Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - Sterling North and SouthSTAFF AGENDA REPORT AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: DATE: INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND: 8A DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER CONSIDER PETITION FROM PRIOR LAKE DEVELOPMENT, L.P. TO AMEND THE WILDS PUD 9-93 FOR OUTLOT L, STERLING NORTH AND STERLING SOUTH. JAN UARY 17, 1995 The purpose of this item is to consider a petition to amend development standards for The Wilds PUD 9-93. The proposed amendments effect Outlot L, The Wilds, Sterling North and South at the Wilds, specifically pages 5, 7, 43, 48 and the Schematic Plan Map of The Wilds found in the approved PUD 9-93 text. A summary of the amendments proposed by applicant, Prior Lake Development, L.P. are as follows: o Change setback and building separation standards for the plats of Sterling North and Sterling South at The Wilds, as per attached Exhibit A. . Change the land use for Outlot L from 21, high density residential Corporate Villas to 9, single family, "Detached Villa Homesites" as per attached Exhibit B. . Establish a street alignment, (Proposed Preserve Boulevard) for Outlot L, The Wilds as per attached Exhibit C. . Change the total number and density of Villa dwelling units approved for The Wilds PUD 9-93 as per Exhibits D, E, F, and G. The proposed amendments are summarized as follows: Decrease the maximum number of dwelling units. b. Decrease the overall project density. c. Decrease the number of villa units. d. Decrease the total anticipated PUD population. e. Revise the Development Phase Plan for the PUD. f. Revise the Schematic PUD Plan Map according to the amendments proposed. A complete description and background of the proposed amendments is included in the attached Planning Report, prepared by Blair Tremere, dated December 22, 1994. The application has been reviewed and processed according to Zoning Ordinance Section 6.11, which identifies PUD amendment procedures. 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 553_~_2-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FJVlPLOYER DISCUSSION: ISSUES: DISCUSSION: ISSUES: PROPOSED AMENDMENT I - STERLING NORTH AND STERLING SOUTH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: The plats of Sterling North and Sterling South were approved by the City Council in 1994. The developments consist of a series of duplex units to be developed upon lots platted by developer, David Carlson Companies. The developer platted lots, typically 50' wide by 100' deep, intending to offer a variety of unit types to prospective buyers. All units will be owner occupied. Page 43 of The Wilds PUD text indicates the development standards for Villa Units. After platting, it was determined that unit types offered by the developer, could not be built according to the setback and building separation standards identified on Page 43. In order to correct the discrepancy, an amendment is proposed to establish different setback and building separation standards for units within Sterling North and Sterling South at The Wilds as per attached Exhibit A. The issue associated with changing setback and building separation standards, according to staff, is that there will be a resulting decrease in the amount of open space for each plat. The open space within each plat consists of platted common area and open space resulting from building setbacks required from the platted lot line to the dwelling unit. The amendments proposed to page 43 for the "Sterling" subdivisions will result in less open space available to residents for aesthetic, recreational, and access purposes. The issue before the City Council is to determine if the proposed setback and building separation changes are consistent with the open space objectives of the approved Wilds 9-93 PUD. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 2 & 3 - OUTLOT L, THE WILDS: The approved PUD Plan identifies that Outlot L is to be developed with 21 "Corporate Villas" on the 2.8 acre subject site. The proposed amendment is to create a new Villa category "Detached Villa Homesites" and reduce the density from 21 to 9 units. In addition, an amendment to the PUD Schematic Plan Map is proposed to establish the access to Outlot L, from Wilds Parkway. See attached Exhibit C for details. Page 43 of The Wilds PUD text indicates development standards for Villa Units. The proposal is to establish new standards for"Detached Villa Homesites" as per attached Exhibit B. The rationale for creating a new type of villa unit, (Detached Villa Homesites), is to allow for the construction of single family homes on property that would be owned and maintained by a common homeowner's association. The applicant has submitted a detailed tree inventory and indicates that detached villa units are preferred on this site in order to provide for special grading and tree preservation options to retain existing natural features on site. The result of proposed amendment 2 is to reduce the total number of Villa units for Outlot L from 21 to a maximum of 9 units. Amendment 3 is proposed to establish access to Outlot L from Wilds Parkway. The applicant submitted a sketch plan identifying 9 dwelling units, 9 lots and a proposed alignment for Preserve Boulevard which is intended to be a private road. The City Council should note that the sketch, Exhibit C, is for conceptual purposes only and does not constitute -2- DISCUSSION: ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDATION: ACTION REQUIRED: subdivision approval or City approval of a site layout for Outlot C. The amendments identify only that a street access is contemplated for Outlot L and that the maximum density proposed is 9 units. The issue before the City Council is to determine if the proposed Detached Villa Homesite development standards, (Exhibit B), reduction of density from 21 to 9 units; and proposal for street access to Outlot L, is consistent with the approved Wilds PUD Plan. PROPOSED AMENDMENT 4 - "HOUSEKEEPING" CHANGES: Amendment 4 is a housekeeping amendment representing official recognition of changes to the overall PUD Plan which have evolved as development has proceeded in The Wilds. The changes are identified on attached Exhibits D, E, F and G. The proposed amendments reflect factual changes that have occurred in demographic items, population of the PUD, number of units approved, and the like. . . Approve amendments as proposed by the applicant. Approve amendments as per attached Planning Commission Resolution 95-05PC and exhibits attached thereto. Table or continue this item for specific information or research. Deny the proposed amendments finding that some or all are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the approved PUD 9-93. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments on January 5, 1995 and recommends approval of the amendment as per attached Resolution 95-01PC and subsequent Exhibits A - G. The rationale for approval being that the amendments as cited in the Exhibits, are consistent with the intent and purpose of the approved Wilds PUD 9-93 and will not be detrimental to the health, welfare and safety of the general public. A motion to reaffirm the position of the Planning Commission to adopt the attached City Council Resolution which approves the amendments as per Resolution 95-01PC and Exhibits A through G as submitted or with changes directed by the City Council. REVIEWED BY: Frank Boyles, City Manager -3- RESOLUTION 95- RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE WILDS PUD 9-93 FOR OUTLOT L, STERLING NORTH AND STERLING SOUTH. MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the 5th 'day of January, 1995, to act on a petition submitted by Prior Lake Development L.P., to amend The Wilds PUD 9-93; and The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the amendments as per Resolution 95-01 PC and Exhibits A through G, attached thereto: and The Prior Lake City Council considered the petition for amendment on the 17, day of January, 1995; and The City Council reaffirms the position of the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, That it hereby approves amendments to The Wilds PUD 9-93 as set forth in Resolution 95-01PC and Exhibits A through G, attached thereto. Passed and adopted this 17th day of January, 1995. YES NO Andren Andren Greenfield Greenfield Kedrowski Kedrowski Scott Scott Schenck Schenck {Seal} Frank Boyles City Manager City of Prior Lake "RS01PC" 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESOLUTION 95-01PC RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND AN AMENDMENT TO THE WILDS PUD 9-93 FOR OUTLOT L, STERLING NORTH AND STERLING SOUTH. MOTION BY: ARNOLD SECONDED BY: ROSETH WHEREAS, WHEREAS. WHEREAS. WHEREAS, WHEREAS. thc Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on the 5th day of January, 1995, to act on a petition submitted by Prior Lake Development L.P., to amend The Wilds PUD 9-93; and notice of the public hearing on said motion has been duly published and posted in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes; and the Planning Commission finds that the amendments, with recommended revisions contained herein, are consistent with the purpose and intent of the approved "The Wilds PUD 9-93" plan document; and it is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City City Council approve the amendments to change the minimum building setback standards as per attached Exhibit A for Sterling North m~d Sterling South at The Wilds; and The provisions of the Letter of Understanding, endorsed by the City Council and executed on Novemi')er 2. 1994 be incorporated into the PUD Plan Document. The reduction of open space within the plats of Sterling North and Sterling South resulting from revised setback standards is a minor adjustment and will not compromise the overall open space plan for The Wilds PUD 9-93. The setback provisions identified in Exhibit A, will provide adequate area which will permit parking of vehicles on lots, in a manner that will not obstruct the sidewalk within the plat of Sterling South at The Wilds. it is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City Council approve the amendments to Outlot L. The Wilds First Addition as per attached Exhibit B, for The Preserve at The Wilds; and Change the density of Villa units from 21 attached and detached to a maximum of 9 Detached Villa Homesites. . The configuration of lots, units, and street as shown on Exhibit C is not approved via this PUD amendment petition. Future development design will be considered at the time of subdivision of Outlot L. , The development standards identified on Exhibit B, apply to future development of up to 9 Detached Villa Homesites on Outlot L. Street access to future units within Outlot L, be designed to City standards for public streets and the location of the intersection of proposed Preserve Boulevard be subject to resolution of design concerns of the City Engineer prior to submission of a preliminary plat. 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 . concerns of the City Engineer prior to submission of a preliminary plat. Additional land is represented for future development of "The Preserve" that is not currently part of Outlot L. A change in the property boundaries of Outlot L will require subdivision approval, vacation of existing easements and dedication of new easements as required by the City of Prior Lake. . The tree inventory data provided for the amendment to Outlot L shall be utilized at the time of future subdivision of the Outlot. A specific building pad/tree preservation plan for each lot shall be required at the time of subdivision of Outlot L. The City will require compliance with the preservation plan prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for each structure built within Outlot L. it is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City Council approve the amendments to The Wilds PUD 9-93 as per attached Exhibits D, E, and E Approve the factual, "housekeeping" items identified in attached Exhibits D, E, and F as amended by staff and/or the Planning Commission. . Language stating that front yard setbacks may be reduced to 20' if topography or existing vegetation dictates should be revised to state that: "At the time of subdivision, proposed lots with topographic or existing vegetation constraints will be identified and the front yard setback may be reduced from 25 to 20' if deemed appropriate by the City Council." NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, that it hereby recommends that the City Council approve the amendments to The Wilds PUD 9-93 as identified herein. Passed and adopted this 5th day of January, 1995. {Seal} Vonhof Arnold Kuykendall Loftus Roseth Yes Vonhof Arnold Kuykendall Loftus ~ '~'-'~°nald Rye "~'-" X'](' Director of Planning City of Prior Lake No PAGE 43 - EXISTING PUD Do Villa Homesites: Single-family attached and single-family detached structures intended for individual lot ownership which may include golf villas, club villas, etc. - Permitted Uses Single-family residential, single-family attached residential - Minimum Lot Size 2,200 sq. ft. - Maximum Building Height 35ft. - Minimum Front Yard if Abutting Arterial Street 50 ft. from ROW line - Minimum Front Yard if Abutting Public/Private Street 25 ft. from ROW/roadway easement - Minimum Lot Width* 22 ft. (at building line) - Minimum Lot Depth 100 ft. - Minimum Rear Yard 20 ft. - Minimum Rear Yard for Villa Units Adjacent to Fairways 5 ft. (Resolution 94-06) - Minimum Side Yards of Buildings 7.5 ft. - Minimum Separation between Buildings 15ft. - Maximum Number Attached Units 8 units - Minimum Off-Street Parking 2 spaces per DU * Cul-de-sac, pie shaped and flag lots will have less than minimum width measured at building lines. NOTE: No construction on, or alteration of, any land within a sensitive land easement will be allowed. Other Requirements: It is intended that a preliminary and final plat will be submitted for the residential development areas that are consistent with the concepts and development standards set forth above. Additional requirements or modifications may be established by the Prior Lake Planning Commissions and Prior Lake City Council pursuant to their review. City Council Revision (1-18-94) STANDARDS APPUCABLE TO 'THE VILLAS AT THE WILDS' SUBDIVISION 43- .-..f ,!1 il EXHIBIT A - D, Sterling North and South at The Wilds Villa Homesites: Single-family attached structures intended for individual lot ownership which may include golf villas, club villas, etc. ** - Permitted Uses - Maximum Number of Attached Units - Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces per Dwelling Unit - Minimum Lot Size - Minimum Lot Width - Minimum Lot Depth - Maximum Building Height STERLING SOUTH MINIMUM SETBACKS: ** Lot 1 south and east setbacks rear setback Lots 2-25; 83-87 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lots 26 and 88 front setback side setback rear setback Lot 27 front setback side and rear setback Lots 28-29; 49-51 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lot 30 and 62 north setback cast setback south setback single family attached residential ** 8 units 2 spaces 2,200 sq. ft. 22 ft. (at building line) ** 100 ft. 35ft. 25 ft. from back of curb 5 ft. from property line * 25 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 5 ft. from property line * 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 5 ft. from property line * 30 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 30 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 2.5 ft. from property line 30 ft. from back of curb 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line STANDARDS APPUCABI I= TO STERUNG NORTH AND SOUTH AT 'FHE WILDS SUBDIVISIONS 43 (A- 1) Lot 31 front setback side and rear setbacks Lots 32-40; 73-82 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lot~ 41-43; 64-72 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lot 4~ front setback side setback rear setback north setbacl~-~ side yard set~ south setback Lot 48 north setback west setback south setback Lots 52-61 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lot 63 South and East setback rear setback 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 25 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 2.5 ft. from property line 25 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 40 ft. separation between buildings 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 40 ft. separation between buildings 30 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 25 ft. from back of curb 30 ft. from back of curb 25 ft. from back of curb 25 ft. from back of curb 30 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 40 ft. separation between buildings 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line STERLING NORTH MINIML~I SETBACKS: ** Lots 1, and 16 front setback side yard setback rear setback Lots 2- 15 front setback side yard setback rear setback 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 5 ft. from property line * 25 ft. from back of curb 15 ft. separation between buildings 5 ff. from property line * 43 (A- 2) NOTES: Ao Bo C. Lot 17 Lot 18 north and east setbacks rear setback front setback side yard setback rear setback 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 25 ft. from back of curb 2.5 ft. from property line 2.5 ft. from property line No construction on, or alteration of, any land within a sensitive land easement will be allowed. "Zero Lot Lines" only allowed for common wall property line between attached units. ** No part of any structure, including roof overhangs, shall extend over the lot line. ** Other Requirements: It is intended that a preliminary and final plat will be submitted for the residential development areas that are consistent with the concepts and development standards set forth above. Additional requirements or modifications may be 'established by the' Prior Lake Planning Commissions and Prior Lake City Council pursuant to their review. City Council Revisions: ** * Resolution 94-06 approved on 01-18-94 5' rear yard setback for villa units abutting a fairway Resolution 95-?? approved on ??-??-?? setback revisions, text changes 43 (A- 3) I,I Z 4 ~ fl ' f|'l ' ;nfl · , .,... Detac~ Villa Homesites: etc. - MinimtanLot Size - MaximumBuilding Height - MinimutnFmnt Yard if Abating Arterial Street - MinimtmFtont Yard if A~g PublicJPfivate St - MinimumLot W'rlth* - Minimtm Rear Yard - Minimum Rear Yard - Villa Units Adjacent to Fairways - MinimtmSide Yards of Buildin~ - Minimum Separation between Buildings - MaximumNuml:er Attached Units - Minim~Off-Street Parking EXHIBIT B Single-fanfly ~ stmmaes inlended for individual owawship which may indude golf villas, club villas, EXISTINGPUD S/F re~denfia~ S/F anached residential S/F Det~_~ ct~d residential 35 ft. NK2 50 ft. fromROWline 25 ft fromROW/roadway 20 f-c caselnmt 22 ft(at building line) 100ft N/C N/C N/C 5 ft. (Resolution N/C 75 ft. N/C 15 fl. N/C 8 units 9 (Detached) 2 spaces per DU NC * Cul-de-sac, pie shaped and flag lots w~l have less than minkmmwidth measuxed at building lines. NOIE: No consmmfion on, or alteration of, any land within a sensitive land easemmt will be allowed. Other R .equire~ts: It is intended that a preliminmy and final plat will be s~ for the residential develoiamat areas that are consistent with the concepts and develo~t standards set forth above. Additional requirenm~ts or mcdific~om may be established by the Prior Lake Planning Cmanissions and Prior Lake City Coax:il pumuant to their review. City Camdl Revision (1-1894):5' Rear Yard Setback for V'flla Units Adjacent to Fairways. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO OUTLOT L, 'THE PRESERVE" SUBDIVISION $091/~ 3HJ. J.V 3A~353Bcl i! i oo z ~ ~ o< 0 ~~ -- ~ ~Pl'~ ,,,,, EXHIBIT C - SKETCH MAP EXHIBIT D LAND USE S~Y Project Area Total Residential Dev. Area Max. Number Dwelling Units Total Open Sp. Area (52.4%) Overall Project Density Total Commercial Area Residential: -Estate Homesites -Total Area -Number of Dwelling Units -Density 1/2 Acre Homesites -Total Area -Number of Dwelling Units -Density 1/3 Acre Homesites -Total Area -Number of Dwelling Units -Density Villas (Detached & Attached) -Total Area -Number of Dwelling Units -Density Commercial: -Hotel/Clubhouse -Hotel -Restaurant -Neighborhood Shopping -Restaurant -Convenience Store PROPOSED AMENDMENT N/C N/C 426 N/C 0.73 DU/acre N/C APPROVED PUD +-580.4 acres +-226.7 acres 466 +-304.1 acres 0.80 DU/acre +-38.8 acres N/C N/C 0.56 DU/acre N/C *~ +-70.4 acres N/C 100 N/C 1.42 N/C 70.9 acre N/C 161 N/C 2.27 DU/acre N/C +-32.9 acres 137 131-177 4.16 DU/acre 4.0-7.5 DU/acre N/C +- 16.7 acres 158,750 sq.ft. N/C +- 11.8 acres 60,000 sq.ft. N/C +- 1.0 acre 7,000 sq.ft. N/C +-4.0 acres 24,000 sq.ft. N/C +-3.2 acres 5,000 sq.ft. N/C +- 1.0 acre 2,000 sq.ft. N/C Indicates No Change Proposed -5- PROJECTED PUD POPULATION ANALYSIS Total Anticipated PUD Pop. PROPOSED AMENDMENT EXHIBIT E APPROVED PUD 1,201 1,291 Adults -S/F Detached (1.'9 p/DU) -S/F Attached (1.5 p/DU) 758 815 566 549 192 266 School Age Children -S/F Detached (0.69 p/DU) -S/F Attached (0.57 p/DU) 279 300 206 199 73 101 Non-School Age Children -S/F Detached (0.41 p/DU) -S/F Attached (0.33 p/DU) 164 176 122 118 42 58 Total # of Families (0.80 x number of DU's) 341 373 Data obtained and interpolated from the 1990 Censu~ of Population and H0u~ing for Prior Lake. Minnesota and Prior Lake Public Schools Census Statistics. August. 11, 1992. -7- EXHIBIT F ~mJmmmtf m m ~fmmd. m ft, m~mmm~ ~qt~ W e~m~ ~mmmmj~ PROPOSED AMENDMENTS INDICATED BY ( ) EXHIBIT G DEVELOPMENT PHASING A. P_h~n~ Analysis It is anticipated The Wilds will be developed in three major phases. Thc first phase,_which contains approximately 3'71.9 acres, is the largest of the three phases. With the bulk of the first phase scheduled to begin in 1993, this phase will contain the 18-hole championship golf course, golf practice facility, the clubhouse/hotel, two public parks, approximately half of the main collector road that will begin at the main entrance off of Mystic Lake Drive/Columbia Avenue and all of the residential areas located in the north half of the project. This phase will contain the following SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS - 1/2 acre Lots - 1/3 acre Lots - Corporate Villas SINGLE-F~Y ATTACHED DWELLINGS - Club Villas It.F. XLSF,~ 87 DUs 54 24 9 79 DUs 79 Total Number of Dwelling Units in Phase One 166 DUs Thc second phase is expected to begin in 1994 and contains approximately 146.7 acres. This phase is to include thc extension of thc project's main collector road approximately 1,850 feet to the south and east, the second hotel, two restaurants, convenience store and two public parks. The residential mix is Phase Two is: SINGLE-FAM~Y DETACHED DWELLINGS 132 DUs - 1/2 Acre Lots 46 - 1/3 Acre Lots 58 - Estate Lots 28 SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLINGS - Fairway Villas - Fairway~ View Villas - Executive Villas 147 DUs 26 73 48 Total Number of Dwelling Units in Phase Two 279 DUs The :!:49.3 acres that make up Phase Three complete the build out of Thc Wilds. Scheduled to begin in 1995, Phase Three will include thc village shopping area and thc remaining single-family detached dwellings. The residential breakdown is as follows: '48- Nov 'z. 9 199 , APPLICATION FOR THE SUBDMSION CF LA~ WTTHIN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE Property Owner: PRIOR LAKE DEVELOPMENT L.P. .Phone: .? 445-4455 Address: 2500 WILDS PARKWAY, PRIOR LAKE, MN'. 55372 " Subdivider: Phone: Address: ,Phone: Name of Surveyor: POINEER ENGINEERING Name of Engineer: PIONEER ENGINEERING Phone: 861-191& Phone: ~R1-1914 Legal Descri,~tion of Property: 0UTLOT '~' T~E WILDS' Present Zoning: BUD ~cd Restrictions: No X Yes Property Acreage: 3.4 ACRES . If so, please attach. Has the Applicant previously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional use pemit on the subject site or any part of it: No. X Yes What was requested: I have read the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance and agree to provide the '~om~ion a~ do the work in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance. ~1 i~t~ S{gnature Date Fee Owners Signature Date THIS SE~ON TO BE FTr,r,ED IN BY THE i~N~ DIRECfOR PLA.NNII~ ~S~ ,,~~ D~~ ~ OF ~ ~ ~~ ~ D~~ ~ OF B~ ~~ONS: Signature of the Planning Director Date I' $O CITY OF PRIOR LAKE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND "THE WILDS PUD 9-93" You are hereby notified that a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission in the Prior Lake Council Chambers at 4629 Dakota Street S.E. on: January 5, 1995, at 7:30 p.m. The purpose of the public hearing is to consider an amendment to "The Wilds" Planned Unit Development 9-93. The developer, Prior Lake Development, L.P., has submitted a petition for PUD amendment pursuant to Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance 83-6, Section 7.9. Specifically, the petition is to change the "The Wilds PUD 9-93, Schematic PUD Plan" approved by the Prior Lake City Council on July 19, 1993, per Resolution 93-54, as subsequently amended. The following changes to the approved Schematic PUD Plan are outlined as follows: AMENDMENT 1: The proposal is to change the minimum building setback standards for the single family attached villa units located within the plats of "Sterling North at The Wilds" and "Sterling South at The Wilds." AMENDMENT 2: The proposal is to change the land use designation and total number of units from 21, single family attached villa units to 9, single family detached units for the property legally described as: Outlot L, The Wilds. AMENDMENT 3: The proposal is to amend The Wilds PUD 9-93, Schematic PUD Plan Map to change the street alignment for Outlot L, The Wilds. AMENDMENT 4: The proposal is to change the total number and density of villa dwelling units approved for "The Wilds Schematic PUD Plan. The Land Use Summary statistics identified within the approved "The Wilds Schematic PUD Plan" are proposed to be amended as follows: 1. Decrease the Maximum Number of Dwelling Units. 2. Decrease the Overall Project Density. 3. Decrease the number of Villa Units. 4. Decrease the Total Anticipated PUD Population. 5. Revise the Development Phase Plan for the PUD. 6. Revise the Schematic PUD Plan Map according to the amendments proposed. A copy of the specific amendments to "The Wilds PUD 9-93, Schematic PUD Plan," are on file and available for review at the City of Prior Lake Planning Department. A copy of the proposal may be obtained by calling Connie Carlson at 447-4230. A fee of $ .50 cents per page will be charged for individual copies of the amendment. If you are interested in this issue, you should attend this public hearing. The Planning Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Questions related to this issue should be directed to the Prior Lake Planning Department by calling 447-4230, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Gina M. Mitchell Associate City Planner Published in the Prior Lake American December 17 and 24, 1994. 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 4474245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PR!$95 SUBJECT: APPLICANT: SITE: PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE' PLANNING REPORT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR "THE WILDS" PRIOR LAKE DEVELOPMENT, L.P. AND DAVID CARLSON COMPANIES OUTLOT L, THE WILDS; AND STERLING NORTH AT THE WILDS AND STERLING SOUTH AT THE WILDS, ALL WESTERLY OF WILDS PARKWAY ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR BLAIR TRElX, IERE YES DECEMBER 22. 1994 FOR JANUARY 5, 1995 MEETING INTRODUCTION The applicants have requested approval of an amendment to the Schematic Plan for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) No. 9-93, The Wilds. The Zoning Ordinance provides for amendments to approved PUD's and requires a public hearing by the Planning Commission prior to action by the City Council. The application contains four elements which are identified as Amendments No. 1 - 4. Amendments No. 2 - 4 are related and interdependent. There are aspects of Amendment No. 1 and No. 4 which constitute "housekeeping" for the overall PUD plan (schematic plan and narrative standards), and these are discussed in this report. The "housekeeping" aspect is important for tracking the progress of the PUD development, including adjusunents and amendments that may be approved over time. The applicants supplied staff with copies of selected pages from the approved PUD Plan with revisions inserted to illustrate the specific changes (sec pages 5, 7, 43, and 48 in the attached materials from the applicants, and refer to the corrected pages 5, 7, and 43 in the materials prepared by staff). Staff has used that technique with some of the exhibits attached to this report (we checked the material submitted for accuracy and made corrections to ensure clarity). All amendments ultimately approved by the City Council will be incorporated in the PUD Plan on separate pages that will reflect the specific changes made to specific developments, including those that may apply to the entire PUD. The four amendment elements are: AMENDMENT 1' The proposal is to change the minimum building setback standards for the single family attached Villa units located within the plats of "Sterling Noah at The Wilds" and "Sterling South at The Wilds". 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 44%4245 AMENDMENT 2: The proposal is to change the land use designations and total number of units from 21, single family attached Villa units to 9, single family detached units for the property legally described as: Outlot L, The Wilds. AMENDMENT 3: The proposal is to amend The Wilds PUD 9-93, Schematic PUD Plan Map to change the street alignment for Outlot L, The Wilds. AMENDMENT 4: The proposal is to change the total number and density of villa dwelling units approved for "The Wilds Schematic PUD Plan. The Land Use Summary statistics identified within the approved "The Wilds Schematic PUD Plan" are proposed to be amended as follows: . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Decrease the maximum number of dwelling units. Decrease the overall project density. Decrease the number of villa units. Decrease the total anticipated PUD population. Revise the Development Phase Plan for the PUD. Revise the Schematic PUD Plan Map according to the amendments proposed. BACKGROUND The PUD Schematic Plan for the Wilds received its last approval by the City Council on September 20, 1993 under Resolution No. 93-83. The Final Plat for the PUD was approved under Resolution 93-96 on October 22, 1993. The areas treated in this report were platted as Outlots, subject to future platting. Sterling North at The Wilds received final plat and development agreement approval on May 16, 1994. Sterling South at The Wilds was approved on August 15, 1994. Variances were approved for Sterling North at The Wilds regarding side yard setbacks (5' vs. 7.5') for Lots 1 - 6 on August 18, 1994. Variances for cul-de-sac street length were granted for Sterling South at The Wilds on July 21, 1994. Outlot L, to be known as The Preserve, has yet to be platted, pending approval of this application. The City Council approved an amendment to the PUD Plan under Resolution 94-06 on January 18, 1994; a rear yard setback of 5', rather than 20' was allowed for all Villa lots that abut the fairways of the golf course. The developer for the two Sterling at The Wilds projects requested minor amendments to the PUD, per the Zoning Ordinance (Section 6.11, B, 7, f), regarding the front and side yard building setback dimensions. A Letter of Understanding was drafted and, as a condition of approval of the minor amendments by the Planning Staff, executed on November 2, 1994 (see attached copy of the Letter of Understanding). The minor amendment was endorsed by the City Manager who reviewed it with the City Council. While the side and front yard setbacks are outside the scope of this application and hearihg, the provisions of the Letter of Understanding will be incorporated with the PUD Plan as an overall update or "housekeeping" action. The specific amendment for the Sterling at The Wilds project requested here involves the determination of the rear yard setbacks, particularly for those lots which do not abut the fairways. Notice of Public Hearing v~as published in the legal newspaper and was mailed to property owners within the PUD and with 500' of the PUD. ANALYSIS AMENDMENT 1: The approved PUD Plan requires a minimum of 20' between the rear lot line and the building for all the attached and detached Villa units, except for those units that abut the fairways, where the minimum rear yard setback may be 5'. The applicant seeks approval of a revised minimum rear yard standard for the two Sterling at The Wilds projects; the rear yard dimension would be a function of the separation between dwellings. The minimum standard would be a separation of 40' which the applicant contends is the intended effect of a 20' setback on each lot; in cases where there is a rear-to-side setback situation, the proposed separation would be 27.5 ft. Refer to the narrative information provided by the applicant, noting that there is correspondence from the applicant which refers to the December 16 staff letter that was seeking clarification of setback matters related to both this amendment request and the administratively approved Letter of Understanding. Evaluation of yard dimensions should consider the purpose of yards--to provide light, air, and view as well as access--and the amount of effective usable space available to the residents. Whereas, the approved PUD Plan envisions an abundance of open space throughout the overall PUD, the actual amount for each development within the PUD may vary. The space is provided as both common areas and by individual yards within platted lots. The Sterling at the Wilds plats created individual platted lots, generally in pairs, which would contain one of several house designs that would be built as duplexes. Compliance with the PUD Plan standards was assured by the developer in the narrative material submitted with the Plats (see attached materials). The interpretation by the City staff was, and, relative to the rear yard dimension, is that the minimum building setback areas (yards) should be measured from the platted rear lot line of each lot. Thus, the perceived open space to the rear of each building is the minimum 20 ft. distance from the building to the platted lot line, PLUS any common open area (including is some cases the fairways of the golf course). The proposed amendment is offered as an alternative: the open space would be the distance within the platted lot, from the building to the rear lot line, which, when combined with any common open space and rear or other yard area of neighboring lots, would equal at least forty feet. Unlike the side yard dimension, the rear yard standard in the PUD Plan does not refer to building separation. That is the essence of the proposal: allow for the building separation distance, of at least forty feet, rather than relating the yard area to the confines of each lot. The PUD design was determined, to a great degree, by the golf course which, by definition, is mostly open space. Thus, on a macroscopic or "big view" basis, the issue of yard area for developments such within the PUD, and especially those adjacent to the fairways, is of minor consequence. The comparative view is more microscopic: the actual ground available to residents for aesthetic, recreational, and access purposes. A key feature of PUD's that distinguishes them from more conventionally platted developments is how open space is preserved and utilized (see attached extracts from Zoning Ordinance). The PUD Plan presented a vision that the City used to evaluate the Sterling at the Wilds developments; the question now is how consistent the new plan and vision will be with the intent of the Ordinance. Review comments by the City Engineering Department, per Engineering Technician Jeff Evens, include: 1. It appears that gie curve at Mystic Ridge and Wilds Lane has been modified from the approved plans at the City offices. New curve data should be submitted and the construction plans revised and resubmitted. 2. A five foot concrete sidewalk is proposed on a portion of Mystic Ridge and on the south side of Wilds Lane. The sidewalk is proposed to be adjacent to the back of curb. With a 25 ft. setback from the curb to the buildings, this leaves only 20 ft. to park a vehicle. Assuming an average vehicle length of 18 ft., and a 3 ft. clearance from the garage this means that a minimum of one foot of the vehicle will be obstructing the sidewalk depending on the type of vehicle.- AMENDMENT 2: The approved PUD Plan calls for "Corporate Villas" on the site now planned as Outlot L. The calculated density on this site was 21 attached villas units on approximately 2.8 acres; there was no layout approved for Outlot L. The proposed amendment indicates 9 detached villas units on approximately 3.4 acres. The development is designated "The Preserve." Refer to the attached narrative and graphic materials submitted by the applicant. The site is enlarged by virtue of consolidating some land to be subdivided from the adjacent fairway area; this amendment would be accomplished through the required re-planning which would be initiated upon approval of this proposed schematic plan amendment. The applicant's narrative states that an attribute of the proposed development is the preservation of more trees than would be the case with the development envisioned by the original PUD plan. Comparison is offered with the nearby Sterling South development where a large number of trees were clear-cut to accommodate the approved villas units. The applicant states that the reduced density and "selective custom grading" will ensure the tree preservation. The City does not have a tree preservation ordinance, but the preservation of natural features, including trees, is a basic feature and regulatory standard for PUD's. The loss of substantial tree stock in other developments in this PUD is unfortunate. This request, including the tree inventory data, should be viewed as an appropriate standard for evaluating future developments in this PUD (and others). It is appropriate to require the developer of the PUD as well as the developer of specific phases within the approved PUD (the developer of the phase may not be the original proponent) to demonstrate the preservation efforts and to guarantee the final product. The reduced density is desired by the applicant to accommodate a particular housing product. The PUD design flexibility afforded by the Ordinance would allow a building configuration, including possible modifications to the maximum height standards, that could retain the original density and preserve trees. The developer of the proposed "detached townhomes" prefers the large individual lots and fewer units. Tree preservation is a beneficial feature, i.e., the loss will be less than other villas layouts with more units. The Ordinance PUD standards allow for a variety of housing styles and densities within the PUD. The proposed villas are an alternative style on a site that is "sandwiched" between fairways, buffered by woods. Outlot L (The Preserve) is the last of the villas-style development areas within this PUD. The number of villas units actually planned is less than the original PUD Plan for the Wilds anticipated (see comments for Amendment No. 4). Thus, the impact of a reduction of 12 units for this area may be negligible in terms of the overall PUD. The configuration of the proposed lots and the street arrangement will be the subject of a separate platting application. AMENDMENT 3: The revision of the density and housing unit style for The Preserve on Outlot L also involves amendment of the PUD Schematic Plah' to establish the access to the lots from Wilds Parkway. The proposed street would be a private road. The final design and alignment of right-of-way will be the subject of a separate platting application. However, the City Engineer has raised some concerns regarding the proximity of the intersection of the proposed road, Preserve Boulevard, with Wilds Lane to Wilds Parkway. The resolution of the traffic movement and safety concerns could alter the layout of the proposed development. The applicant has provided an analysis by the project engineer regarding the City Engineer's concerns (see narrative material). It confirms that revision of the proposed private road would have an impact on both the design and density of the project. Other observations by the City Engineer, per Jeff Evens, include: 1. Preserve Blvd. shows variable widths; it is unclear why this is shown; a minimum unobstructed driving lane of 20 ft. is required by State Law, thus any reduced-width roadway that may be approved could result in prohibition of on-street parking. 2. It appears the proposed road width and cul-de-sac radius are less than City standards. The lack of a full right-of-way may cause future problems, considering the accommodation of public and private utilities and drainage. 3. The proposed road width is less than the City standard of 32 ft. 4. Additional land is represented for The Preserve, i.e., more area than Outlot L; this will involve replatting and the existing easement around Outlot L will have to be modified/vacated. The planning issue for consideration at this time is whether the road proposed per the amended Schematic Plan should be approved or whether alternatives should be evaluated, recognizing that the lot layout, tree preservation, and density would change. The applicant contends the proposed road is appropriate for a residential project of this area and density, and that there would be minimal, if any, negative impacts upon traffic movements or safety. The private road, in effect should be viewed as a private driveway serving a "cluster" of townhomes (which are detached). AMENDMENT 4: This is a multi-part item which is "housekeeping" in nature. It represents the official recognition of changes to the overall PUD Plan which have evolved as development has proceeded. The approved villas plats with fewer units will also likely result in a reduced (estimated) population base, for example. The record PUD Plan, including the narrative and the graphics (Schematic Plan and Preliminary Plat) require a periodic formal updating; that is what this amendment represents. Refer to the attached materials based upon selected pages from the approved PUD Plan. The applicant prepared exhibits to show the degree of change; the information was reviewed by the Planning Staff to ensure accuracy of the "existing" conditions (per the approved PUD Plan, as previously amended); and, thus, the attached materials will ultimately become part of the record Plan. The impact of the reduction of the number of villas units within the proposed Preserve development was mentioned under Amendment No. 1. Judging the overall impact the reduction of villas units for the whole PUD is subjective; one measurement for comparative purposes is to consider the valuation of the improved property. The Finance Director calculated the effect a reduction of 40 villas units would have, given an average tax capacity valuation of $400,000 per villa unit and given current tax rates, for both the gross property taxes ($11,336) and for just the City taxes ($2,665). The potential annual loss for the gross taxes would be $453,440 and the potentialf"annual loss for the City taxes would be $106,600. The terms of the Letter of Understanding between the City and Carlson Companies relative to the Sterling at the Wilds projects will also be incorporated with the record PUD Plan. The materials submitted by the applicants included language to be considered for addition to the page(s) dealing with dimension standards for villas. The language states, regarding the minimum 25ft. front yard standard: "Upon a lot-by-lot review this will be reduced to 20 ft. if topography or existing vegetation dictates." The language is comparable to, but not the same as, language in the PUD Plan, relative to the housing styles other than the attached and detached villas. That language states: "Certain lots, due to topographic conditions, may have less than the minimum front yard requirements, but no lot shall have less than a 20 ft. front yard setback." There is a reason why the villas standards do not include this adjustment: it is unnecessary because of the design of villas, often attached, which should be flexible to "match" the topography and natural features--moreso than the standard detached homes on individual lots. Further, the Zoning Ordinance provides for minor amendments which allows for adjustments to setback dimensions when warranted (on a case-by-case basis). Staff finds that the lack of the subject language in the villas standards was not an inadvertent omission. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve amendments as proposed (with data clarified and/or corrected by Staff). 2. Approve selected amendments and table others for further information or revisions. 3. Deny requested amendments. RECOMMENDATIONS The Zoning Ordinance PUD standards include three criteria upon which the Planning Commission should base its recommendations to the City Council relative to Schematic Plans (and amendments); the bases are not limited to these: 1. Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development. 2. Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located, to the City's Land Use Plan and to other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or densities; circulation and parking facilities; public facilities, recreation areas and open space. Staff recommendations for each of the amendment elements are: AMENDMENT 1 The proposed standard for rear yard dimension, using a building separation approach, rather than the traditional measurement from the property line, is not inconsistent with PUD procedures. The issue in this case is that the situation came to light after the final plat was approved and, unlike the side yard standards, did there was no design consideration based upon building separation. The proposal uses the common open space to realize the separation distance which is the equivalent to two rear yards are to a rear yard and a side yard. The key consideration is~that the developer now clarifies that the intended development involves a dwelling that virtually occupies the entire platted lot. This is not unusual, though it is but one layout style often found in PUD's (dwellings can be reasonably accommodated within the platted lots--the platted dimensions do not render the lots unbuildable). The applicant's product was not matched to the approved overall PUD standards for villas units. The proposal is generally consistent with the cited criteria, considering the stage of development approval. It is only speculation at this point whether the same lot layout and open space provisions would have been approved if this amendment had been proposed prior to or during preliminary plat review. We recommend that the approval of this request, which is to amend the schematic plan, be limited to the Sterling at the Wilds developments only. Further, we recommend that the engineering concerns raised about the sidewalk and street design data be addressed by the applicant and approved by the Development Review Committee before building permits are issued. The sidewalk is very important for pedestrian circulation through this area and adjustments can be made to garage locations (and, thus, driveway length) to handle tandem parking in the driveways. AMENDMENT 2 There are several considerations that related to the Ordinance criteria: density, preservation of natural features, and circulation. The recommendation must address the street design (circulation) concerns raised by the City Engineer. The Commission's consideration of that may lead to the conclusion that a revised site layout is warranted. That may lead to the density reduction proposed. Staff recommends that the Commission consider the observation made earlier that tree preservation is a attribute that could be realized with other villas layouts. The proposed layout is market driven and accommodates a preferred house design. The number of trees preserved is more than some other layout, perhaps; but the City has not approved any other layout for this specific Outlot. The "savings" realized, per the applicant's data, are estimates with inferred benefits by comparison with a nearby development which was virtually clear-cut. The PUD Ordinance and City Plans do encourage a mix of housing types, for purposes of both design and affordability. This amendment provides another housing product in the upscale PUD which is oriented to the golf course environment. The staff recommendation is that approval should include resolution of the street design concerns at the schematic plan level (now), rather than at the preliminary plat stage. Further, the tree inventory data should be used during the platting process and during the development of the site to ensure the preservation proposed is the preservation that, at a minimum, is realized. It would be appropriate to eventually have a specific building pad/tree preservation area plan for each lot, with the requirement that approved preservation results are a condition of occupancy (which could involve replacement of damaged or destroyed trees). AMENDMENT 3 This has been addressed under Amendment 2: the concerns raised regarding traffic movement (circulation) and safety should be addressed at the schematic plan stage because of the potential impact on site layout and density. The applicant has submitted engineering data which suggests the proposed layout will work safely; the data also indicates the possible impacts on the site design and number of units. Safe and effective access to Outlot L is a basic planning issue, regardless of the specific site layout and density. It is a valid schematic plan matter that probably has several feasible solutions. The recommendation is to approve the "housekeeping" items contained in this amendment element, recognizing that some items may not be readily changed until the other amendments in this application are finally resolved. Those items that reflect factual changes that have occurred (demographic items, the number of villas units approved, and the like) and those changes authorized by Staff, per the Zoning Ordinance (the Letter of Understanding items for the Sterling at the Wilds developments) are examples of the "housekeeping" update items. Staff does not recommend approval of the language regarding adjustments to the front yard setbacks for villas units. It is not necessary; as proposed, it is not consistent with the comparable language for other housing developments. The Zoning Ordinance provides for minor adjustments, when warranted by field conditions. Staff recommends that approval recognize the corrected information on the several pages of the PUD Plan that were modified to illustrate the various amendments requested by the applicants. The staff-corrected pages (see pages 5,7, and 43) were produced to ensure accuracy and not to dispute the proposed amendments. All amendments approved by the City Council will be clearly reflected in the record copy of the PUD Plan; the format may vary from the versions submitted. Attachments DAVID CARLSON COMPANIES, INC. Proposal to amend PUD 9-93, Development Standards for Villa Units within the plats of Sterling North and Sterling South David Carlson Companies, Inc. Scott Clements 19965 Waterford Court Shorewood, MN 55331 474-1362 AMENDMENT I $1dPI:::~ORTZ~ ZNFORHAT/OI~ FOR A PROPOSED ,P~IEI~)MENT TO PAGE 43 UZLD$ P.U.D. S;CTZON VZZ. ZTEH D YARD SETBACKS, 8UZLOZNG SEPRR~TZON, AND OPEN SP~CE The existino Development StandaTc~ ~or villa Homesite~ at The Wiids were ~ri~en to accommodate several types of detached and developers. Villa or Townhome houeing tYplcal/¥ invoIves a Homeowners A~so~iation, as a legal corporate en~£ty, which prov/de~ beyond any of those set fo~=h by the City 0r P.U.D. standards. members o~ the common Jand areas private ~[reets, and o~he~ amenities. · Three platting method~ are most often Used in Villa type housing under association "rule', though one is more particular to detached housing. This method results in irregular lot sizes and has Proven to be problematic in association management where equal treatmemt of ail homeowners, ParCicularly in the area o~ fee asmessment, is desired. Of the t~o me:hod~ mo~e common to at%ached housing, one ~orks best, with the fixed plan type building of multi, pie units such as the B unit structures that are allowed by The ~ilds P.U.D. This ~ethod plats only the building footprint itselY, and conveys lot o~ne?ship unde~ the home to the buyer, wich all other land areas in the development o~ned equally by association members as commo~ space. The method somewhat P~ecludes use of yard setbacks to confirm and maintain open space, becau=e there are essentially no Property lines between the multiple u~it buildings. Separation guideline~ ate clearly most appropriate In this situation. The third method (used by David Carlson Companies, Inc 1%r The Wilds Outlots C and P) is preferred when a variety o~= ~loor Plans are to be afl%red, oonstructlon is to Occur on a sold lot basis only, and the specific lot ahd floor plan arm not paired until ~ b~yer makes their selection, This me~hod involve~ platting a standard unit lot size, grouped according to the of attached structure planned for the development. The lot g~oupe arm laid out to meet o~en space requirements, end all o%he~ land a~ea Is conveyed as one common lo~. The common area ofte~ completely surrounds lot groups, and ~s an excellen~ instrument for %he developer to g~an[ easements ~o the Citz other parties Eot streets, access, d~eina~e, u~ilities, etc. p. I - 199zl :12/02/94 FRI 12:29 FAX 612 474 7701 WATERPORD 1~i003 Standard lot si=es are ideal for asmo¢iation man.a~ement relate8 to 1see assessment. However. this method of pla~tInG also relies le~ on yard setbacks a.d more heavily on =e~aratio~ ~uidm~ine~ to m~inta~n ope~ space. Sterling No~th and South ~ere both pla-~ed ~or all tomnhome s~TUO~UTe8, ~h ~yp~ca~ un~ ~0~ o~ lOt gTOups O~ ~00' x 100', nlthough the Developer ~n all cases ~a~d ou~ ~he lo~ gToups to meet o~ exceed Lhe ~n~ended open space requirements u~l~z~ng the ~ongest and ~de== ~loor plan o~ered as a typ~ca~ ~oo~print, they relied more upon ~he~r unde~standtng o~ :he (in~ended or inferred) building realized by the Ci=y that although separation ~as a~equate, cerua[n modoZs ~ould e~croach on aide and rea~ yard aetback distances. ~hZle the approved P~el[m~nary Plats eho~ed an overall layout and typical tot ~eta[[ ~hat condition, ~t ~as only discovered ~hen individual lot surveys ~e~e submitted ~i~h but[dXn9 permit apO[[cations. Therefore, in keeping ~ith the P.U.O.'s intent to allo~ a variety o~ developmen~ ~ype~, and recognizing through the above in~ormat[O~ that more clarification ~s necesaa~y, ar~ Rmendment to Page 43 (Section VII Item D ~velo~ment Standards for Villa To~nhomes) should be permitted to more clearly de?ina the relation between, and use of, yard setbacks, building separe~ion, and open s~ace requirements for the approved ~l]d~ P .U .O. P, 2 Z d Z I flqlllqtl:l tRRI ~ t 'hr t t '~ i David Carlson Companies, Inc. 19967 Waterford Court Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 Mr. Blair Tremere City of Prior Lake 4629 Dakota Street S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Re: Proposed Amendment to The Wilds PUD Dear Blair: December 21, 1994 Our premise for the amendment is that to allow for the various methods of platting residential lots, particularly townhome developments with association rule, common land areas, and shared ownership of land outside a specific unit lot, building separation standards should be allowed as an alternate to the more restrictive yard setback standards, providing that open space requirements can be demonstrated and maintained. You have identified several conditions in your letter of 12/16/94 that are not currently addressed clearly enough in the proposed language for Page 43 of the PUD. My unders~nding of these issues are as follows: 1.) Side Yard Open Space in relation to Outlot and PUD Perimeter Property Lines. Lots not adjacent to another structure, but adjacent to the Outlot property line cannot be reviewed by building separation, but must be held to some other ~setback~ guideline. Lots 26, 27, 88 Sterling South, and Lots 1, 16, 18 Sterling North, encroach the 7.5' sideyard setback to their respective lot lines, but clearly far exceed that distance to the edge of the Outlot. 2.) Rear Yard Open Space in relation to Outlot and PUD Perimeter Property Lines (for lots not on golf course fairways). As above, Lots 27-40, 73-82 Sterling South, and Lots 17-18 Sterling North encroach the 20' rearyard setback to their respective lot lines, but clearly exceed that distance to the edge of the outlot and/or PUD. 3.) Building Separation The proposed PUD Amendment suggests the adoption of language to maintain building separations for side-to-side and rear-to-rear conditions, but does not currently address side-to-rear situations (Lots 30 to 31, and 44 to 51 Sterling South, for example). We would suggest that a minimum building separation of 27.5' (20' rear + 7.5' side) be included in the Amendment. I believe that these comments are appropriate to the Amendment discussion, and would appreciate theft consideration in your Staff Report. Please let me know if any additional information is required. Sincerely Yours, DAVID CARLSON COMPANIES, INC. Scott T. Clements General Manager cc: Titan Jacobs Mark Flis PRIOR LAKE DEVELOPMENT L.P. Proposal to amend PUD 9-93 Outlot L, The Preserve Prior Lake Development L.P. Timn Jacobs 2500 Wilds Parkway Prior Lake, MN 55372 445-4455 AMENDMENTS 2, 3, AND 4 Proposal to amend PUD-9 '93 OUTLOT 'L' , 6~--4'55'3500 . TO: The City of Prior Lake 11/28/94 FROM: Titan F. Jacobs-The Wilds RE: Amending the PUD 9-93 for Outlot 'L' In keeping with the Wilds' Mission Statement to preserve as much of the natural beauty of this development as possible, we are proposing to amend the PUD 9-93 to change the density of Outlot 'L' from 21 attached villas to 9 single detached villas. The description of the 9 single detached villas is conveyed in the "narrative description of Outlot 'L'" by Nedegaard Construction on the sheet attached. This 'hybrid' villa concept truly combines the best of both worlds; the look and feel of a single family detached homesite with the convenience of no maintenance. This decrease in density allows the development to 'preserve' a greater number of trees on the site thru the method of selective, custom grading. The following is a comparative analysis of the impact this change will have on tree vegetation as compared to the original proposed PUD plan. ITEM Exist. PUD Proposed PUD site acreage number of pro.posed units attached villas detached villas 2.8 3.4 21 9 21 0 0 9 est. no. of original trees on site 348 348 est. no. of trees left after devel. 42* 218' * The preservation of trees calculations from the existing PUD were derived from actual counts obtained from the Sterling South Development. The existing PUD for Outlot 'L' is similar in nature to Sterling South.** *~i'he following are the calculations made on Sterling South: acreage no. of proposed sites est. no. of original trees proposed no. of trees percentage of trees saved 21 88 1600 185 (after development) 12% Our new proposal calls for selective and custom grading of each lot, clearing the minimum no. of trees surrounding the building footprint. TJ-PUDL.WPS I would also like to address the proposed entrance to Outlot 'L' from Wilds Lane. The City of Prior Lake has expressed concerns over the proximity of this entrance to the entrance of VVilds Lane to Wilds Parkway. Our engineers have evaluated this' situation and have attempted to relocate this entrance further away from the intersection. Their evaluation is stated in a letter attached. It is our position that we leave the entrances as proposed. We hope this narrative assists you in the understanding of our proposed amendment. Further, we appreciate your consideration in this matter. TJ-PUDL. WPS NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF OUTLOT L Nedegaard Construction intends to construct detached townhomes on each of the lots created by this replat. Each of these homes will be individual, free-standing single family dwellings. As in a townhome situation, there will be a Homeowner's Association to maintain the exterior of all units, the grounds, landscaping, and provide all snow removal. Each unit will ~ave a consistept appearance with some %imited variation f~om unit to unit as it relates to the selection of accent materIals. The exterior of the units will consist of redwood, stucco, brick or stone. It is estimated that the price of these units will range from $450,000 to $550,000 each. We expect the homeowners will consist mainly of empty nesters or families with teenage or older children who will soon be leaving the home. Our buyers will not want large yards for children to play in. One of the unique design aspects of these homes is their flexibility in being adaptable to a variety of types of lots. While it is our hope and expectation that all of the lots will have full basement walkouts, the location of the walkout in the home may vary from unit to unit. Since it is not necessary to create full walkout basements for each home, we hope to reduce the number of trees that will need to be removed during grading. Each unit will be fully landscaped and we estimate the landscaping budget for each unit will be approximately $10,000 including underground irrigation. The level of landscaping for each unit will be similar to our current free-standing single family model. There will also be extensive landscaping along common areas and at the entrance to this project. If you would like to see a similar project, we encourage you to view our Courtyards of French Creek community in Plymouth. This development is located south of County Road 9 and east of 1-494, immediately east of the entrance to Clifton French Regional Park. While the homes we are proposing for Outlot L in the Wilds will be larger and more expensive, a visit to the Courtyard project will give you a feel for the type of community we wish to develop. '" / / / I I ,111 ~ II d I / x \ \ I \ I I \ \ \ \ \ · \\ \\\ - ! \ / ( I''/ I ~ I II ~' ~ I ( \ I I i I \ \ i/ \ ---% _..~/ o I I ii I/I I f v'me DEVELOPMENT PHASING A. Phn~in~ Annlysis It is anticipated The Wilds will be developed in three major phases. The first phase, which contains approximately 371.9 acres, is the largest of the thre~ pha,s~. With the bulk of the first phase scheduled to begin in 1993, this phase will contain the 18-hole championship golf course, golf practice facility, the clubhouse/hotel, two public parks, approximately half of the main collector road that will begin at the main entrance off of Mystic Lake Drive/Columbia Avenue and all of the residential areas located in the north half of the project. This phase will contain the following residential mix: SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS - 1/2 acre Lots - 1/3 acre Lots - Corporate Villas SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLINGS - Club Villas 87 DUs 54 24 9 79 DUs 79 Total Number of Dwelling Units in Phase One 166 DUs The second phase is expected to begin in 1994 and contains approximately 146.7 acres. This phase is to include the extension of the project's main collector road approximately 1,850 feet to the south and east, the second hotel, two restaurants, convenience store and two public parks. The residential mix is Phase Two is: SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS 132 DUs - 1/2 Acre Lots 46 - 1/3 Acre Lots 58 - Estate Lots 28 SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED DWELLINGS - Fairway Villas - Fairway/Lake View Villas - Executive Villas 147 DUs 26 73 48 Total Number of Dwelling Units in Phase Two 279 DUs The :t:49.3 acres that make up Phase Three complete the build out of The Wilds. Scheduled to begin in 1995, Phase Three will include the village shopping area and the remaining single-family detached dwellings. The residential breakdown is as follows: '48-