Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda 05-02-2017 (Joint Meeting) AGENDA SPECIAL/JOINT MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 2nd, 2017 - 5:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, Lucas Wynne City Council: Brian Stumpf, Jim Davidson, Bill Fair, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Jacob Thunander, John Rued 1. Call to Order 2. Concept Proposal for amendment to Planned Unit Development for detached townhome lots in an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) District at Carlisle Village 2nd Addition. Applicant: Carlisle Village, LLC 3. Adjournment NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. __________________________________________________________________ 415 0 Olson Memorial Highway, Ste. 320, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.957.1100 Website: www.nacplanning.com MEMORANDUM TO: Angela Schumann Monticello Planning Commission, Monticello City Council FROM: Stephen Grittman DATE: April 26, 2017 RE: Monticello – Carlisle Village PUD Amendment – Concept Review NAC FILE NO: 191.07 – 17.11 PLANNING CASE NO: 2017 - 012 Application and Project Description. This memorandum reviews the elements of a proposed amendment to the Carlisle Village Planned Unit Development. The proposal is made by Paxmar Development, as Carlisle Village LLC for the remaining undeveloped townhouse area along Gateway Circle in the north portion of the Carlisle Village neighborhood. The property lies east of Carlisle Village’s main corridor, Gateway Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Single and Two Family Residence District. A total of 8 townhouse units were built in this area as a part of the original Carlisle Village PUD. An additional 17 townhouse lots were final platted, and up to 92 units were planned in total. The remaining 67 unplatted townhouse lots were located in a large outlot to the east of the subject property. The current proposal is for a PUD Concept Plan review, which is not a formal zoning application, but is intended to provide the applicant an opportunity to get City feedback on a potential development proposal prior to more formal zoning review and the extensive supporting materials that such reviews require. The Planning Commission and City Council will have the opportunity to review the project, ask questions of the proposer, and provide comment as to the issues and elements raised by the project. The neighboring property owners have been notified of the meeting, but it is not a formal public hearing. This memorandum provides an overview of the project, and will serve as an outline for the discussion. No formal approval or denial is offered for a Concept Review. 2 The original Carlisle Village development was platted and processed as a Planned Unit Development by Conditional Use Permit, comprised of approximately 240 mixed residential units developed as traditional single family homes, small -lot single family detached homes, and attached townhomes. The most southerly portion of the project was designed to preserve much of the existing woodlands. In concept, the project was envisioned to be a “step-up” development for all housing types. Over the years, there have been a few amendments to the project PUD approvals. The majority of the detached areas have been built out, with only a few exceptions in the large-lot single family portion of the project. Just eight of the townhouses were completed, along with only a portion of the loop road serving what was to be as many as 92 units. The new property owner is seeking a revised PUD layout that would consists of detached units, built and managed as a townhome project, often referred to as “detached townhomes”. A similar concept was implemented – currently under construction – in the remaining portion of the Sunset Ponds development. One of the significant differences between the two projects was that Sunset Ponds was generally conceived as an entry-level project, whereas Carlisle Village was envisioned as more of a move-up neighborhood. PUD Concept Review Criteria. Since the time Carlisle Village was developed as a Conditional Use PUD project, the Zoning Ordinance 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 the Concept Review step. The Ordinance identifies the purpose of Planned Unit Development as follows: (1) Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district is to provide greater flexibility in the development of neighborhoods and non- residential areas in order to maximize public values and achieve more creative development outcomes while remaining economically viable and marketable. This is achieved by undertaking a process that results in a development outcome exceeding that which is typically achievable through the conventional zoning district. The City reserves the right to deny the PUD rezoning and direct the developer to re-apply under the standard applicable zoning district. PUD Concept reviews are to proceed as follows: (a) PUD Concept Proposal Prior to submitting formal development stage PUD, preliminary plat (as applicable) and rezoning applications for the proposed development, the applicant may, at its option, prepare an informal concept plan and present it to the Planning Commission and City Council at a concurrent work session, as scheduled by the 3 Community Development Department. The purpose of the Concept Proposal is to: 1. Provide preliminary feedback on the concept plan in collaboration between the applicant, general public, Planning Commission, and City Council; 2. Provide a forum for public comment on the PUD prior to a requirement for extensive engineering and other plans. 3. Provide a forum to identify potential issues and benefits of the proposal which can be addressed at succeeding stages of PUD design and review. The intent of Concept Proposal review is to consider the general acceptability of the proposed land use, and identify potential issues that may guide the City’s later consideration of a full PUD application. The 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. The proposal consists of the following changes: o Convert the 5 townhouse lots in Block 1 to 4 detached unit lots. o Convert the 3 townhouse lots in Block 2, along with a portion of the common property outlot, into 3 detached unit lots. o Convert the four townhouse lots in Block 3 to 3 detached units lots. This conversion would lie next to an existing 3-unit townhouse building. o Convert the 5 townhouse lots in Block 5 to 4 detached unit lots. This conversion would lie next to an existing 5-unit townhouse building. For this proposal, the primary considerations evident at this point in the process would likely include the following elements: a. Note that the conversion of the lots of Blocks 3 and 5 sit within the underlying common property belonging to the existing Villas on Gateway Homeowners Association rather than Paxmar, requiring cooperation in subsequent applications, and eventual inclusion of any changed units into the Association, since the driveways to each unit lie within common property. At this stage, the Association is not participating in the request for Concept review. b. Change in land use from attached to detached units. c. Acceptability of mixing existing attached units with new, architectural ly distinct detached units side by side. d. Issues related to development of the remainder of the originally planned project in a consistent manner. e. Reduction in overall density from 19 units to 17 units over an area of approximately 1.5 acres of buildable area excluding right of way. 4 f. 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. This note relates to how these detached units may compare to those in the area along Gateway Drive – originally zoned as “R-2A” under the previous zoning ordinance. This note would also relate to how the detached units compare to the previously approved and developed attached units. g. Architectural compatibility of the proposed units with the intent of the PUD, and of the Carlisle Village concept as a “step-up” residential neighborhood. h. Small individual lots relying on common maintenance for driveways and access to the public street (Gateway Circle for 14 of the units, Bakken Street for 3 units). i. Address Engineering concerns including: 1. Water service disconnections will be required if existing water services are not utilized. 2. Wetland Conservation Act documentation for a no loss determination has been approved for the created wetlands on the site. 3. Review of stormwater management requirements will be evaluated with the plan submittal to determine if the existing pond adjacent to the development meets City and MPCA’s current requirements. j. Other issues raised by staff or city officials. Summary. As noted, the Planning Commission and City Council provide comment and feedback at the Concept Review level. City officials should identify any areas of concern that would require amendment to avoid the potential for eventual denial, as well as any elements of the concept that the City would find essential for eventual approval. While there are several details to incorporate as the project moves forward, the most significant appear to be how the proposed detached units fit into the City’s intent for the Carlisle Village project, and whether the changes to both the unit design and building architecture of the proposed units is consistent with the project vision. The notes listed above acknowledge that a significant amount of detail will be added as the project proceeds to a more advanced stage of review. EXHIBITS: A. Aerial Site Image B. Applicant Narrative C. Concept Site Plan D. Concept Elevations E. Concept Floor Plans F. Carlisle Village and Carlisle Village 2nd Addition Final Plat G. Carlisle Village Preliminary Plat Pax mar, LLC. - R eq uest fo r Amen dment to P UD for D eta ched To wnh ome L ots in a n R -2 District Lot 1-5, Block 1; Lot 1-3, Block 2; Lot 1-4, Block 3; Lot 1-5, Block 5 Carlisle Village 2nd Addition C reated by : C ity of Monticello 385 ft PAXMAR© 3495 Northdale Blvd. NW, Suite 210 Coon Rapids, MN 55448 (763)753-6176 3/20/2017 Ms. Angela Schuman Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: PUD Concept/Amendment Carlisle Village 2nd Addition Dear Ms. Schuman, Council, Commissioner and consulting staff: This narrative provides a summary of the proposed scope for Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-3, Block 2; Lots 1-4, Block 3; Lots 1-5 Block 5; and Outlot C of Carlisle Village 2nd Addition. The objective of the amendment is to make 17 attached townhome platted lots into 14 detached townhome lots. This would decrease Density by 2 units/acre. Changes to be made: Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-3, Block 2; and Outlot C would be re-platted to detached Townhome lots, adding 2 driveway accesses to Bakken Street and a utility connection. Lots 1-4, Block 3 would be re-platted to 3 detached Townhome lots, adding 1 driveway access to Bakken Street Lots 1-5, Block 5 would be re-platted to 4 detached Townhome lots Lots are NOT currently part of the Villas at Gateway HOA and the 10 year period to add additional real estate has expired. We are open to joining the existing HOA if the legal means of joining can be accomplished or starting a new HOA. Regardless of which HOA option goes forward, the new units would provide the following: • Lawn maintenance • Snow removal • Lawn irrigation • ARC control • Ability to correct exterior blights or non-conformance Several utility connections would need to be utilized for irrigation or capped/abandoned PAXMAR© 3495 Northdale Blvd. NW, Suite 210 Coon Rapids, MN 55448 (763)753-6176 We are currently aware of a master irrigation system serving the existing units in the Villas HOA. This would need to be mapped/located and some easements given. The front facades of the proposed homes would far exceed the current PUD standards for the existing units. Brick, Stone, Shangles, Accent Trim, shutters, etc. will be utilized to promote varied and aesthetically pleasing front elevations. Paxmar purchased the property from Central Bank in 2011. The property had stalled out and the original developer gave it back to the bank. The intent of the amendment is to replace a less marketable attached product with an in demand detached style townhome. Construction would begin on the homes within 90 days of all entitlements being in place and all units could be full constructed by the end of 2018. In summation, this amendment would do several things: Decrease Density Complete a stalled-out project Increase exterior front elevations standards Increase revenue from property taxes Increase value of surrounding properties Respectfully, Alan Roessler Paxmar Carlisle Village 8th Addition Monticello, MN Concept Sketch Plan 3495 Northdale Blvd NW Coon Rapids, MN 55448 Phone (952) 937-5150 Fax (952) 937-5822 Toll Free (888) 937-5150 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Existing Monument Sign Existing Platted Lot Envelope Replat all internal Lot Lines in Outlot C Existing Trail Existing Rowhomes Existing Pond Existing Pond 3 1 Paxmar, LLC Prepared for: CONCEPT DATA Aerial photography from State of Minnesota; Topography from record grading plans Existing Zoning: R-2 Gross Site Area: 1.5 ac (Outlot C, and Blocks 1-3 & 5 = 65,167 sf ) Approved Townhomes: 17 units Proposed SF Homes: 14 homes - 2 Car Homes 4 homes - 3 Car Homes 9 homes Concept Site Plan Standards: Front Setback to public R/W: 20 Side setback: 5/5 (10 total btw bldgs) Setback to outlots: 0 Note: Original platted lot envelope honored within Outlots B & D; internal lot lines & Outlot C to be replatted as shown. Approved Density: 11.3 un/ac 17 units / 1.5 ac Proposed Density: 9.3 un/ac 14 units / 1.5 ac Existing Legal Description: Lots 1-5, Block 1, Lots 1-3, Block 2, Lots 1-4, Block 3, Lots 1-5, Block 5, and Outlot C, CARLISLE VILLAGE 2nd ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Wright County, Minnesota. Existing Rowhomes 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 1 Existing Trail 1 2 3 OUTLOT C 000821003-17-2017 N050100 150 LOCATION MAP site OUTLOT A 1 5 4 6 Proposed Landscape Buer Existing Storm Sewer (typ.) Existing Sanitary Line (typ.) Existing Water Line (typ.) Existing Platted Lot Envelope