HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-07-22 Joint Board Packetter
THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA
Meeting Notice
Stillwater City and Town Joint Board
City Council Chambers
216 North Fourth Street
Stillwater MN 55082
7 p.m.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
3.01 Case No. 09-21. A amendment to the residential planned unit
development for house plans and site plan revisions located in the
Millbrook Subdivision. Joe Jablonski, U.S. Home Corporation, applicant.
3.02 Case No. 09-26. A final plat for Outlot D, Millrook 2"d Addition for 16
residential units (Millbrook 3rd Addition). U.S. Home Corporation,
applicant.
4. NEW BUSINESS
4.01 Discussion on Bergmann retail sales,
4.02 Liberty Village Signage
CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082
PHONE: 651-430-8800 • WEBSITE: www.d.stillwater.mn.us
TO:
DATE:
REQUEST:
APPLICANT:
' Iwa ta
r
6' A T H r I A'_ !, 0! P, ; N N f_ Q U I 4,
Stillwater Township/City of Stillwater Joint Board
July 15, 2009
CASE NO.: 09-21
Millbrook PUD Amendment related to new house plans and lot
layout changes.
Joe Jablonski, Lennar
LOCATION: South of State Highway 96 (Dellwood Road North) and
approximately 2000 feet east of Manning Ave
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: SFLL - Single Family Large Lot and
SFSL - Single Family Small Lot
ZONING: TR - Traditional Residential and CR- Cottage Residential
MEETING DATE: July 22, 2009
REVIEWED BY: Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner
4
BACKGROUND
Joe Jablonski of Lennar is requesting a PUD amendment in order to add additional
house plans and to revise the lot sizes in the Millbrook Development. Five new house
plans with between 2 to 4 elevations per plan are proposed to be added to the current
mix of eight plans. The lot layout calls for increasing the lot size of the remaining
undeveloped CR lots and decreasing some of the TR lots. The changes would result in
the loss of four CR lots and the gain of two TR lots for an overall decrease of two lots
in the development.
SPECIFIC REQUESTS
A PUD Amendment to the Millbrook PUD to permit five new single-family house
plans and changes to the current lot layout and sizes.
Millbrook PUD Amendment
July 15, 2009
Page 2
DISCUSSION
House Plans
Five new house plans with between 2 to 4 elevations per plan are proposed to be
added to the current mix of eight plans. Each of the new house plans contains three -
car garages. A porch is proposed on the front of the homes to meet the requirement
that the garage be setback six feet from the front of the house. Unlike the previously
approved plans, all of these plans place the garage parallel with or forward of the
main front plane of the home. This has the potential to create a garage dominate
appearance on the homes.
Lot Sizes and Layout
The proposed revised lot layout increased the lot size of the remaining undeveloped
CR lots and decreasing some of the TR lots. The changes would result in the loss of
four CR lots and the gain of two TR lots for an overall decrease of two lots in the
development.
Originally, only two car garages were proposed to be used on the CR lots. The revised
lot sizes would permit Lennar to fit three car garages on all of the remaining
undeveloped lots, including the CR lots.
The adjustments to the lots will require some of the trails to be slightly adjusted. In
most cases, there are no issues with these changes. There is a section of trail north of
White Pine Way that should be adjusted. The proposed traffic calming median on
White Pine Way should be adjusted to the east to align with the new trail location
between Lots 7 and 8 on the north side of White Pine Way. Additionally, the trail
north of Lots 7 and 8 on the north side of White Pine Way should be adjusted to
remove the 90 -degree turns. The proposed adjustments to the other trail segments are
acceptable.
ACTION BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
The City Planning Commission (CPC) held a public hearing and took action on this
request at their June 10, 2009 meeting. The CPC voted 8-0 to recommend approval of
the PUD amendment with the conditions listed below. Specifically, the Commission
recommended approval conditioned that the new house plans for use on the CR lots
and that area B remain unchanged.
Millbrook PUD Amendment
July 15, 2009
Page 3
ALTERNATIVES
As outlined in the orderly annexation agreement, the Joint Planning Board needs to
review and consider changes to official controls effecting development. The Board has
several alternatives that can be considered:
1. If the proposed PUD is found acceptable to the Joint Planning Board, then
the Board should approve the PUD amendment with the following
minimum conditions of approval:
a. The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall
be substantially similar to the plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist,
Inc., and on file in the Community Development Department as
listed in Stillwater City Council Resolution Number 2006-179 except
as amended by the revised concept sketch dated May 8, 2009.
b. The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD worksheet and
submit it to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource's (DNR)
Area Hydrologist prior to submitting an application for a final plan
approval for the lots being revised with this amendment. If the DNR
review results in substantial changes to the PUD Amendment, then
the developer shall resubmit the PUD amendment or review by the
City and Joint Planning Board.
c. The proposed traffic calming median in White Pine Way shall align
with the proposed trail between Lots 7 and 8 on the north side of
White Pine Way as shown on Area B. Additionally, the trail north of
lots 7 and 8 on the north side of White Pine Way as shown on Area B
shall be adjusted to remove the multiple 90 -degree turns.
d. Conditions 3 through 14 in Stillwater City Council Resolution
Number 2006-179 shall remain in effect with this PUD Amendment.
e. Changes to the lots sizes are approved for Area A and C. The lot
sizes for Area B shall remain unchanged.
f. The new house plans shall only be used on the CR lots.
2. If the Joint Planning Board finds that the proposal is not acceptable, then the
Board should deny the requested PUD amendment.
3. If the Joint Planning Board needs additional information to make a decision,
the request could be tabled to a future meeting. The decision deadline for
the request is September 12, 2009. Since the 60 -day deadline has been
extended by City Staff the applicant would need to approve any extension
in writing beyond September 12, 2009.
RECOMMENDATION
Review and make a recommendation to the City Council.
attachments: Applicant's Letter, revised site plan, accompanying material, Resolution
2006-179, Zoning Map for Millbrook, Preliminary Plat for Millbrook.
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-179
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR A USHOMES DEVELOPMENT
LOCATED ON STATE HIGHWAY NO. 96
AND KNOWN AS MILLBROOK
CASE NO. 06-06
WHEREAS, US Homes Corporation made application for approval of a
Preliminary Plat and Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 170 acre project
known as MILLBROOK, said project containing 98 townhomes and 172 single-family
lots; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2006 and April 10, 2006 the Planning Commission
held a public hearing and recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and Concept
PUD with 17 conditions; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2006 the Joint Planning Board considered and
recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat. and Concept FUD with the same 17
conditions as the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on February 27, 2006 and June 26, 2006 the Parks & Recreation
Board considered the proposed trail, sidewalk and park improvements and recommended
approval of the trails, sidewalk and park improvements with 8 conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Preliminary Plat and Concept PUD are consistent with the
City's Ordinances and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Stillwater hereby approves the Preliminary Plat and Concept PUD for MILLBROOK
with the following conditions:
The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall be
substantially similar to the following plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc.,
and on file in the Community Development Department, except as modified
herein:
Site Plan dated 7/21/06
Phasing Plan dated 7/24/06
Buffer Averaging Plan (including trails) - 8 sheets dated 6/26/06
Preliminary Site Map* (Sheets SM2 — SM6) dated 1/17/06
Preliminary Plat (Sheets PP1-7) dated 3/30/06
Final Grading Plan (Sheets GP2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 6) dated 4/12/06
Final Utility Plan (Sheets 2-5) dated 4/12/06
Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheets 1-4) dated 2/1/06
*Except trails to be as shown in Site Plan dated 7/21/06
2. The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD worksheet and submit it to the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resource's (DNR) Area Hydrologist prior to
submitting an application for a final plat for Phase One. If the DNR review
results in substantial changes to the Preliminary Plat or Concept PUD plans, then
the developer shall resubmit the Concept PUD and Preliminary Plat for review by
the City and Joint Planning Board.
3. The trail and sidewalk system shall be constructed substantially the same as
represented in the following plan sets on file with the Community Development
Department:
a. Carnelian Marine Trails —Revised (Sheets CM -1, 2, 3) dated 6-21-06
b. Brown's Creek Trail —Revision 3 (Sheet BC 2b-1) dated 6-26-06
c. Brown's Creek Trail — Revision 2 (Sheet BC 2-2 + 2-3) dated 6-22-06
d. Revised Sidewalk Plan (Sheets SP -1, 2,3) dated 6-21-06
4. All trails shall be paved.
5. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, a blanket easement shall be
provided over the open space outlot on the south side of South Twin Lake for trail
purposes. Should the Carnelian -Marine Watershed District rules ever change and
allow a trail closer to the lake, the easement will give the City the right to
construct that trail.
6. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, the developer shall provide a 20
foot wide general easement allowing for future use for trails and utilities on the
property along the south side of State Highway 96 right of way. The easement
shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and City Attorney and found satisfactory
to them in both form and content.
7. The trail connection to State Highway 96 along Outlot F shall be allowed as
shown only if the wetland in the ditch is determined by a State licensed delineator
to be an incidental wetland. If it is not an incidental wetland, then the trail shall
be realigned westward along the rear of Lots 17 through 19. Documentation from
the delineator shall be submitted together with final plat application materials for
the Phase One final plat.
8. Lots 129 and 149 adjacent to the trail access off of the roundabout will be
restricted by covenant to have open rail fencing and non -continuous shrubbery not
exceeding four feet in height along their side and rear lot lines abutting the trail
corridor. This is to provide for a more inviting entrance to the trail system.
9. The Developer shall provide water service stubs at each park with three stubs to
be included at the large active park. A sanitary sewer stub will be provided at the
large active park at a place yet to be determined by the City of Stillwater.
10. The two active parks will be graded by the developer as part of the first phase of
development and the developer shall establish turf to the satisfaction of the city
prior to the City's assuming maintenance of same. This shall at a minimum
include mowing, fertilizing, rock picking, leveling, trimming, weed management
and over seeding as necessary. Target date for the first transfer of park land will
be fall of 2007.
11. The Brown's Creek trail link on the Millbrook property that connects to the
Carlson property to the south shall be installed by the developer at the same time
that the Carlson property trail is constructed, if prior to construction of the final
phase in Millbrook.
12. An as built easement map showing 30 foot easements where possible (minimum
of 15 foot) for trails shall be completed and recorded as each section of trail is
completed.
13. Final civil engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the Stillwater Public
Works Director or they shall either be: a) revised to his satisfaction; or b)
reviewed by the City Council and approved.
14. Prior to commencement of any grading on the subject property, the developer
shall enter into a Development Agreement that is approved by the City Council.
Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota this 15th day of August,
2006.
OF STILLWATER
David
A'
Diane F. Ward, Clerk
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
April 16, 2009
Mr. Middleton asked about the length of operation of the garden center. The Cub Foods
representative stated the request is for operation until about July 5, noting that the length of
operation actually depends on the seasonality of product and weather; he said, in most
instances, it is Cub's desire to conclude the operation by mid- to third -week in June. Mr.
Middleton said his concern was with the potential for two outdoor operations — the garden center
and fireworks sales. It was noted that the request for fireworks sales must be approved and that
request is submitted by the vendor, not Cub, for consideration. Mr. Wolden expressed a concern
about the proximity of the garden center to the liquor store entrance and the truck traffic there.
There was a question about frequency of fuel delivery; the Cub representative said that is
dependent on movement of product, but said he would expect that at the high end, there would
be one delivery per day; he reiterated that the vendor, Holiday, has been very cooperative in
arranging for overnight or early morning delivery. Mr. Wolden, seconded by Mr. Malsam, moved
approval as conditioned. Motion passed unanimously Mr. Gag spoke of a possible alternate
location; the Cub representative responded that location may be off the store's property. Motion
to approve as conditioned passed unanimously.
Discussion of Millbrook subdivision single-family home design — Several representatives of
Lennar were present to discuss proposed additional elevations and house plans in both the CR
and large -lot areas of Millbrook; plans include two -car garages, in the CR district, and three -car
garages for the larger lots. The spokesperson stated the three -car garage design incorporates
the additional garage space into the living space, rather than just adding a stall to the edge of
the garage area. Mr. Dahlquist asked if these plans would be additional to the current offerings;
the Lennar spokesperson stated the current offerings would be available, but they may phase
out those that are not getting any buyer attention, likely resulting in six total plans being
available. On a question by Mr. Dahlquist, the Lennar spokesperson stated the three -car garage
versions would be limited to the larger lots, but noted they may come back in the future with a
request to change the designation of some lots to large -lot even though some home sites may
be lost. It was noted that square footage and floor plans are much the same as current offerings
— the change is in the addition or deletion of the garage stall. Ms. Block noted a previous
concern about the height of homes backed up to Twin Lake and asked if the height has
changed in the new plans; the Lennar spokesperson said the heights have not changed. Ms.
Block wondered whether the elimination of a garage stall may lead to future requests for sheds.
Mr. Wolden asked whether plans would meet setbacks as referenced in Lennar's letter to the
City; the spokesperson stated based on their understanding of the design regulations for the
area, they know they will have to limit the use of some of the plans to meet the guidelines. Mr.
Dahlquist commented that the garages are a much more dominant feature of the new plans; he
asked whether these plans would apply to phase 1 only or to future phases, as well. The
spokesperson said the request would be to utilize these plans through phase 1 and as the
project moves forward. Mr. Dahlquist verified that the developer would be limited to about 25%
of the lots based on the garage setbacks of the new plans.
Ms. Block spoke of the "monotony" regulations and stated she had noticed two houses, viewed
from the rear elevation, of the same color next door to each other; the spokesperson stated the
front elevation is related to both color and house plans and there could potentially be two
houses of the same color adjacent to each other if they are different house plans. Ms. Block
asked about plans for the park; the spokesperson responded that about half of the park is ready
for development. Mr. Pogge noted the City has been programming park development funds and
City of Stillwater
Planning Commission
April 16, 2009
because of the low number of residents has decided to wait until the area develops a bit further
before developing the park. Ms. Block pointed out the park will serve residents other than just
Millbrook residents and wondered if there was any advantage to delaying development. Mr.
Pogge said there is a financial consideration in delaying development. Mr. Gag asked about the
process for approval of the changes; Mr. Pogge explained both the Planning Commission and
Council would hear the request and could consider additional conditions related to the house
plans if so desired. Mr. Gag spoke of the amount of time spent considering plans in the past and
said he finds the constant changes difficult and frustrating. There was discussion of the changes
that have been made to plans in the past. The spokesman spoke of the changes in the market
and industry that have prompted the request. Mr. Dahlquist suggested there will be additional
changes to the market before this project is completed and the City must be careful not to react
incorrectly to every change; Mr. Dahlquist also stated when this project was first considered, the
housing types, cottages and traditional, were looked at as adding variety to the City housing
stock. Mr. Dahlquist spoke of the importance of ensuring that there is a variety of housing stock,
styles, prices, for all residents, a reason why the Planning Commission must careful when
considering the proposed changes. The Lennar spokesperson reiterated that the proposal adds
variety to what is available and falls within the rules for Millbrook. Mr. Middleton noted there
while things change over time, there are some guidelines, such as garage
setbacks/prominence, in place for this development, guidelines that the Commission is going to
be very critical of when considering the request.
Comprehensive Plan update — Community Development Director Turnblad provided an update
on the Comprehensive Plan process. He stated the jurisdictional review period is finished, with
only Lake Elmo's review/comment yet to be completed, and the Met Council has indicated the
City can proceed. He said at the next meeting, the Planning Commission will look at all the
comments from the reviewing agencies and decide if any comments have merit to be included
in the Plan. After the City Council reviews/discusses comments, the Plan will be submitted to
Met Council, hopefully by early June. Mr. Turnblad also stated that at the May meeting, the
Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to refine the land use map, which will be
included with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Turnblad reviewed some of the possible land use
map changes. Mr. Turnblad said once the Comp Plan is adopted, the Commission will be busy
with two consistency projects, looking at properties to ensure they are zoned consistent with the
newly adopted maps/Plan. Mr. Kalmon asked if there is any additional time for public comments;
Mr. Turnblad stated the public comment period is never closed, even after the Plan is adopted.
Ms. Block, seconded by Mr. Wolden, moved to adjourn at 8:10 p.m. Motion passed
unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary
May 7, 2009
City of Stillwater
216 Fourth Street North
Stillwater, MN 55082
Re: Millbrook
Dear Honorable Mayor and members of the Council;
Clearly the market in Stillwater and elsewhere has slowed significantly. Despite the efforts of a Central marketing campaign,
upgrades to our website (www.lennar.com), and adjustments to prices and product lines, sales velocities in Millbrook remain
disappointing. To combat the challenging housing market, Lennar is excited for the opportunity to propose changes in
Millbrook.
New House Plans
The new plans are designed based upon focus groups conducted with Lennar buyers, feedback from JD Powers surveys, and
market research. The presented series includes design features that meet current lifestyle needs and buyer preferences that are
not addressed by the current offerings in Millbrook. The 2009 Landmark series has evolved from the general concept of the
currently approved plan set. For the interior, kitchens are expanded and traditional rooms such as a formal dining area have been
incorporated into a living pattern that brings the family room, eating area, and kitchen into one large flowing space. Efficiencies
in floor plan design and mechanical layout allows the opportunity to offer comparable square footage at more competitive
pricing without taking away from the curb appeal of the home.
These homes continue turn -of -the -century architectural styling including the incorporation of front porches on all of the plans.
Front porches are an important and charming part of the Millbrook neighborhood, creating not only the opportunity to add
details such as stone or masonry piers, column designs and roof interest, but to foster a sense of social connection between
neighbors. Carefully thought out elevations were created to de-emphasize garages which will be set back a minimum six (6) feet
from the front elevation. Based on comments from the Planning Commission and staff, all of the new plans have been adjusted
to meet the standards of the PUD. The new plans offer finished square footages of 1,867-2,776 sq ft plus the ability to finish the
basement and will add additional interest to an already diverse streetscape. A prototype (Ramsey — Prairie) from this series was
recently completed in Rosemount and has received excellent reviews from consumers.
Site Plan Revisions
In order to accommodate the above proposed house plans we are also including some changes to the site plan. The new plans
require a slightly larger homesite. As a result the homesite widths in future phases within the CR - Cottage Residential District
have increased to an average width of 65'. The result of the change is a loss of four (4) homesites. The loss will be mitigated by
reducing a section of homesite widths in the TR — Traditional Residential District from 90' minimums down to an average of
74'. The result will add two (2) homesites back to the plan, leaving the net change at a loss of two (2) homes. These changes
will not necessitate deviation from the setback standards. Trail connections may move slightly but will be maintained in
approximately the same locations. A plan is included with this submission that graphically demonstrates the proposed changes.
Difficult economic times have changed the way families, Cities, businesses, and even our great nation makes financial decisions.
To endure the demands of today's challenging housing market, Lennar continues to evolve house plans to offer homes that are
receptive to customers changing wants and needs. We feel strongly that the approval of these new plans will improve interest in
Millbrook which ultimately leads to increased permit activity for the City and accelerated construction of amenities for existing
residents. We appreciate your support and look foreword to continuing our partnership with the City of Stillwater in creating a
successful Community. In the meantime, if you have any questions or comments feel free to contact me.
Respectfully,
oeJablonski
Lennar Corporation
545 Indian Mound E., Wayzata, MN 55391 • Phone: 952-473-0993 • Fax: 952-476-0194
LEWNAR.COM � m
!4
i
f
I
S
V,-0 ` L C.V-o
c
0
x
I CPQ o" �Iell 1�_
f
i
L
r
1
rk-\ I
LW
54'-0"
10°•0"
2 2'•0" 3'-10" T-2" 6'-!0" 4'-0"
i
� I 1
M
a � A
J
0 p
0
a
N it
0 ro 8
a
I'
� I
I o
al
N ®un I
6 E
\24'-O"
- I
� 1 E
a E I
I \ I
m�°DAm A
imp $n'
' PE -p41 D\
I— --- -- ^� pZZv-O� z
I I iZimZ ~
I Sm mOl
0 I v I mc
4,4gDm
E ' p?m
I+
6 L \ ---------I--------------
_ I
f
I
I
0 I
f
0 I
l
I
----------
54'-0'
m ONI 'NOLMO&JO3 NVNN3-1
,a ra3�a
OOOUB9L6CZ95)16655'WIYIVZAVMAVMaVOtl9H1110SOSl V10S3NNIW'2�31`dM�IIlS
N 'ONI '1SIf1OJJ38-32JHlb'S € Nooaeiiiw���
� •� w=�F� � Ys
H013YS 1d3ONOO 03SIAMA
m � 4te ryr� ONI 'NOI-L"OdUOO NVNN31 W
oB°" !' '° '�+Yx`u�"xY varmwncses� V10S3NNN'd31VM1�11S II II
� 'SNI .iS1CiCl�b�B-3?�Hlb'S �,y�f ..,�*� ,,..,,.�ooaa��iw - - �a al $I s�,Na
m d rk'ONI 'NOIlVaOcl8OO NVNN31
0009-BLV(nw I. 'M'V-L .VM AVMOVOtl9 RmosOSl • ^" VlOS3NNIW'131VM�lIlS
N 'ONl isi660J 1218-3�1HiVS I Noozis-iliw
Zi w� Nfir� y # B
HO -GAS ld30NO3 a3SIA3d
a
mIT) � �,� eri� 'ONI 'NOI1VNOdN00 NVNN3l
01 mmar+l►Iu as++r Ytwscrnr xrnecaielweosasl V10S3NNIW N3LVMllLLS IJ
-DNI `i51'� OEN4313- tI E-EiVS � �a NOOa9llIW
H013)IS 1d30N00 03SVA3N y g
d
, N • � AV �IV3
I'S
d
d
v
CIS
\ \ \ \
2 ) 'm # 3 o f
. _ - E
CL
a)2 £ _ _ & ) ) 00) § a 30 § ] ¥
» \) §
« 2 j E § J f @
%) y o a)
(/ \ -% 2\
?
2
o# _
a a p) % _ � « ; � m � � � s ! « 4 ]
z E E
z -.
`
=
§ %)) 0 } ° § ( k 3 f 2 G w S § E
»
'
) / _
_
e o 0 2 D= o a@ r r 2 2&■ -
0 E g
§)\\k\f)}/\)\/0o \)
N
co () _
7LU
; 2 CO e / CO 3 » A ' ' $ c ' _ ' z m { =
_ _ , _ % % + c , - « 2 e
@\ }) §\\ G S G/ g y\) S i 5 5 k§) M CL E)ƒ
) ggq�q
d
, N • � AV �IV3
I'S
d
d
v
Current
Approved Plans
LENNAR MINNESOTA
IW B ROOK CR ZONE
COPYRIGHT LENNAR 2007
LE N N A I-
LLENNA
LENNAR-
LENNAM
PM
LENNAM
_ s 7
-irbm r;
t
�
r't1
'I
T:19 n
5
{ I I IY
J I I
-
\ c
�j
f.l
-
rr t
�,
F�
asp
I II � i r '.I� �i`I i � 't• I z`
r
11 i I f
42
Q
U
C
Jj
§
B
res -,s �� `I Is, , �.
x
-4.4` — 4 to
�° moi® t-� �►E C� ��®vf ��
r�. - -Vv vr�� 13"OUT r
MINNESOTA
MONOTONY CODE
The minimum Monotony code requirements are that no home with the same
elevation can be on either side, across the street (directly or diagonal). See
drawing below.
Although this is a minimum guideline, through panalization Lennar makes
every effort to adhere to much stricter standards. Each community is pre -
planned at the time that the home sites are released for sale to the public.
Because of this policy most home elevations are only repeated once out of
every 12 homes. The exterior color packages are also reviewed under these
same guidelines.
Features reviewed under monotony and panelization:
Roof lines, break up streetscapes with differing roof lines
® Overall massing of home
® Porches, limit the same porch configuration.
® Exterior Colors
® Architecture styles, i.e. two Prairie style homes will not be put next to
each other.
Overall look, we make every effort to give the streetscape a custom
feel with our homes.
TDELLWOOD ROAD — _�_ _ NORT1
mo
/ VV TLAND BUF/F�R
�j /
1
I� FAIS i IIVG 111 11 1711 -IS, 1011111 ARE SHOWN IN AN APPROXP 1,111 WAY ONLY A IE
CONTRAC FOR SI IAl I- UP I ERMINE THE EXAC ILOCATION OF ANY AND ALL EXISTING
U 11LIl IES BFFORE COMMENCING WORK. FIE AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY
AND ALL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF HIS FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY
!! AND ALL EXIST ING Ul IL ITIES
iON WAS PREPARED BY HE OR UNDER MY
;l FRED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER
o ( REG, NO—_c6.Z_
Q z
O
O
co
Q 0
0 a_ z af
(.D cr M o
Cn —i w U)
_ W
Q J g
TO: Stillwater Township/City of Stillwater Joint Board
DATE: July 2, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-26
REQUEST: Millbrook 3rd Addition Final Plat
APPLICANT: Joe Jabonski, U.S. Home Corporation
LOCATION: State Highway 96 west of South Twin Lake
MEETING DATE: July 7, 2009
REVIEWED BY: Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner
BACKGROUND
The Joint Board and City Council approved the Preliminary Plat and Concept Planned
Unit Development for Millbrook in the Summer of 2006. The 170 acre preliminary plat
includes 172 single family homes and 98 townhomes. Development of the property is
planned to occur in three overall phases. The application at hand is the third plat in
Phase I.
The first plat in Phase I was Millbrook (1st Addition) and consisted of 30 single family
lots in the CR, Cottage Residential Zoning District and 33 single family lots in the TR,
Traditional Residential Zoning District. The second plat in Phase I was Millbrook 2nd
Addition and included 44 townhome units.
This plat is the third and final plat in Phase I of Millbrook. This plat is known as
Millbrook 3rd Addition and includes 16 townhome units. Initial improvements made
during the Millbrook (1st Addition) included local streets, utilities, grading,
landscaping, etc. for Millbrook (1st Addition), Millbrook 2nd Addition, and this plat
(Millbrook 3rd Addition). The final PUD approval of Millbrook 2nd Addition also
included approval of the Final PUD Site Plan for this third plat.
�a l L. 1
7 4r e'
8 R T H P I. A
TO: Stillwater Township/City of Stillwater Joint Board
DATE: July 2, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-26
REQUEST: Millbrook 3rd Addition Final Plat
APPLICANT: Joe Jabonski, U.S. Home Corporation
LOCATION: State Highway 96 west of South Twin Lake
MEETING DATE: July 7, 2009
REVIEWED BY: Community Development Director
PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner
BACKGROUND
The Joint Board and City Council approved the Preliminary Plat and Concept Planned
Unit Development for Millbrook in the Summer of 2006. The 170 acre preliminary plat
includes 172 single family homes and 98 townhomes. Development of the property is
planned to occur in three overall phases. The application at hand is the third plat in
Phase I.
The first plat in Phase I was Millbrook (1st Addition) and consisted of 30 single family
lots in the CR, Cottage Residential Zoning District and 33 single family lots in the TR,
Traditional Residential Zoning District. The second plat in Phase I was Millbrook 2nd
Addition and included 44 townhome units.
This plat is the third and final plat in Phase I of Millbrook. This plat is known as
Millbrook 3rd Addition and includes 16 townhome units. Initial improvements made
during the Millbrook (1st Addition) included local streets, utilities, grading,
landscaping, etc. for Millbrook (1st Addition), Millbrook 2nd Addition, and this plat
(Millbrook 3rd Addition). The final PUD approval of Millbrook 2nd Addition also
included approval of the Final PUD Site Plan for this third plat.
Millbrook 3`d Addition — Final Plat
July 2, 2009
Page 2
REQUEST AND ANALYSIS
The specific request before the City is to approve the Final Plat for MILLBROOK 3RD
ADDITION.
The City Council adopted a resolution approving the preliminary plat and concept PUD
permit for MILLBROOK on August 15, 2006. On April 17, 2007 the Council adopted a
resolution approving an amendment to the preliminary plat and concept PUD permit as they
apply to the townhome neighborhood in MILLBROOK. Therefore, the final plat and final PUD
permit for Millbrook 3RD Addition are subject to the pertinent conditions of both resolutions of
approval. They are detailed below.
A. August 15, 2006 Resolution Conditions.
1_ The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development application shall be substantially
similar to the following plans prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., and on file in the
Community Development Department, except as modified herein:
Site Plan dated 7/21/06
Phasing Plan dated 7/24/06
Buffer Averaging Plan (including trails) - 8 sheets dated 6/26/06
Preliminary Site Map* (Sheets SM2 - SM6) dated 1/17/06
Preliminary Plat (Sheets PP1-7) dated 3/30/06
Final Grading Plan (Sheets GP2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 6) dated 4/12/06
Final Utility Plan (Sheets 2-5) dated 4/ 12/ 06
Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheets 1-4) dated 2/1/06
*Except trails to be as shown in Site Plan dated 7/21/06
The final plan submittals for MILLBROOK 3RD ADDITION are substantially similar
to the approved preliminary plans.
2. The developer shall complete a Lakeshore PUD worksheet and submit it to the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resource's (DNR) Area Hydrologist prior to
submitting an application for a final plat for Phase One. If the DNR review results in
substantial changes to the Preliminary Plat or Concept PUD plans, then the developer
shall resubmit the Concept PUD and Preliminary Plat for review by the City and Joint
Planning Board.
This condition has been satisfied.
3. The trail and sidewalk system shall be constructed substantially the same as
represented in the following plan sets on file with the Community Development
Department:
a. Carnelian Marine Trails -Revised (Sheets CM -1, 2,3) dated 6-21-06
b. Browns Creek Trail - Revision 3 (Sheet BC 2b-1) dated 6-26-06
c. Browns Creek Trail - Revision 2 (Sheet BC 2-2 + 2-3) dated 6-22-06
d. Revised Sidewalk Plan (Sheets SP -1, 2,3) dated 6-21-06
Park and trail plans for MILLBROOK 3RD ADDITION are consistent with the
approved preliminary plans.
4. All trails shall be paved.
There are no trails in MILLBROOK 3RD ADDITION. There are only sidewalks.
Millbrook 3`d Addition — Final Plat
July 2, 2009
Page 3
5. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, a blanket easement shall be provided
over the open space outlot on the south side of South Twin Lake for trail purposes.
Should the Carnelian -Marine Watershed District rules ever change and allow a trail
closer to the lake, the easement will give the City the right to construct that trail.
This condition has been satisfied.
6. Prior to release of the final plat for Phase One, the developer shall provide a 20 foot
wide general easement allowing for future use for trails and utilities on the property
along the south side of State Highway 96 right of way. The easement shall be
reviewed by the City Engineer and City Attorney and found satisfactory to them in
both form and content.
This condition has been satisfied.
7. The trail connection to State Highway 96 along Outlot F shall be allowed as shown
only if the wetland in the ditch is determined by a State licensed delineator to be an
incidental wetland. If it is not an incidental wetland, then the trail shall be realigned
westward along the rear of Lots 17 through 19. Documentation from the delineator
shall be submitted together with final plat application materials for the Phase One
final plat.
This portion of the trail is in Phase II, so the delineation will be submitted
together with Phase II application materials. Therefore, this condition will
not appear in the approval resolutions for Phase L
8. Lots 129 and 149 adjacent to the trail access off of the roundabout will be restricted by
covenant to have open rail fencing and non -continuous shrubbery not exceeding four
feet in height along their side and rear lot lines abutting the trail corridor. This is to
provide for a more inviting entrance to the trail system.
This condition has been satisfied.
9. The Developer shall provide water service stubs at each park with three stubs to be
included at the large active park. A sanitary sewer stub will be provided at the large
active park at a place yet to be determined by the City of Stillwater.
This condition has been satisfied.
Millbrook 3`d Addition — Final Plat
July 2, 2009
Page 4
10. The two active parks will be graded by the developer as part of the first phase of
development and the developer shall establish turf to the satisfaction of the city prior
to the City's assuming maintenance of same. This shall at a minimum include mowing,
fertilizing, ruck picking, leveling, trimming, weed management and over seeding as
necessary. Target date for the first transfer of park land will be fall of 2087.
Both active parks were substantially graded with the development of the first
phase. The west thirst of the northern active park area is currently being used
as a soil stockpiling area that will be used in the second phase of the
development.
Originally, the park property was planned to be transfer to the City in 2007;
however, since the Millbrook project did not begin in 2006 as originally hoped
by US Home Corporation, the 2007 transfer date is no longer valid.
Additionally, due to the slow number of home sales Phases II and III the
transfer was again delayed.
With the soil stockpile still on the park site and the status of turf development
staff would recommend that the transfer be after the stockpile is removed and
turf development is complete. If the stockpile is moved and action is taken by
Lennar to improve turf conditions then the park could be turned over as early
as this fall; however, it is likely that it will be at least the fall of 2010 before it
will be turned over to the City.
The City could consider imposing a condition limiting the number of building
permits that could be issued until the transfer occurs. The Park and Recreation
Commission will discuss the status on the active park dedication at their July
27th meeting and will forward a recommendation on the tinting of the
dedication to the City Council for consideration at their July 281), meeting.
11. The Brown's Creek trail link on the Millbrook property that connects to the Carlson
property to the south shall be installed by the developer at the same time that the
Carlson property trail is constructed, if prior to construction of the final phase in
Millbrook.
OK.
12. An as built easement map showing 30 foot easements where possible (minimum of 15
foot) for trails shall be completed and recorded as each section of trail is completed.
OK.
13. Final civil engineering plans shall be found satisfactory to the Stillwater Public Works
Director or they shall either be: a) revised to his satisfaction; or b) reviewed by the City
Council and approved.
The civil engineering plans have been reviewed by the Public Works Director
and were found satisfactory.
14. Prior to commencement of any grading on the subject property, the developer shall
enter into a Development Agreement that is approved by the City Council.
An addendum to the master development agreement for MILLBROOK was
signed already for the first phase.
Millbrook 3`d Addition — Final Plat
July 2, 2009
Page 5
B. April 17, 2007 Resolution Conditions
1. The Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development Permit applications for the
townhomes shall be substantially similar to the following plans on file in the
Community Development Department, except as modified herein:
Preliminary Plat Amendment (Sheet PP) dated 1/8/07
Preliminary Grading .Plan (Sheet GP1) dated 1/12/07
Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheet UP1) dated 1/12/07
Preliminary Landscape Plan (Sheet LP1) dated 1/12/07
Colonial Foundation Planting Plan (Sheet L1) dated 6/8/061
Architectural elevations submitted with materials for 4/17/07 Council Meeting
This condition is satisfied.
2. Any conditions applicable to the townhome development that are found in Resolution
No. 2006-179 (Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat and Concept PUD Permit) shall
continue to be applicable.
This condition is satisfied.
3. Evergreen trees shall be added to screen the driveways from the public streets and
shall be added along the north side of White Pine Way between the street and the
townhome pond.
The landscape plan has been revised to include these plantings.
4. Three to four architectural elevations shall be developed for the ends of the units that
face the public street and the pond.
This condition is satisfied.
5. In order to reduce the mass of the units a variety of materials and colors shall be
introduced into each building with variations amongst the buildings.
This condition is satisfied.
6. Depending on the orientation of the building, sidewalks shall be extended from the
ends of the units to either the sidewalk along the public street or to the sidewalk
surrounding the pond.
This has been included in the revised plans.
7. Material samples shall be submitted with the Final Plat and Final PUD Permit
applications to be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Commission.
This condition is satisfied.
All minor modifications to the Design Review Permit shall be approved in advance by
the Community Development Director. All major modifications shall be approved in
advance by the HPC. Determination of the distinction between "major" and "minor'
shall rest with the City Administrator.
RECOMMENDATION
As outlined in the orderly annexation agreement, the Joint Planning Board needs to
review and comment on development plans. Staff recommends that the Joint
Planning Board review the proposed plat and provide comments to the Stillwater City
Council to consider.
cc: Joe Jablonski
' Augmented by foundation planting plan submitted together with materials for 4/17/07 City Council meeting
}
O
a
�
i V
8
s
a
1
a_
�
;J
J
y�.
gfQk'K.IVlil�l `�l'111A1
bj
t
-V— VT
O
a
:j RN
8
s
a
1
o
�
'a
y�.
C�
9
®
9
9�
8
yy�
8'
®3e
g
yp a
Fs� - e
m uID a
O
,,,.y
9
8
LU
'a
y�.
C�
9
®
9
9�
yy�
8'
®3e
g
C
9�
®
a
9
o�
_ gg B5 g
O
,,,.y
9
LU
d
z
I�
cA
9
LU
'a
s�
9
yy�
®
a
9
_ gg B5 g
y YYYY �
�I
&&fim
4
i 9g
6�
f
dd �
H
�
sy�BHa
4 ®
z
7
d
z
I�
cA
4
LU
ilw
.,+4. N0IlV10dM03 S3WOH ,s*n 9TIJIll
E
000mll( d Wo xmy1yu,VM AVMOVMM woos owl ' VlOS3NNIW-d31VMTILLS I! i
'ONI '1SinbE) 138,IaVNIWITad�-MJHJLVS 1N3W3NidVH Vld I ��
00?J9'lllW I J �'•
NVId 3dVOSONVI Ij
VGaox�Ea ;�c�ol�
4
0,0
0
�1
&3"w
a
�s,
M
a �'V
;r4r �1
Y
� r:
TKDA
ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS
MEMORANDUM
To:
Copies To:
From:
Date:
Background
Joint Board Members
Bill Tumblad, City of Stillwater
444 Cedar Street, Suite 1500
Saint Paul, MN 55101-2140
(651)292-4400
(651)292-0083 Fax
www.tkda.com
Reference: Bergmann Property Issues and
CUP Application
Community Development Director Proj. No.:
Sherri Buss, RLA, Stillwater Routing:
Township Planner
July 15, 2009
14308.000
Stillwater staff contacted the Township Planner in June, 2009 regarding issues related to the Paul Bergmann
property located in Stillwater Township. An aerial photo identifying the property and its location are
attached.
Staff noted that the City has received complaints from residents in the area regarding a changed use on the
property in 2009, and increased traffic on local roads. The use of the property expanded to include a retail
use this spring, and a new (second) driveway access was added to 62nd Street. (The aerial photo does not
include the driveway. Staff will bring photos to the Joint Board meeting if possible.) City staff also
expressed concerns about the new driveway and potential impacts to the City's future plans for the route of
Curve Crest Boulevard in the area.
The Township Planner discussed the issue with the City's Community Development Director and the Town
Board. Those involved in the discussion reached a consensus that Mr. Bergmann should be required to
submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the retail use on the property. Town Board members
also noted that one or more of the structures on the Bergmann property may have been constructed without a
building permit. This issue should be addressed in the CUP process.
County staff noted that the nursery business on the Bergmann properties pre -dates the County's Zoning
Ordinance. Therefore no CUP currently exists for the uses on those properties. The Paul Bergmann property
has been historically used for greenhouse and wholesale activities. The retail use appears to be a new use on
this property.
A Town Board member and the Planner contacted Mr. Bergmann to request that he apply for a CUP. The
Township received his application on July 15. The application will be reviewed by the Joint Board, since the
property is located in the Transition Zone. A Joint Board meeting and public hearing on the issue could be
scheduled during August.
Discussion at the July 22"d Joint Board Meeting
The Township's Planner requests that the Joint Board discuss the following issues at its July 22nd meeting
related to the Bergmann CUP application:
An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity
Memo to Joint Board Page 2 July 15, 2009
Paul Bergmann Property CUP Application
• Determine a date for a Joint Board Meeting/public hearing on the CUP application
• Identify all City and Township issues related to the application, so that they can be addressed in the
staff review of the application
• If possible, identify City and Township conditions to be included in the CUP, or the process to
develop any conditions to be recommended in the staff review
C
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE APPLICATION
Stillwater Township
Mailing Address: PO Box 117
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
Town Hall: 13636 90th Street North
PHONE: 651/439-4120
ESCROW: $500.00
FEE: $50.00
Receipt No.
Makes checks payable to Stillwater Township -
Legal Description and Parcel Identification Number V --
PIN:
Lot , Block
P�3li , )3�j, "—) 6, 3`� C�0C) � f
Project Address
Owner Address City State Zip Phone
r4»Y"CS� II �51-aVk - -//q OCTf.Y-.14 `5c; II WaCv
Applicant (iYdifferenttim Address City State Zip Phone
Owner)
Description of Request
O—Ulp
vfs rug �--�
In connection with your request for a Certificate of Compliance, your signature constitutes permission for a
representative of Stillwater Township, its employee, or designee, to enter upon your property, during normal business
hours, for the purpose of evaluating your request. This may involve minor excavation and soil borings. If you wish to
nt during such inspection, please contact this office.
Signature Date
Signature of Applicant (if diffe e t than Owner) e
i�— 'I � -� L'2'
Certificate of Compliance Applic
ation
' C -C, I [ '
Page I of I
ct� o n 5 -
.Rev. Date. Jttly 20, 2006
CEJ 1— L4- 3Ll l �
(-' � /Ac -/t/ -4
r'
ter
r ga F
N I R; H R i A C O F .. i N N E 0 f A
TO: Stillwater Township/City of Stillwater Joint Board
DATE: July 15, 2009 CASE NO.: 09-04
APPLICANT: Marc Putman
REQUEST: Amendment to the Liberty Village PUD for Architectural Review &
Design Guidelines.
LOCATION: Commercial area at the intersection of Manning Ave and
CSAH 12 (Myrtle St/ 76th St W)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT:
ZONING: VC - Village Commercial
HPC DATE: July 22, 2009
REVIEWERS: Community Dev. Director
CN - Neighborhood Commercial
PREPARED BY: Michel Pogge, City Planner;
DISCUSSION
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development amendment for approval of
Architectural Review and Design Guidelines for Liberty Village. The PUD amendment
is two parts; first, this request officially adopts the design guidelines for the Liberty
Village commercial area, which were inadvertently never adopted by the City. Second,
it revises the sign and graphics section of the original guidelines and adds several new
types of signs that can be used within the development.
SPECIFIC REQUESTS
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development amendment for the Liberty
Village Architectural Review and Design Guidelines for Liberty Village. The Heritage
Preservation has approved the Design Review permit for this item at their July 6, 2009
meeting. The PUD amendment would both officially adopt the design guidelines for
the Liberty Village commercial area and revise the sign and graphics section of those
guidelines.
Liberty Village Design Guidelines
Page 2
JUNE 3rd ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
At the June 3rd HPC meeting, the HPC reviewed and discussed the request. Due to
concerns raised by neighboring residential property owners the Commission elected to
table action on the request and requested staff meet with the applicant and effected
property owners to see if a compromise could be reached.
JUNE 9th NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
On June 9, 2009, representatives for the applicant, the Residential Townhome
Association, the Liberty Residential Master Board, the HPC, and City Staff met at City
Hall to discuss the proposal. Related to the Residential Townhome Association
concerns the applicant proposed eliminating the light pole banner signs on the
southeast side of Settler's Way. With this eliminated the residential homeowners were
in agreement with the proposal as presented, including allowing two pylon signs along
both Manning Ave and Myrtle Street and permitting roof signs.
July 6th ACTION BY THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION
At the July 6d~ HPC meeting, the HPC reviewed and discussed the request. The
Commission approved a design review permit subject to the following conditions:
1. The design review approval shall become void if the PUD amendment is
denied by the City Council.
2. Light pole banner signs shall only be installed north and west of Settler's
Way.
3. Any sign on City property shall be approved by the City Council prior to
installation. Any sign on park property shall be reviewed and approved by
the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council prior to installation.
4. References to banner signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Banner signs shall follow regulations for banners sign permitted in other
areas of the City.
5. Roof signs shall only be used to identify 2nd floor tenants.
6. References to portable signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Portable signs shall be prohibited.
7. Freestanding project monument signs adjacent to the roundabout shall be
limited to six feet in height.
S. Building directory signs are limited to a single faced sign flush mounted to
the wall and placed adjacent to the entry door.
Liberty Village Design Guidelines
Page 3
JULY 13th ACTION BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
At the July 13, 2009 City Planning Commission (CPC) meeting, the CPC reviewed and
discussed the request. The Commission recommend approval of the Planned Unit
Development amendment subject to the following conditions:
1. Light pole banner signs shall only be installed north and west of Settler's
Way.
2. Any sign on City property shall be approved by the City Council prior to
installation. Any sign on park property shall be reviewed and approved by
the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council prior to installation.
3. References to banner signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Banner signs shall follow regulations for banners sign permitted in other
areas of the City.
4. Roof signs are prohibited. (Note: CPC recommended a changed from HPC's
action. See #5 in the HPC's conditions.)
5. References to portable signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Portable signs shall follow regulations for portable signs in other areas of the
City making them a prohibited sign in the City.
6. Freestanding project monument signs adjacent to the roundabout shall be
limited to six feet in height.
7. Building directory signs shall be limited to 12 square feet per side. Can be
either single faced signs flush mounted to the wall or double faced sign
projecting from the building. Signs shall be placed adjacent to the entry door.
(Note: CPC recommended a changed from HPC's action. See #8 in the HPC's
conditions.)
8. Only one pylon sign shall be permitted along Myrtle Street and only one
pylon sign shall be permitted along Manning Ave. (Note: CPC added this
condition which was not in the conditions recommended by the HPC's.)
UO
c
CO
LU
r. LU
b, w
CU LL
Q 0
b, Z
0
r7 Q
J
tLcO u Q
-a P-4 w
0
v
bjD
v
Q �
ND
3 �
v
o
x
4
U V
w .�
� 3
O bA
O CZ
N ¢'
ON
N
-- o O
° 'v
b°.O o
U n5
O O 0)
� O bb
QJ -- u
4-1 O O
� o �
o 4-1 UD
cn
O by
biD
o �•3
N O
M O
cu v
v
bD
� C�
to
G
v
o
bO
41
. cn
+,
m
O
a
�
bloom �
° 0 0
o
C)
a�
0
0 m
MU 4-1
U
o
° °
o
M
4 v 4 w
4 4-J
°
�
a)°
0 0
0
0
0 +,
U
�,
�
� � c�S" •,-. bA
0
OO
o
bjJ
O'
c-1 O bb. U ,..0
O
b• 4, y..,
4-1
c
byp,
� m yo
bio
oo c
U
V
O +�' v
U
4
V 4-1
4!
0
0� v o O
o O r.
0
w
bp'
.moi V +� V
j
uLOZ
m N cn L
U 4O
O 'C3 �� U O m
O_
r N bb
_
b'D
v
v 'Ci m
Off,
4
U.)by u O �-
m N° N
o
•o
o
by
a) W b.0 °
�
(q
V
o
4J
�-' 4
° 3 Cl) o
`� + N
a •- '� o
O c
V
CU
O .0O +
0,
� 3 �
m
biD
bJD
bD
biD
1
q
o
�
*
U ct (L)Z
.
Cn
N v
45
v
O
U
4--
~ O
41
�{ ~
v
m
v v
¢'
cu
S� v.
14-4
m
`n u y
cn
cn
U
75
C � +��+
v
u �' p
Ri
bzD
U
O «i
u w v
m U
w Cn c5 'C�
u
G
v
o
v
s~
o
cz
to 4-1
cn o
b,O
41
� 75
ocn
a)
1
cr' 3
°~' cu
4-t
s~
ocz
o
r s~ o
c v
s~
C)cp 411
U
'c�o
z~
u o
m�
C,5
4.1 U) 41
'+��
v
Ct
7�
U
4
~
v
w U
�
-4-j�
v :+
u
'�
u o
U
�
cnv
v Ow
r..�
s~
Q
U
� O '5
u
cn
�,
4-1
-�
b0 b4
.�
c�
O
-4-Q" v
bA75
v
v�
v
O
bJD
v-4-4-1 v
b0
r Q
u
w
w '�
O
u
� p
U
U o U
n
s�, °Qa
TS
Z
74-
Q, P
-
v a)s~
v
bb
to
M
cz c
;-4v
a
s~
bA
~
�
��
4�
D
DO
N
3
>~
�
o w
Ul)
°
°
r"
3Eb
4-1
O
o a
o m
�
Q
75
o
..
as
to
o
cn
by
�n
J
a�
. � u
u
v
Cd
bU
41
bO
G
0
o
a
U
�,
a
H
°
o14-4
O
a °o
Q
v�
N
o
.Q
O
O
�r
H
.�
bv
'n
)
_
7�
cn
O
.� O v
�
O
cd
s'$C-�
0
3
�
°�U��
X
3�
0 3
�a�.bO
4'
75
-d
b°'o
U
°�' H'�
a V)
o
71
o�
o a
4
a
u
Cd
.�
�" >, (1)
a
o
NO >,
3
a
U
o
""
�'
�
� '°
�
° bio •-
bb
�4
;-4
,a m
�
� o
��'�
o
ac
cc
ao��
-�
Q)
°
bct
b0
a
Ul
•NOO
o o
STs
Z•�
O
(D )
�,
.,
'bDIn �
-0
� o
�oo�
oo��o��>
-,:s°°�
Q)a)
w
4 w
bb
Z
vcq
bb
b -O
05
+ o ¢
o
w ,�
+ o ¢, o
w o
;--q
w� Q)
;-4
q o
m
°) U¢
a)
o
° U Q~ Q)
r
Q) 3
o
Q)
3
o
<�
Unm3��rn�3
0
tko
tO
ct
o
WR
cis
CZ
w
'S
k
'cl
u
c
O
w
u
U
�
o
o
{a
u
on
W
�U
o
Ira'>
r�
;-4 4'.
o
o
I Q)
v
;-4
U
5
N
p
+�
Q °
oU.
-d;
s
o
-
+� cz
c3a
r
0 ,
— vs
t{..,
cd t
� (1),
o t
bA
o
al
a�
'It u
o
U
4�
C)
U)
o ;-4
v
,�
[— Pn
Liberty Village Design Guidelines
Page 8
In staff's opinion, the request as presented by the applicant has the potential to "over
sign" the development. The proposal is more liberal than what the City permits for
signage in the BP zoning district, which is the City's most liberal sign criteria. As a
neighborhood destination shopping area, this would seem a little extreme. Certainly a
case can be made for additional signage along Manning and CSAH 12; however, it
seems appropriate to have signage for this development fall somewhere between the
City's standard for business park signage and neighborhood commercial signage.
Staff supports many of the changes that the Heritage Preservation Commission and
Planning Commission made to the proposal. Overall staff recommends approval of the
recommended conditions approved by the Planning Commission.
Liberty Village Design Guidelines
Page 9
ALTERNATIVES
As outlined in the orderly annexation agreement, the Joint Planning Board needs to
review and consider changes to official controls effecting development. The Board has
several alternatives that can be considered:
A. Approval. If the proposed PUD is found acceptable to the Joint Planning Board,
then the Board should approve the PUD amendment with the following
minimum conditions of approval:
a. Light pole banner signs shall only be installed north and west of Settler's
Way.
b. Any sign on City property shall be approved by the City Council prior to
installation. Any sign on park property shall be reviewed and approved
by the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council prior to
installation.
c. References to banner signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Banner signs shall follow regulations for banners sign permitted in other
areas of the City.
d. References to portable signs shall be removed from the PUD amendment.
Portable signs shall follow regulations for portable signs in other areas of
the City making them a prohibited sign in the City.
e. Freestanding project monument signs adjacent to the roundabout shall be
limited to six feet in height.
f. Building directory signs shall be limited to 12 square feet per side. Can be
either single faced signs flush mounted to the wall or double faced sign
projecting from the building. Signs shall be placed adjacent to the entry
door.
g. Only one pylon sign shall be permitted along Myrtle Street and only one
pylon sign shall be permitted along Manning Ave.
h. Roof signs are prohibited.
B. Denial. If the Joint Planning Board finds that the proposal is not acceptable, then
the Board should deny the requested PUD amendment.
C. Approval in part.
D. Table. If the Joint Planning Board needs additional information to make a
decision, the request could be tabled to a future meeting. The decision deadline
for the request is September 12, 2009. Since the 60 -day deadline has been
extended by City Staff the applicant would need to approve any extension in
writing beyond September 12, 2009.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the PUD with the conditions included above in Alternative A.
attachments: Applicant's materials and Proposed Design Guidelines