Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-28 Joint Board Packetillwater 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. January 28,1998 Agenda Zoning Amendments ZAT/98-1. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment establishing development regulations for a new Lakeshore Residential (LR) District, 20,000 square foot lots. City of Stillwater, applicant. ZAM/98-1. Zoning Ordinance Map amendment rezoning lands on the west side of Long Lake, Lakeshore Residential (LR) District from Agricultural Preservation (AP). City of Stillwater, applicant. (See proposed zoning map.) ZAT/98-2. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment establishing development regulations for a new Traditional Residential (TR) District, 10,000 square foot lots. City of Stillwater, applicant ZAM/98-2. Zoning Map Amendment rezoning lands west of Long Lake, Traditional Residential (TR) District from Agricultural Preservation (AP). City of Stillwater, applicant. (See proposed zoning map.) ZAT/98-3. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment establishing development regulations for a new Cottage Residential (CR) District, 6,000 square foot lots. City of Stillwater, applicant ZAM/98-3. Zoning Map Amendment rezoning lands west of Long Lake, Cottage Residential (CR) District from Agricultural Preservation (AP). City of Stillwater, applicant. (See proposed zoning map.) ZAT/98-4. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment establishing development regulations for a new Townhouse Residential (TR) District, 5,000 square foot lot area per dwelling unit. City of Stillwater, applicant ZAM/98-4. Zoning Map Amendment rezoning lands Townhouse Residential (TR) District from Agricultural Preservation (AP) lands located east of CR 15 and south of CR 12 . City of Stillwater, applicant. (See proposed zoning map.) ZAM/98-5. Zoning Map Amendment rezoning lands Village Commercial (VC) from Agricultural Preservation (AP) located at the southeast corner of CRs 12 and 15. City of Stillwater, applicant. (See proposed zoning map.) Planned Unit Development Review PUD/97-67. Concept planned unit development review for a 156 lot Single Family Residential Development (The Legends of Stillwater) on 75 acres of land located north of 62nd Street North and CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 west of Long Lake (Staloch Farm). Pemton Land Company, applicant. PUD/97-70. Concept planned unit development review for 350 residential units and 6.2 acres of Village Commercial Development on 188 acres (Liberty on Long Lake) located south of County Road 12 east of County Road 15 and west of Long Lake (Newman Farm). Contractor Property Developers Company, applicant. Subdivision Review SUB/97-68. Preliminary plat approval of a 156 residential lot subdivision, Legends of Stillwater, 74 acres of land located in the Lakeshore, Traditional and Cottage Residential Zoning Districts (new), north of 62nd Street North and west of Long Lake (Staloch Farm). Pemton Land Company, applicant. SUB/97-71. Preliminary plat approval of 332 residential lot subdivision, Liberty on Long Lake, including a 6.2 acre Village Commercial site located in Lakeshore, Traditional, Cottage and Townhouse Residential Zoning Districts (new) south of County Road 12, east of County Road 15 and west of Long Lake (Newman Farm). Contractor Property Developers Company, applicant. Other Items: Follow up report on Palmer Property discussion from November 19, 1997. Tax situation for Phase I annexed properties. - Update on Nealmeadows neighborhood meeting and devleopemnt. - Update on utility consruction for Phase I annexation area. - Other items. PROM : FRCS)" ESSESSE C =SSSES SSE:SS PHONE NO. : PCB 1 STILLWATER CITY AND TOWN JOIN 'r BOARD Nov. 19, 1997 Present for Stillwater Township: Supervisor Dave Johnson, Supervisor David Francis; Attorney Tom Scott; and Planner Meg Mc: Munigal Present for City of Stillwater: Councilman Terry Zoller Mayor Jay Kimble; Attorney David Magnuson; Community Development Direc.te; Steve Russell Chairman David Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of agenda: Mr. Francis, seconded by Mr Zoller , moved approval of the agenda as presented; all in favor ADprovLof minutes; Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr Frani s, moved approval of the minutes of July 14, 1997, as presented; all in favr,, Reicityariaace_reaueal Mr. Russell explained the variance requested by Rick and Karen Reidt at 7155 Melville Court N. in the AP, Agricultural Preser. ation District. The Reidts are constructing a new horse on the property and have requested a variance to allow the existing horse to renal( wail the new home is completed. The existing home is to be removed no later than four months after the completion of the new horse; according to the terms of the variance. The variance request was reviewed and approved by the City Planning Commission at its August meeting Mr. Scott noted that while Joint Board approval of the variance is required, the City Planning Commission meeting would be sufficient to fulfill the public hearing requirement Mr. Francis, seconded by M. Zolie► moved approval of the requested variance; all in favor, Annexation request The property in question is a 20-acre parcel wesi. of Neal Avenue and north of Boutwell Road. Jim Peterson was present representing the applicant. Mr. Russell noted the proposal was brought before the Joint Board at its July meeting, With construction of the sanitary sewer to serve the elementary school property, the annexation requesr seems to make sense to the City, Mr. Russell said. He also explained that the proposal its in the FROM : FROOY' SSSSSSSS`` 3SSSSSSSSSSS PHONE Na P©2 conceptual stage and was being brought before the Joint Board at this time for discussion and comment only Mr_ Zoller asked how the annexation would affect the density per year as allowed in the Orderly Annexation Agreement Mr. Scott said according to the agreement, phase 4 property can be annexed if petitioned by 100 percent of the property owners and the developmeiii does not result in exceeding the 120 units per year limit for the total anr►ex atinr area Linda Livermore, 8120 Neal Ave. N., said according to Map A in the City"s Comprehensive Plan, the property in question is designated as open space/park. She also said if the property is developed, it would contradict the plat shown when they purchased thee property, specifically the Original plat showed a road along the back of the property. Ms, Livermore also questioned the proposed density of housing and asl:erl about drainage. Mr, Peterson said if the majority of the proper ly owners desire, the developer would be willing to put in a road as a public improvement and assess benefiting properties. He explained that the parcel was purchased as an outlot, which looked as though it was intended to be a road, but was never deeded to the Township. He said the propu.,,s! is a concept plan only, and he will be contacting all adjacent property owner , to get their input. Mr. Peterson further noted that the development could defray between $40,000 and $50,000 in right-ot--way cost., for the sewer line construction. Ed Otis, 12070 N 87th St. Circle, saki mere area lot of concerned citizens who purchased their property with covenants The original plat showed a road, which is an important consideration for those who purchased as a future investment. Without the road. these property owners would be landlocked and unable to subdivide. He suggested that the property owners be brought into the process now. before the proposal advances to the public hearing stage. John Choiniere, 8160 Neal Ave. N , asked abool the provision that property originally in the phase 4 annexation area can be brought into the city earlier if petitioned by 100 percent of the propel ty owners lie also asked about the possibility of preserving the road as show, in the original plat, Mr. Magnuson noted in this case a single property owner along that portion of Neal Avenue could petitiori for annexatier because it would be contiguous to the City -- the City owns the westerly side of Neal Avenue which was annexed to the city as part of the Oak Gler, development FROM : FROOY'SSSSSsss 3SSSSSESSSSS PHONE NO,, . P03 Craig Wahlquist, 7990 Neal Ave, N. and Rick Ross, 8040 Neal Ave. N., stated the developer has not contacted or had any discussions with neighbors; they said the neighbors would like to get more information to help in their decision -making. Mr Peterson reiterated his willingness to meet with the neighboring property owners and suggested it would be helpful if 1 or 2 residents were designated as key people for the exchange of information. Mr, Johnson summed up the discussion by pointing out that the charge of the Joint Board is to review the property as a whole and the proposal as it relates to compliance with the Orderly Arinexatiur Agreement and the requirement of contiguousness He said the proposa! seems to meet the basic requirements to proceed. He further encourzrge;4 discussions between the developer and neighbors. No action was required of the Joint Board Adjacency_ reduirement.for Palmer prove] Present for the discussion was Elizabeth Bkkdge+ i attorney representing potential buyers of the Palmer property Mr. Magnuson explained that there is air easement agreement for a 60-foot parcel the Palmer's dedicated for access and publi, utilities. The potential buyers have requested an opinion regarding the adjacency requirement for annexation. Mr. Magnuson said, in his opinion the City would have to annex a portion of Neal Avenue in order to meet the adjacency requirement, He said the people with the option to buy want some assurance the adjacency requirement can be met. Ms, Blodgett said the would-be buyers would like the city to annex the necessary portion .)f the .iad Mr. Scott had not had an opportunity to review the easement agreernent and thus could not comment on whetter the Township is in agreement with Mr. Magnuson's opinion. There was discussion as to whether annexation of the road at this point would enable early annexation to the city it was noted the Orderly Annexation Agreement provides for annexatior of the Palmer property after Jan. 1, 200Z, and if 75 percent of phase ti has beer deve.lopcd Mr. Johnson said the Town Board probably wouldn't object to cooperating to facilitate the sale, but would want some assuI arrr.e that doing 5o would not result in a request for early annexation of the property Mr. Magnuson FROM : FROOYSASS SSS- SSSSSSSSSSSS PHalE NO. F'34 and Mr. Scott suggested that the Orderly Annexation Agreement language could be amended in some way to provide assurance to the potential buyers that after Jan. 1, 2O0Z, the City would be required to provide adjacency. It was agreed to have Mr. Magnuson and Mr. Scoti corrie back to the board with their recommendations, Fred Bruns, 8790 Neal Avenue, asked about the exact location of the easement and whether all of Neal Avenue would end up in the City at some point in time. Mr. Johnson responded that copies of the Orderly Annexation Agreement are available for review, and noted that the phase 4 annexation area is not scheduled for potential annexation until'2(.r) 6 Penthouse Acres questionnaire results Mr. Magnuson reported on the results oi the poll of property owners in Penthouse Acres to determine whether they wished to be detached frorn the City. Of the 1 Z polled, six were in favor of ren-raisring in the City, five were not returned, and one indicated an interested in returning to the Township. Eleven neighboring property owner, also were polled, with six preferring to remain In the City, three no3returned, and two favoring detachment from the City, in total, Z3 property owners were polled on the question, with three favoring returning to the Towrishi6. Update ongx ansion are Utiiitstudiesirretreation i2lafirririu Mr. Russell provided the update vn the utility study The City Council may take action on its Dec. Z meeting. Mr Russell said the t'nreline still calls for the utilities to be in place for the opening of the new elementary school. Mr. Russell also said a meetiny is set for De... 3 with Long Lake and McKusick Lake property owners to update them; on the mitigation feasibility study; cost of the mitigation projee; is nearly $1 million, he said. Mr. Johnson asked whether the iocatscur1 of the utilities had been determined. He requested that the City provide- the information to the Township once a route has been determined so the Town can field questions from property owners. Mr Magnuson rioted that is imperative to obtain easements soon if winter construction is to proceed, he said the City will make every effort to keep the Township informed The information, including a list of affected property owners; will be sent to Mr. Francis and Mr. Johnson, as well as ttie Townshiy: Clerk EXRanslon /Lea plan FROM : FRBO"' SSSSSSSSE;SSSSSSSSSSS PHONE E NO. PO'5 Plans were distributed for Legends of Stillwater (Staloch property) and Liberty on the Lake (Newman property). There was some discussion regarding meeting/hearing dates. It was decided to hold a joint meeting with the city and town Planning Commissions on Dec 17 to review the plans in more detail. The City Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at its January meeting. The plans then will come back to the Joint Board, tentatively on Jan. 28, before going to the City Council in February. Other business Mr. Russell said the City is pursuing purchase of the Rivard property for park/public works/water tower location. Mr Johnson said the Township might be interested in participating in some mannu,, as the Town also has plans for a park on a parcel of property on Boutwell Road Agliournment: Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr Kimble moved to adjourn at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission and Joint Board FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director DA: January 23, 1998 RE: LEGENDS OF STILLWATER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT Background The Legends of Stillwater is within the Phase I City of Stillwater Expansion Area. The area was annexed in October of 1996. Since that time, the developers, Planning Commission, Parks Board and Joint Board. Previous to this review, an Environmental Impact Statement (AUAR) has been prepared and adopted for the entire expansion area. The Planned Unit Development Plan is consistent with the Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Plan regarding development type and density and natural resource policies and regulations have been met. The Legends project plans for parks and trails meet the city park dedication requirements and are recommended by the Parks Board for approval as consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. DNR is currently reviewing the Legend PUD and will have to approve the plans before final City PUD approval. Project Description The project entails 155 single family residential lots on 75 acres of land. The lot types are 21 Lakeshore, 36 Traditional, 98 Cottage lots. An extensive system of trails and sidewalks are provided. A portion of the Oak Woodland is dedicated as a public park. Connecting trails lead to a neighborhood or small community park. The street widths are narrower, 28 feet and 24 feet, with 10 foot boulevards with extensive street tree planting. The landscape plan shows nearly 500 trees being planted as a part of the subdivision improvement. In addition, private lot landscaping could easily double that number (see attached complete project description and letter from developer). The developer is proposing a traditional design theme similar in many respects to "Old Stillwater" with narrower streets, landscaped boulevards and varied building facades and garage locations. Attached to this report are typical drawings of cottage lot developments provided by the developer. The residential zoning ordinances for this area and the expansion area design 1 guidelines help more specifically define the future preferred design direction for the area. Analysis The concept PUD plans and preliminary plat are consistent with the recently adopted (December 1995) Comprehensive Plan. The project with the attached conditions of approval is consistent with the AUAR environmental review. DNR must review the proposed PUD for consistnecy with the Shoreland Regulations regarding 50 percent open space protection and dock locations (see letter from DNR). Since the last meeting, staff has met with DNR's representative regarding the shoreland review requirements. An open space map shows the 50 percent+ area that will be maintained in open space. The City Engineer has reviewed the projects grading, stormwater drainage plan, street design and many of his comments have been incorporated into the revised plans. Additional Engineer's comments and conditons are attached. Conditions of Approval The following conditions of approval will have to be meet before the City grants final PUD and plat approval. Conditions of Approval: Parks and Trails. 1. The Oak Woodland being dedicated to the City as a park shall be reviewed by the forester and management recommendations made and implemented before dedication to the City. 2. The Outlot D park shall be graded and seeded as part of the subdivision improvement. 3. All trails shall be 8 feet bitomious pathway and installed as part of Phase I subdivision improvements. 4. A pathway shall be added connecting Baron's Circle cul de sac and Legends Boulevard to the shoreland trail (as originally proposed). Subdivision Improvements 5. Street trees and site landscaping as shown on Map 4 of 8 shall be installed as phased subdivision or improvements are made. 6. McDougal Green shall be expanded to include portions of Lots 11 & 12 to the north. 7. Street crossings along Legends Boulevard shall be paved in concrete. 8. Boulevard areas and front yards shall be sodded. — Z ,4— jO ' fret/ 2 9. Improvements shall be made to 62nd Street as required by the City Engineer (parking lot, pathway, surfacing). 10. Additional right of way or street easement may be required to accommodate 10 feet boulevard. Natural Resource Conditions. ' 11. The lakeshore setback area shall be protected with an open space/conservation easement prohibiting land and vegetation disturbances and prohibiting any construction other than approved pathways, docks and enhancement landscaping.IA,' 12. The draft Forest Management Plan shall be reviewed by a forester as it relates to the Legends property and management activities and responsibilities determined (developer, homeowner, city). 13. Education information shall be provided to all lakeshore homeowners to provide approved lawn care method. 14. The pathway easement shall be legally described and marked along the shoreline. 15. DNR approval shall be obtained for PUD approval before final City PUD and plat approval. 16. A list of trees native to the area shall be provided to developers and owners of individual lots for use in landscape plans. 17. The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for maintenance of Greens cul de sac landscaped areas and development theme areas. 18. Areas around wetlands and drainage ponds shall be planted with native plants suited to the environment. 19. All Lakeshore lots and Staples Place lots shall required design review. 20. Approved fencing detail shall be included in final PUD review and approval. Legal. 21. The City Attorney, City Engineer shall review and approve the declarations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements before final PUD approval. 22. The City Attorney and Community Development Director shall review the dock easements and covenant agreements before final PUD approval. 3 Final PUD Review 23. The Development Architectural Control Committee shall approve final PUD plans for consistency with architectural standards ("the ACC shall encourage the use of traditional elements of design including but not limited to porches, side entry and recessed garages and traditional windows and gables") before submission to the City Planning Commission for review. 24. The City's Design Guidelines for Phase I expansion area development shall be used by the City staff and Planning Commission in reviewing final Planned Unit Development Plans. 25. The City and Developer shall implement the AUAR Mitigation Plan regarding stook water runoff and natural area protection. Attachments: Letter of application, project description and plans - 10 17-97 Traffic/road width description 10-31-97 Neighborhood theme plans Typical small lot elevation Letter from Dan Herbst, Legends developer, regarding DNR review and zoning setback standards. Elevations of typical small lot development. 4 SENT BY: DNR METRO; 1-23-98 15:30; 6127727573 => 4308810; #111 January 23, 1998 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Metro Waters, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977 Mr. Steve Russell City Hall 216 North Fourth Stillwater, MN 55128 Re, Long Lake PUDs: Legends and Liberty Dear Mr. Russell: DNR Waters is continuing to review the preliminary plats for consistency with the Statewide Shoreland Management Regulations. As we have discussed at several recent meetings, certain guidelines must be followed in order to receive approval as a PUD, Both plats appear to meet the 50% open space requirements and we are waiting to receive and comment on the proposed covenants and restrictions for both the public and private open space areas. Within the private open space of the yards, such activities such as decks, patios, pools, accessory structures and play areas and structures would be restricted. Such activities must be conducted within the use envelope surrounding each dwelling unit. Another statewide requirement is the centralization or clustering of shore recreational facilities within the plats. We are waiting to review the proposed locations and designs, as well as the proposed covenants and restrictions for natural shoreline preservation. Other areas where we would like to work with the developers on are forest resource sustainability, native plantings and implementation of alternative stormwater techniques to reduce runoff and increase infiltration. If you have any questions, please contact me at 772-7915. Sincerely, Molly Shodeen Area Hydrologist c: Dan Herbst Mark Putnam Stillwater Township Annette Drewes Sherri Buss Ed Fick C1NR biro) tntlit' l,l'' ''.91.161'17. 1-M1(i-7+.6rh1)I)1) • TT Y: 612-296-548J, I-titN)-biz-tt),y F.pi,t 1( )pporhinuN limpl:tl ct N I'tlutckcc p." f'.t pet C.nt a: ell, ti'htt P:u u: Lb t ifs 411 4, M1l i,ti tft nl 11r, i', r.t Clnr:utta•r i!}n1.. MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Russell FROM: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer DATE: January 23, 1998 SUBJECT: Comments on the Legends Preliminary Development Plan We have reviewed the revised preliminary plat of the Legends Development dated 1/20/98 and offer the following comments: 1. The primary roads including Reunion Road, Barrons Way and Legend Blvd. are all proposed to be 50' right-of-way. These right-of-ways should either be increased to 60', or roadway easements should be added, which are acceptable to the city attorney. 2. Cul-de-sacs labeled Staples Place, Sawyer Place and Barrons Circle should be modified to eliminate the center island or increase the center island to the size of 4,000 sq. ft. or a 35'radius. The McDougal Green also should be increased in size by changing the configuration of Lot 11, Block 1 so that it's the same shape as Lot 10. This would allow McDougle Green to be enlarged in size and more capable of accommodating amenities or pedestrians. Additional information is required for wetland mitigation and protection plans on Outlot D, Lot 7, Block 6, Lot 8, Block 8. All of the comments made by BRA in their review of the compliance with the AUAR should be incorporated in to the plan. At this time it is unclear whether all of these comments have been included. 3. The silt fence/tree protection fence should be shown along Staples Place and Gatiant Way. 4. It's unclear how the development will accommodate drainage coming from the west. This issue must be better detailed. 5. Lot 20, Block 2 shows an existing open ditch on a steep slope which is proposed to remain in place. This could be problematic. 6. Lot 1, Block 4 shows a storm sewer passing directly through the center of the lot. This proposed storm sewer would interfere with the house location. 7. The proposed plant list shown on the landscape plan should be reviewed to insure it does not include invasive species. 8. Some rudimentary street layouts should be shown along with rough grades on the neighboring properties where the proposed dead-end streets are located. 9. The preliminary plat can only be approved if the developers agree to sign the developer agreement which would insure that all public trunk utilities can be installed to serve this area. 1:J October 17, 1997 /74/Yt ThePemtom Land Company WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 14180 WEST 78TH STREET EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 {612j 937-0716 • FAX 937-8635 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: Planned Unit Development Submission - The Legends of Stillwater Members of the City Council, Planning Commission, Park Board, Joint Planning Board, and City Staff: Status In September 1996, concept information pertaining to the James and Ilo Staloch farm located on the western shores of Long Lake, included in the Phase I Annexation Area of the City of Stillwater, was submitted to you. Since that time we have had numerous meetings with the City Staff, Planning Commission, Joint Planning Board, and Park Board, and recently conducted a neighborhood meeting. In addition, a tour was conducted of the site and one of various projects of the Applicant and competitors Planned Unit Developments. We felt fortunate to participate in the annexation process, completion of your Economic Feasibility Study, Comprehensive Plan, and the completion of the A.U.A.R. We now are requesting that our submission be presented for an official public hearing and the adoption of our Planned Unit Development. Submission Included is a summary of the development characteristics consisting of environmental resources, public improvements, proposed development, and dwelling unit calculations. History of Applicant The applicant, Pemtom, has been involved in land development and housing since 1963. A list of neighborhoods completed by the Applicant is enclosed. In creating neighborhoods, Pemtom has taken particular pride in being one of the first in the Twin Cities marketplace to accomplish Planned Unit Developments, employ landscape architects and land planners, establish homeowner's associations, and has a long history of protecting trees, wetlands, slopes, and other resources long before regulations required such protection. City of Stillwater October 17, 1997 Page 2 We are also proud to submit the credentials of Westwood Professional Services, a multi- disciplinary company that employs landscape architects, planners, wetland biologists, engineers, and surveyors. A copy of their credentials is enclosed. In submitting the data on Pemtom and Westwood, it is important that one look at the history of the accomplishments of those two firms. This can be used as a strong indicator of what will be done in the future. Most important, is our excitement at the prospect of creating a unique neighborhood for the City of Stillwater. Not only is it the oldest city in Minnesota, but it is also well thought of and one of the most desired communities in the midwest. We are anxious to commence development and create this new neighborhood which will be of lasting pride to the community. Neighborhood Name The proposed name for this new neighborhood is The Legends of Stillwater. At the final platting stage we would like to incorporate street names that may be suggested by your Planning Commission or Historical Society. We are suggesting such street names as Sawyer Trail, after a social center for the upper crust founded in 1857 and now the Lowell Inn, McKean Circle, for one of Stillwater's founding fathers, Mulvey Road for a prominent logger, Judd Trail after the first school teacher, and Delano Drive after the first prison warden. Neighborhood Identity Throughout the City of Stillwater there are numerous utilizations of limestone, lattice, traditional landscaping, and traditional housing. We intend on installing a neighborhood identity feature, internal gazebo on the pond, and utilizing limestone and traditional landscaping and streetscaping throughout the development. Traditional architecture or architectural elements such as garage placement, roof lines, porches, porticos, window styles, eaves, detailing, etc. will be encouraged. People entering The Legends will know they are not in a standard suburban subdivision and will see and feel the connection to the traditional element in Stillwater today. Preliminary plans of the entry and landscape features are enclosed. Topographical/Slope Analysis A sloping analysis and boundary survey have been conducted on the site and all slopes in four distinct ranges have been studied. A topographical map and slope analysis plan are enclosed. City of Stillwater October 17, 1997 Page 3 Site topography ranges from an elevation of 891.5 at Long Lake along the east boundary to an elevation of 966 along the west center boundary. The topography is generally a slope towards Long Lake for the southerly one half of the site. The northerly half, while also draining into Long Lake, is more rolling with seven wetland pockets. Site slopes range from 2%-40%. Only about 10% of the site has scattered slopes in excess of 12%. The steeper slopes are primarily along the lake shore, the west boundary, and in the northern wooded area. There is a small "bluff' zone located along the lake shore in the northeast corner of the site. The majority of the site, especially in the east central and southern areas, has slopes under 12%. Wetlands and Soils The firm of Arlic Environmental, Inc. was used to analyze the existing wetlands on the site and the various soil types have been identified for the property and graphically displayed. Braun Intertec was employed in December 1995 to conduct soil borings and Terry Brothers Excavating was employed to conduct test pits for soil technician analysis. There are seven (7) delineated wetlands located in the north and northeast parts of the site within the rolling topography totaling 2.07± acres. Five of these wetlands fall within the Ronneby Fine Sand Loam soils. The soils are generally sandy loams, silt loams, and clayey sands, based on the Washington County Soils Survey. Ground water was not observed at soil borings at depths of 10-18 feet. Land Use and Zoning The Comprehensive Plan recently adopted by the City of Stillwater, and approved by the Metropolitan Council, indicates large lot development on the eastern one half of the site permitting two units per acre on approximately 35 acres for a total density of approximately 70 units and the western half of the site indicates approximately 4 units per acre on 38 acres or 153 units for a total guided use of 223 units on the total site of 74.75 acres. Net land existing above the ordinary high water mark and wetlands contains 73.25 acres. The submission included is for 154 dwelling units. Rights of Ways Plans and written description of streets, sidewalks, and streetscapes are included. Grading/Drainage A storm water run off calculation is enclosed. The calculations are based on the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program and the Soil Conservation Service synthetic unit hydrograph method. The flow rates for a 1 year flood frequency up to a 100 year frequency reduce the post development flow rate 19%-38% from the total predevelopment flow. City of Stillwater October 17, 1997 Page 4 Traffic Analysis A memorandum summarizing traffic analysis is enclosed. The projections follow the assumptions in procedures that were also studied in the larger A.U.A.R. study. Based on a daily trip rate of 9.55 trips per single family home, this project is expected to have a daily trip generation of approximately 1440 trips. With minimum residential street widths, these volumes can be accommodated with no roadway operation or capacity problems. Sewer Feasibility Study The feasibility report for sanitary sewer trunk and water main trunk prepared by S.E.H. and Westwood is available for review. Homeowner's Association A Homeowner's Association will be created to maintain architectural control and to maintain the common elements that are not public such as the entry features and gazebo. A sample of the Articles of Incorporation, By -Laws, and Declaration of Covenants is enclosed. Dockage A proposed cluster dock plan is submitted wherein the 21 lake lots will share 11 docks of uniform size, design, and style. An easement agreement will exist between the lot owners. A sample of that agreement is enclosed. Trail and Utilities A 40' drainage utility and trail easement will be granted along the entire shoreline of Long Lake abutting this neighborhood. The trail will be constructed by the applicant at a location jointly agreed to by the Developer and the City and after acceptance will be maintained by the City. At the trail head, the Developer will also construct a 10 stall parking lot with landscaping and buffering. Park Dedication Letter summarizing Park Dedication is enclosed. Key Submission Documents Included: 1. Preliminary Plat 2. Grading Plan 3. Utility Plan 4. Landscape Plan 5. Tree Preservation Plan 6. Street Sections Plan 7. Site Sections Plan 8. Slopes Plan 9. Development Characteristics Tabulation Sheet City of Stillwater October 17, 1997 Page 5 Conclusion We believe we have met all of the requirements of the City under your Platting Ordinance, Planned Unit Development Ordinance, Park Dedication, Shoreland Ordinance, and Steep Slope and Tree Ordinances. We respectfully submit this application for approval by the City of Stillwater. Sincerely, Daniel J. Herbs , President The Legends of Stillwater DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS Environmental Resources (Map and calculated acreage) A. Total site 74.77 acre(s) B. Protected wetlands 2.07 acre(s) C. Wetland buffer/setback area 6.39 acre(s) D. Sloped 12% - 24% 12.56 acre(s) E. Sloped 25% + 2.62 ate($) F. Woodlands 16.83 ads) G. Net developable acres (A - B - F) 5 5.8 7 acre(s) Public improvements H. Public road right of way I. Drainage way and pending areas (2.14 acres at Elev: 904 - Pond NWL) J. Trails/bikeways and sidewalks (outside of road right of way) 3.36 acres) 12.68 acre(s) 3.5 8 acre(s) K Utility easements (water and sewer not used for private development purposes) Public sanitary sewer 0.20 acre(s) easementover Lots 4,6-8,11-12, Block 7 L. Public Parks outlets G & H 4.67 acre(s) (including 0.53 acres of wetland) M. Public open space (not park) 0 u t l o t s A- F 5.12 acre(s) Proposed Development N. Total residential land area 52.32 acre(s) O. Total commercial land area 0 acre(s) P. Total private open space (greens. commons and greenways) 0 acre(s) 1 Single Family Lots Dwelling .UnItType' Number Units • • Acres2 _ : r DU/AG`Net 1100 5wide/20,000± s.f. 21 12.28 1.71 ,,,,MMedium O-.95'wide/ Lot 9,600ts.f. 28 12.40 2.26 Small Lot ,Small Lot 105 27.64 80 4Net Density 154 52.32 L 2. 4 Gross Density 154 74.77 2.06 1. Single family detailed large lot >15,000, single family detached small lot <15,000, single family attached - indicate number of units in structure, multifamily. 2. Acres equals net acres (I) minus road right of ways, pubic parks and open space, utility easements (ponding and utility easements. not developable). 2 41997 West.po0 Professional Sox eft Inc. T no� 600 ISoutheast ...re el .l Guia de. section Jl. So.nN. 50. Range 20. Comely of waa9lan.Slot of • Nnnesom. ARO al oats of IA. Southwest Wanes. C.cwt the Ss.N Nall of m. Southeast Gate, el set N Neal Warts of m. Southwest Waw, one Ih. Swmw.t Waloe uf .dwl Quarter. (reset to h 600 feet m«.of, one o or leftyna west of N s M the 5o.rtnw0.1 WPr.e, of the Northeast ec0waler tone In .t Warts . Ne Ides Wat.r. N n S.ctron 31. township 30. 6m94 20. Canty el WONnplon. Stole of Minn.*. - the South Han or the S rtheosl Warta a Ole Name.. Warta of the Southwest °wrote, of Section 31. Tow0Nip ]0. Ron9e 20. County of W9Nn9tm, Slot* of M.n.so.a. b' Oohing Setback to 660I LONG LAKE /,_ 9-f t '•�, A....A NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0SV9L,nW Wf DATA Sil. A.so: wwewJ Swpe farms. 0.4oese0 Wow 6Wesitr Wetlands: PM/Palk open SPace/Recr.elien 4ws P. D.aoalion - vudk Weal A Whet B Wuo. C Wlat ° Wlat E 7.67 Cosement - Pudk Sue-lotd Less Wetlandso Pars Total Pas LeWelknOs Py Ww ona.Area (11ole O k PC) ea 189n1-01-wet. 62. Street Inlennol streets total Proposed front Bupanp Seleach.. Nord Solerare - Groape Sole trio - u.:.9 Arw Roar Yard LehfNa. Wetra Selb«9 e Sutpot to Pnot Zoning Cntera `• Aaoses `\ peyelTLyd___._ dave.efWw ^ I a e,Comp any MOO i w o. 5 Edon Prowler. NNE 555.4 (612) 902-0216 _ 2A272 At. -155 - 209 On - 2.022 Ac 4962 Ac :02u A. 12)22 A6 25 n. 5 rt. 1e rt. 25 rt. 15 rt. 65 rt. Ton 40 ft Ty7Nd Lo Loop. Lots (lNe. io,) YeOoon lot . 0 ..01 StnN Lot. (Prior) Told 0:r. Watn 21 11104 ft. 36 60-95 rt. 96 55-75 rt. I55 MA. owls 200 f.. 120 ft 120 f1. Areo 20.0002 s 9.6002 s.f. 6.6002 s.l. O1LWL - e915 891,25,2 Setback 60 Tr.2 E.sarne Let..9or. Trel f Btl Pe6...y Blared Coo Ry.) \ \ I /f .r.9 "w 1 029 3 ....,.....alWe ofivoud ...ea,5 Inc. The Mnf1 am a pion ore Edon Prow T.u.A 55311 s. supporting (612) 932 -5150 prosimat mR 'I l em...iou. o Roared . TYPICAL LOT w Lu.l fj uaay9804 ent 0 0 I1, Y 5.le.N tit. J*" - Lot D:nw.kn MONO LAKE • MOUND Lot Names Alwre. Lot Area —ow_ Coining Co..ev. .„ fwmp Walmae W.. Edge of Woo.. Dln5rr50teook. l Call e6 Noun Ware ragging. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL n City Area 454-0002 un.lion fen 1-600-252-1166 on 100 200 300 REVISIONS 10/6/97 - LOTS, R/W 12/10/92 - L015. R/W 12/11/97 - O.ATA SEIBACNS \l/9/96 - KR. 2. LOTS 14-20 k OELANO 0R. 1/20/96 51o00ALA5 (Care) wtely. oar i REG NO 1200J 040 0400* °NJ sat Weeap w.wW ..nec r T.ww fon The Pemtom Land Company &Iw Pmhiw Mn,v.el. The Legends of Stillwater 6411wwww. Mb.mre Preliminary Plat DATE 10/16/9) SHEET 1 Of 01998 W141•ooe P101000iona 5awce•. Mc 89 900 INO Aso • ME SITE MUST OE KEPT IN A YELL -DRAINED CONDIR1N AT ALL TOES ME CONIRACIOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORARY DITCHES PIPING OR OTHER MEANS REQUIRED TO INSURE PROPER ONUNAGC DURING CON5IRUC11041. LOW PORTS IN ROADWAYS OR BUILDING PADS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH A 1.09RVE 00/14107. • PUBLIC STREETS USED FOR HAuLNC SHALL BE KEPT FREE OF SOL AND DEBRIS STREET SWEEPING SHALL BE CONGRRENT NTH CARMWOD ON SHE. • HAULING HOURS MUST BE CONFIRMED WIN ME OTT PRIOR TO BENTONG NOW • AREA TO BE GRADED • 47.28 AC. • TOTAL 9TE AREA • 74.75 AC. --� GENERAL_ NODE • REFER 10 ME FOAL PLAT OR 041E RAN FOR CURRENT HORIZONTAL 9TE D:uEN510NS ANO LAYOUT. • THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VEIDFY THE LOCATION AHD ELEVATION OF EXISTING UnuTES AND TOPOGRAPHICAL FEATURES WM ME OWNERS AND FIELD -VERIFY PRIOR TO CON5IRUCMUN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IuuE0A1ELY NOTIFY ME ENONEE4 OF ANY OSCREPANCLS OR vARIARONS • No CONTRACTOR K TO CONTACT WRIER STATE 'ONE CALL' FOR MAY LOCAT0NS AT 454-0002. • AL SAT FENCE AND OMER EROSION CONTROL FEATURES SHALL BE IN -RACE PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION/CONSTRUCTOR AND SHALL BE 9AIN1AINE0 UNTIL MAKE RAF OR GROUND COVER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. EXISDNG SAT FENCE ON-5TE SHALL BE UNATTAINED ANTI OR REHOED AND MALL BE CON9DERED RKSDENTAL TO THE GRADING GOURMET. 11 K OF EXTREME IUPORINNCE TO OE AWARE CP GRSENT nub CONO9ONS NM RESPECT TO ERONCN CONTROL. TENPORARY PONONC, DIKES HATBALES. FIG. REQUIRED By AGENCIES/0.ER SHALL BE INCIDENTAL 10 11E GRADING. • • THE GRADING CONTRACTOR NUS, BE AWARE OF ALL EKKING AND PROPOSED UMNIES • AL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COWCOR. TO LOCAL AND STATE RULES INOLUONG THE NAOONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE EUNINAIKN SYSTEM (RPM) PERMIT REGUIRENENIS. • ALL SMELTS DKIURBED PANG WORKING IWAIRS u*51 BE GLEANED AT THE END OF EACH woRKING OAT. A R00E ENIRAHG TO ME 900 MUST BE PROVIDED ACCORDING 10 PETALS TO REDUCE TRACKING OC DIRT ONTO PUBLIC STREETS. • P05THE DRAINAGE MORN ME Sol MUST BE PROVIDED AT ALL PRES. • ALL EV:P05ED SOLS MUST BE STABILIZED WARN 14 CALENDAR OATS OF ROUGH GRADE COMPLETION UNLESS OMERWSE DIRECTED BY ME ENGINEER. ALL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE ADECOATE SEDIMENT TRAPPING SYSTD/5 INSTALLED AROUND 11E44 • TENPORART SEEDING FERSUDNG. AND MULCH.. MUST OE APPLIED WHIN 1. OAK OF ROUGH GRADING UNLESS WORK IS TO BE MEOWED NMIN 60 OAK Of GRADING MAPLEl1UN. 404�lj.iirtoitaE T FENCE (TIP.) .AV. l mou drean s }(.. is a) v- - -- ra )r�...tEb7,41 jira1 P' n`. (:., / NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Eli Nos 7I1 nl) c � i W9P , LEGEND DENOTES SILT FENCE HMO— DENOTES EXISTING CONYONRS ---980-- DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS 0—* O OEN0TES EXISTING STORK SERER — --19 DENOTES PROPOSED 5TO1N SEWER DENOTES EDSING TREE ONE. /YYVWN DENOTES APPROKNATE TREE RENON. LIMITS NHS DENOTES POSTING YEILANOS OVER ROW • 909.0 LOb LAKE , i\ N Can .6 H ayy,•y. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL Twat. City Arse 150-0002 w. OW flu I-800-252-1166 940 IOU 200' REVISIONS 1/9/98 DELANO DNA WL-OE-SAC 11/17/97-LONG LAKE H. 12/17/97 T7/22/9, L015 I0-19. BL 2 1/2/98 GRADES. BILK. 7 WW6StWOOd REG. N0. 19153 DK/ wall DJW RtMm WALK. DI/OAR The Pemtom Land Company Pbn hw1. LKN..r,. The Legends of Stillwater Preliminary Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan DATE 10/07/97 SHEET 2 OF '1998 wem.00a Plolasuona Suwcn. Inc. GENERAL UTILITY NOTES • THE CONTRACTOR SNAIL VW( ALL EXISTING COOITONS POOR TO COCSIRUCIRIN AND NOTIFY INC OMNCR OF ANY DIFFERENCES • UNLESS OINERNSE NOTED, ALL MATERIALS. CCNST. TECHNIWES AND TESTNC SHALL CON5OW 10 THE 19BB CO. OF THE 'STANDARD WRITES SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER M. AND SERVICE LNE INSTALLATION AND SUNTAN, SEWER AND STORM SENOR ICSTALNION BY THE OTV (N.M. ASSOOAMM OF NNN' AND TO ENE 'STANDARD SPEOFICAT01 FDR NIOHWAY CONSIRUCIRIN' MINN. MDT. OF TRANS.. JUNE 9,1988 INCLUDING THE CURRENT ADOENDULL THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RE REWIRED TO FOLLOW ALL PROCEDURES AS OUTLINED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY. • THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECEDE MC NECESSARY PERMITS FOR ALL WORN CRTSOE Cf THE PROPERTY UNITS. • DERBY En5TH0 INVERT LOC. • EIEV. POOR TO BEONNINO CONS1RUC158. • TIE WATER SERVICE SHALL BE INSTALLED WIN A LAN. OF 7.5 FT. OF COVER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ,[RIFT 111E OW AS-OUOT CONSTRUCTION PUNS TO CECK LOCATION AND MATERIAL. PIPE. • ALL S10O1 SERER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 5 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • THE CONTRACTOR 19ALL CONTACT'GOPHER STATE ONE CALL' FOR FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS PRIOR TO UTMTY INSTALLATION. -33 RE.9*. R41 E•95.3 E•911.3 MH-35 RE•966.0 \ \ E•9510 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION \ MN -see RE•9AIA E•933.e LEGEND FOSTNG RROROSFD SANITARY SEWER — C — SANITARY SEWER — 4 — TATER WATER —I— HYD. W/NAL.9E NM. W/YALVE STERN SENOR — M — STERN SEWER — N — LONG LAKE Call IS Noun MHr• agy:ny GOPHER STATE ONE CALL MAT. City Area 454-0002 Toll F. I-80)-952-II66 100' REVISIONS 1 /01/91 TRUNK SEWER flow SOUTH TO NORTH I / 1/9/989/93 DClANO DOZE CUL-DE-SAC WH/6StWOOd DATE REG NO 19153 DJw u.A. DJW RECORD 1•aw 3VOAR The Legends Of Stil11WR1a Preliminary Utility Plan DATE t0HU97 SHEET 3GE• 01998 westaood Prolessronal Senn... Inc. EVERGREEN DETAIL 8-50 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION TREE DETAIL 2-R11 3-BS 1-PO- 3-50 — 5-CS 2-H8 -MA 3-RM 1-AP 3-PO 2-BS 2-50 1-AP k1�0NUMENTS SEE DETAILS 6 SO PLANT LIST KEY OTY. COMMON/B0TANICAL NAME H8 66 Hock Derry/Collis occWen la1s It 90 Lillleleol Liod.o/Teiot cordala 50 100 Swamp White Oak/Ouvcus bicolor RM 83 Northwood Red Mople/Ater rubrum 'Northwood' MA 88 Morsh06'a Ash/Frolunue pennsyl.orlka 'Mor018N'i PO 23 Pin Oak/0uercus poluslris RB 14 River Bkch/Belulo nigro CS 33 Colorodo Crean Spruce/Picea pungens 8S 22 Black Hills Spruce/Pkeo 91auca dens3l0 AP 11 Austrian Pine/Pious dire AC 13 R5 18 5D 5 al 9 CH 5 2-CS 2-MA 1-RM Amur Chokecherry/Prunus moackii Red Splendor Crnb/Malus . 'Red Splendor' Snowdrift Crob/Males a 'Snowdrift' 1 1/2' B.B. Indion Mo9k Crob/Molus a 'Indian Magic. 1 1/2' 8 B. Thornless Cockspur Howlhorn/Crotoegus crus-galll Ynermii 1 I/2' B.B. 32E 2 1/2' 8.8. 2 1/2' B.B. 2 1/2' B.B. 2 1 /2' 8.8. 2 1/2' B.B. 2 1/2' B.B. 1 1/2' B8. (Mali) 8' B.B. 6' 8.13. 3-BS 19-LL 1 1/2' 8.8. 1 1/2' B.B. 1I� Ir1 I ,>w 0 Oil 2-HB tom'=I1 i APB ����`a'I �� 3 HB �Z -,:■ 2-50 : pi• Ill f -MA 2-MA 3-50 2 S0 2-RB 6-LL 11-eRS 1 DETAILS SEE S PLANTING NOTES or MI prool mew.. rr, w..omar•w..a Pa am W' ±.ns .w a.. a preno to Ire u.w.w.-elan wHr Gaon P.M l• be More. r....r. AA. Iw.W I.r...• re•r1...Iw.1 wrwNr.r..• a. r co rule.(.... or. re orreellmionerl trom-loolon poll+. .i ...a.* .re® . op ore beelmm Poroom by WO 1 ..raww I OP. ....w ....� .Ir . •••• .array - M .lase Mom. pre.. aH a arm. Is CMIrY •s.w.w.wnwre•m. MY. M. 11.141 oar men.wall..-..ter. w.. w..re.* .A... u.. Sormaime ••Ootool unto,Ota Grow swu'a.. Car Irs.-oowl I. wry tom. MOM lora. 100 20t REVISIONS r/a/05 DELANO MI.r CAL-M-SAC �`� Westwood REG. NO 040. OK Dealer PPM Inver ORA.° erryan Prol000ll too The Pemtom Land Company RANI The Legends of Stillwater AWla.rr. Nmrr. Preliminary Landscape Plan [DAT 10014987] SHE 1 OF m •1997 Waeleoo0 Prdeu,ond Ser*cee. Inc. TREE PRESERVATION DATA TOTAL CANOPY COVER: TOTAL CANOPY COVER REMOKD_ REPLACEMENT TREES REWIRED: (10 trees/1 0c. removed, 10 If 3.71 oc.) REPLACEMENT TREES PROVIDED: i''L NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 18.60 Ac. 3.29 Ac. (70% of fold co.') 33 A71 TREES TO OE •:'(tESERVE0 TREES TO 9E REMOVED 0 L 'NY Tar REVISIONS 1/20/Se 188E C0•ER RD109ED (DAm) \� Westwood ..o.ac. * "..,... .�. w wr .. cu.. +�..rwo'urs'•' REC N0. cu. P.M r 1,1 The Pomei. ..00mLodCompany The Legends of Stillwater 9u0wur. ltmeo. Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan DATE 1 10/14/97 SHEET ,60F9� l997 Westwood Prolessionoi Saran , ina. CONCRETE WALK SIPE OF STREET VARIES SIDEWALK EASEMENT 4' i 10' UTIL. ESMT. SUBGOLLEGTOR STREET tti alb! E5615 C e 6 WHERE POSSIBLE ACCESS ROAD NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 25' B/B 50' R o.W PARKIN& • ;•. % ..� 10' VEIL. ESMT. e\o \\ 0615 CURB AND 6UTTER WHERE POSSIBLE CONCRETE WALK SIDE OF STREET VARIES SIDEWALK EASEMENT 2' Can N Moore neva eagq.na GOPHER STATE ONE CALL .. Cite woe 454-0002 an. Tan free 1-5ee-252-11ee NOT TO SCALE f RE,ASIONS t/xo/9e 50Ewe4M5 (C.e) WwestWooa DATE REC NO n.M ace MUM PR.. NAAR ro The Pavntom Lana Company The Legends of Stillwater ew..aor, arm Preliminary Street Sections r DATE • 10/14/0T SHEET s0OF0� '1997 ••zI.•na Pio(••9i0n0 Svwcw, inc. SECTION A -A' (Typical 50' R.O.W) SECTION 5-5' (Typical 50' R.O.W.) NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS •Elements of the original Stillwater core area •Narrower streets and right-of-ways •Houses placed closer to the street • Sidewalks •open space focal points • Trail along lake • Boulevard trees In right-of-way •Encouroge traditional style building elevations •Encovrage use of front porches or similar elements • Encourage side entry or recessed garage fronts toward street. •Developer to provide strong architectural controls via recorded covenants •Homeowner association to be established to maintain common elements and encourage neighborhood Interaction REVISIONS (/20/9e S0091•H(S (ORD Westwood DATE REO N0 00 aaa9 MN. PMY MOO MAW. Or/Ora ro The Pemtom Land Company The Legends of Stillwater Nninivoin Sections - Design Character DATE \ 10/U/07 SHEET `7 OF !/ •1998 5.AI.o4O Prol.9A,on91 S✓.c•9. tnc. LEGEND O% to 11% Slope 12% to 24% Slope 25% + Slope 10• SA.. S31e.03 TO 9LWr (u�, Lora 00.�A }•} NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION } LAKE } LONG LAKE it a —No— [nesting Contours 514$ a1•11n9 ••non.A } t 1�0 010 000 000 e a. \9M Con ABM 040 GOPHER STATEONE CALL T.In Cay Noe 434-0002 w. T0. rr.. 1-600-251-1166 REVISIONS 10/6/91 - Lo19, am `�• Westwood DATE RED NO '20.3 19(J atm. 0e3 zs.033.030 91•0040 90/00R r Poe,. Ion The Pemtom Land Company W trarla. Warta The Legends of Stillwater 1n11.30n.. Mint* Slope Analysis / DATE 1 10/14/97 SHEET L,8 OF 8, •1998 Wesl.00d Profe..lanal SarNce., Inc. 125.511.511572 OAL Sate kr, Prcpawa 5141 ram9y, Tpkd laic Lake.. NeNdnllal attleaal nwanlld Cottage neeldnlNl 7.JR 0 . 155 01y. 21 36 .e Yalu 50 X. 65 fL SO R ulvf NA= 5J51351.055r Total SII. N.a: Net Slle Nw (less ..o.Y., Puff a wawa) Open 5psa..11h. 1000' S0aalane: Oolbl u et C O.1o1 E (Iw...0anai k blull) Oeemn 170 n. NA 74.77• As 50.05A Ac 01.As 237• Ac. 1.075 A 3.940 As e.46a Subtotal 11.7, , 04n 01•n SPac• (..e ywd•): Total 0pen Space .thin 1000' Shorelane: Addl.. treat ♦ara and s' Sloe Ter. Tat. dO Bell0 Setback WW1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ti. 910. 10.000 10000 .I, a... 11.500 .r. o+. 2.7. As 21.44a As (35S) 111. 32.72.0 Aa. (5..) O..2O.4 Thir Pennant Leta Canpny 1et50 Tru. Xry. Na. 5 Edon ProVie, NN. 55344 014 937-0715 Oros • POS. lline damenstrataa that east SOS ton pets . nnpublca and Pi.te or eon occenimplat• lies line cnn4+rotien of 1N n spate I. subject la lurtnn re.s. and nagotuNor .with us ON. prior la fi d «Y wwoeda isa ..t..#4 wanm�7a.s.e4 W •bead S.Ncea Ins 14150 West7 74Tta.*36 nay. Eden Prat, NN. 55317 (612) 237-5.0 OHWL. - ogle 7e Wely. BtotV BM.4 of Trail Easement L.LesM. TN t 94 P.4..7 9hw.A Dxk (Top) 4 Nt7s 4P lei approximate. and wons an at plan s 49 data fan o1e CN lar to Pm lal dimanaiarsao daa.oa wppating TYPICAL Lor Raw Yea Var.. 5' vee Yard 1.11.0 N'... Existing Contours Eel Ono W.t1wd. . n.l.' Edg. of Wood. .0 Coil 6 Pours Dolor. Paging GOPHER STATE ONE CALI, :n City Nee 454-0002 W. !w Tree 1-500-I52-1155 yWestwood l REG. N0 eaala Mom P64 l®lo Wed.. a..wrz The Legends of Stillwater 4W..... ea*. Open Spaoe Plan DA 1E v201.e SHEET 7 OF 1, •1999 Westwood Pral.«Isual Sr01c«, Inc. tthe t>m� iJO.L t> 600 .1 of Ns S.N«sl Ouster al N. Rorlerest Ourtar of Sect. 31, iawnNlp 30. Ramp 20, County el WaNnelw. Slate of Mnnesota. AND: Norther. Ouster el In ...eel Ouerlar, l.cep1 the Sm. NMI d I« SmNeaet Oumle Northwest Northeast t[Oursnest 01the N. Seu of aanorth GOO Met , el. and 0. 5041.0.1 Ouster les.of 9W lone In 0,e Suu0.«1 Ousts d theand aarterr°ma m. mortneest Iyn0.ertr of N. Sauthea.t Ouartr. all M 5.1. 31. Towns . 30. RN9. 20. County of lea1491w, Stale al Minnesota. AND• eln. SouSW of N. Southeast Ouslar N f Ne sdSouthwestOu t wrl.r of lh• Southwest ster Section 31.1 Teens/de 30. Ronde 20. County el Waeh29tan. Sloes of 2IM,«a10. 40 Dule o 5.16a4 le SS LAND LAKE J i4' ' 0 $ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - r4.772 Ac - 155 - 200 oa/Aa - 2072 Ac. 0.222 Aa 2.372 A. .are Ac 3 02 AN '.172 A. 16.132 Aa 1.652 A. 12.52 Aa 3.N2 A. 1.952 Aa 10 Te2 Aa 12.722 Po. 15e'2 T«tall«- lahe�Omdlllane. m«ed OuWWe S lhoNer• Grunt Yee 51de Yard - Goa. Sine Yard - L.p A« Res Y. hore Well«de Bluff Seth.. Seek. thud:• Large lets (l« ), •dam tole (Hurls)l..) Smell Late (Interior) - Toon e69.a oveE OATS v1e wmo d Slope ramty Proposed ao.. O.nens Wanmdc Pe/WM0MOpen eolM Meow PeY DkM - a11PPutd2udics outlet A alrot Oulbl O Outlet 0 0u001 E T. Easement - Punk Less Soo -cola Wetlands PareTodWetlandsInPold Par. s ( l«s Wetlands &PondC) 600* qw«-reap s92C) Road d Stl-al-roX 0. tl S4«ts Total C flaked Dad D1 B .) • F ` -' DSW -..._... ...-. --... ` ;\yam . i;a„.„ .. ( Ir11 _. •om` t.i • vv.a..r ?) ae a aw,r9ewaWmmwfnv99ar t Eden rru.o. 1.21. 5 s 1Y We run in, 5 Eden Prude, MN. 53N1 Edon Rdr4,1MN. 155317 (e1}) 937-0710 (6@) 037-5150 - 25 FL - 5 rl - 10 rl - 25 rL - 75 FL - 16.5 F1, rr.. - s0 Ft (. 01X NON Depth 21 1002 Ft. 200 Ft. 36 50-95 FL 120 Ft. 96 55-75 FL 120 Ft. MM. N. 20,0002 o.f. 0.000...1 .6002 al. •Sa6}cl to Ft,tl ZMIn9 Cr.. OHWL- 9915 7a L08.04. re B12t219 840ad Sa Tral Emerald Latsdw. Trd a Bll Palmay NOR. Mr... end are. on kT are rape n aRthe andep wrung dot 1 aneon. and enact let da+are« flu fa (w dr4) 100 I I al a 9 Ira LONO LAKE Y 5.teaca ulna - Lel Dlm«.ton �- Appro.. Let Asa 00400. • Om«sbn :r LAMM Sting Canto. :'..,I. r.i.ling %Mande sour.' foe. el Wands cal 46 Mao. MM . dp91n9. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL T.In Dty A« CSe-000T xn. Ta. M1« 1-500-059-1166 200 300 REVISIONS 1!� Westwoyod aRir"iM � w. M...f W aw.I Isara REG. N0 12043 COW CIO ss1 ma More nN.s The Pemtom I -and Company I� nwsl. Ml.•..•u The Legends of Stillwater NWwwfs, sw••sM. Alternate Centralized Dock Plan (tih P«IiMban PLJ DATE vaD/aa SHEET �1 OF 1� 1115.12 noo I Westwood Professional Services, Inc. October 31, 1997 Mr. Steve Russell City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Mn 55082 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 612-937-5150 Fax: 612-937-5822 Toll Free: 1-888-937-5150 Email: wps@westwoodps.com Re: Street Widths - Pemtom - Legends of Stillwater Ref: 96250 Dear Steve: Over the last several months, we have been looking at ways to reduce the street widths from typical Stillwater standards to accomplish a variety of goals within the Legends of Stillwater Development. These goals, also being encouraged by the A.U.A.R. document to help reduce negative effects on the environment, also will help benefit the City in many ways. The following is a partial list of advantages that smaller street widths provide: • Reduces the average temperature of rainwater runoff that eventually routes to Brown's Creek or the St. Croix River • Reduces the runoff rate and runoff volume of stormwater by reducing the amount of hard surface within a project • Encourages slower traffic. Neighborhoods with narrower, curvilinear streets experience slower average speeds than wider, straight streets according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Slower traffic leads to safer streets for the pedestrian • Reduces the amount of snow to be removed from streets, thus reduces the Public Works work effort • Reduces the amount of pavement to be maintained and or replaced during it's lifecycle • Reduces maintenance costs • Reduces replacement costs • Provides for a more pedestrian friendly environment that allows more green space/landscaping adjacent to the homes • Reduces the initial cost of the street by reducing the raw materials required The streets we are proposing are represented in a document provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Within that document, they establish a series of 16 goals that should be considered when laying out a residential street system. They are as follows: 1. Adequate vehicular and pedestrian access should be provided to all parcels 2. Local street systems should be designed to minimize through traffic movements 3. Street patterns should minimize excessive vehicular travel 4. Local street systems should be logical and comprehensible... 5. Local circulation systems and land development patterns should not detract from the efficiency of bordering major streets 6. elements in the local circulation system should not have to rely on extensive traffic regulations in order to function efficiently and safely. Designing the Future Today...since 1972 7. Traffic generators within residential areas should be considered in the local circulation pattern 8. Planning and construction of residential streets should clearing indicate their local function 9. The street system should be designed for a relatively uniform low volume of traffic 10. Local streets should be designed to discourage excessive speeds 11. Pedestrian -vehicular conflict should be minimized 12. A minimum amount of space should be devoted to street use 13. There should be a limited number of intersections 14. The arrangement of local streets should permit economical and practical patterns, shapes and size of development parcels 15. Local streets should be related to topography from the standpoint of both economics amenities 16. Appropriate provisions for transit service within residential areas should be established The Legends of Stillwater contains a local street system with Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes ranging from 50 to 680 two way trips per roadway. Our street classification system includes Limited Access Streets, Access Streets and Subcollector streets. These streets have ranges of ADT from 0-60, 0- 250 and 250-1000 two way trips per day respectively. Although ADT analysis is not the best or only design criteria for residential street design, it gives us a basis for determining use needs of a particular roadway. The following chart represents our proposed street design: Street Type ADT Range Roadway Width Parking Limited Access Drives 0-60 20.5 (B-B) One side Access Streets 0-250 24 feet (B-B) Both sides Subcollector streets 250-1000 28 feet (B-B) One side Access Streets and Subcollector streets are proposed in 50 foot right-of-ways that allow for sidewalks, utility corridors, pedestrian/public movement and landscaping. All houses will have a minimum of a two car garage that will allow for the majority of the cars to park off of the street. On -street parking should be considered an occasional event. The issue of reduced street widths is important to this development to capture the character and overall feel of a quality neighborhood. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, WE ,S O P 'i; sFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. Dwight K. Jelle, P.E. Principal Copy: Dan Herbst, Pemtom Land Co. Illrelprfir evn u�um is gikvei 1111 tJJJ 1 DESIGN. DRAwN EDLCNED PREPARED LHE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY EDEN PRAIRIE, SIINNESOTA THE LEGENDS OE STILLWATER REVISIONS DATE. 2•19.-'E7 ENTRANCE MONUMENT CONCEPT Eat? NCORPORATE ANCRITUrNNa ANmuPa ANollrecrlia MINNEAPOLIS. MN SM. DESIGN DRAWN CNECNED PREPARE I) TOR: THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY WEN PRAIRIE.. MINNESOTA LEGENDS or STILLWATER REVISIONS DATE: T.10•9/ ENTRANCE MONUMENT CONCEPT DESIGN FORUM INCORPORATED MM�6CcAlWaANNWD �K AIICNiT[RMC emus Sr 011i1 .91101 L. G.LoN [OKD-u-I.'4-1. * 3 4 ti ow YLPNtIt c- LAtttce fetiCP c1',NE MotluklAt �• •. W. LINE sp` t c stoNe CAP LI,w St0Ne SCALE: ]/a' OES,GN WN__ CHECK PREPARED. OR: THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY EDEN PRAIRIE, MIINNESOTA THE LEGENDS of STILLWATER REVISIONS OAJE. TYPICAL CORNER MONUMENT DESIGN FORUM INCORPORATED L2g4lIc P ;Ra:•nCi=Ri Z171Naaam,.ea�a iu�ea 1111 • SCALE: 1/R' • I'.0' 141,,14 W VINE ice('-xt // V I IE RAW' LINE r°ND L °I-q-Pl'sco, 6'—IV+f. SCALE: 7/16' • E•-0' DESIGN CHECKED PREP ,RED:OR: THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY ,DEN PRAIRIE• SEINNESOTA THE LEGENDS of STILLWATER REVISIONS Di LE: 9-10.97 POND GAZEBO CONCEPT January 20, 1998 The Pemtom Land Company Mr. Steve Russell City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Steve: 7597 ANAGRAM DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 (612) 937-0716 • FAX 937-8635 This letter is a follow-up of my letter to you on December 26, 1997 and our meeting on Friday, January 16, 1998. No one will ever say our meetings are not without a lot of opinions and enthusiasm. Regarding the DNR position of the area hydrologist, I feel confident that the intentions of these regulations are not to be as cumbersome as they are communicated to us. We will quickly try to resolve this issue through informal channels and, if not successful, I will have a very knowledgeable attorney meet with the DNR staff. It seems to me the restriction being considered for these properties relates to areas where storm water quality treatment and resource protection by N.U.R.P. standards is not being utilized. In the meantime, we will provide a plan showing where we could potentially accommodate the 50% public/private lot open space. The issue of impervious coverage in these areas yet needs further review and negotiation. We will also provide two plans for dock arrangements - one with a single centralized location for 21 docks as requested by the DNR and a second, as we originally proposed, for 11 shared docks for 21 lots. Our feeling is that the lake impact of 11 docks likely will be less since some owners may not install docks whereas, if centralized, the homeowners association and the developer will be required to install all 21 dock slips. As previously noted, these items will be further reviewed with the DNR prior to final City approvals. Regarding the design area - you have made a quantum leap from talking about design guidelines and your consultants draft of Design Guidelines to now drafting Residential Zone Districts requiring "All front facing garages shall be setback at least 5 feet further than the house from front or side streets." Even a Comprehensive Plan stating the need for traditional housing could never be legally stretched to a point of requiring specific limitations that may or may not have anything to do with traditional housing. Neither you or our covenants should be so restrictive as to doom our project financially. Any absolute requirement for a garage to be set back further than the house may not only impact good traditional design, but also limit a traditional prone consumer to have limited floor plan choices. Incentives or encouragement - "yes"; requirements "no". Mr. Steve Russell January 20, 1998 Page 2 Specifically the definition of Traditional Residential (TR) District in your amendment should be general in nature to "encourage" such items as porches, steeper pitched roofs, vertical windows, and less dominant garage elevations. Residential Zone District Standards should allow housing to be closer than the required 25' setback, perhaps 15-20' if the garage is recessed at least 4'. If not, both house and garage would be required to be 25', for example, on an L.R. lot. In all districts (L.R., T.R., C.R., or T.H.), there should not be any mandatory requirements that the garage be setback further than the house, but if a house is designed with a garage recessed at least 4', then a 5' concession could be granted on a front or side street yard setback. Your footnote "1" needs to be rewritten in a less restrictive form with conditions to offer greater flexibility for market demand. Your footnote "2" requirement, "House and garage setbacks shall meet specific design requirements regarding garage location and design and front or side of house elevations" is far too nebulous and should be deleted. We intend to provide 10 foot wide boulevards between the street curbs and right-of-way line or sidewalks through either rearrangement of elements within the right-of-way or by adding right-of-way/sidewalk easements. A draft forestry management plan has been submitted for staff review and comment. Please refer to my letter of December 26, 1997 as it relates to other elements contained in the original design guidelines. Also, being that the design guidelines are just that only, the word "shall" should be removed throughout these guidelines. You should know that our company has and will continue to seek traditional housing and character for this neighborhood and will encourage traditional elements in our architectural control process. We will strongly insist on compliance with builders within this project subject to market support. Sincerely, THE PEMTOM LAND COMPANY Daniel J. Herbst President DJH/idt The Pemtom Land Comp -any F:J December 26, 1997 Steve Russell City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 7597 ANAGRAM DRIVE EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 (612) 937-0716 • FAX 937-8635 Re: Follow up of December 17, 1997 Joint Board and Planning Commission Meeting Dear Steve: As a result of the above meeting, I will have Westwood Professional Services commence work on a forest management plan. Greg Kopischke, Landscape Architect, will start work on the plan as well as the zoning ordinance. With respect to the suggestions of Klayton Eckles, Dwight Jelle and Klayton will work together to resolve the grading and drainage issues on the north west and north central part of the site where the land abuts the Gadient property. It is my understanding that you me¢t with Molly Shodeen, Area Hydrologist for the DNR, to follow up on her letter of December 12, 1997. I am confident that the plan we have submitted to the City is not only a Planned Unit Development, but complies with the Shoreland Ordinance of both the Department of Natural Resources and the City of ' Stillwater. In any event, if you want assistance from us or if you want us to participate in any of the meetings with the D.N.R., please advise. A meeting with Rob Boute, Senior Environmental Scientist of Westwood Professional Services and Dwight Jelle might be of benefit. I understand that Homer Tompkins is in the process of submitting the topography data to Rob Boute so the shoreland analysis can be accomplished on the CPDC site. The data you request be prepared for the D.N.R. is in process by Westwood. With respect to the Design Guidelines, I would like to offer the following comments to you and Roger Tompton of Tompton Environmental Design. I was a little disappointed in his presentation in that no mention or concern was ever raised as it relates to housing affordability. Even though it is impossible as a result of the land costs and density on this site to produce low income housing, all of us should strive, both from the private and public sector, to achieve as much cost efficiency as is possible since all costs are paid by the housing consumer. It is important that one focuses on the relationship of land, land development, and governmental costs since a component of the lot costs ends up Steve Russell December 26, 1997 Page 2 being a four to five time housing multiplier as it relates to the cost of the total finished home. Each increase in mortgage payments excludes a segment of the market place. The greatest deterrent to housing affordability in the last twenty years has not been bricks and mortar, but increases in costs brought on by additional governmental regulations and by the dramatic increase in land prices brought on by limited supply which again is being impacted by regulations and growth controls. With respect to the Guidelines, I offer the following comments: Sidewalks Standard sidewalks are normally 5' wide. The average price of a 5' sidewalk runs about $10 per linear foot and an additional 1' in width will increase each linear foot of sidewalk by approximately 20%. Putting a sidewalk on both sides will add over $1,000 to the cost of each lot abutting the sidewalk on an average size lot which will increase the house price by $4,000-$5,000. Curbs The curb section proposed costs more than the surmountable curb, but also has additional cost effects in that all of the driveways for the entire neighborhood need to be predetermined and if a driveway is changed, the entire curb section must be removed to accommodate that driveway. This curb section should be eliminated as not practical, not cost efficient, and it eliminates any chance of parking on the curb surface itself. Roof Gables If all roof gables are required to be 7/12 or greater, that is exactly what you will get and all of the houses will look identical. I would recommend that a guideline should be 5/12 or greater to allow for some diversity. Vertical Windows Windows with a vertical orientation are not a problem, but if one were to stack a number of vertically integrated windows in a row, would this violate the guidelines? Porches All of us think porches are desirable, but from a design point of view, requiring one half of the houses to have front porches is also going to add forced monotony to the neighborhood. Steve Russell December 26 1997 Page 3 Side and rear porches and market designed traditional housing should be encouraged. If you dictate that one half the houses have similar porches, that is what you will get. Landscaping Impossible to function in Minnesota by requiring no occupancy until lawns are presodded. This prohibits any individual from sodding or seeding their own lawn as a cost component and also prohibits any closing to occur when sod is not available, which can be six months out of the year. We should have a discussion about when the trees should be planted. From a marketing point of view, I like all of the boulevard trees planted up front, but from a construction point of view, it causes the greatest amount of tree loss. Setbacks/Lot Requirements A designated shoreland setback of (R-LA) is a standard suburban requirement of Woodbury and Eden Prairie with 30' front, and 10' side yard. In most cases 100' is where the house ends up, but you may have a garage or a deck or larger house that will be at 75' which is more than adequate. Assuming most of the lots in The Legends have side lot depths from 175'-250' and a 40' easement is protected from both a conservation and tree maintenance point of view, 75' setbacks are acceptable, and 100' does not give the environment or lakescape views any noticeable difference. There will be architectural review of each home. Setbacks/Lot Requirements - Traditional (R-T) If one were to have a 50% requirement for porches, that is what one will get and dictating decks or porches should not be a City's design requirement, but should be market driven. A minimum of 30% of the garages to the rear of the residences and shared driveways are highly impractical in today's market place with consumers wanting shorter driveways for maintenance and snow removal purposes. Reducing the amount of blacktop is environmentally beneficial. Having a substantial number of rear garages impacts on creative floor planning. No discussion is made throughout the Guideline on the need to have creative living spaces inside the homes which is more important to successful housing and desirable living than dictating external constraints that will impact on the floor plans. Setbacks/Lot Requirements - Cottage (_R-C) One look at the special requirements of a rear detached garage and one can only imagine the difficulty of a single woman or elderly couple attempting to maintain that extensive driveway and to encounter the extreme difficulties in Minnesota with going to and from their garage for storage, trash, and car access. Imagine the difficulty of maintaining a Steve Russell December 26 1997 Page 4 shared driveway if the two homeowners did not get along. If two customers would indicate a desire to create such a traditional element, it should be built, but there will need to be specific covenants and agreements between the parties as to the maintenance of those extensive driveways. Too much is being compromised to create a porch on the street. These are market driven elements and should not be design guidelines. Other issues relating to these guidelines are important to us. We will be addressing these issues in the zoning ordinances that we will propose to you on the 6th of January. I will be out of town until January 10, 1998. My phone number is 941-267-8430 while away. Also, please call Dwight Jelle with any questions. Sincerely, Daniel J. Herbs President DJIdt 1990 11:27 430E810 CITY OF STILLWA" PAGE 03 Expansion Area Residential Zone District Standards l/iofro 4tAi eA.thudtee-7 Lakeshore (LR\ Traditional (TR) Cottage (CCR\ Townhouse (TH) Minimum Lot Area 20,000 SF NA NA NA Average Lot Area NA 10,000 6,000 NA Minimum Area per J 14 NA NA NA 5,000 Maximum Building Height 35 ft. 35 ft.1.-%..eft. 35 ft. Minimum Lot Width 80 ft. 65 ft. 50 ft. NA Minimum Lot Depth 170 ft. NA NA NA Minimum Front Yard Setbacks' Z,Q House (w/conditions)2 ,eft. Garage (w/conditions) Front facingft. Side load/courtyd/angled 25 ft. Minimum Side Yard Setbacks' House (at side street) Garage (at side street) Side yard (at adj. lot) Minimum rear yd setbacks 15 ft. otoA. .k5ft. 25 fi. 25 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. Hse 5' gar. 25 ft. Hse 5' gar. 15 ft. 240,2 ft. v L21ft. Z4)oft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 10 ft. Hse 5' gar. 25 ft. Hse 5' gar. 15 ft. Building 20 ft. 20 ft. 25 ft. 5ft. 20ft. 25 ft. Hse 5' ft.gar 25 ft. Hse 5' gar. �-- ,e{-wow - S R.L t(zo /Ica tCx4-e,- ' Ina ns, front facing garages shall be setback at least 5 feet further then the house from front or side streets. 2 House and garage setbacks slyarrmeet special design requirements regarding garage location and design and front or side house elevations. k.aC4 Cot— tedtAxoo.e..._400{- 5-ce- 1/2.0/co, td4c4-.) *glow e-itt÷‘,jur •AtiLd2. 6)?-• d.teAvvote7 rootzt*.C__ us,t_ uept VAA-c? roletz,/ {_xiitm.c_414A-44,ritti u)`i't-zat"t w5e.-ti �-C µt44-4A- 41.47 04.c140 etkci`I+ie+ u�L� �4�,.r�a8(,.. �.aP�Cc, �sok�, de) MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director !V DA: January 23, 1998 RE: PHASE I EXPANSION ARE ZONING TEXT, MAP AMENDMENTS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES The Phase I expansion area is currently zoned Agricultural Preservation as an Urban reserve District. The proposed text and map zoning amendments provide basic development standards regarding permitted use, lot size, setbacks and in some cases require special use permit review or design review. The purpose of these reviews is to make sure the intent of the development to create a unique, attractive neighborhoods that incorporate many of the desirable characteristics of Stillwater is carried out. The proposed ordinances for the Lakeshore, Traditional, Cottage and Townhome Residential Districts are similar to other residential districts used in the City of Stillwater with some exceptions. The design guidelines provide desirable design detail and direction not appropriate for zoning regulations. The Lakeshore District required administrative design review for all lot development. This is called for because of the sensitive nature of the shoreland area with its slopes, oak trees and woodland and need to control grading and erosion. Through administrative design review, these special site conditions can be reviewed and natural resources protected. Through this review, it maybe necessary to modify a setback stand and to preserve vegetation or minimize site alteration. All the residential districts have special setback requirements for the front of the residence and relationship between the setback for the residence and the garage. The Lakeshore and Traditional Districts require the garage setback to be 6 feet back of the front wall or porch of the residence. Five feet is required for the Cottage District. This requirement is to ensure that the project with all good intention does not end up being a traditional garage dominant development with garages projecting impact of the residence. The developers have indicated that they are interested in creating a neighborhood comfortable to the pedestrian with narrower streets and wide boulevards. The de -emphasis of the auto and garage contributes to that pedestrian neighborhood feel so common in the older Stillwater neighborhoods where garages are typically detached and located in the rear yards. The Traditional Residential Districts allows accessory dwelling units or home offices above the garage with special design review. This is similar to the recently adopted RB, second unit zoning ordinance. Also a limited number of duplexes are allowed in the Traditional District on a larger than standard lot and with special design standards. These incentives are provided to help create neighborhood like we have in the older parts of Stillwater where single family, duplexes and apartments reside on the same street. A housing benefit of this approach is to provide smaller lower cost housing and to provide for the changing smaller housing demand. The lot size requirements are 20,000 square feet, Lakeshore, 10,000 square feet, Traditional, and 6,000 square feet, Cottage. The Townhome District requires a lot area of 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit. The Phase I expansion area design guidelines describe the approach used by the city as directed in the Comprehensive Plan for guiding development in new "neighborhoods". The purpose of the guidelines is to help achieve a better quality of design that is not typical on new standard subdivision development. The guidelines relate the public street scape (streets, land spaced boulevards and sidewalks) to the private spaces (residential facade, proportions, detailing and location and design of the garage). The subdivision design includes narrower streets with generous 10 foot tree boulevards and 5 foot sidewalks. The setbacks for the residences in all districts is reduced to bring the houses closer to the street and help create a closer relationship between the private space and the public space, street detailing, curb design, concrete crosswalks and setback of sidewalk from street help create a comfortable space for pedestrians. As important as the street and right of way improvements, are the private lot improvements. Street facades and garage locations (pages 6, 7, & 8) are critical elements to creating a unique neighborhood. Garage location and building facade design create the personality and feel of the neighborhood. Are entries centered and clearly designed? Are their porches to talk with neighbors and pedestrians? Does the house or garage dominate the appearance of the lot? Guidelines address all of these design questions. The final design guideline sheets provide examples of how duplexes or accessory dwelling units could be designed in a neighborhood and examples of Lakeshore and Cottage site planning. The guidelines are not zoning requirements but show a clear intent that will be reviewed as a part of final PUD approval. The smaller cottage lots will require special design solutions to meet the zoning and design guideline standards and create a uniquely attractive traditional neighborhood. The following zoning ordinances are attached: Text Amendments Lakeshore Residential ZAT/98-1 Traditional Residential ZAT/98-2 Cottage Residential ZAT/98-3 Townhome Residential ZAT/98-4 Map Amendments Lakeshore Residential ZAM/98-1 Traditional Residential ZAMI98-2 Cottage Residential ZAM/98-3 Townhome Residential ZAM/98-4 Village Commercial ZAM/98-5 Map amendments on one proposed zoning map. Expansion Area Design Guidelines. ZONING ORDINANCE LAKESHORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LR) REGULATIONS Subdivision 11.b. LR Lakeshore Residential District 1. Residential Buildings and Uses. In the Lakeshore District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses are permitted: a. Dwelling houses each occupied by not more than one family. b. Parks, playgrounds and other open spaces areas. 2. Permitted Uses with Special Use Permits. In a Lakeshore Residential District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses may be permitted by special use permits: a. Home occupations (see home occupation use permit regulations). 3. Accessory Buildings and Uses. Uses and buildings incidental to permitted or special peiniitted uses shall be subject to the following regulations: a. All accessory structures shall meet the Shoreland Ordinance setback requirements for the bluff and shoreline. b. No retaining walls shall be constructed to create yard areas or sites for swimming pools. c. No accessory buildings or uses shall be permitted that results in the cutting of trees or clearing of vegetation. 4. Development Regulations. a. Area, setback and height regulations: Provision Single Family 1. Maximum building height: Main building Accessory building (garages) 2-1/2 stories and 35 feet 1 story and 20 feet 2. Minimum lot area 20,000 square feet 3. Minimum lot width 80 feet 1 4. Minimum lot depth 170 feet 5. Minimum yard requirements Front yard House Front yard garage (front facing)' Front yard garage (side loading) 25 feet 32 feet 20 feet 6. Side yard Interior House 10 feet Garage 5 feet Corner House 25 feet Garage 25 feet 7. Rear yard (any building) 85 feet from OHW 8. Frontage Requirement2 35 feet 5. Design Review. Administrative Design Review by the Community Development Director shall be required for all permitted and specially permitted buildings or uses in the Lakeshore District building siting. Grading, drainage, tree protection and erosion control measures shall be reviewed for each development site. 'Front facing garages shall be setback at least 6 feet more than the front wall or porch line of the house. House and garage setbacks are strongly encouraged to meet special design guidelines for variety of garage types and locations (front loaded, side loaded and recessed) and front and exterior side house elevations. 2Where two or more adjacent lots do not meet street frontage requirements, the driveways shall be combined. 2 ZONING ORDINANCE TRADITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (TR) REGULATIONS Subdivision 11.c. TR Traditional Residential District. 1. Permitted Buildings and Uses. In the Traditional Residential District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses are permitted: a. Dwelling houses each occupied by not more than one family. b. Parks, playgrounds and other open spaces areas. 2. Permitted Uses with Special Use Permits. In a Traditional Residential District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses may be permitted by special use peiiuits: a. Home occupations (see home occupation use permit regulations). b. Accessory Dwelling Units are Permitted Special Uses in the TR District subject to the following regulations: 1. Lot size must be at least 10,000 square feet; 2. May be located on second floor above the garage; 3. The accessory dwelling unit must abide by the primary structure setbacks for side and rear setbacks; 4. The accessory dwelling must be located in the rear yard of the primary residence or be setback from the front of the lot beyond the midpoint of the primary residence; 5. Off-street parking requirements for an apartment and single family residence (4 spaces) must be provided; 6. Maximum size of accessory dwelling is 800 square feet; 7. The application required Design Review for consistency with the primary unit in design, detailing and materials; 8. The height may not exceed that of the primary residence. c. Duplex accessory units are permitted special uses in the TR District subject to the following requirements: 1. Minimum lot size is 12,000 square feet ; 2. Garages shall be separated if street facing or on separate street fronts for corner lots; 3. The design of the duplex shall appear as a single family house; 4. The number of duplexes shall be limited by the applicant PUD for the subject property; 1 5. Duplexes shall be located 200 feet apart; 6. The applicant shall require design review for consistency with Traditional Neighborhood Design Guidelines; 7. Duplexes shall meet the development standards for single family structures. d. Home office above garage located in rear yard 3. Accessory Uses. No more than two accessory buildings; one private garage and one other accessory building, 120 square feet maximum shall be located on a residential premise. 4. Development Regulations. a. Area, setback and height regulations: Provision 1. Maximum building height: Main building/accessory dwelling Garages, accessory building 2. Average Lot Area (for PUD phase) 3. Minimum lot width 4. Minimum lot depth 5. Minimum front yard requirements: Front yard House Front yard garage (front facing)' Front yard garage (side facing) Single Family 2-1/2 stories and 35 feet 1 story and 20 feet 10,000 square feet 65 feet NA 20 feet 27 feet 20 feet 6. Side yard Interior House 10 feet Garage 5 feet, 3 feet if in rear yard Corner House 15 feet Garage 20 feet 7. Rear yard House 25 feet Garage 3 feet 2 8. Frontage Requirement2 35 feet 5. Design Review. Design Review is required for accessory dwelling units or duplex developments subject to Traditional Development Design Standards. 'Front facing garages shall be setback at least 6 feet more than the front wall or porch line of the house. House and garage setbacks are strongly encouraged to meet special design guidelines for variety of garage types and locations (front loaded, side loaded and recessed) and front and exterior side house elevations. 'Where two or more adjacent lots do not meet street frontage requirements, the driveways shall be combined. 3 JAN-23-90 FRI 12:12 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 G P s -r i !r- L. � F S-hot' E GCE = EXPAN1Ot4 J Ah, r,5 StN-1 GU I 1:)5.1.1t%.,4 e.e P55 PP,IZSO FOtz O (D( Ttt- P'-r - • i N N ►NCoIM l i o fiJ Gtr! OF' c-l11t,WlNV.- • CDMMuh1 DeVEW ENT t7e'P Tshtet-cr JA+NuA,12Yf 199 R44 . Tc7 T EN'JtJ mR3TAY. Dev4e0 Jup0 Z t'A4-1Ot•l 40: CiZotX , MtJ 55i5 A-1-o2-12 (912 • 4 i. taOa FAlt', 66,dl JAN-23-98 FRI 12:12 TOD DRE__CHER ARCHITECT +12 4c 5600 P.03 G t -r F T 1 i... L- Imo, re kAs e o1--tE = exFPN101-1 R> A ,CAS f eN GU lnEL.1t a -A t✓ c5,-r T1 ! D E AA T E- t;5s (1'givim- T E STge` T (Pubc-1 ) p'T I ri OF i N $ r. T1+6 mot °-Teiz.,- of • D-E1JTIAU Stn-ETA ;,s t'i7-{ 9; Deli,'Apt-k=S m2e Tie Pu t3Lt �t T bkLC ,3 q ' tS Ic ik - tt.i -TIc . •- *f DaL C 4 ' t m€ pe- 6f" po bU '6 5'A- - us) rr-fari 6f The S E 'rl "i ct i T t 5 1.1e Co 14150e- 'ta F-Nr *t1-iY P il-te 5elm 1- p u 51-1 G p/ -Q P c1-i 0S."j7 fi'C 4 ( -now IM Tv 179_,W ATE, 5PPS Tits"- �21 VATE " %PAS P Deri ►- Z7 �S� FP rr " `5 + PAN °TEN 0\1N& Qa?Y'^r' 1ti- TomIke) Aer - ^,- tsprImTc 11 wte f v MezCt No a.. t -Ol .. --totc-►,) se e• C Ilk 1� t w 4 Sr+ i 2 rJ st,+.� 6-16V . JAN-23-98 FRI 12:13 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT ammmormimmms +12 433 5600 P.04 G 1 -r ( 0 F y'a -T" I L. L- t/Sb AN-7 E O- t~ : E X PP, N t ate P� R ,o• 12' ON { 1A1C+0 cur-oYF ?¢ is IJ5 \ — t SI cosy e.-r s t o ,LK,S cA.-,1 51005 ot~ 11-112-00CA sir7'S , 3 01,1 otsW •s;o OF AU- 0 . ST2 • fr.OVIDe I ©EttS IAe-fls CAN -n; ilco* ot"t's • 'tom c tE TWO tA4-,D TP- 'S / Lor `le ALA) Pu k+)-xv. P.eoog.c Nc9 - Dtt.L. • ''i its t»f_AmUPEI3e5Tt P4,-.) �r t1Z t-t cars 2a sf'zET' -Vr ?53, • f 1NI Cp" cc iC, GA)_ vc t r, o,t E2 cv TYt's °?tss Fgov ‘ t>*t aT CUL cam• . , • cez,tzotN a-rNA$Actl.e6X Des(4 4 " 0.4215 L-OCAT1 C75 $ • d 2- JAN-23-98 FRI 12:14 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 P.05 PRASE afro ex PAN - ln.N. pSfz A. 5-meET- s 5-1s 'i" NT c ot. • • "T}kE Y`(Ptc L FAvemstJ1 NI1}C Ate,... t ov r t A OTt-t sU Fp.c . • G*PKC ' -EE'l" PAVEMai r -i- cR1 p,&1D /0 , P-141\1 cgeicJ5it4s ' lml✓l<' ov E r=TJE' RAARYJ coiiTnlueSEVEwal.l<. iNr "tt 0W, . 3 JAN'-23-90 FRI 12:15 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT '12 433 5600 P.06 rTR Case's ZAM/93-1, 2, 3, & 4 Proposed Zoning Districts Lakeshore - LR Traditional - TR Cottage - CR Village Commercial - VC Int ...... 444t er xtor..ITX 62nd S-ris-reckee.e t-tiefi OF c-rIc7E-re Long Lake • • Long Lake Ler.R.D SlizaT Wrrri Id LVD. .4eQiC WALK-S CI 1134 -11-kSgMT. CaQT100E MATEIZIM. P,GFOr- 1 JAN-23-98 FRI 12:16 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 P,07 r P A o t-t i, : GX FAQ s i©S P fz A- ,57 5 1 St,4 G'Ll117)1-11ft--lee 51-*SEEThcAfes LAN�sc c�tr • Pi t t t 17,3-7 ActL ur .1 e9 /-ooE-) '511Z" 4 Lck-ncYN' P\14P.t. PLO peMovAL. • t O cawP ( f;STAL' UNri U LAW Oi k -5r -1 PuPq rr - , 15Y 0 eto E T✓ 14cIA5 cWNe r -TgP,4L, 50e5M1' 1V , ez vvt- v4t-51 CC DttJ ' .s1614Ae.i:e tizio• tt.ed5r q ccexpfkNCtf. • F c SE W441-rt1 P T NA Tt HZP STOt- Waxc oR of Z AM\Je7 065iGt . • r_o r.0tt3Pci wt tL N t Ncc, cou-(.. N 1e-i/A. F. pme T7 N ivru ?- G .57z3NE Gt % PPPf O JB 'tom t &tJ, • pU. uT1 L cY •rao iPmt T 05:1 LOG P,Tle7 •-ED -TO M f N i Nll2 AfP JAF(-23-98 FPI 12:18 TOD DRES H R ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 P.09 t T 1P . ' i= a - r s rH.AE 01.4 : EXPAI-.I1O4 P,.SaA, 5 I eN f2 5lD •tTt/�•C, �t.11l.DUJC� FA DeS uiwir l� Folcv,De5 13evpP D +.)D p Rfl C u LTD PN 1 DE vtSup - m ! C:it C). 1 FRIMF, -f bNTzY 16-ND FREc L) T W itaCcivJ ofSN►t ' tot e LD F - ST ET. 1 bNT Po RC1-kt t ,(.5 p4.13 554.4o tit 18'S E cµAgac--re ?.1$T1G of E J 11 N& i Y. 511 a S7DG1�- r (U Na CP *CL A BtutLDIN& ACID [a)sLsr Or fNtJ UNPcRTt ULATeD N t( W U' oR. 1 C GgS. YKov t i NtpaN t,COc� t t Pit ota Rp=tsm 2 TU 3 mer Net46 eirgEZI Elxvp(TicyQ. f1-1T tNJT `( •Sft.1"- FOBft.p.i3c7 NP-ePRO Pg ‘ k-Te. 19zQU ip A M1N1 MOIM of 5O°10 OF fz..1i>e,NIce5 i�v'(TFr Q t=UNcTtottP t. aZoNT Pow+ (must, CO FEET' CGP� DtJE 57( f N rpt-k-T) e t r Ta -114e s-rR —r. JAN-23-99 FRI 12: 9 TOD D%ESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 P„ 1F P R A S E E X PA.tJ 1 Ct4 A fz z p- SiGib GU1 14 5 SnE- KS I Oc t I T t A t,, L�R C�s✓5 st4,44_1r e FIroN)-co R ou m VL a.L , mpAcT GN s T, THic7 Auaye, ?E penV VtsuALt--( E 0- -1 061 �iTREsaT tG sTgCET 11 • Cep '-AC,E MP 1 11"6-0 1- e-X,JGRAt. lArPe Y+E K64.,R prcct e D Frt(A Ate AL '1' FrsoM 4.4Ec) c>gw E) o F F A.N ,a1st- E`( Fgotyn 460N - AL -LE/ OR t� 4p E) iV FZil TE STET • JAN-23-98 FRI 12:20 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5600 1s' P.11 t T'`(' . c,F Ti l..t ATEIS P I-t A s E at-4 : GX Pp.t-.t 1C*i, fkRems* SIGN GUI 5.L..,.1 31-rE fMst DaNT1 A �orL Ekio:zY rooK FUw(r' c- c s, cr.le FROrJT t..OA' D is Pr-toa)e]7t Fr.cv 'DeD 1 . Tub c A(. 1$ 6.0r p. M1N. o <<, fEf'T }EOM "Ma +Ce- OF Tice e OR PcFCµ , /4.1D '2. T14E vJtc fl - OFm E. ttkrp0 FAGE 7)-4E sTRt i s ! 40 `Io TF!€ w tL T k- of j}{E (a 2 1 P-013 . CzAm 2s c cT1-k - dgr-141 r cV3 M- QEI i� USED --rn e- u P T tebSs cF TRG rcoF t_.t t-t , k1 D A-. A- CcO ROT M ( N , LoT b6iDTh4 t5 FRGV'DcD ,AND OT-telg- iIZQ*iT, r t.0 D Ot:51!9W-S Aga N2/i" ADJA T of , UtRFG'it (?CROr -aka- EST. OhtE Pr-ov i UED T aT } . A (co Fxrr V. WDT tit 011-I r5 FUll DE; b t i D L. R ►'h t5fl E LTn ns � �� Zip �Z if THE A 5 op The E �Y gec,E,INC2 c; ic's, MOPe A.CTIVE L t N L/ P-R-EAS C c>NEIZL - THE Si1ceET, -rz) KIP A WATC WULL e 04.11,egeN ANt7 NStc-Ne:DR ,D PGT N N. me-n-koos dF R 55itiC ' C RrbC�L'S ; FULL`( > (I.E. �t✓T � FRS 14E Fgter eF Ti it0Sei A t{1 tN . or 1 k2 'Me t J L FRONT LOADED / SiDE LOAD JAN-23-98 FRI 12:17 TOD DgFSCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 3600 Pe©S F -r i e.. L L A 'T s P 1-+ AsE j- L X Pf,s1 la AC<5;5 1 is), GU IDEL-11.4es ftRM ITTED U` ✓ • ' SPEGtAA. U51r5 (ADt i N t3TRATNE U PERM iT) - At-tc tli.b- •-( U t-t tT'S - bU PL+EX Of=F'c-e o iW r 1,8 1C 1 etc ttj • tvp tV,,, Gr ht.lr UN t tqt ( 6E cu iiOV I D tat'It attart MIT, - 4.0 cu.kt,424 UN rf INAJW - e { LT cart . coe. tom Fgov tl GtCatJt! ttz-tt&--07'c. J CI010 C Lo'C MtN . 'c 1 • Cu Pt-t Z's `►D £' cr`1,1 C gAC,oc51) 014 `1 JAN-23-98 FRI 12:21 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT +12 433 5660 immimmodommommliimmilimmminmilinsmomm P. 12 -1' F s" fr 1 L- L. tit r�'�• s i 14 A s EX PtleEA S l eN inE Itie 17E t-4T ReQ) I \Et.1T1 l Ki✓ 1Z 5�i�ENTtn 4.. Dx5Tg.t cY • (i ) SanaCK FRct\T 64 jr fr r• �i \ J etvo. � '_. 7. Gt ( Pe l L »P NTEFLIOg. aTIW OKNER- 5ki�*ea� f sfWO • P1(d " »1 STTetG, 35 Nt1A)C. 1 E' + 20 ¥ . • SPECIAL. Ftza" 1.p.a ' LP T 5 * su)Pe5 - ocofc.A fZ Jt AJ r ADTAI0 tsTRATkge i R€ 'D, - C OTT-5 GONG P2-011`1 s vtell) Fa -Mr -Pa) U - t.--( • 51.1G6►TK D fgo01-' Fbgr Tr 'i" Fr4a,Jet 6 'tv - C PC W64.4.5• /0 J'AN-23-98 FRI 12:21 TOD DRESCHER ARCHITECT mmmw +12 433 5600 P 13 c t -r s -'r t L- I, try, ` s E ©I 4 E= EX P S 1 or•.t P•c R E,z=b- \TE ReQu t ReMe ,a f, G oTCACCS gePP-, • 1-0 G 4T tt 1JTt i , DtsTfzKT (sc,R� 23 Y . "fit PL Ql�it'-t=YV\ i • CoPl�CS St t� t, !3 t~ SeT t E O b aov5'' .. 11 ,,.\\ kc• - teENC. O Lars, - sIANzED AcLLG;,� PCL-E.as- "ta - A tvNO I VE RNCt AL. T c: 4 M\N • ( t i Dom', io E&- w0>✓& 1 } GS' 4J 1Dc ALL }i V e L Z V aoP),iS W t`Tl . gCGeSS Cct - S19E - t_4( CD 4 rezyt3T b-CD (4tesatoE3 fit,t~ NrMlt✓ (DO! tot A L T W ►p'j' 4 - YAK. or 25G70 LO" VAX), rgwr- LDACeD Gib 5 t f - LOPID2C3 6;6 . • u t 6 // ZONING ORDINANCE COTTAGE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (CR) REGULATIONS Subdivision 11.d. CR Cottage Residential District. 1. Permitted Buildings and Uses. In the Cottage Residential District the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses shall be permitted. a. Dwelling houses each occupied by not more than one family and two stall garage maximum (maybe one stall tandem). b. Parks, playgrounds, greens and other open space area. 2. Permitted Uses with Special Use Permits. In a Cottage Residential District, the following buildings and uses may be permitted by special use permits: a. Home occupations (see home occupation use permit regulations). 3. Accessory Uses. No more than two accessory buildings, one private garage and one accessory building 90 square feet maximum shall be located in a residential premises. 4. Development Regulations. a. Area, setback and height regulations: Provision 1. Maximum building height: Main building Garages Single Family 2 stories and 28 feet 1 story and 20 feet 2. Average lot area (for PUD) 6,000 square feet 3. Minimum lot width 50 feet 4. Minimum lot depth NA 5. Minimum front yard requirements Front yard House Front yard garage (front facing)' Front yard garage (side facing) 6. Side yard 1 15 feet 20 feet 15 feet Interior House 5 feet Garage 5 feet Corner House 15 feet Garage 15 feet 7. Rear yard House 25 feet Garage 3 feet 8. Frontage Requirement2 30 feet 9. Driveway width maximum 12 feet 'Front facing garages shall be setback at least 5 feet more than the front wall of the house. House and garage setbacks are strongly encouraged to meet special design guidelines for variety of garage types and locations (front loaded, side loaded and recessed) and front and exterior side house elevations. 2Where two or more adjacent lots do not meet street frontage requirements, the driveways shall be combined. 2 ZONING ORDINANCE TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (TH) REGULATIONS Subdivision 11.b. TH Townhouse Residential District 1. Permitted Buildings and Uses. In the Townhouse Residential District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses are permitted: a. Single family residences. b. Parks, playgrounds and other open space areas. 2. Permitted Uses with Special Use Permits. In a Townhouse Residential District, the following buildings and uses and their accessory buildings and uses may be permitted by special use petiriits: a. Attached single family residences. b. Home occupations subject to home occupation use peiuiit regulations. 3. Development Regulations. a. Area, setback and height regulations: Provision Single Family 1. Maximum building height 2-1/2 story, 35 feet 2. Minimum lot area per unit 5,000 square feet 3. Minimum setback Residence 20 feet Garage front facing 25 feet Garage side facing 20 feet 4. Minimum side yard setback 5. Minimum rear yard setback 6. Minimum setback between buildings 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet 4. Design Review. Design Review is required for all permitted and specially permitted buildings or uses. 1 �11______-- CR12 Case's ZAM/98-1, 2, 3, & 4 Proposed Zoning Districts / Lakeshore - LR Traditional - TR Cottage - CR Village Commercial - VC i l lwater. IMF Mi MIMIIACI OF MI4MI1CT� .411. /LIJBERTY', NEWNAN „ Long Lake Long Lake MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission and Joint Board FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director A.,/ DA: January 23, 1998 RE: LIBERTY ON LONG LAKE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW (PUD/97-70 & SUB/97-71) Background and Project Description The Liberty on Long Lake site was annexed by the City in 1996 as part of the first phase expansion. A portion of the site, 16 acres, was sold to the school district for an elementary school. Since annexation and earlier during the Comprehensive Plan update, development planning for the site proceeded. Besides the school, the development provides sites for 350 residential units and 6.2 acres of Village Commercial. The project is comprised of 18 lakeshore lots, 195 Traditional lots, 79 Cottage lots and 40 townhomes. The site is interconnected by an extensive system of sidewalks and pedestrian paths. Liberty Parkway provides a major transportation link between Heritage Square and Liberty Village (Village Commercial District). The parks provided by the development are consistent with the City park and trailway dedication requirements and recommended for approval by the Parks Board. Analysis At the December 17th public meeting and during project review to date issues regarding the traffic circle, right turn commercial access off of County Road 12, DNR PUD open space and dock requirements and slope setback issues have been raised. The attached letter from Marc Putman of Charles Cudd Development provides additional information regarding the issues. Ongoing discussions have continued between Washington County Public Works, the developer and the City Traffic Engineer regarding the traffic circle design. A location and design has been approved by the City's Consulting Engineer but the location may not meet Washington County Spacing Standards. As of this writing, Washington County is reviewing the traffic circle and right turn access location and design for comment. The right turn access will have to finally be approved by the County Board after City review and approval. Since the last Planning Commission/Joint Board meeting, staff has met with DNR and the developers to better understand the DNR PUD requirements and to prepare an open space plan that meets the requirements (see attached letter from developer to DNR). The open space plan is sheet 30 of the application packet. Four grouped dock locations are provided to meet centralization of docks DNR PUD requirements. January 23, 1998 City of Stillwater Planning & Zoning 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 1-23-9 s"/ Attn: Steve Russell RE: Liberty Village/Newman Realty Limited Partnership Dear Mr. Russell: I am writing to express a variety of concerns as the City is considering the preliminary plat of Liberty Village. As you know Newman Realty Limited Partnership is going to be retaining ownership of the 6.2 commercial acres on the northwest corner of this project. Even though the preliminary plat is being considered, there are a number of issues relating to the commercial portion which have not yet been finalized. They are: 1. The width of the right-of-way on the east side of Manning Avenue has not yet been determined. 2. The final design of Manning Avenue has also not been finalized and this is a factor that will affect the final design of the commercial portion of this project. 3. The access from Highway 12 to Rutherford Elementary School, the residential portions of Liberty on the Lake as well as the entrance to Liberty Village, has not been finalized. 4. The grading plan has not been completed for either the commercial or residential sections of this plat since the ponding questions have not yet been answered. 5. The ponding issues are dependent on the calculations pertaining to the run off from the City of Grant on the West side of Manning Avenue and also the amount of runoff which will come from the residential portions of Liberty On the Lake. 6. The final boundaries of the commercial area have not yet been fixed. We do know that the total commercial area will not exceed 6.2 acres, but the final layout must be worked out with Homer Tomkins of Contractor City of Stillwater January 23, 1998 Page 2 Property Developers Company. 7. Even though the concept plans show potential uses for specific buildings, we would not want to limit the final uses to the specific locations shown on the concept plan. Obviously, we would expect to work with you on the future commercial uses. We are of course anxious to keep this process moving forward but have concerns that the above matters may be considered final by the Planning Department based on the concept drawings that have been submitted. If you have any questions regarding any of the above issues please feel free to contact me at any time. Very truly yours, Paula Kroening ,...„j>r DNR approval of the open space plan and dock arrangement is necessary before final first phase PUD approval. A Forest Management Plan has bene provided for the Legend Development. The draft plan needs to be specifically applied to the Legends and Liberty Woodland site. Design review is required for all lakeshore lot development and deed restricts will limit development between the lakeshore residence and the OHW mark. The City Engineer has reviewed the project with the developer and many of the comments have been incorporated in the revised plans. Additional comments are attached and made conditions of approval. Preliminary Conditions of Approval The following conditions of approval will have to be met before the city grants final approval to the PUD and final plat. Conditions of Approval. 1. A Forest Management Plan for the Liberty Woodlands shall be prepared with City review and approval by a qualified forester. The plan shall describe measures that can be taken by the developer and new homeowner to protect the woodland. 2. All trails shall be 8 feet bitomious pathways and installed as part of Phase I subdivision improvements. 3. Street trees and site landscaping shall be installed as phased subdivision occurs or as public improvements are made. 4. Street crossings along Liberty Parkway, Liberty Avenue, Rutherford Road, Pioneer Place and Settlers Way shall be paved with concrete. 5. Boulevard areas and front yards shall be sodded. 6. The final design of the traffic circle and County Road 12 right of way shall be approved by the City and Washington County before final PUD and plat approval. 7. DNR shall approve the open space plan and dock locations plan before final PUD and plat approval. 8. Added right of way or street easements shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. 9. The lakeshore setback area shall be protected with an open space/conservation easement prohibiting land and vegetation disturbances and prohibiting construction other than the public pathway, docks and enhances landscaping. 10. Educational information shall be provided to all lakeshore homeowners to provide approved lawn care methods. 11. The pathway easements shall be legally described and marked along the shoreline. 12. A list of acceptable trees native to the area shall be provided to developers and owners of individual lots for use in their landscape plans. 13. The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for maintenance of greens, cul de sacs and landscaped development theme areas. 14. Areas around wetlands and drainage ponds shall be plated with native plants suited to the environment. 15. All lakeshore and echo green lots shall require design review. 16. Approved fencing detail shall be included in final PUD review and approval. 17. The City Attorney, City Engineer shall review and approve the declarations, covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements before final PUD approval. 18. The City Attorney and Community Development Director shall review the dock easements and covenant agreements before final PUD approval. 19. The Development Architectural Control Committee shall approve final PUD plans for consistency with architectural standards contained in the PUD application. 20. The City's Design Guidelines for Phase I expansion area development shall be used by the City staff and Planning Commission in reviewing final Planned Unit Development Plans. 21. The City and Developer shall implement the AUAR Mitigation Plan regarding storm water runoff and natural area protection. Attachments: Memo from City Engineer 1-22-98 Update letter from Marc Putnam, Charles Cudd Company 1-21-98 MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Russell FROM: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer DATE: January 23, 1998 SUBJECT: Comments on Liberty on the Lake Preliminary Plat The engineering staff has reviewed the preliminary plat submittals for the Liberty on the Lake Development Plan and offers the following comments: 1. Significant additional work is required to demonstrate that the proposed Storm Water Management Plan will function. The ponding plan as proposed appears to be inadequate for both water quality and water quantity management. The plan needs to further reduce the rate of flows in to Long Lake , deal with managing water flowing into the development from Grant Township and reduce reliance on wetlands for holding capacity. 2. All of the comments made by Eric Peters of Bonestroo and Associates regarding storm water quality and quantity management need be addressed. 3. The proposed plan has shown potential impacts to existing wetlands near the Liberty Village and the School House Circle. A thorough sequencing and mitigation plan is required for any wetland impacts. 4. The plans as presented show right-of-ways of 50' for the subcollector streets and 41' for the local streets. These widths are inadequate to provide proper 10' separation between sidewalk and curb. 5. The center island at Rutherford Place cul-de-sac should be removed. 6. The intersection at Newman Trail and Eben Way should be reconfigured to eliminate the porkchop island. 7. The tree planting program should be modified to include comments by Sherry Buss regarding the use of native species. This list needs further review by engineering staff as well. 8. The details which show sidewalks around the outside edge of the greens is recommended for modification (i.e. remove these walks). The project shows possible future street extensions off of Planting Green and Tending Green. The lots which border these future street extensions should be plotted as outlots to allow for proper grading of the area. 9. The grading plan shows grade changes which would require grading of school property. Developer needs to verify that the school is accepting of this design feature. The proposed grading plan does require additional examination. The plan does appear to go to significant lengths to save trees in the area of Echo Green and Newman Trail. In the process, the streets in this area range from 8 to 10 % grades. It is unclear whether this is absolutely necessary. Perhaps by changing proposed house designs or by making modifications to the street grades, these grades could be reduced. Also, there are a large number of homes which show as walkouts or lookouts where the grades on the property don't necessarily support these designs without the use of a very creative house design. By the time the final grading plan is designed, these issues will have to be better detailed. 10. In order for this development to proceed, trunk utilities must be brought to the area. The developer agreement has been put together which deals with installation and funding of these trunk utilities. The developers need to enter into this agreement. 11. Given that the proposed development will be constructed in phases and the utilities will be coming from the far northend of the project, the developer needs to demonstrate an interim utility design concept to carry the project from Phase I through to the final phase. SENT BY: OMR METRO; 1-23-98 15:30; 6127727573 =? 4308810; 41!1 January 23, 1998 Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources Metro Waters, 1200 Warner Road, St, Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977 Mr. Steve Russell City Hall 216 North Fourth Stillwater, MN 55128 Re ; Long Lake PUUs: Legends and Liberty Dear Mr. Russell: DNR Waters is continuing to review the preliminary plats for consistency with the Statewide Shoreland Management Regulations, As we have discussed at several recent meetings, certain guidelines must be followed in order to receive approval as a PUD. Both plats appear to meet the 50% open space requirements and we are waiting to receive and comment on the proposed covenants and restrictions for both the public and private open space areas. Within the private open space of the yards, such activities such as decks, patios, pools, accessory structures and play areas and structures would be restricted. Such activities must be conducted within the use envelope surrounding each dwelling unit. Another statewide requirement is the centralization or clustering of shore recreational facilities within the plats. We are waiting to review the proposed locations and designs, as well as the proposed covenants and restrictions for natural shoreline preservation. Other areas where we would like to work with the developers on are forest resource sustainability, native plantings and implementation of alternative stormwater techniques to reduce runoff and increase infiltration. If you have any questions, please contact me at 772-7915. Sincerely, Molly Shodecn Area Hydrologist Dan Herbst Mark Putnam Stillwater Township Annette Drewes Sherri Huss Ed Fick i./NR hi1,1r1+;01.1n. (,I' 'q(, (,I 7 1-N00-7f (-61)!)I) • .f..I-Y. 617-296-5.4ti4, 1-ti()(1-6i7..i�)?9 \r. I .v1,11 O1,ioirArrV I niphro I elkIhinlc,.l “.1 KO.y-Iw1 f.y:c� S.•nlu:mu �: \\hn A6dur-, 1111,1,1h tj Mfainintn w I11`: I'n.: t.ao,ianrr 'nl` WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PARKS • HIGHWAYS • FACILITIES 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082-9573 612-430-4300 Facsimile Machine 612-430-4350 January 23, 1998 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N. Fourth St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Donald C. Wisniewski, P.E. Director Public Works/County Engineer John P. Perkovich, Deputy Director Operations Division Donald J. Theisen, P.E., Deputy Director Technical & Administrative Division Sandra K. Cullen, P.E. Traffic/Transportation Engineer Marvin E. Erickson, Facilities Manager LIBERTY ON THE LAKE AND LEGENDS OF STILLWATER FINAL PLAT COMMENTS Dear Mr. Russell: Prior to the January 26th Planning Commission meeting we wanted to clarify Washington County's positions on the various issues associated with the Liberty on the Lake and Legends of Stillwater subdivisions. LIBERTY ON THE LAKE: There are five elements of the Liberty on the Lake plat that was presented to the Planning Commission on December 17, 1997 which require action by the County. These elements are listed below with the Washington County Public Works Department's position and the action required by the developer. Liberty Avenue: • The location of this street is acceptable to the County. • An access permit is required for construction of the street. Specific design requirements will be incorporated into the permit provisions. The City of Stillwater must be named as the permit holder but the permit application may be made on the City's behalf by the developer. Settler's Way: • The location of this street, approximately 1,050 feet south of the Manning Avenue (CSAH 151/75th Street North (CSAH 12) intersection is acceptable. • An access permit is required for construction of this street. Specific design requirements will be incorporated into the permit provisions. Again, the City should be named as the permit holder but need not make the submittal. • Washington County has preliminary plans to improve the CSAH 12/CSAH 15 intersection in 1999. To the extent possible, we will coordinate this work with the construction of Settler's Way. Rutherford Road: • The proposed location of the Rutherford Road/CSAH 12 intersection is in an access controlled County right of way. The Washington County Board of Commissioners must approve any access to CSAH 12 before a permit can be issued. Specific design elements still must be reviewed, but the County's Transportation Engineer and Director of Public works will recommend approval of this street location to the Board. • The developer will be required to plant a sufficient number of evergreen trees to adequately screen the property at 12360 75th Street North from the headlights of northbound vehicles on Rutherford Road. New England Place: • The proposed location of New England Place is also in the access controlled right of way. The Washington County Board of Commissioners must approve this access before a permit can be issued. The County Transportation Engineer and Director of Public works will recommend to the Board that this access be denied for the following reasons: 1. Adequate spacing does not exist between rvlanning Avenue, New England Place, and Rutherford Road to construct long enough turn lanes to provide safe deceleration of vehicles outside of the through traffic lane. 2. Conflicts are created between the outbound right turning vehicles at New England Place and vehicles entering the right turn lane for Rutherford Road. 3. We are concerned about the safe operation of this intersection because of the difficulty of preventing left turn movements on an undivided two lane highway. 4. The Access Spacing Guidelines of the Washington County 2015 Comprehensive Plan require one quarter mile spacing of streets on high volume minor arterial highways. The proposed location of New England Place would be approximately 650 feet east of CSAH 15 and spacing between New England Place and Rutherford Road would be approximately 500 feet. We have recommended acceptance of the location of Rutherford Road at a spacing of slightly less than the 1,320 foot standard in order to avoid wetlands and to accommodate needs of the development. We cannot recommend approval of an additional street between CSAH 15 and Rutherford Road that does not conform with the Board approved standards. Right of Way: • The final plat shows dedication of right of way along CSAH 15 to create a 110 foot wide corridor measured from the traveled centerline of the road. This is necessary to preserve the corridor and is acceptable to the County. • Excess right of way exists along CSAH 12. The County will release right of way outside of 110 feet from the traveled centerline to the developer. The release of this land is contingent on the developer meeting all conditions set forth in this letter and all conditions of all permits that are required by the County for completion of this project. It shall be the responsibility of the developer to provide the County with an acceptable legal description of the excess right of way and any surveys and/or documentation that may be necessary to convey the land. • Access control must be dedicated on all rights of way, except at approved access points. If the locations of both Rutherford Road and New England Place can be relocated so that standard turn and deceleration lanes can be constructed, we will consider them to have met our spacing requirements. It will still be necessary for the County Board to grant right of entry in an access controlled right of way. LEGENDS OF STILLWATER: This development does not directly affect any County Road but does contribute to the traffic on 62"d Street North. We request that the City require the developer to construct a southbound left turn lane at this location. A County permit is required for this work. We have appreciated the cooperation of the City throughout the planning processes of these developments. Our reluctance to endorse access that deviates significantly from the County's standards is motivated only by the need for long term corridor preservation along these important County Roads. We feel that preserving their capacity is crucial to maintaining their utility to the City and to through traffic. The function of both CSAH 12 and CSAH 15 is to provide mobility rather than direct access. If this function is degraded the burden will be shifted to other routes within the City. Our standards were in place and cleariy stated prior to the annexation of these .ands. We have been f i-xibie in the application of these standards where it has seemed reasonable to be. As for endorsing the location of New England Place, we have been shown no compelling reason to deviate from the standards and cannot recommend doing so. Please call me if you have questions or comments. Sincerely, Joseph Lux c: Wally Abrahamson, Washington County Commissioner Marc Putman, Charles Cudd Co. Meg McMonigal, Stillwater Township Planner Dan Parker, ISD 834 Homer Tomkins, Contractor Property Development Co. Dwight Jelle, Westwood Professional Services Gary Erichson, Mayor, City of Grant Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Date: 11/20/97 Re: POSTPONE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF PHASE I EXPANSION AREA PLANS Because the completed expansion area plans have not yet been submitted and the need to hold a Joint Board/Planning Commission review of the expansion area plans, the previously tentatively scheduled planning Commission meeting for November 24, 1997 has been rescheduled for Wednesday, December 17, 1997 at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A staff report and plans will be sent out for commission review before the meeting. If you have questions, feel free to call. We will have our regular planning commission meeting on December 8, 1997. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Expansion Area Developers, Other Project Reviewers FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director DA: November 13, 1997 (revised November 20, 1997) RE: UPCOMING TENTATIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MEETINGS The following meetings have tentatively been set for review of expansion area plans. Check before you attend the meeting to make sure the dates have been finalized. Date/Time Meeting Subject Location 11-19-97 7 p.m. Expansion Plans Joint Board City Council Chambers 11-21-97 9 a.m. Traffic/Staff Stillwater/Riverview Room 11-25-97 3 p.m. Traffic/Washington County Stillwater/Riverview Room 12-17-97 7 p.m. Planning Commission/Joint Board Public meeting on expansion area plans. City Council Chambers 1-19-98 7 p.m. Public Hearing Expansion Plans/ PUD/Preliminary Plat/Zoning City Council Chambers 1-28-97 7 ry Joint Board Expansion area plan review City Council Chambers 2-3-98 7 p.m. Public Hearing Expansion Plans/ PUD/Preliminary Plat/Zoning City Council Chambers