Watertown City Council

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Watertown City Council"

Rosanna Hoover
5 years ago
Views:

City of Watertown Watertown City Council 2/14/2017 Agenda Item: Riverpointe Subdivision 2 nd Replat Request for Action: Sketch Plan Department: Planning Request for Action Request: Paxmar, LLC

1 City of Watertown Watertown City Council 2/14/2017 Agenda Item: Riverpointe Subdivision 2 nd Replat Request for Action: Sketch Plan Department: Planning Request for Action Request: Paxmar, LLC (Applicant) requests that the City consider the following actions for the property commonly known as Riverpointe Subdivision in the City of Watertown: a. Sketch Plan Review Property/Site Information: The subject property is located on Riverpointe Road along the east side of State Highway 25 near the south end of the City and just north of CSAH 122. The property is currently partially developed and was initially subdivided to accommodate attached townhomes and twin homes. The property has the following site characteristics: Property Information: Riverpointe Subdivision Zoning: PUD-RP Planned Unit Development Riverpointe Comprehensive Plan: Medium Density Residential Acreage: 7.0 acres Site Location

2 Background: The applicant would like the City to consider repurposing a portion of the subject property to allow the construction of detached single family homes rather than attached multi-family buildings as originally approved under the Development Agreement and the Zoning Ordinance. The property known as Riverpointe was initially developed in At that time, it was anticipated that the entire development would accommodate attached multi-family buildings (both twin homes and townhomes). The property was platted and designed to accommodate 26 attached twin homes, 8 attached townhomes and 24 back to back attached townhomes. All the requisite infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, utilities) initially planned for the development have been installed. Due to a reported change in the market, only 6 buildings were constructed housing 20 units. The balance of the existing lots and Outlots have remained vacant since the initial development. The applicant is proposing to replat 30 multi-family lots (which would accommodate 50 units) and convert them into 39 single-family lots. If the Applicant moves forward with its proposed plan after the informal Sketch Plan Review Process, the Applicant will have to make the necessary applications, including filing for preliminary and final plat approval, requesting a zoning text amendment, and approval of any negotiated amendment to the Development Agreement. Part and parcel of that would be City Council consideration of amending the PUD-RP zoning district to allow single family homes in this area. The City will also need to consider approval of the proposed re-platting of this property to allow the 30 lots (4 lots would have housed 24 back to back attached townhomes) to be converted into 39 single family lots. The property is currently guided in the comprehensive plan as medium density residential with a net density of units per acre. The proposed re-platting and development of the remaining lots would decrease the density from the approved 7.1 units per acre to the proposed 5.6 units per acre. This net density would comply with the existing comprehensive plan. The proposed single family home development would continue to have common open spaces surrounding each home and be association maintained. This type of association maintained single family produce is offered in the recently converted Tuscany Hills Subdivision and not currently offered anywhere else in the City. All common areas would be maintained by the association. The proposed single family lots would be approximately 4,000 SF in overall area. The applicant is proposing to utilize 20 foot front yard, 5 foot side yard and 5 foot rear yard setbacks. These setbacks would allow for the construction of the proposed homes along with a deck area in the rear of the home. The original Riverpointe Development incorporated architectural standards that were relevant for that type of attached product initially proposed. The proposed repurposing of this property to single-family would potentially cause the architectural standards to be reconsidered. The applicant has not provided the City with information relating to the proposed types of materials or architectural standards. Staff did discuss the architectural standards and building materials with the applicant in initial meetings. Staff is seeking feedback from the City Council relating to the utilization of architectural details and materials that would complement the existing buildings. Sketch Plan Review City Code provides for an informal Sketch Plan Review Process, prior to the filing of any formal applications for decision by the City Council. The Applicant s submission of a sketch plan does not constitute formal filing of a preliminary plat. Under 52.61(e), the City Council may review the sketch plan. This informal review is advisory only and does not constitute a decision nor is it binding on the City Council. Staff has completed a review of the development and related site improvements. The plans generally comply with the City requirements pertaining to new development. There are several comments that have not been

3 fully resolved during the staff review of this project. Recommended revisions will be requested to be made by the applicant prior to the submittal of the preliminary and final plat. Staff has provided the following breakdown of important sketch plan review related components: Building Design The applicant has not formally proposed architectural standards or the types of building materials with this application. Following direction provided by the City, additional details will be required. The applicant did provide the City with conceptual home designs at the Planning Commission Meeting which are attached to this report. Site Design The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing site design which includes the roads, sidewalks and general configuration. It should be noted that there are no sidewalks proposed in front of those lots located in Block 1, Lots The City may want to require the installation of a sidewalk in front of these lots in addition to what was previously installed. Utilities, Storm Water, & Grading The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing utilities that were installed for the original development. Some of the existing water and sewer connections will be closed off and not used by the developer. Similarly, there are several lots (Block 2, Lots 1-12) that will require individual sewer services to be installed versus a common system. The City has reviewed the utilities, storm water and grading plans and provided additional comments (see review letter prepared by Bolton & Menk and dated January 13, Landscaping and Tree Preservation The applicant would be required to meet the City s landscape ordinance requirements of two trees per lot. The requisite landscape does not appear to be shown on the proposed sketch plat. The applicant is proposing to install supplemental landscaping between the existing back to back attached townhomes and the proposed new single family homes on Lots 1-3, Block 2. The overall development includes extensive existing landscaping along TH 25. This landscaping will remain intact and will not be impacted by the proposed development. Planning Commission Discussion/Public Comments: Planning Commissioners reviewed the sketch plan and asked questions of staff and the applicants. Commissioners asked staff for clarification on the type and location of the existing versus proposed lots. Staff clarified that there were three types of products originally proposed within this development. Commissioners asked the applicants for the general price range of the proposed single family detached homes. The applicant noted that they anticipated the homes to range between $200 and $280K. Commissioners noted that the applicant provided the City with general house plans for several different types of homes. Commissioners asked for clarification on which types of homes would fit onto which lots within the development. The applicant noted that lots 6 and 7, Block 3 could accommodate the more traditionally designed three car garage style home. The type of home that would fit on a potential lot is delineated by the lighter and darker colored homes shown on the sketch plan. Generally, the darker homes represent those lots that can only accommodate a two-car garage. Commissioners confirmed that all lots within the proposed development would be multi-level homes. Commissioners discussed the width of the existing private streets that are located adjacent to TH 25. It was noted that the width is approximately 22 feet. The City heard from an array of residents that live in the adjacent Riverpointe twin and town homes. Residents asked the City to maintain a buffer between the existing homes

4 and the proposed development. Residents also commented that the type of homes proposed was not consistent with the existing homes and that no single level homes were proposed. Commissioners noted that they would like the applicant to consider additional floor plans and architectural styles for the proposed homes. Commissioners noted that they would further review the proposed architectural standards if the preliminary plat is brought forward in the future. No formal recommendation was made by the Planning Commission. Summary: The City will need to determine if the repurposing of this development from attached twin, townhome and back to back townhomes will be in keeping with the character of the surrounding properties and the City s comprehensive plan. The association maintained twin and back to back attached townhomes to the south of the proposed redevelopment area were constructed with the anticipation of the original plan being realized. The proposed layout could be considered to establish a reasonable transition between the adjacent single-family housing to the north and the existing multi-family buildings to the south. A text amendmentto the PUD-RP zoning district,, which the Applicant has not yet applied for, would be required in order to allow the proposed single family homes. The proposal is generally in keeping with the City s Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The City Council is being asked to consider sketch plan for this property. During the sketch plan review process, matters pertaining to land use, access, circulation, lot layout, building layout, parks, buffering and conceptual drainage design are analyzed relative to existing natural and man-made conditions, the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Subdivision Code. Additional details pertaining to the building architecture, building materials, construction details and similar landscape, drainage and grading details will be reviewed and considered during the preliminary plat review process. The City Council will, based on such sketch plan, unofficially advise the developer of the extent to which the proposed subdivision conforms to this chapter and will discuss possible modifications. Based on the information presented in this report and by the applicant, staff is seeking discussion and feedback from the City Council relating to the requested sketch plan application. This informal review is advisory only and does not constitute a decision of the City Council.

5 CITY OF WATERTOWN Sketch Plan Application PROJECT NAME: Riverpointe 2 nd Addition (Revised PUD APPLICANT NAME: Paxmar, LLC PHONE: FAX: x ADDRESS: 3495 Northdale Blvd NW; Suite 210 Coon Rapids, MN SKETCH PLAN INTENT: The Sketch plan process is intended to provide an opportunity for the applicant to consult early with Staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council before preparing a Preliminary Plat. During the Sketch Plan review process, matters pertaining to land use, access, circulation, lot layout, building layout, parks, buffering and conceptual drainage design are analyzed relative to existing natural and man-made conditions, the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Subdivision Code. The Sketch Plan is to be prepared by a landscape architect or land planner and must further the Community s goal of a pedestrian friendly, walkable neighborhood with defined public and private areas. Submission and approval of a sketch plan shall not be construed as a lot density or unit number guarantee by the City Council. Changes to the site layout may be necessary to incorporate subdivision, zoning code requirements and City comments. INSTRUCTIONS: All of the items listed on this checklist are required to be shown on the Sketch Plat drawing and on related attachments. Any checklist items that are missing must be added for an application to be considerd complete. Once all items are shown, the drawings and related attachments may be submitted (along with a copy of this completed checklist) to the City Planner. For specific information related to setbacks, lot area and width, etc., refer to the City of Watertown Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The City staff reserves the right to determine if a submittal is complete. The Sketch Plat will not be placed on the Planning Commission's agenda until City staff has accepted a complete submittal, including reciept of fees. A determination of completeness shall be made within fifteen (15) business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within fifteen (15) business days of application. Sketch Plans must be developed by Landscape Architect or Land Planners/ Designers. Received By: Date Plat is delivered to City Hall: Date Plat is Deemed Complete/Officially Filed:

6 Sketch Plat Application 2 A COPY OF THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH ALL OTHER REQUIRED DRAWINGS AND RELATED ITEMS. SKETCH PLAT CHECKLIST SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION PROVIDED: YES NO (All Sheets) x 1. Maximum Drawing Size (all sheets): 24" by 36" x 2. North Arrow x 3. Scale of drawing (1"= 50' for small plats, 1 100' for large plats) SECTION II: NARRATIVE INFORMATION (must be on same sheet as illustrations) x 4. Name of Development x 5. Name of Property Owner, including address x 6. Name of Applicant and exact interest of Applicant in the Subject Property x 7. Name of Preparer, including Address x 8. Present Zoning of the site (including Flood Fringe, if applicable) x 9. All proposed uses for the site and buildings x 10. Location Map of subject property within City x 11. Total Area of the Site SECTION III: REQUIRED ILLUSTRATIONS x 12. Plat boundary shown with a heavy line x 13. All lots numbered (outlots, if any, designated with letters) x 14. Contours n/a 15. Contour of 100-Year Flood Elevation, if applicable x 16. All existing easements (public & private) x 17. street, alley rights-of-way, buildings x 18. drainage courses and streams x 19. Outline of existing trees and wooded areas n/a 20. Proposed Easements shown; type of easement indicated exg 21. Sidewalks, both sides of public streets YES NO exg 22. Eight-foot wide trail shown exg 23. Streets: a. Street pattern b. Width of all rights-of-way shown 309 Lewis Avenue S. PO Box 279 (952)

7 Sketch Plat Application 3 c. Width of all streets shown NOTE: Please note any items from this checklist that are not being provided (except those which do not apply to this project and are marked not applicable), with an explanation as to why they are not being provided. Attach a separate sheet if necessary. SECTION IV: NOTICES Notice of Meeting Attendance: In order for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider any request, the applicant or a designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter will be tabled until the next available agenda. Notice of additional fees: In addition to the fees outlined in the City of Watertown Fee Schedule, all applicants are hereby advised that the City of Watertown retains engineering, legal, and building consultants who will be involved in the development review process. All costs resulting from the review of development applications by the City staff and it s consultants will be paid by the applicant. These fees will be deducted from the escrow deposit provided. I, the undersigned, certify that the information on this application, to the best of my knowledge, is true and correct. I further certify that I have a legal interest in the property/properties in question, attaching a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner s Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), and/or that I am legally able to represent all other persons or entities (if any) with interest in this property. I am able to furnish proof of all such interest to the City of Watertown upon request. I acknowledge that all costs associated with this development will be my responsibility. Notice of approval: Approval of a sketch plan does not constitute a guarantee for the number of units or general density as proposed. SECTION V: SIGNATURE Signature of Applicant Signature of Owner (or Owners agent) 12/20/16 Date 12/20/16 Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact the City Planner for a copy of the staff report and agenda, which will be available two days prior to the meeting. 309 Lewis Avenue S. PO Box 279 (952)

8 Concept Sketch Plan Riverpointe 2nd Replat Watertown, MN CONCEPT DATA LOCATION MAP Zoning: PUD Gross Site Area: Approved Townhomes: Trail site 7.0 ac 50 units - Twinhomes/Rowhomes - Back-Back Townhomes 26 homes 24 homes Proposed SF Homes: 39 homes - 2 Car Homes - 3 Car Homes 7 homes 32 homes Riverpointe PUD Standards: *Front Setback: *Side Setbacks: *Rear Setbacks: *Measured from platted lot envelope Note: Original platted lot envelope honored; internal lot lines to be replatted as shown. Trail Concept Site Plan Standards: Front Setback to public R/W: Min. driveway length o private drives: Setback to Hwy 25 (principal bldg): Mininum distance b/tw buildings: Landscaping Platted Lot Envelope Utilities Twinhome Twinhome Twinhome Twinhome CL 13 CL 7 Monument Sign Back-Back Townhome 4 3 CL 22 Landscape Bu ering Prepared for: Phone (952) Fax (952) Toll Free (888) Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN westwoodps.com Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Paxmar, LLC 3495 Northdale Blvd NW Coon Rapids, MN /19/2017 Proposed Density: 5.6 un/ac Aerial photography from State of Minnesota; Topography from record grading plans Pond un/ac 39 units / 7.0 ac Trail 3 21 Approved Density: 50 units / 7.0 ac as shown Berm Landscape Bu ering Supplemental Landscape Bu ering OUTLOT A Back-Back Townhome

ZONING & LAND USE APPLICATION

City of Maple Plain 5050 Independence St P.O. Box 97 Maple Plain, MN 55359 Office: (763) 479-0515 Fax: (763) 479-0519 ZONING & LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant Name Company, if applicable