City Council Agenda Packet 10-27-2014 SpecialAGENDA
SPECIALJOINTMEETINGOFTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSION
ANDMONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL
Monday,October27,2014–6:00p.m.
MississippiRoom,MonticelloCommunityCenter
Commissioners:ChairBradFyle,SamBurvee,CharlotteGabler,AlanHeidemann
CityCouncil:MayorClintHerbst,LloydHilgart,TomPerrault,GlenPosusta,Brian
Stumpf
Staff:AngelaSchumann,SteveGrittman(NAC),RonHackenmueller
1.CalltoOrder–PlanningCommissionChair
2.ConsiderationofaPlannedUnitDevelopmentConceptPlanProposalforSunsetPonds.
Applicant:DJZDMJPlanning(Jensen/Donald)/Paxmar
3.Adjourn
Joint City Council/Planning Commission Agenda – 10/27/14
1
2. Consideration of a Planned Unit Development Concept Plan Proposal for Sunset
Ponds. Applicant: DJZDMJ Planning (Jensen, Donald)/Paxmar (NAC)
Property: Lots 1-5, Block 4, Lots 1-41, 51 Block 5, Lots 1-9 Block 6
Sunset Ponds 2nd Addition
Planning Case Number: 2014 - 049
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Request(s): Concept Review for a Planned Unit Development that
would vacate the previous 52 unit attached townhome PUD
authorized under the original Sunset Ponds approval,
replacing it with a “detached townhome” PUD of 44
detached single family structures.
Deadline for Decision: November 23, 2014
Land Use Designation: Places to Live
Zoning Designation: T-N (formerly R-2A), Sunset Ponds Planned Unit
Development
The purpose of the "T-N," The purpose of the "T-N"
traditional neighborhood residential district is to provide
for medium density, single family, detached residential
dwelling units and directly related complementary uses.
Current Site Use: Vacant platted townhome development
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Residential, Attached Townhouses
East: Residential/Agricultural, Monticello Township
South: Residential, Attached Townhouses
West: Residential, Attached Townhouses
Joint City Council/Planning Commission Agenda – 10/27/14
2
Analysis:
Previous PUD Approval. The original Sunset Ponds development was platted and
processed as a Planned Unit Development, including a significant number of mixed
residential units developed as traditional single family homes, small-lot single family
detached homes, and attached townhomes. Over the years, there have been amendments
to the project PUD approvals, including amendments to the T-N district area to facilitate
development of units similar to those proposed.
The majority of the detached areas have been built out, with some exceptions in the
small-lot portion of the project. The townhouses were completed, with the exception of
the loop road comprising the area of the current request. As the market has changed, the
applicant/property owner is seeking a new PUD layout that would consists of detached
units, built and managed as a townhome project, often referred to as “detached
townhomes”.
PUD Concept Review Criteria. The Zoning Ordinance was recently amended to revise
the process for PUD review. The first stage consists of an informal Concept Plan review
which is separate from the formal PUD application, which will follow this Concept
Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as
follows:
(1) Purpose and Intent
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to
provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non-
residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more
creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and
marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a process that results in a
development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable
through the conventional zoning district. The City reserves the right to
deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re-apply under the
standard applicable zoning district.
PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows:
(a) PUD Concept Proposal
Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as
applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the
applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present
it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work
session, as scheduled by the Community Development Department. The
purpose of the Concept Proposal is to:
Joint City Council/Planning Commission Agenda – 10/27/14
3
Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration
between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City
Council;
Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a
requirement for extensive engineering and other plans;
Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the
proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and
review.
The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the
proposed land use, and identify potential issues that may guide the City’s later
consideration of a full PUD application. The Concept Proposal review includes notice to
area property owners, but is not a public hearing. The City Council and Planning
Commission meet in joint session to provide feedback to the developer, and may include
an opportunity for informal public comment as they deem appropriate.
For this proposal, the primary considerations evident at this point in the process would
likely include the following elements:
a. Note that a significant amount of the underlying property to this replat belongs to the
existing Sunset Ponds III Homeowners Association rather than Paxmar, requiring
cooperation in subsequent applications, and eventual transfer from the Association to
Paxmar. This area is the lots surrounding the townhome area, which is also covered
in the majority by drainage and utility easements. The Association is not
participating in this request for Concept review..
b. Change in land use from attached to detached units.
c. Reduction in overall density from 52 units to 44 units over an area of approximately 7
acres, about 5.5 acres of buildable area excluding right of way.
d. Occupancy of the lots by smaller single family detached units, generally narrower
than commonly available on wider lots, with the majority of the building front
occupied by garage.
e. Small single family lots, averaging about 5,855 square feet, as small as 3,822 square
feet.
f. Maintenance of grounds under private ownership, rather than association ownership,
an issue that can arise on small lot developments.
g. Management and abandonment of excess utility connections in the streets.
h. Vacation of noted drainage and utility easements to create proposed lots
i. Management of stormwater on small lots.
j. Snowplowing of streets with significant areas of driveway cuts due to narrow parcels
of 40 feet in width, which can be complicated by private driveway clearing in narrow
spaces.
k. Address engineering concerns including:
1. Sewer and water services for each proposed lot should be contained entirely within the
property lines of the lot it is serving. The three services labeled as “B” on the concept
Joint City Council/Planning Commission Agenda – 10/27/14
4
plan extend from the main in the street through the adjacent property’s drainage and
utility easement before extending to the lot it serves. Since the property owner maintains
the services from the home to the main in the street, the property owner would have to
enter the adjacent property’s yard to replace or repair the service if a problem arises,
which may create an ownership/encroachment issue.
2. The applicant should demonstrate how all utility services, public and private (i.e. gas,
phone, electric), will serve each home given the limited space between each proposed
home. This may be an issue if the utilities will extend along the side yard. Adequate
space should be provided to repair these services if there ever is a need
3. Verify location of services lines with ties and as-builts. It may to beneficial to review
sewer televising tapes to determine exact location of sewer service stub as well.
l. Other issues raised by staff or city officials.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
No official action is taken at the Concept Review. As noted above, the Planning
Commission and City Council should provide feedback to the developer that will help
guide their formal PUD application.
C. STAFF RECOMMNDATION
No formal staff recommendation is made on the Concept Proposal.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Aerial Parcel Image
B. Application
C. Applicant Narrative
D. Concept Subject Plat Area
E. Sketch Plans for Lot Configuration and Utility Service
F. Density and Area Calculations
G. Home Image Illustrations
H. Home Plans