Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-28 Joint Board MINStillwater City and Town Joint Board February 28, 2007 Present: David Johnson and Linda Countryman, Stillwater Township, Ken Harycki and Wally Milbrandt, City of Stillwater Staff present: Bill Turnblad, City of Stillwater Community Development Director, and David Magnuson, Stillwater City Attorney Mr. Johnson called the meeting to order. He suggested the first order of business be the election of a chair and vice chair for the coming year. Mr. Milbrandt nominated David Johnson as chair and Ken Harycki as vice chair. Ms. Countryman seconded motion; motion passed unanimously. Approval of minutes: Ms. Countryman, seconded by Mr. Milbrandt, moved to approve the minutes. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS Case No. 07-07. Final approval of Phase I development of Millbrook, a residential subdivision on TH 96 west of Neal Avenue, including final plat approval for 59 single-family homes in Phase I; final PUD approval for Phase I; a PUD amendment relating to townhome design; and any variances related thereto. US Home Corporation, applicant. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the request. He noted the final plat is substantially similar to the preliminary plat previously reviewed by the Joint Board. He reviewed the Phase I plat and improvements and highlighted the 14 proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Turnblad spoke to the proposed changes, specifically the change in the townhome design from a brownstone, row home concept to a back-to-back design, as well as design changes to the housing products in the Cottage Residential and Traditional Residential districts. Regarding the requested townhome change, Mr. Turnblad pointed out that either design meets City code; the major difference is in the streetscape. He also noted that the number of units remains the same. Mr. Turnblad also reviewed the proposed changes to the design of the single-family homes. In the preliminary plat, the single-family homes in the CR zoning district were one-story homes, with walkouts. In the final plat, the single-family homes in the CR zoning district are two-story homes, with lower roofline, and walkout. Mr. Turnblad noted the major difference is that the homes would appear as three-story structures as viewed from across South Twin Lake or Brown’s Creek, although the roofline is dramatically reduced and the overall height remains the same at about 28 feet. It also was pointed out that initially, there were seven distinct designs in the single-family homes in the TR zoning district; now there are basically four different TR zone models. Mr. Turnblad concluded that the final plat and PUD are in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat and concept PUD. Mr. Magnuson pointed out that as no variances are required, the Joint Board’s function is review and comment on the plat and PUD proposals. Mr. Johnson opened the public hearing. Jay Liberacki, Lennar Corp., and Teresa St. Amant, corporate design, were present representing the applicant. Mr. Liberacki told the Board the developer had hosted a neighborhood meeting and had offered to meet with neighbors at their homes if they were unable to attend. He stated two neighbors had attended the meeting, Orville Johnson and Ed Otis. Mr. Liberacki spoke of the changes in the housing market, which has necessitated the requested changes to the products. Ms. St. Amant reviewed the architecture of the housing products. Ms. St. Amant noted that this developer pre-plats all of their single-family neighborhoods to make sure there is a variety of home elevations and colors, as well as variety Stillwater City and Town Joint Board February 28, 2007 2 of color palettes in the building materials. As proposed, there are four floor plans with four different facades, resulting in 16 different looks. Ms. St. Amant pointed out that the two-story single-family homes in the CR district, as proposed, enables the homes to be of a smaller footprint than the originals, increasing the rear-yard setbacks and space between homes, while slightly reducing the height of the homes. Mr. Liberacki reviewed the site and views from the existing three homes on Neal Avenue across Twin Lake, which are 1,700 feet away from the homes in Millbrook. Ms. St. Amant also reviewed the proposed change in townhome design and architectural details/materials; Mr. Liberacki noted that the plan includes plantings of both trees and hedge/shrubbery. Ms. Countryman asked about the price range of the townhomes; Ms. St. Amant responded that the units have been selling for between $220,000-$240,000. Ms. St. Amant pointed out that the change from the three-story brownstone design to the back-to-back design has enabled the elimination of the stairs from the first level to street level. Mr. Liberacki again spoke to the changing market, which also has affected the townhome market. Orville Johnson, 8820 Neal Ave. N., noted that as neighbors across Twin Lake they will never see the front side of the homes and called for creativity/variation on the rear elevations. Orville Johnson also said he felt there is a market for one-story versus two-story homes. Ms. St. Amant responded that the plans are four-sided architecture and she noted that customers will individualize their homes with the addition of decks, porches and other improvements which will provide different looks to the rear elevations. No other comments were received, and the public hearing portion of the consideration was closed. Mr. Johnson noted that the Board’s responsibility is review and comment. Mr. Johnson pointed out that from the Township’s perspective, there is significant sensitivity to the visual impact from Highway 96. He said he felt the developer has made reasonable effort to be sensitive to the Township’s comments on that issue, and said he felt the proposed (townhome) change provides a better feel from the highway view. Mr. Milbrandt expressed his disappointment at the last-hour changes in both the single-family and townhomes and the loss of single-level living opportunities. Mr. Milbrandt also said he did not think the change in townhome design was an improvement when viewed from the highway, suggesting with the numerous curb cuts, it looks much like Settler’s Glen. Mr. Harycki spoke of a concern about the possible lack of variety of house styles in the single-family neighborhood; Mr. Milbrandt agreed with the lack of variety, noting there are only four house designs. Mr. Liberacki noted that the development is viewed as a family neighborhood and pointed out that the single-level design has not been successful and has been removed from their offerings. Mr. Johnson suggested that the single-level option provided a diversity of appeal and provided the opportunity of having grandparents integrated into a community. Mr. Johnson suggested that the preliminary plan provided for the potential for diversity, while now the proposal is essentially a younger/family-oriented neighborhood only. Mr. Harycki said he understood the reasoning behind the change in townhome concept, increasing the square-footage, but said the design doesn’t seem to be unique or different from what is available in other areas of the City. Mr. Milbrandt pointed out that as there are no code issues, the challenge will be for the developer to offer a variety of housing stock when the Planning Commission next considers this matter. Ms. Countryman suggested the change in the townhome design is a practical consideration; Mr. Milbrandt reiterated his position that the proposed back-to-back townhome design will be less attractive than the brownstones due to the number of curb cuts and cars that will be visible from the highway. Mr. Johnson asked if there would be some way to bring the front look around to the end view of the townhomes, which would enhance the view from the street. Ms. St. Amant Stillwater City and Town Joint Board February 28, 2007 3 pointed out that bringing the front around to the side would change the entire floor plan of the home, a plan that has been very successful. Ms. Countryman said this proposal appears to be a medium fit between Liberty and Settler’s Glen in the marketplace; however, she said practical considerations should be given to the aging population and urged that be taken into consideration in any “redraws.” Ms. St. Amant responded that buyers are not willing to pay for the additional cost per square-foot for a single-level home versus two-story. No action was taken. Case No. 07-09 A preliminary Planned Unit Development for a 50-lot development on 25.28 acres at 12525 75th St. N. and 12620 and 12550 72nd St. N.; preliminary plat creating 50 single- family lots; and zoning map amendment to rezone the property from AP, Agricultural Preservation, to TR, Traditional Residential, and LR, Lakeshore Residential; and any variances related thereto. Ed Dulak, Elite Development, applicant. Mr. Turnblad reviewed the project site and noted the proposed layout and number of lots is the same as the Board had reviewed previously. He stated the reason the project has stalled is the fact that the majority of the site is within 1,000 feet of Long Lake and therefore the PUD is subject to the DNR requirements for minimum lot size/open space. Moreover, the DNR had been slow to respond to the open space issue. He noted that purchase of the DNR’s adjacent Jackson Wildlife Management Area is being proposed as a way to satisfy the open space requirement. Because the DNR has not completed its review, Mr. Turnblad said it is recommended that the Board table action until its March 28 meeting. He pointed out that progress is being made regarding the possible purchase of the Jackson area, with enabling legislation introduced in both houses of the state Legislature as well as discussions regarding a potential purchase price. Mr. Johnson questioned the value of acquiring the Jackson area when it is already open space and counting that space as a way of enabling the developer to increase the project density. Mr. Johnson pointed out that when the project was first considered, it was suggested that an active park be developed along 75th Street. Mr. Milbrandt pointed out that given the location between Northland Park and Rutherford School, there is not a great need for another large active, park in this area. Mr. Harycki noted that the City does not control t he use of Rutherford School. Mr. Milbrandt expressed a concern about the layout of the development creating another potential cut-through for north-south traffic. Mr. Turnblad spoke to one advantage of acquiring the Jackson Wildlife Management Area -- being able to complete a section of the City’s master trail plan; under DNR ownership, a trail cannot not be constructed on the property. As this was advertised as a public hearing, Mr. Johnson opened the hearing. Jay Liberacki, Lennar Corp., spoke of his experience with the Millbrook development and stated he thought it was City policy that the City takes its 10 percent for parkland and requires that the 10 percent dedication requirement for parkland be generally usable property. Mr. Liberacki suggested this development offers an opportunity to expand upon Rutherford School facilities and is an opportunity to build an interdevelopmental relationship with the school district. Mr. Liberacki encouraged the City to stick by its policy, given the precedent set with Millbrook. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Milbrandt pointed out the City’s park dedication policy provides the City with the option of accepting cash in lieu of land to meet the 10 percent dedication requirement. Mr. Johnson reiterated his position that there is enough of a shortage of active recreational opportunities that active play areas should be required wherever possible. Mr. Johnson pointed out that there will Stillwater City and Town Joint Board February 28, 2007 4 be likely be 100 kids in this neighborhood in need of a place to play; he stated he thought it would be very shortsighted not to require an active park element in this plan if possible. Ms. Countryman also spoke to the shortage of active play space. Mr. Harycki pointed out that Rutherford School facilities cannot be included in consideration of park requirements for this development, as the City does not control the use of those fields. No action was taken. It was agreed that March 28 would be the next Board meeting date. Meeting was adjourned on a motion by Mr. Harycki. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary