Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-156 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN RESOLUTION 03-156 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CRYSTAL BAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT MOTION BY: ZIESKA · SECOND BY: LEMAIR WHEREAS: 212 Development, LLC has submitted an application for a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan to be known as Crystal Bay; and WHEREAS: The Prior Lake Planning Commission considered the proposed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan at a public hearing on September 8, 2003; and WHEREAS: Notice of the public hearing on said PUD Preliminary Plan has been duly published in accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this issue and persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the PUD Preliminary Plan; and WHEREAS: The Prior Lake City Council considered the proposed PUD Preliminary Plan for Crystal Bay on September 15, 2003; and WHEREAS: The City Council finds the PUD Preliminary Plan is compatible with the stated purposes and intent of the Section 1106 Planned Unit Developments of the Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA: 1. The above recitals are herein fully incorporated herein as set forth above. 2. It hereby adopts the following findings: a) Greater utilization of new technologies in building design, materials, construction and land development. The developer has attempted to design the buildings so they fit the land, rather than force the land to fit the building design. The use of permeable pavement for the driveways on the site will reduce the runoff and allow further treatment of the storm water. b) Higher standards of site and building design. The density of this site is clustered to the north and set back further from the lake shore than would be required under a conventional development. The units have also been placed so as to preserve the trees on the east boundary of the site. The utilization of private streets further reduces the impervious surface on the site. c) More efficient and effective use of streets, utilities, and public facilities to support high quality land use development at a lesser cost. r:~resotuti\planres~2003\03-156.doc PAGE 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I I Maintenance of private streets, including plowing and future repairs, is done by the homeowners association. This reduces City costs in providing services to these homes. d) Enhanced incorporation of recreational, public and open space components in the development which may be made more useable and be more suitably located than would otherwise be provided under conventional development procedures. The developer is providing a private beach and recreation area for the residents of the development, as well as private walking trails. These trails will connect to the public trail along CSAH 82. e) Provides a flexible approach to development which allows modifications to the strict application of regulations within the various Use Districts that are in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The density and variety of housing units is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals to provide a variety of housing styles. 0 Encourages a more creative and efficient use of/and. The PUD allows the higher density areas to be clustered, and preserves open space. g) Preserves and enhances desirable site characteristics including flora and fauna, scenic views, screening and buffering, and access. The townhouse units are sited to take advantage of the natural terrain. h) Allows the development to operate in concert with a Redevelopment Plan in certain areas of the City and to insure the redevelopment goals and objectives within the Redevelopment District will be achieved. This criterion is not applicable. i) Provides for flexibility in design and construction of the development in cases where large tracts of land are under single ownership or control and where the use(s) has the potential to significantly affect adjacent or nearby properties. The use of the PUD allows the clustering of the homes and the use of private streets. j) Encourages the developer to convey property to the public, over and above required dedications, by allowing a portion of the density to be transferred to other parts of the site. There is no additional parkland dedication with this plan. k) The design shall consider the whole of the project and shall create a unified environment within the boundaries of the project by insuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and efficient use and design of utilities. The design creates a unified environment. Revision of the landscaping plan to meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will also enhance this area. I) The design of a PUD shall optimize compatibility between the project and surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. The use of the PUD will allow the clustering of the townhouse units and provide a greater setback from the shore line. m) If a project for which PUD treatment has been requested involves construction over a period of time in two or more phases, the applicant shall demonstrate that each phase is capable of addressing and meeting each of the criteria independent of the other phases. r:\resoluti\planres\2003\03 - 156.doc PAGE 2 This project will be completed in two phases. The utilities, roads and landscaping will be completed for each phase. n) Approval of a PUD may permit the placement of more than one building on a lot. This is not applicable. o) A PUD in a Residential Use District shall conform to the requirements of that Use District unless modified by the following or other provisions of this Ordinance. 1) The tract of land for which a project is proposed shall have not less than 200 feet of frontage on a public right-of-way; 2) No building shall be nearer than its building height to any property line when the property abutting the subject property is in an "R-l" or "R-2" Use District; 3) No building within the project shall be nearer to another building than ~ the sum of the building heights of the two buildings, except for parking ramps which may be directly connected to another building; and 4) Private roadways within the project site may not be used in calculating required off-street parking spaces. The modifications requested by the developer include the following: · The use of private streets. Normally, a development of this type would require a minimum right-of-way width of 50' and a 28' to 30' wide surface. The developer is requesting a 24' wide private street. The additional 26' of right-of-way would be accommodated by the use of easements adjacent to the private road. · Reduced front yard setbacks on the private streets. The conventional setback requirement is 25' from the right-of-way line. The developer is requesting a 20' front yard setback, measured from the building face to the curb of the private street. · Reduced front yard setback along Fremont Avenue. The conventional setback requirement is 25' from the right-of-way line. The developer is requesting a 15' setback along Fremont Avenue./ · Impervious Surface. The developer is requesting a modification to the maximum 25% impervious surface in tier 2 of the development. The developer is proposing to utilize permeable pavement for all of the driveways in the development. This pavement, if installed and maintain properly, should reduce the impact of the impervious surface on the site. The overall impervious surface of the site is 27.9 percent. These modifications are permitted under the PUD provisions at the discretion of the Council. The City Council found these modifications to be consistent with the goals and intent of the PUD criteria in that they allowed the clustering of the townhouses to preserve the natural terrain. The Council also found the modification to the impervious surface appropriate since the overall impervious surface is less than 30% and the ponding is sized to accommodate all of the driveways, roads, and other areas. The Commission also reasoned that a conventional development could include impervious surface up to the 30% maximum. 3. The Crystal Bay Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan is hereby approved subject to the following conditions a) The tree inventory must be revised so it is consistent with the revised grading plan. b) The landscaping plan should be revised to meet all ordinance requirements. Replacement trees must be included on the landscaping plan. c) The private streets must be platted as outlots. A 13' wide drainage and utility easements must be provided on either side of the outlot. The developer must place "No Parking" signs on the private streets. d) The developer must provide easements for the storm water pond. r:\r esoluti\planresg2003\03-156.doc PAGE 3 e) All driveways in the development must be constructed with permeable pavement. The design and installation of these drives must be approved and inspected by the City. f) Fremont Avenue must be improved adjacent to this site. The City will participate inthe cost of the project. g) The homeowners' association documents must address the maintenance of the permeable pavement. h) Address the comments identified in the memorandum from Larry Poppler, Assistant City Engineer, dated July 23, 2003.Ali public improvements must be constructed to the standards of the Public Works Design Manual. Revised plans must be submitted for review by the City. i) Provide a phasing plan for the project. j) The height of the units on Lots 23 and 24 may not exceed 35' along Fremont Avenue or CSAH 82. k) Provide plans for the entry monument signs. These signs must be located at least 10' from any right-of-way line and may not be located within the clear view triangle. Passed and adopted this 15th day of September, 2003. YES NO Haugen X Haugen Blomberg X Blomberg LeMair X LeMair Petersen X Petersen Zieska X Zieska {Seal} Frank Boyles, City Manager r:\rcsoluti\planres~2003\03-156.doc PAGE 4 T T