAND USE PLAN. Motion carried unanimously.
7a. Planning Commission Liaison to MCr (Monticello Communitv Partners).
Rod Dragsten who has been acting as liaison to the MCP indicated that he would be
giving that up at the end of his term. After discussion of the position and what it entails
it was determined that Roy Popilek will serve as liaison to the MCP.
7b. Uodate on West Bridf!e Park
Rod Dragsten informed the Planning Commission that a concept design for the West
Bridge Park was going to be presented to the HRA at their next meeting. It was
suggested that the Planning Commission review this design if they have an opportunity.
8. Par West Addition
Chairman Frie expressed his concern about the potential danger at the entrance into the
Par West Addition. Inadequate lighting obscures the entrance to the addition. The fact
that there is a pedestrian walkway near the entrance further compounds the problem since
any pedestrians in the area cannot be readily seen by motorists because of the poor
lighting. A number of residents had registered complaints with Chairman Frie about this
situation. Fred Patch indicated that street lights are generally installed based on safety
concerns and also at the request of the public. This area will be looked at by the staff and
a recommendation will be made as to what is needed.
MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH AND SECONDED BY ROY POPILEK
AT 9:15 P.M. TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried unanimously.
Recording Secretary
-6-
.
.
~
"- <.~-".....-::,
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
5.
Public "earin!! - Consideration of a request for a Commercial Preliminary Plat for
"River View SQuare" within the R-2 Zonin!! District. Apolicant: Richard E.
Williamson. (NAC)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Last fall, the City considered the request of the owners of the 17 acre parcel at the northeast
quadrant of County Highways 75 and 39 to amend the Zoning Ordinance allowing for
restaurants in the PZM District. Although alternatives were considered, including rezoning
of a portion of the 17 acres to B-3, the amendment to the PZM District was chosen and
approved by the City Council.
The owners of the property now request approval of a plat to accommodate future
development. The plat consists of four parcels, three of which front along County Highway
75. The fourth parcel comprises the northeast portion of the site, and is divided from the
others by a new street. The proposed street connects Hart Boulevard from its current ends
at County Highway 39 and the River Mill residential development.
The parcels in this plat range from 2.37 acres to 5.02 acres, all well in excess of the
requirements for commercial lots. There are a few issues which need to be addressed.
Pedestrian Circulation
The Plan shows a sidewalk along the new portion of Hart Boulevard extending from River
Mill on the east and terminating at County Highway 39. The primary circulation pattern for
this pedestrian traffic will be from the River Mill area into this development, or connecting
to the City's pathways along Mississippi Drive, along Broadway, or across the interstate to
the school campus area. A sidewalk or pathway connection should be added, therefore,
along County Highway 39 to the intersection with County Highway 75. Staff has also
discussed the opportunity to create a pedestrian underpass of CSAH 75 as a part of the
County's coming improvements to the roadway. This option would need to be explored
further. To preserve this option, the drainage and utility casement in the southeast corncr of
the plat should also include a separate pedestrian pathway easement in the event that it
becomes feasible.
Drivewav Access
The plat illustrates a private driveway access between lots 2 and 3 trom Hart Boulevard to
CSAH 75. The County Highway Department has apparently given its preliminary approval
to this right-in, right-out driveway. The City's transportation planning has maintained a
policy oflimiting access to major collector and arterial routes in an effort to avoid conflicts
with the through traffic function, particularly where there are local street options. Staff
would encourage consideration of not allowing access at this driveway point, and instead
-1-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
requiring all access to be from Hart Boulevard internally.
future Development
The plat illustrates a wide drainage and utility easement between lots 1 and 2, and the
previously mentioned common driveway easement between lots 2 and 3. It would appear
that a Planned Unit Development may be envisioned for the development of this property
entailing common accesses and cross-traffic agreements. This plat does not infer approval
of a development plan which would require a separate PUD review.
B. AL TERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the Preliminary Plat for River View Square, based on a finding
that the design is in compliance with the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning
regulations, and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z.
2. Motion to deny the Preliminary Plat for River View Square, based on a finding that
the development of the project will likely require a PUD, and that the plat should be
processed concurrently with the PUD consideration.
.
3.
Motion to table action on the Preliminary Plat, subject to the submission of additional
information.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the plat, with the conditions outlined in Exhibit Z. Although
a PUD process may eventually be requested to develop some of the property, Staffs
inference on this issue should not hold up plat processing. The plat complies with the City's
regulations, and development within the plat is possible on the lots as designed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A - Site Location and Zoning
Exhibit B - Preliminary Plat
Exhibit Z - Conditions of Approval
.
-2-
~~,
~"
, ~ ;;~:.~ ,
~ "I .....
~ 7c~ ~--.. "
~ "l'R.J'~ ""~~l
= ~ '- r:~~' "~..,.. r~-l1C
~ " !JI '...
'-. ~ l 1. ....... ... c..-, 1
: ~ ... ~~... "_:!!...LIMl =-
) ,J/. ~,. II -....., --2
'. '?i;:,.,' '''It'lt.~~" ~2
I 1 ~ L' ['f.f. ...
· .~ 7 r. k- .,> ~, I j .. '"
· ~'..-1 ;""oool..J ,'-. -
~ R f;f:, - ------ ~
~ J 'J .r;-~~~ ;;I__:...t"":
O " ..... ,
~ . ~ ""'---
.. ii ~ .",,~ _ r\ T V -
-..... S ~ .~ :i;~ITJ~ --d~
~
""'lO.:
v ~~
-..-
~
l=+
~-----
R1
'"
~.
4t:J
~~/s
.~
. ..:~
.1 ........ \ . ..!.J.'t:iWJ
.-~ -I r
./ t. !!.' . \
. ~ - \~'
,I : ;.. 'I" ~
· · · ;\L\!."". ~ ·
I ....:....~ ~n \ '- I \...-J ),
~1r.l11,*" ~ ~1ii1iIlif"" -.0'
,.
'"
'CFfOOL
--
-~.~ .-
c' . '0
,<<-' - -: :?
.~.", j;l ~I '1'\' · f'
I '.' P! -. ~-:
.ji 0 J." I' rr::l. :I --_
'" I I 'm !:Ir '='.
!~._o 0 .. 'ar · r!J .....-
~ '.ltIIL~ ~
I ..,.
:oi"II[! I . .~~ .Jl2 I I \ ':.t ...
~I~~'-'\"I __ W MIl! ID I I
f--- ---~---- -- ---- ~
. ...
.
.
. .
.
.. "'; :1
~
~
-
. . , ,
. . -..;. ~~
..... . ,.. I " ·
.. .~... ...-r:
,.:r ., · ~ i ~ _
~ - A" lIT
R1 \~~ ~-
~/~~ ~
~~~,l-
Exhibit A - Site Location
-
~.
AD
\1
I
...... ..
.11 ... o'"liQi1NClJl
... '0"" '1MY~ ~ 'O'W'W
itiVnDI M!1^ W3^I~
. ;11
A' "I ill
;.1
lllIlL .-.
lUll Ul .11
' "'fSl+4 ~ I~! -
"-
'-... " ''0 , .$'~
"~;ia,.'" '~
, ...
. ,
, , .
, ,.(&,.
" ,-...,. :s: "'.
. '
'".~."'" q"..
'" ,
..., """
" ,AI.
'. ... """'"....
, "..,.
" ,- "" '
~, -', -
........ ',"f.G....
-., " .~
" '.
'. ,
" ''0
" ..........
" '.
"'~ "
"
i!
it
.
~;;
SIt
II
l~ Ii i
-lli !i
~...
..~
II
.
I
2
1
.
-
I
t
;~
.
"',.,~ ..
. I
. VI
IA
3 ""
"v
tt~ :-......
I "
r.r~::, .J?
t :j,
.:J
--
r'-
. F
-r
..--.III .-
~*:./':'. ~' Ii
..! :j""o'" <'~', J !! I;
<l .'.,..':' Ii
"".. ':':-,
~ :':",~~ /..r Ii
",. 1 :;r.
. .'," .
.,. ,,,. ~ .. I.
.--1 18
i '
5
"
I
.
Exhibit B - Preliminary Plat
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
Preliminary Plat Conditions of Approval
I. Inclusion of a Pathway Easement within the drainage easement in the southeast
corner of the plat.
2. Inclusion of a sidewalk or pathway along the County Highway 39 frontage between
lIart Boulevard and COlmty Highway 75.
3. City Engineer approval of the Grading and Utility plans.
4. Consideration of removing the driveway access to County Highway 75.
ExhibitZ - Conditions of Approval
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
6.
Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Preliminary Plat and ConditionallJse
Permit for a Development Stage PUD approval within the Monticello Orderly
Annexation Area. Aoplicant: Gold Nugget Development, Inc. (NAC)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Gold Nugget Development is presenting its proposed Preliminary Plat and Development
Stage Planned Unit Development for a 220 acre residential subdivision to be known as "Pine
Meadows". The preliminary plat, if approved by the City, would be forwarded to the
Monticello Orderly Annexation Board for its findings as to consistency with land use plans
and contiguity with existing City boundaries.
Land Use
The site is located on the southern boundaryofthe City's Orderly Annexation area between
85th Street NE and Kjellberg East Mobile Horne Park, and between Highway 25 and County
Road 117. Single Family Residential has been the guided future land use for this site in
several previous planning documents, including the 1977 MOAA Land Use Guide Plan and
the 1986 City of Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The MOAA document mentioned the
possibility of preserving a parcel at the intersection of Highway 25 and County 106 (85th
Street NE) for commercial use. The City's current Plan calls for a continuation of low
density residential, typically defined as fewer than four units per acre.
The proposed development consists of a projected 545 units, 307 of which would be single
family. This results in a gross residential density of2.53 dwelling units per acre, and a net
developed residential density (exclusive of right -of-way, pond, and park areas) of 3.78 units
per acre, based on a reservation offive acres for commercial land in the southwest corner of
the project.
As a part of the MOAA Board's planning for future land use, there has been discussion of
converting the Gold Nugget site to an industrial land use designation. The rationale for this
change has been based on two primary concerns. First, there is concern that the generally
flat topography of the site would likely lead to entry-level homes, a market category which
has comprised a relatively large portion of Monticello's residential construction in recent
years. Second, the site was viewed as potential replacement area for industrial land which
has been tentatively programmed in the area of the Chelsea Road extension, north of County
Road 39 between Silver Springs golf course and thc Interstate.
Planning staff has not encouraged the redcsignation ofthis site's land use for several reasons.
With regard to industrial development, creating additional competitive industrial sites outside
of the extended Chclsea Road corridor would almost certainly slow down the development
pace to the west which is critical in working toward a new interchange with 1-94 at Orchard
Road. Moreover, traffic in the Trunk Highway 25 corridor will make the Gold Nugget site
-3-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
an unattractive location for industrial, and industrial traffic will degrade the TH 25 corridor
for commercial uses. There do not appear to be viable industrial traffic routes to the east,
given the location of the school campus and recent reports from Mn/DOT that the half
interchange at County Highway 118 may not be approved. Even if the MOAA and the City
decide to change the land use pattern in the northwest area from industrial to residential, staff
would not recommend that the Gold Nugget property replace it.
Apart from the land use and traffic implications, City Engineering staff has suggested that
there would be significant costs involved to retrofit portions of the City's utility system to
allow the Gold Nugget site to develop as industrial. Given the long-standing plans which
guided this area to residential, portions of the sanitary sewer system have been sized to
accommodate a residential sewer flow - about half of what would be required for industrial
development. Industrial development also creates three times the amount of storm water
flow. While these costs are recovered from the development, downstream ponding has been
designed with this site as a residential area.
.
As a residential area, the topography of the site is a concern as it relates to the potential
residential market. Staff has been actively working with the developer in an effort to
improve the development pattern and the site amenities to ensure a development which is
something more than a "starter home" environment. The City's Comprehensive Plan calls
for a stronger effort to diversify the community's housing stock by encouraging higher-end
residential development. A PUD design approach gives the City the ability to accomplish
this objective.
Plat/PUD Design
A number of changes have been made to the project design since the City's review of the
PUD Concept Plan. Due to a greater than anticipated ponding need, the full development
now shows 545 units, 30 fewer than originally planned. Almost all of this loss has come
from the count of single family homes. Single family homes comprise about 64% of the
proposed development, with the remainder being townhomes. The original project showed
about 66% ofthe units as single family.
Lots and Blocks
.
All of the single family lots in the proposed development meet the minimum 12,000 square
foot area requirement, with the vast majority exceeding the minimum by a significant
amount. In the first phase which consists of 83 lots, the median lot size is approximately
13,550 square feet, and the mean (average) lot size is 14,450 square feet. Nine ofthe lots are
the minimum 12,000 square feet in area, and 60 of the 83 lots exceed 13,000 square feet.
Increased lot size is one of the ways to encourage larger and more valuable home
construction. For the entire single family portion of the plat, this pattern appears to bear out,
with a median lot size of about 13,600 and a mean lot size of 14,900. Approximately 30%
-4-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
of the lots in the plat exceed 15,000 square feet.
With regard to lot width, again the vast majority exceed the 80 foot minimum, with 85 feet
or more being a common width dimension. Of the 83 lots in Phase I, 23 exceed 90 feet in
width. There are a few lots which are close, but appear to fall below the required 80 foot
width dimension. These should be expanded to meet the minimum. Given the additional
width of most of the other parcels, a small adjustment should be feasible without altering the
lot count. The lots in question in the first phase are:
Lots 2,6, and 14, Block 1
Lots 5 and 25, Block 3
Lot sizes for future phases of the plat will be more thoroughly checked as they are proposed
to ensure compliance with the City's minimum R-l standards.
Street Layout
.
The street pattern has changed slightly from the concept plan as well. The change has
resulted in two additional cul-de-sacs and a less "organic" design in a few areas. With regard
to the first phase, the primary change has been the reduction in lots due to the need to
construct a large pond (Outlot A) in the north portion of the project. The pond is shown with
a curving edge, and is i1anked by a pathway with connects the main park area with the public
facilities to the northeast, including the School campus and Pioneer (Klein Farms) Park.
The loop street in Phase I is more rectilinear than originally drawn, but an additional street
connection does not appear to be justified. The primary issue will be maintenance access to
the smaller pond area (Outlot C) which is otherwise surrounded by lots. The large pond in
Outlot A has more than 200 feet of frontage along both Red Pine Way, the main connector
street in the plat, and County Road 117 on the east. This exposure will provide both
visibility into the pond area and access for maintenance when necessary.
.
Street layout in the townhouse area has been improved by eliminating one of the public street
cul-de-sacs and replacing it with a looped private street. The public street connection to 85th
Street NE will be flanked on both sides by "detached townhomes". This unit type provides
detached single family homes in an association similar to more typical townhouse projects,
but without attached units. The units are sited on private base lots, but surrounded by
association-owned common area. Additional design detail will be necessary for the
townhouse portions of the project which include common area, including building details.
The plan set includes typical landscaping plans which will require review as a part of the
building plans. Therefore, staffwill recommend holding Development Stage PUD approval
on these portions until such time as the developer is ready to address them in more detail.
Street changes to the western portion of the single family area are the most dramatic, and
-5-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
raise the most significant issues. Red Pine Way, the main internal street, is now paralleled
by Ponderosa 'frail. These two streets create a block length of more than 3,000 feet without
an intersecting cross street. A pathway connection (moved north from the original concept
plan location) is the only interruption to this pattern. A less parallel pattern would help to
vary both street views and rear yard "sameness" in this portion of the project. The concept
plan's street layout provided for a more interesting pattern.
The concept plan also included a connection to Trunk Highway 25 which has been
eliminated in the preliminary plat drawing. The loss of the access to Highway 25 will result
in a greater concentration of traffic utilizing more of the internal street system. This issue
is compounded by the single street serving the lots in the northwest portion of the project.
More than 90 lots front on Jack Pine Trail, Court, Lane, or Circle. Staffwould recommend
at least one additional connection to Red Pine Way from Jack Pine Trail, and inclusion of
the access to Highway 25 if Mn/DOT will permit it.
.
There has been some discussion at staff involving a frontage road connection from the
northwest corner of the project along the east side of Highway 25 to the north. The
developer shows a pathway connection in this location. There are both advantages and
disadvantages to the frontage road concept, and staff is divided on this item. Advantages
would include more convenient access to School Boulevard and the signalized intersection.
Disadvantages would include the expense of construction and maintenance, and the
possibility of increased non-local traffic in a residential area.
With regard to street dimensions, Red Pine Way should be constructed at a 36 foot width,
and sidewalk is shown on the plan. As designed, Jack Pine Trail would also require a 36 foot
width, given the amount of traffic it will carry with only two outlets. Design changes should
add connections to reduce the traffic on this segment, and allow a 32 foot wide street surface.
This same comment is applicable to Ponderosa Trail. The cul-de~sacs and the loop street in
Phase I, White Pine Lane, may be constructed at 30 foot widths. Sugar Pine Trail, Norway
Avenue, and Norway Lane should be constructed at 32 foot widths.
A particular issue noted by staff is the proposal for landscaped islands in the right-of-way
at the entrances to Red Pine Way. The aesthetic value of these entrmlces to the development
is understood, however, they raise a series of policy issues with regard to street maintenance,
island maintenance, liability, and visibility. The development plans show landscaping and
a monument sign to be located outside of the right-of-way, at the rear corners of the
adjoining lot. The island treatment is not identified on the plan submission. Staffwill have
additional recommendations for standards relating to these types of islands at the Planning
Commission's meeting.
.
-6-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
Park Dimensions
The plat scheme includes three primary park nodes connected by pathway. Portions of the
pathway cut through the blocks in 100 foot wide (or more) rights-of-way in a linear park
design. The largest node is Outlot D, a 9.1 acre parcel with frontage on Red Pine Way to the
north, Sugar Pine Trail to the east, and a 100 foot wide pathway connection to Ponderosa
Trail to the west. The design also includes a pathway connection from the park into the
townhouse neighborhood to the south. Outlot D has adequate area for an informal play field
and a small children's sliding hill which is included in the grading plan.
The other two park nodes (Outlots F and G) also include adequate area for an informal play
field, and consist of 3.8 and 4.4 acres respectively, including their linear pathway
connections.
With regard to Phase I development, slightly more than seven acres of parkland is scheduled
for dedication. This includes about 4.2 acres of pathway around the large pond in Outlot A,
and about 2.84 acres of the Outlot D park area.
Pedestrian Connections
.
The development plan shows a sidewalk all along the north side of the main roadway, Red
Pine Way. This sidewalk should provide connections to other pathway destinations. Staff
would recommend the extension of pathway from the sidewalk terminus north along County
Road 117 to the northwest corner ofthe plat, and west along 85th StreetNE to Highway 25.
It would also be beneficial to provide an off-street connection parallel to Highway 25. The
original concept plan created a pedestrian corridor which could have included a portion of
the Red Pine Way sidewalk. This would not appear to be convenient under the revised plan.
In lieu of an interior connection, a pathway which follows the east line of Highway 25 for
the length ofthe project would be appropriate. Other pathway connections within the project
appear to be adequate to provide good pedestrian access both internally and to external
destinations.
Townhouse Neighborhoods
.
As noted previously, Development Stage PUD approval for the townhouse neighborhoods
should be held until additional detailed plans are available, including building plans. The
changes made to the townhouse areas from the concept plan, however, are positive in regard
to internal circulation. The design now includes a looped private street serving both clusters
of townhouses which will make service and emergency vehicle access safer and morc
convenient.
-7-
.
Planning Conunission Agenda - 1/05/99
Phasing
The project is designed to be developed in phases, with the first phase consisting of83 single
family lots, all but two of the single family lots in the northeast portion of the plat. This
phase will include two access points to County Road 117, the large pond on Outlot A, and
parkland in Outlots D and B. For phasing, the larger issue will be future development, and
the need to increase access to the project as it proceeds over time. The developer should
prepare a phasing plan which illustrates the completion of the internal street system to 85th
Street NE in the earliest phase possible. Staff would be concerned about a plan which
extends too far beyond 100 units without a third access to the development.
Landscaping
.
The developer has submitted a landscape plan which illustrates a significant level of
perimeter landscape treatment along Trunk Highway 25, 85th Street NE, County Road 117,
and the common boundary with the Kjellberg Mobile Home Park. Included in the proposed
landscaping are a variety of shrubs and pine trees, berming at the perimeter, and the required
street trees throughout the development. There would appear to be an opportunity to
strengthen the landscape border along the north boundary, particularly where deep lots allow
a more diverse planting schedule.
The Phase I landscape plan should also illustrate the treatment of the ponds in Outlots A and
C. Staffhas recommended that a plan be developed which includes a variety of native plant
materials, both shrubs and perennial grasses which will complement the wet environment
and minimize the need for maintenance as water levels in the pond fluctuate.
General Comments
One of the issues which has been raised in relation to residential use of this site is the interest
in avoiding the "sameness" which can devalue a neighborhood over the long term. An
option which may be considered is to limit a builder's ability to construct the same house
plan on consecutive parcels. This type of regulation would be permissible under the PUD,
but requires additional stafI management to ensure compliance. Defining what constitutes
the "same" house plan is the primary issue. Differences may be as minimal as alternative
siding, roofing and/or trim colors, to varied facade treatments, garage location, and window
placement, to completely different floor plans. Ifthe Planning Commission is interested in
this type of management, staff will be prepared to discuss the impacts and options of this
approach.
.
-8-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
B.
AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
Decision 1: Preliminary Plat
I. Motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for Pine Meadows, based on
a finding that the project is consistent with the existing and future land use plan, is
contiguous to the City of Monticello, and complies with the requirements for
annexation as outlined in the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area agreement. This
motion should be contingent on the conditions listed in Exhibit Z.
2. Motion to recommend denial ofthc Preliminary Plat for Pine Meadows, based on a
finding that the revised land usc plan for the MOAA is still under consideration.
3. Motion to table action on the Preliminary Plat, subject to the submission of additional
information.
Decision 2. Development Stage PUD
1.
Motion to recommend approval of the Development Stage PUD, based on a finding
that the proposed land use is consistent with the anticipated low density residential
pattern and that the PUD, including unit mix, park development and perimeter
landscaping, create a project which will be superior in design to that which would
otherwise be required by the City's Zoning Ordinance.
.
2. Motion to recommend approval of the Development Stage PUD for Phase I, but
withhold Development Stage approval for the remainder of the project, based on a
finding that additional detail is necessary prior to complete the Development Stage
PUD for future phases, and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z.
3. Motion to recommend denial of the Development Stage PUD, based on a finding that
the design does not rise to the level necessary to meet the purpose of PUD in the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
4. Motion to table action on the PUD, subject to the submission of additional
information.
C. S'[,AFF RECOMMENDATION:
.
Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat as outlined in Decision 1, Alternative I,
and approval ofthe PUD for Phase I, as outlined in Dccision 2, Alternative 2. Staff believes
that the land use is both appropriate for the site, is consistent with the current land use guide
plan for the OAA, and is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. As noted in the
discussion, it has been suggested that the subject property be considered for an industrial
-9-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
land use designation. However, this suggestion is neither the plan of the MOAA nor the
City. Most importantly, it is infeasible to provide for industrial development on this site
without significant cost, much of which would be duplicative of previously installed
infrastructure. The sewer, stoffilwater, and traffic impacts of industrial land use here would
negatively affect many other City systems, including existing residential and school areas,
planned commercial development in the Highway 25 corridor, as well as set up a negative
environment for achieving the development of a future interchange at 1-94 and Orchard
Road.
With regard to the plat and PUD design, staff believes that there are a number of changes
which will facilitate an attractive, valuable development. While this site is not likely to see
the development 01'$200,000 homes, design components can be instituted which ensure that
the neighborhood need not be a starter home environment. Those suggestions are listed on
the attached Exhibit Z.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B - Concept Plan Drawing
Exhibit C - Proposed Plat Drawing
Exhibit D - Proposed 1 st Addition
Exhibit E - Phase 1 Preliminary Plat
Exhibit F - Phase 1 Grading Plan
Exhibit G - Phase 1 Utility Plan
Exhibit H - Phase 1 Landscape Plan
Exhibit 1 - Entrance Monument Detail
Exhibit J - Perimeter Landscape Plan (typical)
Exhibit K - MOAA Anticipated Future Land Use (1977)
Exhibit Z - Preliminary Plat and PUD Conditions
.
-10-
~.;.
, ------'-
--1-- - "1
-. / .
\
.,
._-,.:.- I
L'i
I
;.
! Jk~~
-...-
.-.,-
_ Site ~~, C, \8. tlon
Exhibit A \0-
.
.
~
.
l~
~~
I
-... \J
~ ~ . ,~
a .... r-... III j;) t.t.o
:;; ~ :: !: -a ~ ~ ;t:
..
! l'; i ~
.. ",l-i~. l:- ,
~ . f ~ ~ ~ ~.} ~
~'\ii\!~~ia ."
J( ~-
It . .. :
Ii dE ' ..
~ ..,,: .~Ii! j
~'
"
..---.....
. .. t.~1
. ~
"i ...
1>. .. .... ....
'I(".JS ' " . t
Exhibit B - Concept Plan Drawing ~
" .. .". ,. " ," "\9.
""I\'n~
L II UYOlil ALNIlQ:)
UY.ljojUlON 31'iNJi\v I\lOSNOI1IJ3
.
.p
~Q
".;
...?
~
#Q
,
,pr-
eP
~
Do
O.
---. .- ......- --....... -- --.--
. .-.- ..... .,
.h. __.\ __ _ ...._ __".
.
i]
n _',
,
I
[] ,:f:J
r'
.,\ Q
r'" ,,.)
" I -:::?
'0
110
II~
II~
II -C>
!! ,p
II c:?
'It?
I.
il <P
:, 0
~
~
iI
'I
E
~
D
~
g
,
~i:
t'~
.11 ~
~f:
1-'
~ ~,~
;~;
~~l
Hi
ri.:
;.~
:~.
1:' t
:-f!
i('~
j,,::''Jio
,;:i:t
. I'
h~
:.;'
.
r
,"
. .
f,:
,~-
.. ~ .
-.
,I
I .
Ii!
q'
3'
I pi
:, t.
, ~~
, .,
i.~
J IT~
, ..
~."q
~,d
rq
h.
i~t
11+1 5 ~
\\:1.... I'"
~ ~
r ~
Exhibit C · Proposed Plat Drawing ,,1.
~(:;
--.
..&oj
~ "'--
I: .-, ~
'>)Jo ~...
~(o ~\......
\
J.,J
-;
,)
...)
IJ
T
!>
)
J ~-
"'II
51_
-; ~l:1
"
-~
.
)
7"
(>>
Ul
:i!
ill_
i"
,J~
i8
.
-"'--.
-............. 8,,,
-',' 't"
.............
"
'--.............. l)j>".v....
"-.:. .,
.............
-............. >\<.....
.~,t..J.
.~~
-, "t1G',y
"'.............,~,<f,...
.............,
.............
'............., .vo
--------.::'
.............." <$
"',
'.............
"'--.
(I)
51
~
-i
%
!i
~
r>1
>
(I)
-i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I "
I ~llj
I '"
I ~~
I .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
"t%if' I
,
I
I
I
I ~~
I
I
I l..,'-
I ...
...
I
I
..
3
~li~!t~ :; ~'u !~ " I ,.~2
"" tOlo.J i
...........
..o~.... I Y'" ~I r5~
~1I! "!:l , ....
r-....-;~ :\:.
. ii ill 1 ...... 3it!!~
.... ~~ ~J
-PO ~
'I ~I :a-"'''').
~ ' . ~ "W"
i! ,II I I' ___r-~ ~ i~ ~h~ ~
I, ..., ",~;lZ
I I' I 11 . I ~, ~, dddt,j Si
II!~ I~ f!ff
I I." I , '"
Itl"'''' ~ '" ~":r-i.. ;:t
~~ '"'
1"Jo.~~~ ~ ;!:!'; z:
:.;!jj~~ a 'l!t e.. ii:
CI.. :fil
=~i,A .. "'"
::f~~Jl:Q III ;::15 i<>
i i~ ..1lI
~Si~!2 ~l
.
,j.
. I .~."....
r : ( '...... "
r;:1 J.ll...... ,.: ..PN
~''''~',:..:..;~,:_f.:,,:: :::..
~~
I.~
~
J.J.NnOJ)
-,. .- --~~":'
Q.,.~ ;~N():!
.LSVaHJ.~ON 3nN& V
aVOH
..'
~', T""~" y""'''' ,~,-.,.. ...~ -
.. 4 ~;. :i:f:':-"\ /~:': ':'A
':=-~'''';.,-:'":,,.-
.':l,."
. ....
, _.::~<;"'::,,:.: i I
' --.:::~?;.). 'y':
"~-':""';;,.1 ~~ ~ ~
: ," 'l i':, __ ~ -'. ..
! ~ Y'...\ . .
'"" tr~. ~
::': ::'~h~~ .... ....-
;' ~'r'.'~
.' . ::'h~; :i I
~'h..lo\ L
)." \ (. Jp ,t'
. '. ~'1:>I\ i
~' Ii I ;/ '''''' ,_
,,.,.;..'"), .....J r~
\,.' ........ l ,.00'- --.
" (.,:...~ : ~ i
~. ,-
--....1_1 : =
~. /. ',"
..... \ II
)_')\V ;,"\
(./ \"
('~) ; \.....
....
...
<:..)... I
.~. I
..........\ 1\..
(_.......Q,;
'4.1
c:;>.~
,,\{
<:""/
.'1 '
~/l \
I
t.";.i.. ... 'I
(...._~ /1
-",...""",.;
\,
'.
! II' ....\_
I
............
........
-., ...
... -.,..
.' .ow
.;:~/'...,
..-"'-
,
-.--.
q'\
;1\
'I
...'
..
I"
\
\
"
.......
.' \
\
'\
;~i~~ ,~~~: il~
'~"h .,t'.1 HJ~',~~ s
j~~7~~:1!~i~I:~~~:~
, ... (;,...b~~..t. .~!
~ i~~~~J~~!ir~~~~~.~~
r ~~.~-~a'~-tK~!~~~~f
f;J.~~i;:t~~~~li:~t3
>'l "....E,:.. r....,;..h~'
· ;~}~'.!!i~S!!~':it~
~ ., ~l;""'''' J;...t- .
~ ;~:t~~~~;~i!~~~i~;~I
~ i;)~~~t.:it~~~~~~i~
} iU;-.,H;'lhf,,,,l"'
:l ~~~'i:H~i~n.I~:d;,
.', '.'.';" .t~~~t~~~i
~'~-':ktl",.. .~.
i. .(IY~~t~J'I;l!~:';'
'JI,~~jtJ'~l; i'I.,~
, ~i"~...., "''i'f~.I(~j '~'
tr. c:i.1_-o;~dciJ~' .-'t" I'
"t l~i~l\I\::'IIil:'..l."l~ .::,::
l! "[i,~!:.~J.!. 'i":;t~ !'.~,:
"'. 11::..~8;:!i;t:.,~ll .tf:~t.:-: 'j"':
~t~'" :..~.'+"'t"'i~t.i ~J!
.ii~"'!w'~:#:" f'l"" ,',
~I~~~.-.l"-t-"" ,~t .':
:~ ;l:iJf\\!l"~;!~!n.i:u U'1'
;1 .; M~i!tl~'":~~~~~ IiI!
~~ l!lt~r~.~< ..l5..~~' .
.'2'"
......1:
...
,
,
\
'''.
'I
J/" - .
..,,' '\'\
".
"'.
I', \
\ '..'\.
'.~.....
....-
, ." ~.
".. ,j
1:\
'.. -.... '- - ~:".. '~ -.., . .I
I". :-~~".'..mMO~ '~:"~.~.j" ,. .".,
"- ";j'~..-.",_. ....-..,.......
"',
.~ ". ,.. ...
",
""""
'\
}~, . 1,
.. ~ ".~ . ~
~ i: ~~.. i:I"''' If;.
~ ...:1 "K!~=.~ f,.
~.,it~;t..r.~. ji
; i II
: , L.. J ;
... r....-.-....I:
i>tO
~~/
i3,:
,',I
',;
".
'.......
!..
i~1
'II
~ -
c.t
,..
u
;t
~ ,I
I~~
il.i
i!li~
>-<!
~=f
...z~
S ~
..
;,~.
I
I
: ~
1
! ---
...
<
~
..
!l
z
:>
a
J>:
Q,
',f
j
~I
'~
.
~
\-. ,
If
~,
<,
'i
"
;1
'1
II
.1
'iI
I.
I!
1ft
ill
!Ii
- Phase I prelimina~~t
I~XIIIIII'r I~
I"
..
il . \ 'i~ ~ ~;
r '~r
Y~I i i !, . "lfi'l :' t' i I
.~ i . Ii' "~' r 'Ia ~ !I ,!.
11:i r: ~ b ~. --- II!
. 2 i ! lie I "
lin r I I ,! "~'l
1. : i · 1!1 · . 1!'lii
r ~~ 'Ii h~;(
"...to It. , ".>, lth:l
.. '"~, ~: ~ 1;= ~ Ti ~ 'IIJ I!~!
'"..,. ...~ ,L
~~f I: ~ " ':~: '; .~~!I
. ~t . ~,
i}J i~ ~ . '. '\~, '. ~ .. ,..
..I,~~. I' 1I ~ "
. ' 11,-" '.'. or
.... ,.. ~ ~ ,I , ' I:,,',>
to.. - , ~.~
itH l ,. " "-
i ~~; ll!' I'~II I~ F. ,,!,.
H i ~ " I If ii'
~ ,~' 1- 11 II l~ ii ii~
~ ;.\.1 ..1\oy
6]~
...... Z. I. ,
· E
~
.
i
,
f i "
J!. . ~ i .1': ill' (J.
iH (. I !! !l'j'! lei,
151. 1: 11 i. s~lt L'II;;
~ ;! 'ie 1 ~. i, \. .hi..1 ,pI! 'd"~1
~b , '11 f;u .. ....1Ii Ib h <Iln
,,! \\\\~~"ll /~' _l. I I.. ..\..'1
I ,:.:;U; (.,i ,''''''
. . &::....Luj ~ I ~
i 1:~f' , I
~i ~
,~ ~J
'..0' '
.. 'i) '-_ Jf{jl;~'__
~_"'_, . - ..I. .
Ii
r,lj .
c,
l
"
"
.
~ ~ ~ ~
~ H ~
:.: )- ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
,,' . I ~
r r II
: ~ g ~,;
;. "I Of
,I ...
"
~ ~
i
I
~ j
r ~
il
l'<
-li
ooj
i
7-
0
l:
c;
0
..
,".
~
~
0
g
::!
!;l;!
ii:
f
~
~il
~;.:
"ll~
t!I~i
~~5
~
..
~
~.
~
..
5
..
~
'~
-'1/
"Ii.
,
,
r.; ;
i
~~
;"J
"
} i
l.t
It
..
I"
.1
~J
P
I ~.
l!j
J~~
~u
I'r
rl!
;11
,~'
II~ '"
~i: ..F
h.~~
~.~~
,m
mH
::If
"e.
I~XIIIIII'r I~ - Phase I Grading Plan
\o~
I"
I
...;.:".-.,
".....,
.
~~ ~.
'f~ ~"~:'
~;:. ?~~
~~; \..~d
, ;"'''1-->>
I!!
'V.. ~~
"'~ ill 1 I
!n:J-S~:, e. '"
" '," ", "
i'l!; !i ~!,
i'~""'-~" ! I,~
'I' pi'
I' ,~..m
. I",),.,
r I. ~l~~~
III ':!il,'
_ -H- !lm.'1
f 11,,~~r:I'
," ~" 1J!7-
HJ,-,.
I;,r't,
li~ .....;
Il~ ,~~~.
.. \.. ;~ .:;.
,a.,1
/--
:=01
I
~, ,~~ I
',ll ~. h:;
I: de .1. "'
lj..:'~II--' l~
I' , I !!l.:
~" H: ',' ~I'~rl
" ..' j~~
"i~ "~
'IIL].-.
i~ -~ lit
19Ii"~
::.\'lI~
J. !
.,f, ; 4
I,'J I"
m ~!
I=~ i ~
!~; ~ t
!~~ ~ ~
l~' :,
Hrl q ~
!~1~ ; ~
~~I~ I ~
g ~UI ~ ~
;,
" "
~ ~t
~ ll"O
'-, n,_. '-!"
-i~~
;~i
!t~,
....a z: -
'I~
~ =
II ::
. ~
~
f ;; .
: ~ ..
~ . ~
- ; . .
!: a ;; .~
Si ~ p
I 11 ..
r i i.'"
'. . ."",1
,,~,~:, _.: " t'
} ~ "jl~/~>g:-
-
~,
!
t.. , ....J-..
. ,.
';,"
,'....,
,",'
l/'
\0c'
~l
(?!
0:
..-? '--,
v r
(/ :'
o
o
<?>
o?
c:?
c?
()
<9'
^
.~;j
e',
~'
· a
"I
. ~
4
~
....
I!
.!!!
l:l
>I
i
II
i
~
c
'"
4;
....
~
~
CI
...
'"
~
'"
z
,ii"
i:;
i.
~
..: ,
~;;
e~~
;:,,~,
..~~
~!;..
gi~
... ~
~ ~
~
~
a.
~
::;
'"
::.
'"
i:'
!II
>-
or:
'"'
_ii
i~
r.:~
.0:
"'0.
,
- .
"d
~l~
~~l
.
. ,
1 .
it
II
U
..
II
;'1
.~
"ii,
Hi
Il'
. ~ 1'1
..,'
!~;
-r
,I
:ti~
......
· Phase I Utility Plan
,\0''\
I~XIIIIII'r (,
.
.]
I :-i li-'
Ipl ~,li !
~ ~~u~ ,jn~i
HI J! !iI,1
~. I \ "
Ir '. I
I! 'OJ
i n, ',=---- I..
III ::z:
~um mH
.~If",aI' gnu
m .:i;,; :I:. ~~~ :!:14;1 ~
';.. :'2~' ~:~ ::: U~ .
:El:r.s: rt~ rH H ~ ~
Hi 1m ". ;1. ~~( ,
~1..:~ ;Ch n. ....... ......
I
. iij .~ I
'Ih 'i
I;~; Ii
1~1. t!
. ~~Hi
~ l.rl I.
; t~rl It,
, .~'" J'I
: iii' i! I
. ,rl .!
~ h~:f 'l
[-...-.'.' --.
~ I ; I
I" I' i ~I ~ 1 ~ ~
, I .., '1;; I: I' I'
, I'll h III I .1 '
. I I II .1,1, i: fll
"f ! ,t- !d \11 I. h ,,'I'
I ~ drtl if I C'I ii ! Ill! II; !; :
dc1t1I'~': .' I' II"l!., I I
'" II" il" . II I"'}' I
it "1'11: . "~I 1'11\. !1'llll ! 1 1
I ~ 1~~lil'lll, jrhi:!JM111ll!: ~ 1
1511:~11'11 I:' !['Jbl:j'!IH:tl, I
I !*:I!!~I!I!~~;~I!i!!Ii!I!~j,~ I
1-..- . ---- .-
miii nln
i! tlItm mt~
. . ~ ~' 'Ii
a ~ ~ ~ I ~ It.'
~ = ,i!i'J ii' :i.; & .ij ~ I!~ I'~I ii~
~ I f;nlh "i';~i t,i!' ~~iH lr 7., 'I I
~ ~ .i~.U ;'=2.1 i Ii! Ii f 'If ~ II! U~ !I. J
~ i~J~~~i P'~!!ij~ i~tI5i!. I.~! !.I! th r
" {i~ i~ IW:~ Jh ~hH Illr~ rB hi I
I ~ (1m; ,'.!. 8 m I ~ I
L___..",.0 0 1;) ::_.~~l_l_
..
~
~:. 11'.
. .. L'~ . l t ~~
'iT~ ::",'// l:;;/~ .,igl~i~l~ J ; _~;'ii',
'" + - /.......:..:.... l,dl. J_ _ . ,,_ _ mB~~_~~ _ """""__ _ _ I
, " '.' " " ~ ..~ ilL 'U_\__ -.- ._ _ _
~ -
4.' '-. -....,' .1 .. . p''''I -- ....-,..- ~-"A~---:.~~',~~~ H """""'hi''::':'
..~, .:.~,....., ;.'1 .' ~".I 1!lI1~;.[J'~'
," .i'. ~/.' ....:.....1 ,.". / 1" SI3J-. .,...._~~ tl(~~I!'[, ,.~. ".
..'\rO........,.'. ..~..;..-.. '':''':'''I".j.. - ., "" "II... ..'..at'! ~,.;.. I I 1"11
;~~/~~:":.,. /':';~t~:,f;l-o' ~~ ~I 1M; '0' ij~ ....+,~:n n l'S" . . ...~"7j'..1 ~"f- :~~: . ',':':~
"'3 .'lJ1 '1'::<,",l~k~1,' ~J;':; I ~::-ei'C.dR~:~tcSi.<);' 11-1.-"'-"-'/ :,".,: ,0''''
:~. p!.';' d.1f1 ~~~..'.9ti{:~::~~ ....~ '':~~~:i. .b~': ~,ip~~'~ ": ~._.F':~
.i..Ii/ I . t.." ~:i..l. ,-~"' -",. ,,- ...;. , ';." . 0 " ." !!i 1.~.";'I,;./,~-":'-;o1
. ..~ 12. ': I." '.\1 x. ........".,..~U.~~' i' 'Ifr!.-'- ,- :N~~ .1"', liL. i ,.':::~""'2N;
.!.i ((' :;ii'-~~(~~'~ I . ,!'I: .i[J\.. '~.Il.:... .' _-:J: ; $l.. !' ,I _.. r.r~ i,~.l' 'D'~"";-'
..; .\', ''',1,.,:.", ." ~ '~r /. - .1 '0'" 1,[ I' .
,.,/ ." ,'....,.;.~~~',. .,'-'" ;.- "I' "",.,.. - -+ "i~1 '"I" .... 'M'
,.'/:/ I .l.f Inl:1./{-'~.~~',~"~"~.,, '" ~.l ~ I II ~'fll .. ft...._I'!__ II, I .~.. i it-..>>'~
'II ,Ii "1': ':I,:f.'!'~~' ":~<;-.-:-:~ ~ ,; :" r"-~' ... ..- . -;; '0\ II! = I ~ '0!11
.,":'//"i /1: ,.....'~/!I. "<:i:<...",,_ "/1' I!f . " '. ~ . .,.. 91 '~j' .- i'o. .\1 ral : ~
...../ ;~ ~'~f/~i{ ~'!lil'\!>l:! Ii:: ' ,~j ~DY-"rF~ r~.~-;:.:'.~ .n.. L 'IM1; J \\ ~ ~ I~ .J-F1~1
'l Ii" ,,', "I' . III", ' ,I, ""...-..", --lO\ -tlI... I eL.J1.,,// \ ,."" Iii' ~J,...,.!.
.//'! '~"Ihl tl~i ' . :1 ~.... ~k~~:;~;'I'J I...... H~ .
''::-1 .~llllil: 1,\\"\1 '1.~~::~~f"""'--;"":;';;; '(.li 'I, II!,- i!lL !i rOlr!
".":"",.,:.:,,..t. i \ I'lllli \\\,\;\1' .\ '~ - ,I', i1~""_.. 1"'-. . "\i;z. ~ . ; . . "I~ f'. . ;;."
;;1\ 1: ',il 1\\\1"\;r ~i Ii. it""" '/. \ -d-... '--.,{~~:J.'l,; I'~ ~~, (0--]1 i"
.- ,,1;1,1, 1,\\\.\,Yl)jt\\~~.= "~"'~"'l:1ll i4LJ~~. '1"1.
I' :', 1.;111:1; '\~\ ~\t ,~.I" '< ~ ~~L....i.... ..... -=r-~'s-"'" :;W'.\II!l1 I 'i'l~ _~ .~\ ,\:_.n. I
11111 I '\\\ ~ \:. .... --- -"..... .-:.~ \1 i:r-- I I.'. 'Ol!"/
\0 :\ i:l.m \~:~, '.:;~- ,,~,', '" :I\'i~/:7" .,~~~.~ ..--"......,;~:"~!~;~!r I Il ~fD; .\ ~.:.J I
Q "1'111:', '~\;\'~\' 'l'i', \~Na'('~~~*I~r:;-- ~ \\\ 1\1\11:\1 " \; , '1..
!11'1111 'I~' \"'~'Y.t. .\::~~, ~~;'F.,~=~~.:=':....,. Jl'l iii;! !:-..... I)o'! &1-..'
~ ., I .! ",:~. ,.r . ~ :<,' :< '~" li.i~= :0;:''''''' '~Li<j,; : -~ 'i ..'
,.\ '1'111 ':: .... " ,:\;1 r j:'. ...- , ...,,~--:: 'JIJ;), (t:J:J I.. 'Q- -. '-.
I" " :~ \.....;\; \. ,I \ '" ~:'\..r.". 1~.1 . '/...-' . I Q, I h '''''':
/\ :' I),\!i!: ''(~'\~~. ,~"~"'~' 1--' oJ..:ir" ~_..,,/ ~ta~.,: I if,"'
\/'" I I", .,. " . N,'i"\.'C::llo\ '=1"- rr..-/.4,J:..~'~ I . 'I
/'\ l:!f\';: iEI ,,,~~,.';,,,,&~' "~~y ~'l:'.~ = y-~ 1 R-'!Il_...::rf~ q I. ~/)!1 ..L:,.g>,
\/ illl 11i!i: :~ ..~~:.~'::<'- ~ ~.:\\~!'.... ... _ ~'~./ 'A ~1j I..-r~.t'~
/? ~"I: II:II!' ~ '\~~~- I'll., ,,\ ~".~."!.' - ""- ~ ;, J ~;.... '
V. :! I 'I': II "'~" "~'r ~j 1Il\'~.. '::~ JI.,;~.L~'~~" ~ f__? ,'.'
(/ :\'li:I:]'1 '~'i~lt..li.Y'- ~\\ir~' L.::lI.J..::pi~'~:":.'"'''' \ I /'j'
ii! ili:li i ~~\"~_i~\'~ ~'~~ '~~~-..."'"{~ to'O,.', ,./
</ "1"1'1 ^ \~:," j,.- _-r/,i';.~, . -.-',1' . ,-'
,~ I\i II.. 'I ~~'iJ If; !Ii! --; _" ~ '\.. ~ ''--'" ....n_ ' .~;;
</ I '!Il': \\iI '-'<"'-~~""'" r--~--: . ilQ!!~'i ~i ,,/".~~~~. ~,~~~.-;:s~' ~~
. "I ..1..; ,,:.;:- -.....,'""-. J/~{r ,I .'\ /,/ .........~'-~ ' Z ~ . "-
/' . I \:1 l!.l!~'~;.:::;,:.;~'- . ----.'~~..r..f.'''b=-'.. . . '::;jfiJ;i,' ] /7 C--...., ",.1" "'. J01{--:~'~ '.
v : rll~~ ':':,;~;:.:.<,:r--C-=I ~__ - :~'::::;'f:...;:,t.,,::-;.:~.;~,;/ ,'...:o~ -.'............ ... ,j ')" (>>:
c:? . ,.....I'..I..~."M.~"':...__~:O!J,h .-?..... -". ...." ~-. Y' .. \ ~'
...-? ~~::J.=' '~~;;:...=.r--;.~L,::~:._=~~...:;i" ~ f' ;&''''''''_. '- ~.'"___. \, \\" ". ~.~
v :. .~r:;::;.!l; ,:::..7.- , ,--" gr ~ /, : -". ";1 " '. '.', "" ( .
-,,0') , : /~'.i,,_.!l~"", <~,_..!. ..-" ~',Fii r,t~i!1 ~~ . _. "",', ~. .." \. '.',\ "-\
Go' r. :/fl!'J '---.;;;.u '6 ,g~ "1-t:/ tc: " ~...... -- 'i . '. '. \ " '0'
<:> 1li1.~"""~' ~-'~"'.o,..~,~_.' ,,~ ! '~'I;;':;~ ,....."T2=~.". \. .>...~ .... \ )'_-+"='
,: . ". '-.17.......~...-'._-.~~. ~~:.,..... ...--V7'!iII!>.'.... ' 'i\... " " 1/\ ,
I/~ \\ I .'~ ..~ .............. -0 . -'..~ I .:~ -;;,-a.\ :~. ,- · \~ ...... ' 'YI \ \
'I' .. ....u;.a.~.~' _~~ I 1.:1 ~.lII!"" ' , "Iii;."='".;.k,...... "' /;' "'~
tG:,,:~.! I 'f"';.~- , ~ ;"~1'1r! 1./"\:', I!~ i ~ ~ t."":I- lS~:~t'll\', ", '. \~~,,:.../ \. \ ~
..' ,V, \ ~" 'U~",-,: l.: ~(:),~,,'.~'" '. ,'~ " \\
~ ,~I,. \....., '11 1 .,,-, .:.:.' ,n' ~'~'" J': \~ "'. -,c~~ ~ti~'... If,., ..\ ... 1\ '.. \
C'\ ~l,', ..... I" 1~lI'r'lrJl' I'll.
..
1!S
II'
~
....
...
'"
'"
~
'"
Q
~
,,,
.:lo
'2!
i~
~
~ ~
in
i:i~!
~':Illit
~ii
f
:z
..
t!
~
u
'"
~
...l
>
~
::ii
~~
t;>,
1" :.
! . J
j
~~
,1 ~
l~
\ ,
J f
it
"
.'1
H
,.
l'
'J}
I,
I.
fl.
,d
.TI
~i,
!h
,J !
"I..,
ai Ii
'i I
I
"~!
. .
. .
......
l~xIlllnT II - Phase I Landscape Pla~
,\0/
.
.
.
ENTRANCE VALL} SIGN AND PLANTING DETAIL
NO SCALE
BOUI.D~R WALL.
MUGHO PINE (2)
PROJECT SIGN
------
.---
- \.
I
T\"%
:>'1/ \ ~
'!~q/~~;
, .....~
. ----;l
.' _ yJ;._. .~'
, ~\\/~/I\'''.?,
. I,i' ~.
!~\I't/NI'I\~l~;
~\~\ \ I'I . -=- ....;1".
~\ . ,- :;;,...
.-2"11 \'" ,."~
. - II I . f":"'\.""
"I ~, .,",,' , ,
;,,~7.;;.,~ )
~..~=-. ---
ENTRANCE 'WALL}
NO SCALE
I
WHITE PINE (5)
I (VARIOUS HEIG TS)
~
...."
..........
I~XIIIIII'r I - Entrance Monument Detail
:\o~
r
I
· Perimeter l.andscape Plan (typicall. J
..' " \0/\ D
=~
N.
~ECONDAIIIIT
,.&i<Q d
I ceu.n..I .'~",""
...
I~I
i
;..1
:I:l'
;l!
'"',
~~ "Ao.l.'
I
:~,
.'"
:"'j
.
i I
"I
I "
I
I
I
I
LT
,'CE 12
.f DUd. .
.~f1
,~~ l)Io
a: ,Iii .
".
"-
"
..,
--
.
'.....
.........
........
.......
....
'I..
.-.......
"..
'..
I~XIIIIII'r .J
~--,
GM.\VIlIr ~C.LB I. PIn
FOUNDATION PLANS (sclIle: '....20')
"I
I
l
I
FOUNDATION PLANTING SCHEDULe
eo.KIH,fKJTAN'laL *Hn
II'I%C/Ill001'
~~
.'
,.
~
fl.' Wvoouow; ~P\IC....,..... '.,111". .I:III"'~~"" .
c:~ r._.. c,....-..,(IJ~......" ~I,I. c.-...'''''III
~., t.u~, cw~"',/~ia..mol'" 1IliatI... 'lIl1fNt
F=~~:.a~.w=t~~tI-';iW:,;,,~ """Ida
'&I~''''''J 11111.11" ~.lIn/C.G _~~
...,"'IiII-\.IIe..J...-I/l;......ltI..'..~1MI
.... ,~~ P"fi_IA::"~. .""oe.1IlI 1/1..1...,.
H;p-J._u,IIfh....,. J..hl'lll'l' ."'IIM ,. ~/III'''' N.I"')
...."'.. ,ll,l1I4'../-~ ftgp.....,llI.. """'Il1o",..'
.J 0l1li Pi:ll
J P 11'(101
.\iQIII",,'
l~jiIC11
J y" poll
J .U111..1
"'~ poen
~ '31" Ihlll
.3j1:11",.1
3. V'II1t1il'
L~'
"
..
....
PLANT SCHEDULe
o
tIJODVlQ'NIIIC!~ )I.uII:S'
DVE~S1'CIIn TIll:ES _...."T...~.
C'~ a~~""iM.1 ~ "JIo'IrI:l:MIiLL'S Sl:c:..t;.r
....n"oP,:lIlIa.ia ~""""" \t,~1'II.'"
~.ttfl.t,~tt.'I't PR:llltJlf-.lt.
ACt -'\.~iM:i. 1lU___ '''DI'~I:'
.. .....,C'lrtUtolS 1IiIrC.1}l!.....
",;,,'-0\lil ~D o.w"~KW. ...
lJl''''lOC"'''' MES _T1TT-5lI1Il
S1K.1l1(1l1T .....:J~
II'~. ....
':I."......
u.....
f'':I,...
==." ''''
~.II_'
.':I"'~1I
1Il':~"
iII~ ~....
.-:. S.II._
~~oCI_
ar.~'1
o
iII.UII'.......t'.cCtl~... u.,.....
U'-~...,..t.t....,...u:: V' 'i'~ pllllr' VS' .'-.
(jI...u-U.-,ot",~ ~. 'PIIIIG D1i:1l1f' Ll:='- hi
Tw:r: i.1I...c.I'.I'IIII'IIII".l.c.t.L-r. ,no IL.
,~...'U _.'~I'CIUII411:CiI$ CIlU~,1,1 1IIIIIIlJiII1.'l ~"II ...
I
.::. ~(l....
I"l; ,..t~...~.
"'~ :001:011"
..~ ~'"-
.1oH....
d
_I_ T_S _TITI'.~")
~,~~J':';~..~J:-:.'~:lI"lf
W"'&'C 'lJoIf.P&lO: 'U~
11.... ...1
.,.,..
.r 1.&..
.....s..(I...
....:::lo,(l_
.;Wvlll
_ ...n ......, ...T'E'I..... <G_T1TT-6'"
GVAP4 &M"~""',,",~ ~G1I11,':.
~. . MIII.~IIIo,~GI""'-'.
. . .. I' S-l:tIliI'l.U~L:'IIJIIIII'A~"'''
~.... ..1~.".I""i11II1U11111U11 ~1,j1,nUIII
".".111:""
,...~.,
II" lIIIIIIL.r
~.. ......:: "
IIoP'f.I"
.. nor
..t' r: ~
Ulg
GliIJAAa
S/'IIuIS llN&llT,"",;n~,
.....c.1II~_ t'll1Ai1K1Cil'1 !IIIJ:I,..'.....~# till........
~i1 I.;:.g:" _..iWlilli:lll~ 1-AoI.(II
rllll"~ ~14'" '.'~I~ II t-d....n
~~~,
i~fI'D'
,e... -V'
~II \\'-
lIILle.
_I ;'
,..~~.:,
..,....c~t.:IM.I!I,.......,r;:.IIIII'III6I.1111.Q
t,i... tG--....~...~.,.-.;.t..:ls.
!~..... ..a.:_~.cbol-n ,:1a,1IIitI1I'.... UAIIU'
~' 1lI_
U'C':
:I,:l!'l.I.,
itl;lill.,,,",,'
. l..1li.. P131
~ (.IIir,. lID'
IIlitii.', ..'" ,It. ~I"'AM"'IIII;. . "'MOt''!:1 i Gal.. "aT
1II1~~ 01.. "/.o-.:"i.IIII~"", ...C'.-"PM ""1'01. "" l C".-a,
lit:: AA.~ II(:CCI..A'Wf.M"'. "",,,,,,"biIo 'lU'1Ii IIIftRU' iI~... ~t
""-..... .:..c.,..~ ~ ~ '-' 'G!'
:"':':If:
;II.' 1::_
.:t.~' _"
K"'i.,"D ...... ",. 01' ~,""1
~= '::.'tI:,.::t~~Qtrtll~~a::.~ :9J...~:::"'~
f
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
11.
I
I
I
II
II
II
[I
.
II
III~XIIIIII'r I(
.R......-:
'.
:::: ilf~~ .
,,'
,:
I,.' . J ~ :1"
1/ ~r] _
._ .~ "'. '1
,
'..,
'j'
; - .
. :. "-
, 171.' .
,
UJ
.ex:
::::)
g>1~ .5UJ
u:1'~ ~ u... (I)
~() ~ ~ c::::)
~t=~- UJ c
oz~~ ~~
~ i::j Q....I
G.l <. ....
... z
.~ <:
L1.
I~ ~z
i I
I.
j!s
..i ~ R
~ ~ w i~
:n ~ lQ~
z ~QI
; Cl ~'l
~ ~ ~i
i ~si
lIIl
": ,"'.
.' ~ ~j , :~~:'-
Il".
_~....'r"._
. MOAA Anticipated Future Land Use ("1977) .\
' ~/\
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/05/99
PRELIMINARY PLAT and PUD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Rezoning of Phase I to R- I, Single Family Residential upon approval of annexation
and submission of Final Plat.
2. Division of blocks within the Preliminary Plat to meet the maximum 1,320 block
length and required pedestrian access through blocks of more than 800 feet.
3. Verification that all lots meet or exceed the minimum standards 01'12,000 square feet
in area and 80 feet in width.
4. Street connections are added to the northwest and southwest portions of the plat to
provide greater traffic dispersal.
5. Submission of a revised plat showing a change to the long parallel street pattern in
the southwest portion of the plat.
6. Additional access is provided to Trunk Highway 25, if approved by Mn/DOT.
7.
Consideration is given to the provision of a frontage road connection to the north
from the northwest corner of the plat.
8.
The street pattern is altered to comply with the standards for street width construction
as mentioned in this report.
9.
Access is provided to Outlot C.
10.
Approval of the landscaped islands in Red Pine Way by staff.
11.
Park areas are graded and seeded as shown in the Grading Plan.
12.
Sidewalks and Pathways are constructed in coordination with the development of the
plat.
13.
Pathway is added to the Preliminary Plat along County Road 117 between Red Pine
Way and the northeast corner of the plat.
14.
Pathway is added to the Preliminary Plat along 85th Street NE between Red Pine
Way and the southwest corner of the plat.
Exhibit Z - PUD/Preliminary Plat Conditions of Approval
la.A ?-
.
18.
19.
20.
21.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda ~ 1/05/99
15.
Pathway is addcd to create a parallel pathway connection along Trunk Highway 25,
either in the I'll 25 right-of-way, or within the plat close to TH 25.
16.
Submission of a preliminary phasing plan.
17.
Additional landscaping is provided along the northern boundary to strengthen and
diversify the buffer.
A landscape plan is provided for Outlots A and C (the ponding areas) to provide a
low maintenance natural wetland environment.
City Engineer approval of the Grading and Utility Plans.
Consideration of architectural control measures with the objective of limiting
monotony in the building layout.
Submission of additional details for the townhouse portions ofthe project, including
building plans and, where appropriate, intensified landscaping.
Exhibit Z - PUD/Preliminary Plat Conditions of Approval - Continued
IO\~
j-5- 99 I1ti>JJI'>'
cA c.s@lanmed 9:ffnit ~&Vel{?jvme/ftt
- ~ --.-
---- -......_~--- '--
Proposed by:
Gold Nugget Development
8857 Zealand Avenue North
Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
(612) 424-6377
lZ/DEC.ll.1998G 1:43PM82S2RHS TITLE CHICAGO TITLE pc
DEe 1121 ' 9lil rag: 57'RI"'I CAMPBELL ~
I
I
..
s TrNO.497 P.2/3l2
p.V5
F~le ~o.: 26-03J83
CAMPUU. MIITRAC'r co.
7 biD ST NW BOX 4ZS
"UFI'ALO. IIH 5Uf~ -oaS
~~.~ of ~rop.Y~Y Owue~. of p~aparc~ 350 t..~ .ur~~uu4~U~ p~r~ a~ N~t Sec~~on
22-121-2! 17~g E- of Z-1y line o~ r1&h~ o~ vB7 of s~.~. Trun~ Ch~Y Va. 25 AND NWt
of S.c~~o= 23-121-25. except s- 933 f..c at ~- 933 !e.~. PIUI. 1 213-100-232200~
2) 213-100-232~Ol: 3) ~13-100-Z21101.
p~; 213-100-221200; 113-100-221101. lSS-500-143400i
155-5UO-143-143301; 213-100-1'4402; lS5-500-143300
xa1U:: 1CJ.Uberg
1000 S~~6 R~ghu.y 25 ME
1!SoD.~~ee~~o. M'D-- 5:;j362
..
PrD: 213-100-2~1100
Che.~.r G. & Po~~y A- ~c.o~
8817 6~ac. K~gnvaY 25 NE
Ko~c~e.l~o. Mn. 55362
P~. 213-100-221300 6 210-100-~21301
~~~c.l1o covenant Churcb
PO >>ax 1405
~~~c.llo, ~. 5"62
Pxn: 213-!OQ-223113
~.... A. . X.Te~~ AAd.:.On
3503 8!~h St_ NI
Hont.1.c.:u.o. Mn. 55362
~ZD~ 2!3-1aC-224Z03 . 213-100-224204
ll.:1.cb.aJ:"d. .1. " ~ulU.;h I!l~ pausaea. (0Va.:- of Cout:. for naRd)
6600 7Seh 5~. NW
Hap]"a LaM. M'P _ 55:13 &
Thoma. A. & K1~.C~ha J~~esk~ (T~.Y.~ of Coue. for D.ad)
11000 ~u~nn A.e. $~
BJ...,oa:LqCOl1, &. 55437
~zn: 213~'OO-224100 & 213-100-233100
navid A. Koch
1"0 BoX S1472
~.pG1~8~ Mn. 55440-9412 .
P%D: 213-100-2311UO
lrauc:J,_ J!: _ iii J!u.n'ls, ta. S. 1C..e:la.
a903 Fa1.~DQ "'ve.. n
~ti.c.~1o. Mllf. S.5.362
PIn: 155-102-001090 (Lot 9. B~k. 1. X1e.~ft 'arm. 3rd Add~~1o~)
Fenna CODScruet~~n. Inc~ (199i ~axp.y.r)
13631. 1l&1.... 1...1'.
Dayton. MD. 55327
lZ/DEC.ll.19988 1:44PM8262RHS TITLE CHICAGO TITLE PC
, t. DEe;: 10 ' 9B 1219; S?Ff1 a:w...--tIU-L Aa::s=. I RA--I
~~: 155-102-001100 (Lo: 10, B~ock 1. ~ai~ 7arms 3r4 A4~~a~)
tam.. ~1u. >>esi~.~G-.1dr5. (1998 Taxpayer)
5;'30 Q\).am .A."l1e. 16
~a.r.;~. SS374-9032
I
_Xl) .l.S~-.102-QD1lIO CLot ,il, B1oc;'k 1. lQ..;i,n P'anuiI 31:'d. 44cU.tiou)
....naaz Bome. (1~9a Taxp.~er)
"'363E '1'1"1 Oe11:.& Cuc:1. n
WyClUaIfi~ 11m. 55092
~1D: LSS-50Q-143401
l5,-098-o00040 (O~~loe D, Kofttieello BU5~~..8 Center)
QcaJ.1o LLC
11915 ~ro~kto~ Av.. N.
0...0, ~. 55369
~ I
I'
,
~ RBS TI't.j.Q.; 497 P. ~~:s
P.3/S
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
250 E. Broadway, PO Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
(612) 295-2711
Planning
Case #
PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION
Check Requested Action:
CONDITIONAL USE. $125.00 + all necessary consulting expenses*
XX ZONING MAP/ TEXT AMENDMENT. $250.00 + necessary consulting expenses*
SIMPLE SUBDMSION - $50
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - $250
XX SUBDMSION PLAT - $300 + $100/acre up to 10 acres; $25/acre
after 10 acres + expenses. City will refund excess of per-acre deposit.
_ VARIANCE REQUEST - $50 for setbackl$125 for others + nee. consult. expenses*
XX OTHER _ PUD"":Developnent Stage Fee $
* NOTE: Necessary consulting fees include cost to have City Planner analyze variance, rezoning, &
conditional use permit requests at the rate of $75/hr. The need for City Planner assistance is determined
solely by City staff.
Applicant Name:
Address:
Phone: Home:
Gold Nugget Development, Inc.
8857 Zealand Ave. No., B~?Oklyn Park
447-8513
Business:
424-6377
Property Address:
Legal Description of Property:
Lot: ; Block: ; Subdivision:
Other: See attached le al descri tions for PUD Re
Curren t Zoning:
Ag
Describe Request:
L
(CONTINUE ON BACK...)
VCUSSAM.APP: 2106//95
Date ReceivedIPaid:
Receipt Nwnber:
Public Hearing Date:
."
Nov-25-9S 12:29P Pioneer Engineering
1
P.02
'-
. ..... * *" ...
* PIONEER
~ engineering
*...*ic
Civil Engineers · Land Planners · Land Surveyors · Landscape Architects
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FDR
REZONING & PRELIMINARY PLAT
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 121, Range 25, Hennepin
County, Minnesota described as follows:
Beginning at the North Quarter comer of said section; thence on an assumed bearing of
South 89 degrees 26 minutes 10 seconds West, along the north line of said NW 'It, a
distance of 1,537.78 feet; thence South 2 degrees 23 minutes 12 seconds West, 974.82
feet; thence South 24 degrees 59 minutes 18 seconds West, 106.95 feet; thence South 32
degrees 58 minutes 11 seconds West, 112.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 03 minutes 16
seconds West, 112.07 feet; thence South 55 degrees 58 minutes 50 seconds West, 139.97
feet; thence North 89 degrees 2 t minutes 33 seconds East, 370.48 feet; thence North 52
degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds East, 162.55 feet; thence South 46 degrees 14 minutes 21
seconds East 147.80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 40 minutes 21 seconds East, 64.50
feet; thence southwesterly on a nontangential curve concave to the northwest for a
distance of34.95 feet, radius of said curve is 380.00 feet and the chord bearing is South
50 degrees 17 minutes 14 seconds West; thence South 52 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds
West, 79.50 teet; thence on a tangential curve to the left for a distance of 30.62 feet,
radius of said curve is 155.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds East,
117.33 feet; thence South 49 degrees 53 minutes 56 seconds East, 104.72 feet; thence
South 64 degrees 01 minutes 39 seconds East, 117.90 feet; thence South 78 degrees 45
minutes 34 seconds East, 111.28 feet to the northwest corner of the South 933.00 feet of
the East 933.00 feet of said NW1/4; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 39 seconds East,
along the north line of said South 933.00 fee:t, to the east line of said NW I/..; thence North
1 degree 36 minutes 50 seconds East, along said east line, 1,694.09 feet to the point of
beginning. Subject to Edmonson A venue and other easements.
2422 Enterprise Drive. Mendota Heights. Minnesota 55120 · (612) 681-1914. Fax 681-9488
625 Highway 10 N,E. . Blaine, Minnesota 55434 · (612) 783-1880 . Fax 783-1883
"'~.>,
Z@
o
IJl Z
(")
:I:>
~,
.',''..,
.......',.
;
<:., I
'~
~k,
i
n
=t
......
r-'
;
~
N
\ '
\
i
I
-,
--
(,,,
\
,.
, '
((
~
r
:
I, ~ i~
I"f
, "";'11
, , ,
r)l r
\ '
II, j/
" r
, '..l
(-II f1 ~
, ,
')11
\ I
I
't, ~
" ----'-'~ r- i 'n
_1___'---_--''''''''''''---_ I I ',: I " ':'
I L----..l' -, I _ n I ()
~,-..~- I - '" ",'
I r)". ___ (Idll
l_ tP'I,:i $r-.l
1~j11 J
II" 111(1
~ -;' '----1 t,
In(n I I I
I ,
t
"
GOLD NUGGET DEVELOPMENT INC.
8857 Zealand Avenue North
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 554~5
(612) 424.-4955
December 1, 1998
Jeff O'N eill
Assistant City Administrator
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
Dear Mr. O'Neill:
Please accept this letter as a petition for annexation to the City of Monticello for 57.87 acres of
land lying contiguous to and directly south of the city limits of Monticello and adjacent to and
directly west of County Road 117 The proposed annexation is contained in the orderly
annexation area stipulated in the "Joint Resolution of the City of Monticello and the Township of
Monticello as to the Ordefly Annexation of Property" dated March 2, 1998. Please refer to
attached Exhibit A for the legal description of the area petitioned to be annexed. Gold Nugget
Development, Inc. is the fee owner of the land proposed for annexation.
The area proposed for annexation is part of a multi-phased Planned Unit Development (PUD)
consisting of220.8 acres. The PUD received concept plan approval from the Monticello City
Council on June 8, 1998 The PUD consists of 545 residential units and approximately 5 acres of
commercial. The predominant residential land use within the proposed PUD is consistent with the
planned long range land use objectives of Monticello and the Township of Monticello. Existing
infrastructure is stubbed to the northeast corner of the PUD and is of capacity to serve the entire
PUD_
This petition for annexation is being filed contemporaneous with the PUD development stage and
a preliminary plat and rezoning application from agricultural to R-1 residential for the first phase
of the POD. The legal description for the first phase of development is identical to the legal
description of the area proposed for annexation.
Respect~ll , ._
. /-
, Q \
. L~ v-.-J
Wayne.-F ec
President I
Gold NuggeV
Attachment
"---..t :.Jf..,I ...L&........ IIL...J'
, .'_,...HI~I;;:' LII'.::J l'It..::::'t::f III~
-'-
,~. U.::
')f * * -i'
: PIO.NEE~
*" engineering
*...**
Civil Engineers' Land Planners · Land Surveyors' Landscape Architects
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FDR
LAND TO BE ANNEXED
That part or the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 121, Range 25, llennepin
County, Minnesota described as tallows:
Beginning at the North Quarter corner of said section; thence on an assumed bearing of
South 89 degrees 26 minutes 10 seconds West, along the north line of said NW~, a
distance of 1,537.78 feel; thence South 2 degrees 23 minutes 12 seconds West, 974.82
feel; thence South 24 degrees 59 minutes 18 seconds West, 106.95 feet; thence South 32
degrees 58 minutes II seconds West, 112.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 03 minutes 16
seconds West, 112.07 feet; thence South 55 degrees 58 minutes 50 seconds West, 139.97
fect; thence North 89 degrees 21 minutes 33 seconds East, 370.48 feet; thence North 52
degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds East, 162.55 feet; thence South 46 degrees 14 minutes 21
seconds East 147.80 feet; thence South 22 degrees 40 minutes 21 seconds East, 64.50
feet; thence southwesterly on a nontangential curve concave to the northwest for a
distance of 34.95 feet, radius of said curve is 380.00 feet and the chord bearing is South
50 degrees 17 minutes 14 seconds West; thence South 52 degrees 55 minutes 20 seconds
West, 79.50 tect; thence on a tangential curve to the left for a distance of 30.62 fect,
radius of said curve is 155.00 feet; thence South 46 degrees 43 minutes 07 seconds East,
117.33 feet; thence South 49 degrees 53 minutes 56 seconds East, 104.72 feet; thence
South 64 degrees 01 minutes 39 seconds East, 117.90 feet; thence South 78 degrees 45
minutes 34 seconds East, 111.28 feet to the northwest comer of the South 933.00 feet of
the Ea..t 933.00 feet of said NWI/4; thence North 89 degrees 06 minutes 39 seconds East,
along the north line of said South 933.00 feet, to the cast line of said NW 1/4; thence North
I degree 36 minutes 50 seconds East, along said east line, 1.694.09 feet to the point of
heginning. Suhject to Edmonson A venue and other easements.
2422 Enterprise DrivEl' Mendota Heights. Minnesota 55120' (612) 681-1914' Fax 681-9488
625 Highway 10 N,E . Blaine, Minnesota 55434' (612) 783-1880 . Fax 783-1883
"
Introduction:
Earlier this year Gold Nugget Development, Inc. (GND) acquired an interest in a parcel ofland
consisting of220.46 acres farmland contiguous to the southern boundary of the City of
Monticello The principle reason for this acquisition was to pursue an urban development
consistent with the long range planning objectives of the City of Monticello. The City staff have
been very helpful in providing guidance and direction during the planning and design stages of this
project. Gold Nugget Development is committed to the challenge of this project and endeavors
to build Pine Meadows.
Requested Actions:
GND is requesting the City of Monticello to consider and grant the following approvals:
1) Development stage PUD for the 220 acres.
2) Preliminary plat for the first phase of Pine Meadows consisting of 57.87 acres
3) Rezoning of the first phase of Pine Meadows from agricultural to R-I
single family.
4) Annex the first phase of Pine Meadows into the city limits of Monticello.
Previous Actions:
On 6/8/98, the Monticello City Council granted "General Concept Stage" approval for Pine
Meadows (see attached text describing the project and 6/8/98 Council minutes). The Council
approval was subject to 12 conditions which have been incorporated into the "Development Stage
PUD". City staff processed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for this project and on
10/12/98, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing a negative declaration. A wetland
determination report was prepared by Arlig Environmental, Inc. in May of this year which
concluded that no wetlands existed on this site (letter attached).
Area Identification:
Pine Meadows consisting of 220.46 acres is located between State Trunk Highway No. 25 and
Co. Rd. 117 and directly north of 85th Street Northeast. The entire site is currently in agricultural
production with either corn or beans. The topography is relatively flat with no ponds, wetlands or
trees. Pine Meadows is contiguous to the southern boundary of Monticello and part of the area
covered by an orderly annexation agreement between Monticello and the Township of Monticello.
The land use to the north of Pine Meadows is currently an older style trailer park. To the
southeast of the subject site is a 20 acre hobby farm. The land uses to the south consists of a golf
diving range and agricultural. To the west of the development are large acre hobby farms and
agricultural.
,
-2-
The topography of the subject site is relatively flat agricultural land with no trees, ponds or
wetlands. The only recognizable feature is a 6-10 foot depressing running predominately north
and south in the center of the site. Soil borings revealed about 1-2 feet of topsoil with silty and
poorly graded sand below the topsoil.
Concept POO Plan Changes:
The design concept for Pine Meadows is to plan a variety of land uses around a curvalinear road
system and a linear park and open space system.. The concept plan revealed 339 single family
units, 238 attached townhome units, 22 acres park and five acres of neighborhood commercial in
the southwest corner of the site. The uses were arranged to function around Red Pine Way an
internal minor collector road (see attached concept plan for reference)
The Concept PUD Plan hearing revealed the City Council wanted a larger open space mass in the
southwest part of the site and more park exposure at streets. And shortly after the Concept Plan
hearing, it was determined that considerable additional storm water storage was required. Both of
these requirements mandated site plan adjustments. As a result, the arrangement of land uses did
not change, however, the density was reduced by 32 single family units and the local road system
was modified to accommodate the required changes. The most significant land use change
occurred in the southwest corner of the subject site. The 20 twin home units adjacent to Red Pine
Way were changed to single family homes and the attached townhomes cluster to the northwest
was increased by 20 units.
Development Stage PUD:
Pine Meadows is a 220.46 acre planned development consisting of 545 residential units and
approximately 5 acres of neighborhood commercial located in the southwest corner of the project
The concept is to provide a variety of housing styles and living opportunities in an environment
that allows maximum access to open space and pedestrian and bicycle access to neighborhood
commercial. Red Pine Way will have a sidewalk system on one side that functions as a pedestrian
collector for the bituminous pathway system that is planned throughout the development Of the
307 single family lots, 75 will have rear or side yard frontage on public open space.
Consequently, this amenity allows for a higher lot price and upscale housing.
The park system is proposed to encompass 22.28 acres and was designed in conjunction with the
storm water system. A bituminous trail system connects the carious components of the park
system. The trail system together with the sidewalk adjacent to Red Pine Way will provide the
pedestrian and/or jogger with a variety of route choices without leaving the neighborhood. To
provide for land use delineation between private and public space, GND will install a vinyl or
wood post at each rear lot corner The color has yet to be determined.
The residential component of Pine Meadows consists of 105 acres of single family, 30.65 acres of
townhomes and 8.3 1 acres of detached townhomes for a total ofl44.23 acres at 65.4%. The
.'
-3-
single family lots will have different width options to provide design flexibility for housing. The
gross density in Pine Meadows is 2.47 ulac and net density is 378 u/ac.
Site Data - Pine Meadows
# of units
Area
Single family
Townhomes
Detached townhomes
Commercial
Park
Street row
Outlots
307
196
42
105.27 ac.
30.65
8.31
5.00
22.28
34.60
14.35
Total site
545 units
220.46 acres
The landscape plan features entry monuments at either end of Red Pine Way to provide a sense of
identification and arrival. Components of these features include a boulder retaining wall, pine tree
plantings, a center island in Red Pine Way and a neighborhood identification sign. These features
will be irrigated and lighted for evening identification. The other three access points will also
have entry features consisting of pine tree planting and black rod iron fencing to give the
appearance of a gate and sense of entry, however, these features will not be lit.
The perimeter of Pine Meadows will be buffered with a combination of berms and plantings. In
the event boulders are found on the site, they will be used to augment the berms for additional
interest. The landscaping for the townhomes is represented in the landscape plan via a typical
foundation planting schedule. GND is currently in discussion with Minnegasco to provide gas
lighting for all of Pine Meadows. This would include front yard lighting for the sidewalk along
Red Pine Way. Gas lighting has recently been perfected for use in public applications. The
advantages of gas light is the unique glow and sense of character and human scale it give a
neighborhood. Moreover, gas lights operate at about one fourth the cost of electrical lights.
At full development, Pine Meadows will have a population of 1295 people. This number is based
on single family household size of2.73 people and 185 people per household for multi-family.
Preliminary Plat - First Phase of Pine Meadows
GND is requesting preliminary plat approval for the first phase of Pine Meadows. The first phase
consists ofa total of57.87 acres and is located in the northeast corner of the POO. Both sewer
and water of size to permit a residential development has been stubbed to the northeast corner of
the first phase. The first phase consists of 83 single family lots with a gross density of 1.43 ulac
and a net density of3.02 u/ac. The site data for the first phase is as follows:
"
-4-
Total area
Single family
R.O.W. area
Park (outlots B & D)
Pond (outlots A & C)
Total number of units
57.87 ac.
27.50 ac.
9.45 ac.
6.57 ac.
14.35 ac.
8300
GND desires to start improving the first phase as soon as weather permits in the Spring of 1999.
The first phase will be restricted to a pool of 4-6 builders Restrictive covenants are anticipated
but have not been developed. However, they will be available for council review prior to final
plat.
..
..
A Planned Unit Development
Proposed
by
Gold Nugget Development Inc.
8857 Zealand Ave. N.
Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
(612) 424 - 4955
.
..
Requested Action:
Gold Nugget Development Inc. is requesting the city of Monticello to grant General Concept
stage approval for the attached planned unit Development in accordance with Chapter 20 of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance.
Proiect Identification:
Gold Nugget Development Inc. (GND) has entered into option agreement with Ocello, LLC a
Minnesota limited liability company to acquire 220 acres lying adjacent to and east of State Trunk
Highway No. 25 and adjacent to the city limits of Monticello. This site is currently included in an
orderly annexation agreement with Monticello and the adjacent Township. GND intends to pursue
all approvals necessary for the first phase of development to commence as soon as possible.
In general the proposal is to develop a multi use planned unit development consisting of about
five acres of commercial and between 550 and 600 units of residential. The proposed project will
include a variety of different housing styles and living opportunities
Site Conditions:
The site consists of 220 aces of relatively flat agricultural land. The entire site has been and is
currently being cropped consequently there are no trees on the site. There is an existing row of 8-
12 foot pine trees between STH 25 and the west property line of the site. There are some mature
overstory trees along the north property line belonging to the residents of the mobile home park.
The site is bordered by STH 25 on the west, Co. Rd. 117 on the east, 85th St.N.E. on the south
and existing mobile home park on the north. The general topography of the site can be described
as flat. There is approximately 6-10 feet of relief running predominately north and south in the
center of the site which is the predominant physical feature. Just to the east of this slope is the
sites lowest elevation which receives the majority of the drainage from the site. The steepest
slopes are found just south of the center of the site but do not exceed 5.8%.
The entire site does not contain ponds or wetlands. This is being confirmed via a wetland
deliniation survey during peak runoff periods to be performed in mid may. Several low points in
the eastern third of the site will pond water. However water would appear to permeate quickly
through the sandy soils.
A total of 20 soil boring were put down to a depths of 15ft. at various locations. The results
revealed topsoil depth of 0.8 to 2ft. Beneath the topsoil layers, silty and poorly graded sands were
generally encountered to the termination depths of the borings. Groundwater was encountered in
eight of the twenty boring ranging from 7 to 14 feet below grade. The boring that encountered
water also showed a stiff clay layer which indicates a " perched" groundwater condition on the
site. In general, the engineer who analyzed the bornings concluded that conditions are favorable
for the support of situations by conventional, spread footing foundation systems.
Other than subtle topographic changed, no other natural identifYing features exist. This also holds
true for properties to th~ south, west and east. For purposes of urban design this physiography is
uninteresting but it does provide for views of a distant horizon.
Comprehensive Plan Consistency:
Although the site is not currently within the city limits of Monticello it is how'ever part of an
orderly annexation agreement. The principle component of the agreement stipulates that .
annexation can occur if the proposed land uses are consistent with the cities comprehensive plan.
If the proposed plan is found to be consistent annexation and rezoning would occur
contemporaneously at the preliminary plat stage of the platting process.
Monticello has designated the site in its comprehensive plan as low density residential. Although
there is no density range specified the city has generally considered less than four units per acre as
low density. The proposed PUD has a gross density .01'2.68 units per acre. The transportation
element of the comprehensive plan indicates 85th St. and Co. Rd. 117 as collectors and STH 25
as an arterial. The PUD recognized this functional road system by not allowing direct land access,
providing for deeper lots which will permit screening and adhering to spacing guidelines for
access points. The trail pathway plan shows a path along the east side of STH 25. The PUD will
have both a sidewalk system along St. A and a path through the park system which will eventually
provide a connection to the city path along STH 25 and to Co. Rd. 117
The schematic utility plan indicates that the POD can be served with public sewer and water
which are stubbed to the northeast corner of the site. Storm water will be accommodated within
the POO via a system of storm water management ponds and storm sewers. There is some
questions of downstream capacity for the sanitary sewer. This will have to be addressed by the
city of Monticello.
POO Land Use and Design:
One of the principle objective in designing a residential neighborhood is to utilize natural and man
made features to give identity character, and a sense of place to the neighborhood. Unfortunately
this site has few of these qualities. It was decided to utilize a curvaliniar road system and a linear
park system as the basic design for this PUD. This design will relieve monotony, create edge lots
on the park and create an interesting living environment.
The land use of the PUD is as follows:
-= 577
Area
IIO.9Ac.
26.8
3.8
IL2
5.0
22.0
40.3
220.0
Single Family Homes
Townhomes
Twinhomes
Detached Townhomes
Commercial
Park
Street Row
Total Site
Vnits
339
176
20
4p...
Gross Density
Net Density
Total Population
2.88 VI Ac
3.78 VI Ac.
1502
Approximately one half of the area of the PUD is devoted to single family detached housing.
About one third of the 339 lots have direct access to the park which is proposed to be dedicated
to the city as a public park. Because of its curvilinear design, the use of the park should be limited
to neighborhood activities. The lots along the periphery of the POD have been increased in depth
to accommodate screening by using a combination of berming and plant material. The width of
the lots will very to accommodate a variety of home styles and sizes. The current code requires a
30 foot setback from the front property line. In an effort to defuse uniformity in the streetscape a
10 foot front yard variance is requested for all single family and townhome structures. Varying
setbacks will increase front yard green space relieve monotony and uniformity and have a positive
atfect on the streetscape. It is anticipated that setbacks will vary from 20 to 40 feet from the front
property line. If approved a detailed setback plan can be included at the general plan stage.
F or the single family lots north of streets J & A and west of the park, GND proposes a reduction
in both lot width and size for 35% of the 122 lots in this area. The requested deviation in lot width
is from 80 to 65 feet and lot size from 12,000 to 10,000 square feet. The affected lot total would
be 43. It is anticipated that the reduced lot sizes would be planned for the periphery of this area.
For example the lots along STH 25 would be reduced in width but increased in depth in an effort
to increase the separation between the home and traffic. To provide for additional design
flexibility within the building envelope a 5 foot side yard setback is requested on the garage side.
Approximately 12.5% of the PUD is devoted to attached Townhomes. These 176 units are
clusters of four units to a building served by private streets. A townhome association will control
and maintain the common area. Forty detached townhomes are proposed which are clusters of
two units but are detached. This style of unit has become popular for the elderly A townhome
association also maintains the common area and the exterior of the units.
Five acres in the southeast corner of the PUD is proposed for commercial. The objective is to
provide an opportunity for neighborhood orientated business such as a convenience store, beauty
shop, professional ofiices and other related neighborhood uses. Access to the commercial site will
be from 85th St, which is a city collector street and ST. A which is a minor collector street
internal to the PUD This commercial site is at the edge of the neighborhood and has good
exposure to trafiic and is easily accessable to residents of the neighborhood. It is a desirable
benefit to any neighborhood to be able to shopror essential goods and services without leaving
the neighborhood. It should underscored that every resident in the PUD can either walk of bicycle
safely to this commercial node. The proposed zoning for the five acres is B-2 limited business.
This will be one of the last phases of the PUD to develop which is anticipated to be in 8 - 12
years.
The park component of the POO encompasses about 22 acres which is required by Monticello
ordinance. The linear park system will provide internal pedestrian and recreational opportunities
and connect the neighborhood with the regional trail system. A pathway meandering through the
open space system is proposed as an alternative route to the sidewalk within the right of the way
of street A. Several portions of the open space system have adequate mass for ballfields or other
activities as may be planned by the city. It becomes essential that a common element be
implemented to delineate the common property line of rear yards and open space. Such a measure
will help to establish the domain of the open space system and eliminate possible user
apprehension. GND will implement such a plan if deemed appropriate by the city.
Development Staging:
Depending on economic and market conditions it is anticipated the POO will take 8- 10 years to
completely develop. The first phase of construction will be a single family project consisting of
about 50 lots in the northeast corner of the site. The existing utilities are stubbed to the northeast
corner of the site therefore contigious development must occur from east to west. It is the desire
of GND to start construction of the first phase late last year.
PUD Marketing:
GND expects to market the single family home to first and second home buyers similar to what is
currently being constructed in the Klein Farms Additions. There will be some opportunities for
higher priced housing on lots with higher amenities.
It is anticipated the townhomes will be entry level units in the 90,000 to 110,00 dollar range. The
detached townhomes adjacent to street M will be marketed to elderly residents with a range of
100,000 to 120,000 dollars. The twinhomes will provide an alternative living opportunity with a
common wall arrangement and no association. These units will be one of the last phases to be
constructed.
Street Systems:
The street system was designed as a curvaliniar road system to add interest to the development.
Street A will function as a minor collector with a sidewalk system to accommodate pedestrian
traffic One accesS point'is provided to STH 25 close to the location of the current field acceSS (
Street J). Street J will also have a sidewalk to connect the development with the regional path
planned for in the right of way ofSTH 25. Three intersections are planned for 85th St. N.E.
which currently is a township street and also designated a collector street in Monticello's
Comprehensive Plan.
Two intersections are shown with Co. Rd.117. County spacing guidelines are 660 feet. Although
both intersections meet spacing criteria, GND is of the opinion only one intersection is required
The second or southerly access serves little purpose other than an alternative access for the
townhomes in the southeast. The single family homes along street 0 should not be subject to cut
through traffic from the townhomes.
Council Minutes - 6/8/98
s. Consideration of a request for a concept stage planned unit development for a 220-acre
residential subdivision. Applicant. Gold NugGet Development. Inc.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill reported that Gold Nugget Development is
proposing a residential planned unit devclopment consisting of 220 acres south of
Kjellbergs East Mobile I lome Park. Thc project would consist of a combination of
approximately 339 single I~Hnily homes, 176 townhomcs, 20 twin homes, and 40
detached townhomes, a tolal of 577 units. In addition, 5.5 acres in the southwest curtler
of the project was reserved for commercial use.
Horst Graser, representing Uold Nugget Development, reviewed the proposed PUD and
noted that the project concept utilizes a "linear park" design throughout the subdivision.
The development proposes varied individual lot sizes to include a series of about 43
scattered, nonconforming lots, using a standard of 10,000 sq ft and a 65-ft width; a
variance from the side yard setback standard; and varying front yard setbacks, ranging
from 20 n to 40 ft, to create additional interest along the street. Mr. Graser pointed out
that the linear road system with curves would slow traffic down, and the varied front yard
setbacks would provide an opportunity for green and open space in the front yards. He
noted that one of the conditions placed on the development was low level lighting for the
pathway areas internal to the project, which he requested be required only at the entry to
the trail rather than throughout the cntire system.
Council discussed their concerns regarding the nonconforming lots proposed for the
subdivision, specifically the 65-ft width, but agreed that lighting of the entire pathway
would not be necessary .
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN AND SECONDED
BY CLINT IIEROST TO APPROVE TilE CONCEPT PLAN, REQUIRING THAT THE 80-FT
MINIMUM WIDTH STANDARD I3E ADHERED TO, WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
I. PROVISION OF A LANDSCAPED BUFFER BETWEEN TilE PROJECT AND THE
ADJACENT USES ON THE WEST enl 25) AND TilE NORTH (KJELL13ERGS
EAST). TI-llS NEED NOT BE AN OPAQUE SCREEN BUT SHOULD I3E A
REASONABLE, GREEN VISUAL 13UFFER.
2. TOWNHOME TYPES WILL NOT EXCEED THE DENSITIES PROPOSED IN THE
CONCEPT PLAN.
3. THE COMMERCIAL AREAS ARE LIMITED TO THE SIZE INDICATED ON THE
CONCEPT PLAN AND ARE LIMITED TO NEIGI-IBO:\HOOD RELATED USES.
4. A PAVED PATHW A Y IS INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT IN LIEU OF SIDEWALK
IN MOST OTHER AREAS.
5. THE PARK AREA IS WIDENED AT THE COLLECTOR STREET AS INDICATED
ON TI IE PARK EXIIIDIT. THIS AREA SHOULD BE GRADED TO
ACCOMMODATE AN INFORMAL PLA YFIELD FOR NEIGHOORHOOD USE.
Council Minutes - 6/8/98
6. TilE PARK AREA IS EXPANDED TO CREATE A COMMON GREEN NEAR THE
WESTERN TOWNHOMES AS INDICATED ON THE PARK EXIIIBIT.
7. THE PARK AREA IS CONNECTED TO THE NORTHWEST VIA A PATl-IW A Y
CONNECTION AS SHOWN ON TIlE PARK EXHIBIT, AS WELL AS TO TIlE
SOUTHER.N TOWNHOME CULDE-SAC.
8. TilE COLLECTOR STREET TIIROUGH THE CENTER OF TilE PROJECT IS
PLATTED AT A 70-FT RIGHT-OF-WAY, WITH A STREET CONSTRUCTION
ACCORDING TO TIlE CITY ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
9. THE REMAINDER OF TilE STREETS ARE PLATTED AT 60-FT RIGI-lTS-OF-WA Y,
WITH 30-FT OR 32-FT STREET SECTIONS AS SHOWN ON THE STREETS
EXHIBIT.
10. A SIDEWALK ALONG THE NOR'!'ll SIDE OF THE COLLECTOR IS DEVELOPED
AS A PART OF THE PROJECT.
II. ENGINEERING AND UTILITIES MEET TilE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY
ENGINEER.
12. PI lASING WHICH PROVIDES LOOPING OF WATER AND ADDITIONAL MAJOR
STREET ACCESS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Motion carried unanimously.
ARLlG ENVIRONMENTAL, INc.
Mr. Horst Graser
Gold Nugget Development
8857 Zealand Avenue No
Brooklyn Park, MN 55445
June 11, 1998
RE WETLAND DETERMINATION
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
within the NW Y4 SECTION 23
and the NE 'It SECTION 22, T 121N, R 25W
Dear Mr Graser:
The property referenced above is a parcel approximately 230 acres located just beyond the
city limits of Monticello in Wright County It is bounded by an electric transmission line
and a trailer park on the north, County Road 117 on the east, 85th Avenue NE on the
south, and County Road 25 on west. There is a small farm property designated as an
exception at the southeast corner of the area. The site includes gently rolling land and
some very flat areas. One small area has slopes over 6% according to the SCS map while
approximately 1/4 of the site is flat with slopes of 0%-2%. Most of the parcel has been
cultivated in the recent past There are plans to develop this site.
Arlig Environmental, Inc. was retained to determine if there are wetlands on the property
Prior to visiting the site, I obtained and reviewed the Wright County SCS map, the DNR
Protected Waters map, and the NWI map for the site There are no wetlands designated
at this property on the maps of the vicinity. There are wetlands designated on the
property south of this site (south of 85th Avenue). The SCS map designates the soils on
the site as Estherville loam, Esthen'ille sandy loam, Wadena loam, and a small area of
Terril, sandy substratum which are not listed as hydric soils. I visited the site on May 12,
1998. The purpose of this field visit was to determine whether there are any wetlands
located on the site According to Wetland Conservation Act rules, wetland delineations
should be completed during the growing season. The 1998 growing season began in early
ApriL The weather on May I ih was warm (65 OF), cloudy and damp. It rained most of the
morning prior to my field visit and began raining again while I was at the site The ground
remained well drained I was able to drive on the field without leaving any tire tracks.
Most of the property was plowed and planted prior to the May site visit. The corn plants
were five to seven inches high that day Grading for a commercial development north of
the transmission lines was in progress.
Water levels are usually at the highest annual elevations in the spring I anticipated that
water levels would be normal for this site. I walked over the site to observe apparent
drainage patterns and vegetation. The highest ground was near the east edge of the west
half of the site The ground slopes predominantly in two directions: (1) toward the
Gold Nugget Development site
Monticello. MN
southwest and (2) to a slight swale just east from that high ground. The swale is also
lower than the ground at the east portion of the property. My investigation was
concentrated in the lowest areas I was looking for wetland characteristics. I checked for
indicators of standing water or water within a foot of the surface. Wetland hydrology was
not evident on this site.
Soils on the site were checked by taking one foot deep samples with a 3/4" soil probe I
did not dig soil pits with a shovel since the area was recently planted The soils were
checked for hydric characteristics such as low chroma, organics, motteJing, and gleying
and the presence of water within the top 12". The soils on the site showed no hydric
characteristics other than low chroma. They were mostly 2/ I on the I OYR Munsell Color
Chart with no motteling or gleying. A few samples matched 3/2 at samples from 10"
below the surface These colors are typical of the Estherville, Wadena, and Terril soils
mapped for the area Although a few samples were damp, none were saturated.
Vegetation at the site was nearly all the corn (NI) crop A few upland grasses and forbs
such as Fescue (F ACU). Smooth Brome (UPL), Golden rod, Canadensis (F ACU), Lambs
quarter (F AC-). and other upland species were found There were a few small clumps of
Foxtail (F ACW) and sparse reed canary grass were noticed along the edge of the road at
the south edge of the property. I did not find any areas where the dominant vegetation
was wetland species (hydrophytic)
Wetlands are defined as land where three parameters are met; at least 50% of the plants
are hydrophytes, hydric soils are present, and wetland hydrology is found. Since there was
no evidence of wetland hydrology (standing water or water within 12" of the surface), of
hydric soils, or of predominant wetland vegetation, it is my opinion that there are no
wetlands on this property Copies of the SCS map and the NWI map and are enclosed I
have also enclosed a several photographs taken on my site visit
You may contact me at 974-9856 with any questions or comments
Sincerely,
~ ivkvL'Y'
Patricia Arlig
!'
L \J ~l V'j~
')81J13det
Gold Nugget Development site
Monticello. MN
:;::~t~~~;~;~;;~:~;i.~:~:~~~~~~.j.:;:~::{~ittiliJ~~~~~~j:~:j:~:j:~~~:~;~;:::::
. ",'~,'''''''''''''.'",','''.'.'.'..... '," ............'.......'.'.'......'..'....','....
.......
}}~i;i'r
:;:~:~::~" '.
. '::;::~::;'
:::.:.:'::.:..
. '~j@~{::::::::::::::~jii~:~~~~j~;~i~\t;;/irt~
.~
~.
Iff'
II: I
::::::i"" '\
..,.",":'~
~;;:I:r;,-
~::j::::[;,^""
:::~r
.:.:.;.:.:.:-.
:1~rt.
t...:.".., .....,
.............,~......................"......!I:~I..
:;~:)t
....::,;;;
'. ....1.
"'-J'
..-.~~;:;..
'%.
"l'-
.. ..~~~;;~i~~;
:~,..
H
~"'-:i
z
..
'. "'...
~.'
d
.
o
O'
<::-
:~~,,::~I*::.~..,.I1~.
~.w: 'w:.....' . .:.~.;' ,V
..,". :.,,)tR"''O
.....,..,..1::.:.:.:-...
.. ~::::;:
:~ ;:: :
...., ....::-
: :;::::
I""
I'.:::':'
:..' , .':-:-:
... . ....
----. ....
----, ,. ....
.. .... .' ,...
,.----. . ....
.. ....".,,"';,...: ;}"
:,.. ~. :.;.. . ,: ',:-:
:':.:.:.:....... ,,:.:
m'
',.. "~~'~" :::;~:'
.. ~
~
<t.... . ..............'"".".~...
~ .-:)0>..( ')
.. 4-." "{::..
,.' \,oJ ,
Q..
~ l~I"
~ i
,~
~W-
~. :g
We:..
:;};.~
.....".f'.. \
, ..-'
...--........,.~
<{
....~..
o
l
J
<(
<"
.~....
0--2:
uJ:
Q..
, ;h'
. .
....... .;.".~........' .,' . ' '.
. ;':.' .'.1""'" .,.. '. . .......>:-:..
. .... :'.... . .,.......~ .
t)... '. .
~~,..,,>.
~~,
ift;../'
w.;
0..'
~.~~
d ?'"::::I
-t:t ..~, %
- E ~
',.. ~~:
> :; ""
, Q'
. ...
:~. ~e
'"
'.r,
~~"'"~
...,
""
U
<t""
':>
-
VJ'
i;)..-.
~
/' t\.
i "\
~ .. .
~ :;:
C2th
. t) ..
..
."
,.....
....~..
.......
\~.
d:
Z
w
.0,.....