HomeMy WebLinkAbout8E - Glynwater PUD
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PROPOSED PLAN:
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
8E
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE SCHEMATIC PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS GLYNWATER TO
ALLOW 122 TOWNHOUSE UNITS
JANUARY 5,1998
The purpose of this item is to consider approval of the
Schematic Planned Unit Development, proposed by
Wensmann Homes, to allow a townhouse development
consisting of 122 units in 2-, 3-, and 4-unit buildings. This
property is located on the south side of CR 82, just west of
Fremont Avenue and directly south of the entrance to The
Wilds.
Zonina: This property is currently zoned A-1 (Agriculture).
Much of the property is also located within the Shoreland
District for Prior Lake and Arctic Lake. This property is
designated for Urban Low to Medium Density Residential uses
on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The easterly
portion of the property is located within the 2010 MUSA
boundary. The westerly portion of the property is still outside
of the MUSA. Although no application has been filed, the
developer has indicated his intention to request this property
be zoned R-2 (Urban Residential). The R-2 district is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation.
Densitv: The plan proposes 122 units on a total of 41.57
acres. Density is based on the buildable acres of the site, or in
this case on 32.12 net acres. The overall density proposed in
this plan is 3.8 units per acre. The R-2 district permits a
density of 7 units per acre through the PUD process.
Lot Coveraae/Ooen Soace: The R-2 district allows a
maximum lot coverage of 20% for a townhouse PUD. The
PUD provisions also require a minimum of 20% of the gross
area of the site be devoted to open space uses. Because this
property is located within the Shoreland District, a minimum of
50% of the site must be devoted to open space uses. The
proposed plan indicates a lot coverage of 12.7%, and 51% of
the gross area as open space.
Streets: This plan proposes a public street which starts on the
1:\97files\97puds\glynwate\97106ee.doe Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
east side of the site, directly opposite Wilds Parkway, loops
through the site and exits back onto CR 82. There are also two
cul-de-sacs located on the east side of the site. The two cul-
de-sacs are proposed as private streets rather than public
right-of-ways. The plan also includes an east-west street,
located parallel to CR 82, on the west side of the site. This
street provides access to both the property to the west and to
the east.
Utilities: Sewer and water service is proposed to be extended
to this site from the existing utilities located in CR 82. The plan
proposes to extend the utilities along the loop street for service
to the units within the development, and then back to CR 82 on
the west side of the project site.
ParkslTrails: This plan identifies a park along the south
boundary of the property. The total park site is 11.69 acres;
4.95 acres of the parkland, however, consists of wetlands and
ponds. The plan also identifies a pedestrian trail starting at CR
82, winding through the proposed park, and connecting to the
16.5' wide access owned by the City on the west boundary of
this site.
ComDliance with PUD Reauirements: This plan appears to
comply with the PUD requirements regarding setbacks,
building heights, and so on.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing related
to this application on December 8, 1997. The Planning Report
and Planning Commission minutes are attached to the agenda
packet.
Staff Recommendation: The Planning staff recommended
denial of this Schematic PUD Plan based on the premise that
the proposal does not met the intent of the PUD provisions.
With the exception of the private streets, the proposal can be
accomplished through the conditional use permit process.
Plannina Commission Recommendation: While the
Planning Commission agreed with the general concept of the
style of development on this site, the Commission questioned
the need for a PUD. A similar type of development could be
accommodated under the Conditional Use Permit provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission
recommended denial of this Schematic PUD plan, noting the
developer should revisit the PUD or approach this development
as a conditional use permit.
ISSUES:
The purpose of a Schematic Plan is to review the concept of a
PUD based on the following:
I :\97files\97puds\glynwate\971 06ee.doe
Page 2
1. Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the
planned unit development requirements.
2. Relationship of the proposed plan to the adjacent property,
the Comprehensive Plan, and zoning provisions.
3. Internal organization and adequacy of uses and densities,
circulation and parking facilities, public facilities, recreation
areas and open spaces.
While this proposal is consistent with the general requirements
of a PUD, it must be noted that the same, or a similar type of
development can occur through the conditional use permit
process under the present zoning ordinance. The proposed
zoning ordinance also allows this types of use with a
conditional use permit in the R-1 and R-2 district. The table
below compares the permitted densities for a conditional use
and a PUD in both the current and proposed zoning ordinance.
Proposal
I Current Zoninq Ordinance Proposed Zoninq Ordinance
R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2
CUP PUD CUP PU CUP PUD CUP PUD
o
3.5 4.5 5.5 7.0 3.6 10 7.3 10
112 144 176 224 I 115 321 234 321
Units/acre
I # units
3.8
122
It appears that the primary advantage of a PUD in this case is
that it allows private streets. The proposal does not eliminate
the disturbance of the steep slopes, nor does it eliminate the
need to remove some of the significant trees on the site. The
plan does protect the existing wetlands.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Find the PUD inconsistent with the purpose and intent of
the Zoning Ordinance and adopt Resolution 98-XX denying
the Schematic PUD Plan.
2. Continue the review for specific information or reasons per
City Council discussion.
3. Find the PUD consistent with the purpose and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance and direct the staff to prepare a
resolution, including findings and conditions of approval, for
Council consideration on the Consent Agenda at the
January 20, 1998, Council Meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Alternative #1.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion to adopt Resolution 98-XX denying the Schematic
PUD Plan.
REPORT
A IT ACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 98-XX
2. Planning Report dated December 8, 1997
3. Minutes of December 8, 1998, Planning Commission
1:\97files\97puds\glynwate\97106cc.doc
Page 3
1:\97files\97puds\glynwate\97106cc.doc
Meeting
Page 4
RESOLUTION 98-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE
SCHEMATIC PUD PLAN KNOWN AS "GLYNWATER"
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS: the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 8,
1997, to consider the application from W ensmann Homes, for Schematic PUD Plan
to be known as G lynwater, consisting of a 122 unit townhouse development; and
WHEREAS: the Planning Commission afforded persons interested in this issue an opportunity to
present their views and objections related to the Schematic PUD Plan to be known
as Glynwater; and
WHEREAS: notice of the public hearing on said Schematic PUD was duly published m
accordance with applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS: the City Council finds the proposed Schematic PUD Plan to be known as
Glynwater is inconsistent with the stated purposes and intent of the PUD section of
the Zoning Ordinance in that the same proposal, with the exception of the private
streets, could be accomplished through the Conditional Use Permit Process; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR
LAKE, MINNESOTA, that it hereby denies the Schematic PUD Plan to be known as Glynwater.
MOTION BY:
SECOND BY:
Passed and adopted this 5th day of January, 1998.
YES
NO
Mader
Kedrowski
Petersen
Schenck
Vacant
Mader
I Kedrowski
I Petersen
I Schenck
I Vacant
{Seal}
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
1:\97files\97puds\glY.!lwate\rs98xxcc.doc Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
_....__-... 0> ________... . .......-.;....__._...,
~~ ~.,. ,,'~. ,-, r;:J G
I: \ !I L, '. )
I L\ \ ~
~:..J L'J U U
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DECElVIBER 8, 1997
1. Call to Order:
The December 8, 997, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman
Stamson at 6:30 p. Those present were Commissioners Cramer, Criego, Kuykendall,
Stamson and Vonhof, irector of Planning Don Rye, Plannm7' g Coordinator Jane Kansier
and Planner J enni Tovar.
,
'"
2. Roll Call: "-"-'" /
V onhof ',Prese
,
Kuykendall ',Pr ent
"-
Criego '- resent
Cramer "Eresent
S tamson ABsent
"-
3. Approval of Minutes: / '''''''
/ '
Cramer- Correction on Pa 6, 6th bullet, 3rd sentence "l~ non kennel to 3 animals."
as amended.
To Stamson arrived 6:35pm.
4. Commissioner V onhof explained the publi
~
A. Case #97-106 Consider a Schematic Planned Unit Development to be known as
Glynwater to allow 123 townhouse units, located west of Fremont Avenue on the south
side of County Road 82.
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the staff report dated December 8, 1998.
Wensmann Realty has applied for a Schematic PUD Plan for the property located on the
south side of CR 82, just west of Fremont Avenue and directly south off the entrance to
The Wilds. This property is currently zoned A-I (Agriculture). Much of the property is
also located within the Shoreland District for Prior Lake and Arctic Lake. This property is
designated for Urban Low to Medium Density Residential uses on the 2010
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The easterly portion of the property is located
within the 2010 MUSA boundary. The westerly portion of the property is still outside of
the MUSA.
The purpose of a Schematic Plan is to review the concept of a PUD based on the
following:
R:\COUNCIL\PLAt'lCOMM\MN 120897.DOC
1
. -. ....~.;.--...................-~
.'....::
------., \ 0
i / '') \
' i \ I
'\ L-~.j II u
~ ~J
1. Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the planned unit development
requirements.
2. Relationship of the proposed plan to the adjacent property, the Comprehensive Plan,
and zoning provisions.
3. Internal organization and adequacy of uses and densities, circulation and parking
facilities, public facilities, recreation areas and open spaces.
Staff reviewed current zoning and Comprehensive Plan and MUSA boundaries. The site
is 41.5 acres, with a varied topography ranging in elevation from 910 to 970, generally
drains towards the wetlands. Steep slopes exceeding 20% are along east and northerly
portions of the property. A wetland borders the site. Historically, the site has been
farmed. There are some wooded areas on the perimeter of the wetlands. The
Preservation ordinance applies. There are not a lot of significant trees. There are
significant wetlands. Applicant is proposing to fill wetland only where the road is to be
located. The access is south of the Wilds, and exits on CR 82. The County has no
objection to access. Proposed zoning to R-2 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Proposal is for 122 units in 2,3, and 4 unit townhouses. The overall density of the site is
38 units per acre. Lot coverage is 12.7% (open space 51 %). The City requires 10% Park
dedication, 11.69 acres total is provided, but 5 acres is unbuildable (wetlands). The
location of proposed park is acceptable however, difference must be made up with cash
dedication. The City owns a 16.5' strip of land on the west side of this site under a
specific use deed for trail access to Arctic Lake. This is future access to Arctic Lake.
The Plan meets PUD requirements. This same type of development can occur under the
R-1 or R-2 zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit. R-2 can have 176 units, in R-
1 they can have 112 units. The only reason for pun is to have private streets. They
would have to meet the other requirements. They are not proposing to preserve
significant natural features to warrant the P1JD.
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a determination on whether or not
this proposal is consistent with the purpose and intent of the PUD provisions. The
Commission must make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed
Schematic PUD Plan.
If the Schematic PUD Plan is to proceed, it should be subject to the following conditions:
1. Further action to approve this PUD is conditioned upon the rezoning of the property
to the R-2 district to permit the requested density on the site.
2. The developer must submit additional calculations for densities in the Shoreland tiers.
The calculations submitted did not appear to subtract the wetlands from the site area
for each tier as required by Section 9.11 C of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. A phasing plan for the development of this site must be submitted.
4. A revised Tree Preservation Plan, which includes all of the disturbed areas, and an
accurate count of significant trees, must be submitted.
R:\COUNCIL \PLANCOMM\lY1N 120897 .DOC
2
'-'
.~,".. n
,.: I 1."\
I :. \
._ _ k. .....J
5. The plan must show contours within 200' of the subject property boundary.
6. Provide a sewer stub on the private street that runs east to the adjacent property.
7. Provide all the submittals required by Section 6.12, B, 5 (preliminary PUD Plan) of
the Zoning Ordinance.
The Planning staff recommended denying the request. With the exception of the private
streets, this proposal can be accomplished through the conditional use permit process.
For this reason, the proposal does not meet the intent of the PUD provisions.
Questions from Planning Commissioners:
Criego- Advise developer to go normal route as permitted?
Kansier- Yes, we had several meetings, and told them of the various processes. They
chose this one.
Comments from the public:
Terry Wensmann, Wensmann Realty explained there would be 122 units with varying
styles. He put exterior photo of luxury one level townhomes. 2 Units. 42 of these are
proposed. $250+K. He presented the various townhome styles and prices ranging from
$115,000 to $250,000. His biggest concern of staffs denial is PUD. We can go either
way, the R-O- \V will be larger on public streets. This pushes the units further into the
slopes and wetlands. This is our rational for going with a PUD. The density will not be
affected. We are trying to preserve trees and steep slopes. We are losing 9 of23
significant trees.
Comments from the Commissioners:
V onhof- Likes looks of it. Major geographical features protect the neighborhood. The
looped road and access are good. Agrees with staff that a CUP is the proper procedure.
The developer's request to provide narrower streets is unjustified. Supports staff
recommendations.
KuykendalI- Agrees with V onhof. No argument for private streets and meeting the
objects ofPUD other than impact on wetland and steep slopes. What steps can be taken
to mitigate the impact of public street vs. private street. '
Nick Polta, Pioneer Engineering- Street width will be maintained for public vs. private.
The difference is ROW, which will be 8' wider. The additional 8' pushes the houses
further into the slope. 5-6 feet VS 30 feet additional grading.
Kuykendall-How do you propose top maintain the private streets.
R:\COUNCIL \PLANCOMtvfuvlN 120897 .DOC
3
L
~-
-:J V
1 U
-.
t:1t!'
'i '\ D
. >.~; r\ !~
L.--/ :--...: ,_ .'.J u
Terry Wensmann- 3 different associations will maintain the streets as written in the
bylaws and covenants.
~
j'
Ii
!.J
Kuykendall- Can you explain the parallel street in NW comer?
Terry Wensmann-future access can be dedicate to public.
Kuykendall- What are the private streets in the development?
Terry Wensmann- The street located in the northeast comer of the site and interior cul-de-
sacs are proposed as private streets.
Kuykendall- no advantage ofPUD, developer would accept CUP procedure. Supports
staff recommendation. He asked about the sidewalk location.
Terry Wensmann- Sidewalk is located on the east side of the street to connect with
existing trail.
Kuykendall- Public streets require sidewalk on one side. Promoted in city. Is this
correct?
Kansier- City policy requires sidewalks on collector streets. No sidewalk is required on
local streets.
Kuykendall- Prefers sidewalk. Recommends sidewalk on one side for safety of children..
Stay with CUP and public streets.
Criego- We want to protect slopes. With the ClJP process we can do this. With the
PUD process we can require it and give leeway on other items. Recommends the PUD to
preserve slopes. The Developer needs to show PC how to preserve slopes with PUD.
How may homes get lost if we save the slopes?
Nick Polta- The property is sensitive with slopes and trees. Need to balance amenities.
To redesign without disturbing the 20% slopes would lose 27 homes or 20% of the
development. This is major making the project less desirable. Shoreland District
requirements also place restrictions on the number of units. However, we are at a higher
standard then required.
Criego- Will have the same problem of slopes and trees with CUP or a PUD. With a
PUD we will have some leeway.
Nick Polta- We tried to reach a compromise of the natural amenities slopes and trees,
cutting and filling.
R:\COUNCIL\PLANCOMtvI\MN 120897.DOC
4
,-.. !T) n
:.', LL \
...:J L.. U .-J
s c:-;J
J i'
u
Terry Wensmann- We want as much green space as possible to make the project work.
The open space will create denser areas within the project affecting the visual impact of
the project.
Criego- Ifwe go with.aPUD we can keep slopes. Where does staff fit into this?
Kansier- The Subdivision ordinance says the Developer should preserve slopes 20% or
greater. Under PUD PC could say no cut into slopes at all.
Criego- Standard route will result in wider streets, defeating the purpose of saving the
slopes. If we go PUD, then we could preserve the slopes? He is opposed to public streets
you are recommending with wider ROW, eliminating slopes.
Kansier- With a PUD, the City can place constraints to not cut into slopes at all The.
Developer needs to show how to save slopes & trees.
Crarner- PUD to save slopes is a good idea. He concurs with staff. With revision to
preserve more of the slopes, CUP is appropriate.
Starnson- Concurs with staff. PUD is not appropriate as proposed. CUP is an acceptable
alternative.
.Kuykendall- Public or private street connections.
Nick Polta- Don't want public traveling on private streets. Private streets to remain
private.
Kuykendall- Why not hook up to Fremont?
Kansier- Intersection distance is an issue for connection. We wouldn't want connection
that close.
Kuykendall- Should go back to planning stage if PUD is desired. Can take as a CUP or
revised plan for PUD.
Crarner- If the development is done as a CUP, with public streets, would a cul-de-sac be
required and eliminate a building?
Kansier- Yes.
Criego- If the developer proposed a CUP, would recommendation be different?
Kansier- Our specific recommendation as a CUP is unknown. This application was
reviewed as a Schematic PUD. The CUP requirements were not looked at under this
process. As a general concept and use as a to\vnhouse development, it is acceptable.
R:\COUNCIL \PLANCOMM\MN 120897 .DOC
5
'-_/
i :: "
'-' -J
Cramer- If CUP and public street, would it change your proposal?
Kuykendall- Motion to recommend denial ofthe schematic PUD as presented and suggest
the developer revisit thePUD as presented or approach the CUP plan as proposed.
2nd by V onhof.
Discussion:
Criego- To save slopes, a PUD is the proper procedure. Developer needs to be diligent
to save more slopes. Could be more difficult to get the number of units without PUD.
Kansier- This goes forward to Council.
Criego- Is developer willing to table?
Terry Wensmann- Wants a decision tonight. They have reviewed the alternatives, and
this is the best use of the land.
5 Ayes, 0 Nays.
Kansier- This item will be at City Council on January 5th.
Herb Wensmann- Only issue is 8 foot ROW?
Kansier- Doesn't meet requirements ofPUD. Concept is acceptable.
B. Case #97-11 Consider approval of a preliminary~at to be known as Red Oaks
Second Addition, for tfi construction of 3 single farnrdwellings located on a 2.42 acre
site along the west side of ezy Point Road. //
/
" /
Planning Coordinator Jane Kansierpresented tlie Staff Report dated December 8, 1998.
, //
/
The purpose of this public hearing is to consjder an application for a preliminary plat for the 2.42
acre site located directly west of Breezy p,olnt Road, south of Prior Lake, and north of Rutledge
Street. The preliminary plat is to be kI}o<vn as "Red Oaks Second Addition". The applicant is
Michael S. Benedict, 15380 Breezy ,?6int Road, Prior Lake. There is a single family home
located on this property. /
The site is fairly level, and c9~ns a 0.23 acre wetland. The channel bet\.veen the wetland and
the lake bed was artificially-created, and is considered part of the wetland rather than the lake.
The property is zoned 1Y( SD (Suburban Residential Shoreland District).The 2010
Comprehensive p7lan,identifies this property as R-LlYfD (Urban Low to Medi~m Density
Residential). "
'"
'"
R:\COUNCIL\PLA."'lCOMM\MN 120897 .DOC
6
r:J c-:J
i?
~
, .
1 i
U'
PLA:NNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
4A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A SCHEMATIC
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO BE
KNOWN AS GLYNWATER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
_X_ YES NO-N/A
DECEMBER 8, 1997
PRESENTER:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
Wensmann Realty has applied for a Schematic PUD Plan for the property located on the
south side of CR 82, just west of Fremont Avenue and directly south off the entrance to
The Wilds. This property is currently zoned A-I (Agriculture). Much of the property is
also located within the Shoreland District for Prior Lake and Arctic Lake. This property is
designated for Urban Low to Medium Density Residential uses on the 2010
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The easterly portion of the property is located
within the 2010 MUSA boundary. The westerly portion of the property is still outside of
the MUSA.
The purpose of a Schematic Plan is to review the concept of a PUD based on the
following:
1. Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the planned unit development
requirements.
2. Relationship of the proposed plan to the adjacent property, the Comprehensive Plan,
and zoning provisions.
3. Internal organization and adequacy of uses and densities, circulation and parking
facilities, public facilities, recreation areas and open spaces.
PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Total Site Area: The total PUD area (less the CR 82 right-of-way)) consists of 41.57
acres.
)'onoeranhv: This site has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from 970' MSL
at its highest point to 910' MSL at the lowest point. The site generally drains towards the
wetlands located along the easterly portion of the site, the southerly portion and the center
1:\97fi1~\97pud!i\glyn\)!.at.c.\scb.emepc doC; Fj~d
16200 Eagle creek Ave. ~.t.., Prior CaKe. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61~q. 7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTU;\ITY EMPLOYER
of the site. There are also steep slopes, or slopes in excess of 20%, located on this site.
These slopes are generally located on the eastern half of the site.
Veeetation: This vegetation on this site consists of vacant cropland. The eastern and
southern boundaries of the property are wooded, as is the area adjacent to the wetlands.
The project will be subject to the Tree Preservation requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance. The applicant has submitted an inventory of the significant trees on the site;
however, this inventory does not indicate how many of the trees will be removed.
Wetlands: There are three wetlands located within this site, with a total area of 9.45
acres. The wetlands are located in the southeast comer of the site, along the southern
boundary of the site, and in the center of the site. The plans indicate only a small area of
wetlands will be filled to allow a road connection. This site is subject to the wetland
mitigation requirements.
Access: Access to the site is from CR 82, on the north. CR 82 is identified as a Minor
Arterial street in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
PROPOSED PLAN
Zonin~ Although no application has been filed, the developer has indicated his
intention to request this property be zoned R-2 (Urban Residential). The R-2 district is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation.
Buildin~ Styles: This Schematic PUD plan calls for a townhouse style development
consisting of 2-, 3-, and 4-unit buildings. Sample floor plans of these buildings are
attached to this report.
Densitv: The plan proposes 122 units on a total of 41.57 acres. Density is based on the
buildable acres of the site, or in this case on 32.12 net acres. The overall density
proposed in this plan is 3.8 units per acre. The R-2 district permits a density of 7 units
per acre through the PUD process.
Lot Coveraee/Onen Soace: The R-2 district allows a maximum lot coverage of20% for
a townhouse PUD. The PUD provisions also require a minimum of20% of the gross area
of the site be devoted to open space uses. Because this property is located within the
Shoreland District, a minimum of 50% of the site must be devoted to open space uses.
The proposed plan indicates a lot coverage of 12.7%, and 51 % of the gross area as open
space.
Streets: This plan proposes a street which starts on the east side of the site, directly
opposite Wilds Parkway, loops through the site and exits back onto CR 82. There are
also two cul-de-sacs located on the east side of the site. All of the streets are proposed as
private streets rather than public right-of-ways.
Parks/Trails: This plan identifies a park along the south boundary of the property. The
total park site is 11.69 acres; 4.95 acres of the parkland, however, consists of wetlands
1:\97 fi 1 es\97puds \gl ynwate\sc hemepc. doc
Page 2
and ponds. The plan also identifies a pedestrian trail starting at CR 82, winding through
the proposed park, and connecting to the 16.5' wide access owned by the City on the west
boundary of this site.
Comoliance with pun Reouirements~ This plan appears to comply with the PUD
requirements regarding setbacks, building heights, and so on.
ANALYSIS:
The purpose of a Planned Unit Development is to allow flexibility in residential land
development, variety in the organization of the site, higher standards of site and building
design, preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, and more efficient
and effective use of land. Section 6.12 of the Zoning Ordinance lists the requirements for
a PUD (see attached).
While this proposal is consistent with the general requirements of a PUD, it must be
noted that the same, or a similar type of development can occur through the conditional
use permit process under the present zoning ordinance. The proposed zoning ordinance
also allows this types of use with a conditional use permit in the R-l and R-2 district.
The table below compares the permitted densities for a conditional use and a PUD in both
the current and proposed zoning ordinance.
I
Proposal I
Current Zoning Ordinance
R-l R-2
CUP PUD CUP PUD
3.5 4.5 5.5 7.0
112 144 176 224
Proposed Zoning Ordinance
R-l R-2
CUP PUD CUP PUD
3.6 10 7.3 10
115 321 234 321
Units/acre
# units
3.8
122
It appears that the primary advantage of a PUD in this case is that it allows private streets.
The proposal does not eliminate the disturbance of the steep slopes, nor does it eliminate
the need to remove some of the significant trees on the site. The plan does protect the
existing wetlands.
Section 6.12, A, 12, e, states "a primary function of the PUD provision is to encourage
development which will preserve and enhance the worthwhile, natural terrain
characteristics and not force intense development to utilize all portions of a given site in
order to arrive at the maximum density allowed. In evaluating each individual proposal,
the recognition of this objective will be a basic consideration in granting approval or
denial. "
At this time, the Planning Commission should make a determination on whether or not
this proposal is consistent with the purpose and intent of the PUD provisions. The
Commission must make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed
Schematic PUD Plan.
If the Schematic PUD Plan is to proceed, it should be subject to the following conditions:
1:\97files\97puds\glynwate\schemepc.doc
Page 3
I
1-';-
1. Further action to approve this PUD is conditioned upon the rezoning of the property
to the R-2 district to permit the requested density on the site.
2. The developer must submit additional calculations for densities in the Shoreland tiers.
The calculations submitted did not appear to subtract the wetlands from the site area
for each tier as required by Section 9.11 C of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. A phasing plan for the development of this site must be submitted.
4. A revised Tree Preservation Plan, which includes all of the disturbed areas, and an
accurate count of significant trees, must be submitted.
5. The plan must show contours within 200' of the subject property boundary.
6. Provide a sewer stub on the private street that runs east to the adjacent property.
7. Provide all the submittals required by Section 6.12, B, 5 (Preliminary PUD Plan) of
the Zoning Ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend approval of the Schematic PUD Plan subject to the above listed
conditions, or any conditions deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission.
2. Recommend denial of the request.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning staff recommends Alternative 2. With the exception of the private streets,
this proposal can be accomplished through the conditional use permit process. For this
reason, the proposal does not meet the intent of the PUD provisions.
ACTION REOUIRED:
A motion and second to recommend denial of the Schematic PUD Plan.
EXHIBITS:
1. Section 6.12 of the Zoning Ordinance (pUD Requirements)
2. Location Map
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. Reduced Copy of Schematic PUD Plans
5. Engineering Comments, dated December 3, 1997
6. County Engineer Comments, dated October 31, 1997
7. Finance Department Comments, dated October 22, 1997
8. DNR Comments, dated December 3, 1997
1:\97 fi les\97puds\glyn wale \schemepc.doc
Page 4
6.12
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The provIsIons of this section of the Zoning
Ordinance are intended to provide residential areas which can be developed with some
modifications of the strict application of regulations of the R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4
Residential Districts in accordance with the provisions and regulations contained herein.
P.U.D.'s can be developed within any Residential District with the overall population
density of number of living units permitted to be constructed in general conformance with
the provisions of the basic Zoning District in which it is located. Higher densities may be
allowed than those permitted in each Zoning District with the specific density determined
by the Planning Commission and Council. Rather than strictly enforcing the concept of
uniformity of housing types in each district, this provision will encourage:
1. Flexibility in residential land development to benefit from new technology in
building design and construction and land development.
2. Variety in the organization of site elements, building densities and housing types.
3. Higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and
experienced Land Planners, Registered Architects and/or Landscape Architects
to prepare plans for all Planned Unit Developments.
4. PreseNation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics and open space.
5. More efficient and effective use of land. open space and public facilities.
A. REQUIREMENTS:
1. The development shall be planned so that it is consistent with the Prior Lake
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The tract of land shall be under unified control at the time of application and
scheduled to be developed as one unit. In addition the development plan must
include provisions for the preseNation of natural amenities.
3. The Planned Unit Development proposal appears to harmonize with both existing
and proposed development in the area surrounding the project.
4. The proposed Planned Unit Development is comprised of at least ten (10) acres
of contiguous land. (Ord. 94-09)
5. Permitted uses may include:
a) Any combination of dwelling units in single family, two family, town or row
houses and apartments.
b) Educational, religious, cultural and recreational facilities. Commercial and
industrial uses.
c) Public and private education facHities.
d) Other uses permitted in the Zoning District in which the Planned Unit
Development is located.
6. A minimum of twenty (20) percent of the gross land for private or public open air
recreational use protected by covenants running with the land or by conveyances
or dedicated as the Planning Commission may specify shall be an integral part of
the plan. such open space areas shall not include land devoted to streets,
parking and private yards. .
7. Density increases of up to thirty (30) percent from those outlined in column 7,
table 4.2, may be allowed in proportion to the number of conditions listed
immediately below which have been fulfiile': ;::rovided that traffic patterns will net
be adversely affected and that public utilities and facilities are adequate.
Section 6. Page 13
a) The location, amount and proposed use of common space (10%).
b) The location, design, setting of dwelling units (10%).
c) Location adjacent to existing or proposed collectors or arterial street
(5%).
d) Physical characteristics of the site (5%).
8. Building setbacks from all property lines which form the perimeter of the total
P.U.D. shall be twenty-five (25) feet or the height of the building, whichever is
greater. The setback for any building from all interior and exterior dedicated
street right-of-way lines or from the streets shall be twenty-five (25) feet or the
height of the building, whichever is greater.
9. The height limitation for all buildings in the P.U.D. shall be thirty-five (35) feet.
10. The total coverage by buildings shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of the total
area in the P.U.D.
11. All P.U.D.'s shall have community sewer and water service available.
12. Building and Site Design.
a) More than one (1) building may be placed on one (1) platted lot in a
P.U.D. area for single family, detached dwellings must comply with the
City Subdivision Ordinance.
b) Architectural style of buildings shall not solely be a basis for denial or
approval of a plan. However, the overall appearance and compatibility of
individual buildings to other site elements or to surrounding development
will be primary considerations in the review stages of the Planning
Commission and Council.
c) No building permit shall be granted for any building on land for which a
plan for a P.U.D. has not been finally approved by the City Council.
d) Staging of Development:
1. Any P.U.D. plan proposed to be constructed in stages shall
include full details relating thereto and the City Council may
approve or modify, where necessary, any such proposals.
2. The staging shall include the time for beginning and completion
of each stage. Such timing may be modified by the City Council
on the showing of good cause by the developer.
e) A primary function of the P.U.D. provision is to encourage development
which will preserve and enhance the worthwhile, natural terrain
characteristics and not force intense development to utilize all portions of
a given site in order to arrive at the maximum density allowed. In
evaluating each individual proposal the recognition of this objective will
be a basic consideration in granting approval or denial.
f) The uniqueness of each proposal for a P.U.D. requires that specifications
and standards for streets, utilities and services shall be subject to minor
modifications from the specifications and standards established in this
and other City Ordinances governing their construction. J"he City Council
may therefore waive or modify the specifications or standards where it is
found that they are not required in the interest of the residents of the
entir,= City The olans and profiles of all streets, utilities ane services shall
be reviewed, modified, if necessary, and approved by the City Engineer.
Section 6, Page 14
B. PROCEDURE:
1. Pre-Application Conference.
Before submitting an application for a Planned Unit Development, an applicant
may confer with th~ Planning Staff to obtain information and guidance, before
incurring substantial expense in the preparation of plans, surveys, and other
data. A check list will be provided to the prospective applicant as an indication of
the.w-ritten and graphic materials required for P.U.D. consideration.
2. A general procedure for application, review and action on a P.U.D. shall be
according to the following outline with more details found in the remainder of this
Chapter.
a) Application, filing fee and copies in a number and scale as determined by
the Planning Director of the schematic plan are to be submitted to the
Planning Director for his review and submitted to other City Staff.
b) The Planning Director reviews the plans for compliance and will contact
the developer if additional plans are required.
c) Planning Commission holds a public hearing on schematic plan.
d) Applicant submits schematic plan to Council.
e) Zoning Officer amends Zoning Map identifying the P.U.D.
f) The applicant prepares a preliminary plat. *
g) Planning Commission reviews preliminary plat and forwards
recommendation to the City Council.
h) Council acts on preliminary plat.
i) If Council approves the preliminary plat, applicant submits final plat
within one hundred twenty (120) days of Council approval.
j) Applicant submits final plat to the Planning Director who reviews it for
compliance and transmits plat to the City Council and staff. *
k) Council reviews final plat and takes action.
* FINAL PLAT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT MAY BE PREPARED TO CONFORM WITH
DEVELOPMENT STAGING.
3. Schematic Plan: An applicant shall apply to the Planning Commission for
approval of a development concept of the P.U.D. with map and text as specified
including enough information to demonstrate its relationship to adjoining uses.
a) Maps which are part of the schematic plan shall contain the following:
1.
Location map showing location of the site within the City.
2.
The existing topographic character of the land.
A composite of all natural amenities of the site and three
hundred (300) feet adjacent to the site including steep slopes,
drainage ways, plus marshes, ponds, lakes and property lines.
3.
4.
The size of site =.rc! orooosed uses of the land to be developed
together with an ide'ntiflcation of off-site land use and zoning.
Section 6, Page 15
5. The density of land use to be allocated to the several parts of
the development together with height, bulk, and approximate
location of buildings and other structures.
6. The approximate location of thoroughfares.
7. The" location of common open space including public schools,
parks and playgrounds or private natural preserves.
8. Schematic utility plan.
b) The written statement shall include the following:
1. A statement of the ownership of all land involved in the Planned
Unit Development
together with a summary of previous work experience.
2. An explanation of the general character of the planned
development.
3. A general indication of the expected time schedule of
development.
4. A statement describing the ultimate ownership and maintenance
of all parts of the development including streets, structures and
open space.
5. A statement describing how all necessary governmental
services will be provided to the development.
6. The total anticipated population to occupy the Planned Unit
Development, with break downs indicating the number of sr:hool
age children, adults and families.
4. Schematic Plan Approval:
a) Within thirty (30) days after the filing of a schematic plan, the Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing on the application. The
Planning Commission may continue the hearing or refer the matter back
to the applicant for further information, provided however, that the public
hearing or hearings shall be concluded within forty-five (45) days after
the date of the original hearing, unless the applicant shall consent in
writing to an extension of time.
b) Within sixty (60) days after filing of the schematic plan, the Planning
Commission shall forward the plan to the City Council with a written
staff report, recommending that the plan be disapproved, approved or
approved with modifications, and giving reasons these
recommendations.
c) The Planning Commission shall for.vard to the City Council its
recommendation based on and including but not limited to the following:
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 ar.d -=-:equacj cf 'Iarious uses or densities;
circulation and parking facilities; public facilities, recreation areas
and open space.
Section 6, Page 16
d) The City Council shall act on the schematic plan within forty-five (45)
days after receipt of the plan from the Planning Commission. The City
Council may continue the review process for additional study or
information for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days after receipt of the
schematic plan from the Planning Commission unless the applicant shall
consent in writing to an extension of time. Upon conclusion of all reviews
the City Council shall, within thirty (30) days, make and file findings and
cause a copy thereof to be mailed to the applicant.
e) If the schematic plan is approved, the City Council shall amend the
Zoning Map to show the Planned Unit Development and its
identification number. If the schematic plan is approved with
modifications, the City Council shall not amend the Zoning Map until
the applicant has filed with the City Council written consent to the plan
as modified. Refusal of any modification shall constitute denial of the
plans by the City Council. Failure of the applicant to notify the City
Council of his acceptance or refusal of the modification to the plan
constitute acceptance of these conditions. No building permit may be
issued on the land within the Planned Unit Development until final plans
for the development or phases of the development have been approved
by the City Council.
5. Preliminary P.U.D. Plan:
a) Application for a Preliminary P.U.D. shall be filed with the City Planner
within six (6) months or risk withdrawal of City Council approval of the
P.U.D. and shall be in substantial compliance with the schematic plan. In
the event the preliminary plan is not in substantial compliance the City
Planner shall set forth the ways in which the preliminary plan is not in
substantial compliance with the schematic plan
(1) The applicant may treat such notification as denial of his
application for preliminary plat, or
(2) The applicant may refile his plan so that it does substantially
comply with the schematic plan.
b) The applicant may receive preliminary approval for phases of the
development, however, the first phase of the development shall cover at
least twenty (20) percent of the area approved as part of the schematic
plan.
c) Maps which are part of the preliminary plan shall include:
(1 )
(2)
(3)
All the maps required for schematic plan approval.
Generalized elevations and perspectives of all structures.
A grading plan showing existing and proposed contours at two
(2) foot intervals showing the direction of flow of surface
drainage and all easements necessary for both ponding and
runoff .
(4)
Plans and profiles for the distribution of water, collection of
sanitary waste and storm sewer for the proposed phase. For the
remaining area of the P.U.D. the following information shall be
shown:
a. Water distribution system.
b. Storm water distribution system.
Section 6, Page 17
or
"
c. Sanitary sewer system with invert elevations.
(5) Plans, profiles and typical sections for proposed street
improvements.
(6) All u1i1ity easements.
(7) Landscaping and planting plan.
(8) Erosion control plan.
(Ord. 93-06)
(9)
A storm water management plan, which shall contain the
following information:
a. Existing Site Map showing the site and immediately
adjacent areas, including:
1. The name and address of the applicant, the
section, township and range, north point, date
and scale of drawing.
2. Location of the tract by an insert map at a scale
sufficient to clearly identify the location of the
property.
3. Existing topography with a contour interval
appropriate to the topography of the land but in
no case having a contour interval greater than 2
feet.
4. A delineation of all streams, rivers, public waters
and wetlands located on and immediately
adjacent to the site, including depth of water, a
statement of general water quality and any
classification given to the water body or wetland
by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, and/or the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
5. Location and dimensions of existing storm water
drainage systems and natural drainage patterns
on and immediately adjacent to the site
delineating in which direction and at what rate
storm water is conveyed from the site,
identifying the receiving stream, river, public
water, or wetland and setting forth those areas
of the unaltered site where storm water collects.
6. A description of the soils of the site, including a
map indicating soil types of areas to be
disturbed as well as a soil report containing
information on the suitability of the soils for the
type of development proposed and for the type
of sewage disposal proposed and describing
any remedial steps to be taken by the developer
to render the soils suitable.
7. Vegetative cover and clear delineations of any
vegetation proposed for removal.
8. 100 year floodplains, flood fringes and
floodways.
Section 6, Page 18
b. A site construction plan including:
1. locations and dimensions of all proposed land
disturbing activities and any phasing of those
activities.
2. locations and dimensions of all temporary soil
and dirt stockpiles.
3. locations and dimensions of all construction site
erosion control measures necessary to meet the
standards as outlined in the 1989 edition of
"Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas",
published by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, or an equivalent set of standards.
4. Schedule of anticipated starting and completion
date of each land disturbing activity, including
the installation of construction site erosion
control measures.
5. Provisions for maintenance of the construction
site erosion control measures during
construction.
c. A plan of final site conditions on the same scale as the
existing site map showing the site changes including:
1. Finished grading shown at contours at the same
interval as provided above or as required to
clearly indicate the relationship of proposed
changes to existing topography and remaining
features.
2. A landscape plan, drawn to an appropriate
scale, including dimensions and distances and
the location, type, size and description of all
proposed landscape materials which will be
added to the site as part of the development.
3. A drainage plan of the developed site
delineating in which direction and at what rate
storm water will be conveyed from the site and
setting forth the areas of the site where storm
water will be allowed to collect.
4. The proposed size, alignment, profiles and
intended use of any structures to be erected on
the site.
5. A clear delineation and tabulation of all areas
which shall be paved or surfaced, including a
description of the surfacing material to be used;
and
~
Any other information pertinent to the particular
project which in the opinion of the applicant is
necessary for the review of the project.
d. A summary sheet indicating:
6.
1. land area for each use.
Section 6, Page 19
2. Number of units proposed including number of
bedrooms in each area in d.1 above.
3. Number of areas of common open space.
4. Modifications of any provisions of this
Ordinance or any other ordinance, codes or
regulations of the City of Prior Lake.
5. Phasing plan indicating geographical staging
and approximate timing of the plan or portions
thereof.
e. Design standards:
1. All preliminary and final utility plans shall be
drawn in accordance with Prior Lake
Department of Engineering Design Criteria and
Standard Specifications.
6. Review of Preliminary Plan:
a) The Planning Commission shall make its recommendation to the City
Council for project approval; approval with conditions; or denial. Such
recommendations shall be made within sixty (60) days of the initial
hearing unless the applicant files a written request to the Planning
Commission for delay. If the Planning Commission does not make its
recommendation within the specified time period and a delay has not
been requested by the applicant, the City Council may take action on the
request by the applicant.
7. Final Plan Approval:
a) A final plan shall be submitted with an application for final plan approval
within one hundred twenty (120) days after Council approval of the
preliminary plan unless a written request for an extension is submitted
by the applicant. If an application for final approval or a request for an
extension is not received within one hundred twenty (120) days. the
preliminary plan will be considered abandoned and a new application for
a preliminary plan must be submitted following the preliminary plan
procedure. There shall be a maximum of not more than one (1) year
granted by the City Council for any requested extension.
b) The City Council shall review the final plan within thirty (30) days after
filing of the application for final plan approval.
c) The final plan shall be in substantial compliance with the approved
preliminary plan. Substantial compliance shall mean:
(1) The number of residential living units has not been increased.
(2) The floor area of non-residential uses has not been increased.
(3) Open space has not been decreased or altered to its original
intended design or use.
(4) All special conditions prescribed on the preliminary plan by
the applicant or any of the reviewing bodies have been
incorporated into the final plan.
d) The 2.f:plication for final plan approval shall be accompanied with the
following data and documents:
Section 6, Page 20
(1) All the information contained in the preliminary plan plus any
alterations or corrections required by the City Council.
(2) Proposed zoning changes with legal descriptions of all district
boundary changes.
(3) Deea restrictions, covenants, agreements, by-laws or proposed
homeowners associations and other documents controlling the
use of property, type of construction or development of the
activities of future residents.
a. A Homeowner's Association shall be established prior to
the sale of any lot or other land when land areas,
amenities, or structures are approved by the City and
provided within the Planned Unit Development for
private recreational uses, services, or private ownership
of streets or utilities. The Association documents shall
be in compliance with applicable State Laws, subject to
review and approval by the City Attorney, and shall
provide for the following:
1. Membership shall be mandatory for each
property owner and any successive buyer.
2. The open space use restrictions and ownership
must be permanent.
3. The Association shall be responsible for liability
insurance, local taxes, and for the maintenance
of the common amenities, streets, utilities, and
other facilities approved with the Planned Unit
Development.
4. Property owners shall be responsible for their
pro-rata share of the cost and the assessment
levied by the Association which can become a
lien on the property in accordance with State
Law.
"
The City may enter upon the Common Areas
and perform street maintenance and repair;
snow removal from streets; control of surface
water drainage; maintenance and repair of
sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water supply
system or other utilities, when the City Council
has found and has expressed in a resolution that
the Association has failed to provide those
services that are deemed necessary for the
health, safety, and welfare of the residents and
occupants of the property.
The City may assess the cost, of the
maintenance or repairs or improvements directly
against benefitted lots to the extent permitted by
law or may assess the Common Area in which
case the Association shall levy a special
assessment against the benefited lots to defr:ay
the total amount of the City assessment.
The title of the Association and the owners of
lots in and to the Common Area shall be made
subject to..il. non-exclusive easement in favor of
the City fer the purpose of ingress and egress
Section 6, Page 21
for public safety enforcement and services,
animal control, health and protective
inspections, to provide other public services
deemed necessary by the City. and for the
purposes set forth herein. (Ord. 95-09).
4. A signed and executed developers agreement.
5. A subdivision plat suitable for recording in the office of the
Registrar of Deeds of the County.
e) Annual Review:
1. The Planning Commission shall review all Planned Unit
Development Districts within the City at least once each year
and shall make a report to the City Council on the status of the
development in each of the Planned Unit Development Districts.
If the City Council finds that development has not occurred
within a reasonable time after the original approval, the City
Council may instruct the Planning Commission to initiate
rezoning to the original Zoning District by removing the Planned
Unit Development District from the official Zoning Map.
f) Amendments and Control:
1. Amendments may be made in the approved final plan when
they are shown to be required by changes in conditions that
have occurred since the final plan was approved or by changes
in the development policy of the City.
(a) Minor changes in the location, siting. and height of the
buildings and structures may be authorized by the
planning staff if required by engineering or other
unforeseen circumstances.
(b) All other changes in use, rearrangement of lots.
blocks, and open space must be authorized by the City
Council under procedures outlined for amendment of
the Zoning Ordinance. (Ord. 83-6)
Section 6, Page 22
I
'.{r-~"
,~."
. ~ i
,'.p '~
I."'~l
....:--:;,~.
, I L.!J
1 I'"'
\
jr--..
\:
~
r: d\:~ I,,:'
\ i i ! ;
,
I ,Ii
\'~
J:.....,' I
lr
I
,!..I~"
"! .':'~~-.
I .. I,..r;;j__,_
'1- .....',
N:r; Tll
~
.~
'~
a
~
~
I .
( :~i'-; I'
" . ,,," :
- ~ -~('1'~: I :: ::\
I .' , I . '-,
~1~:'!1
'a ~ - ....
~ ~l
.~~
~ n
=<
I ..,~
IGj'"
. ~m~
I -3:g
- ,}~;:
~ ;:II:
m
.11
~
1
'.
. ~
;(""..; 51
'-1 I.;\", ""i . .1
.~ 'I .1'- 'I
'JI:~,,_,~~ ~~~lt .
i\\ ,~. t'~',;.' _~
. ~~ .. - ,:;,".
,~ ~l..'; /~ '~'\7-!
'.71 .." '~F '5.:, I ~~~1: , i
, .......:....:..L,;.....:... !.7i~'; I n ---:1
Y\.:,-o,j, '=-",' ':..Y' '.J.' .~'
~""""'L~ I' '~f _ " -'. '\=:~
~' ,w ~~_ II .:{_.~-.-.. .~(__....l
~ ~;.~~ ~ ." ,-' :~~ft({l:3,',
--"--- =- /' ~~____;7 ' i -; i'
I ,,;, ~ -," 'ft' /( /' r::U
I "!'!:I" 1 .oJ ----'" ~::~~""'"'1<......J'
- If ~ r---~1;-;.;f:,-r.;I' <: ,i
I '~,? :\~~~~'--~^:~t'
. !,
't I
, ~I
, Il~;
"
'i
Ii
II ' ,
"
Ii! .
:i1
i
t
J
\ /1
/Ij
,
,Ii
I':
,
,;; ,
,
,)~,=,-::ji;:::
~~,=i
i ~ ~~
! I t~
,~ r"~
. ,I' ,I
: I
, 1
; , /
, .
'--
I{
i~~.:
'!T~ ::!::...."
~:~?J1': : .:. ~ -l
; ~ 'II I ! - ; I
. / ~) '.A !
"~\.
cQ:..... . '~\ I . /: :'1-'
:---;.LL i ~\~ ~ U ,~ I\,_~ 1 ~: .
: I~; -1: '\" ~~~~
, 'I . ~'d.
~~, ' . '-i}6:
.....
: !
il
/""~-.--i'!. """'"
-~ :~
; /.M-q
, ,<'..-.()
,( < -~I~'!
~~~-'i
~~~, -:-~~- -j"
. 1> "" r-~.
.1;1....;"",
....,}/...'.
,,-:.~
-lr
GLYNWATER ADDITION
November 24, 1997
) ~@~ D\Yl~ ~
NOV 2 5 /qq7
I
/ I
./
The concept plan as submitted would require PUD approval. Outlined in this narrative
are the reasons behind the PUD development request and how this approval will benefit
the site.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
The property is located within two shoreland districts which have significantly impacted
the development. The site has unique characteristics consisting of wetlands, steep slopes
and a grove of trees located on the southern edge of the property. A tree inventory has
been completed and wetlands delineated. It is our intent to minimize wetland mitigation
and our concept plan indicates this. The trees do not require preservation as far as
species, however it is our intent to preserve all possible to enhance the area. Again this
can be accomplished with this concept plan.
SHORLAND ANALYSIS
We have enclosed a breakdown by tier which shows the design measures we have taken
to keep the development as far away as possible from the lakes. Both shore land districts
have the first tier level preserved with no development planned in these areas (with the
exception of a future trail system) and the overall concept plan as proposed is less than
the maximum allowable density in both shoreland districts.
PUD
By planning the development with private streets in the two townhouse areas, we are able
to keep much of the development away from the shoreline areas, wetlands, trees and steep
slopes. The private streets are constructed 34' back of curb to back of curb which are the
same requirements as a public street. There would be no dedicated right of way in the
private streets as this would be all cornmon area and maintained by the association. Each
townhouse area would be governed by Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions which ensures that streets are maintained and that the overall site will be
managed uniformly. Associations can also control the type of fertilizers applied within
the developments to ensure only organic materials are used which will help in preserving
the lakes.
On the easterly townhouse association's private street, we have taken extraordinary
measures to design homes with extended foundations and walk-out levels to decks, thus
preserving the natural steep slopes. Adding an additional 16' ROW would only push the
buildings back and require additional grading to create building pads on the slopes.
Additional grading may affect the existing wetlands and possibly lose trees. The trees
have been inventoried and even though there are no species which require preservation, it
is our intent to preserve as many as possible. The proposed concept design has a trail
system within the development which we feel eliminates the need for sidewalks. Adding
sidewalks would add an additional 21 ' ROW to construct sidewalks, creating more
maintenance for the townhouse association with no added benefit because of the direct
access to the parkland. In addition to the sidewalks it would requier more site disturbance
which has already been addressed.
On the westerly loop street, adding an additional 16' ROW or 21' ROW would again
cause the units to be developed closer to wetlands and begin to crowd the units with no
added benefit. The design as planned has at least 20% of the gross area dedicated as
common area green space, or public recreational use. All open space would be controlled
by either the City of Prior Lake or the Associations through the Declarations to regulate
uses and preserve the open space.
The design shows a 55' ROW on the east end of the development, with sidewalks on one
side of the street. The ROW then drops down to a 50" ROW at the trail connection. All
homes along the 50' ROW are located with easy access from their homes to the trail
system. Increasing the ROW to 55' to provide for sidewalks would again push buildings
closer to the wetlands, require more grading for building pads and create a maintenance
issue for the homeowners association. The 50' ROW as proposed is the standard city
ROW.
During the past six months we have reviewed every aspect of this development, including
our own building plan designs to maximize the natural terrain and not force building pads
on the site. We feel that this design concept accomplishes these goals and are requesting
approval.
SHORELAND DISTRICT ANALYSIS
This project is impacted by two (2) Shoreland District Management areas. Both upper Prior
Lake, a general development lake, and Arctic Lake, a natural environment lake, impact this land.
The following is a breakdown of each dis~ct by tiers. (See the site plan sheet for a graphic
display of the tier layout.)
UPPER PRIOR LAKE
(A general development lake)
(200' Tiers)
TIER #1
Area = 9,920 S.F.
Riparian Lots - None
Non-Riparian Lot Size = 12,000 S.F.
Density:
Allowed = 0.83 Units
Used = 0
Transfer to Outer Tier = 0.83 Units
TIER #2
Area = 15,965 S.F.
Non-Riparian Lot Area = 12,000 S.F.
Density:
Allowed = 1.33 Units
Used = 0
Transfer to Outer Tier = 1.33 Units
TIER #3
Area = 129,580 S.F.
Non-Riparian Quad Buildings = 8,125 S.F./Unit Required
Density:
Allowed = 15.95 Units
Used = 6
Transfer to Outer Tier = 9.95 Units
TIER #4
Area = 202,585 S.F.
Non-Riparian Duplex, Triplex & Quad Units
Duplex Building = 8,750 S.F./Unit Required
Triplex Building = 8,333 S.F./Unit Required
Quad Building = 8,125 S.F:/Unit Required
Density Allowed:
Duplex @ 9% Usage = 2.08 Units
Triplex @ 13% Usage = 3.16 Units
Quads @ 78% Usage = 19.45 Units
Total Units Allowed = 24.69 Units
Density Used:
Duplex - 2 Units
Triplex - 3 Units
Quads - 18 Units
Total Units Proposed = 23
Transfer to Outer Tier = 1.69 Units
TIER #5
Area = 192.665 S.F. .
Non-Riparian Duplex, Triplex & Quad Units:
Duplex Buildings = 8,750 S.F./Unit Required
Triplex Building = 8.333 S.F./Unit
Quad Buildings = 8, 125 S.F./Unit Required
Density Allowed:
Duplex @ 27% Usage = 5.95 Units
Triplex @ 14% Usage = 3.24 Units
Quads @ 59% Usage = 13.99 Units
Total Units Allowed = 23.18 Units
Density Used:
Duplex = 6 Units
Triplex = 3 Units
Quads = 13 Units
Total Units Proposed = 22 Units
Density Unused This Tier = 1.18 Units
Density Unused Total = 14.83 Units
ARCTIC LAKE
D.N.R. #70-85 A Natural Environment Lake
(320' Tiers)
TIER #1
Area = 56,575 S.F.
Riparian Lots = None
Non-Riparian Lot Size = 20,000 S.F.
Density:
Allowed = 2.83 Units
Used = 0
Transfer to Outer Tier = 2.83 Units
TIER #2
Area = 253,600 S.F.
Non-Riparian Duplex & Quad Units:
Duplex Building = 17,500 S.F./Unit
Quad Building = 16,250 S.F./Unit
Density Allowed:
Duplex = 87% = 12.61 Units
Quad = 13% = 2.03 Units
Total Units Allowed = 14.64 Units
Density Used:
Duplex = 14
Quads = 2
Total Proposed Units = 16
Density Transfer from Tier #1 = 2.83
Density Deficit this Tier = 1.36
,"oii
Density Transfer to Tier 3 = 1.47
TIER #3
Area = 260,711 S.F.
Non-Riparian Duplex & Quad Uni,ts:
Duplex Building - 17,500 S.F./Unit
Quad Building = 16,250 S.F./Unit
Density Allowed:
Duplex @ 21 % Usage = 3.13 Units
Quads @ 79% Usage = 12.67 Units
Total Units Allowed = 15.80 Units
Density Used:
Duplex = 6 Units
Quads = 23 Units
Total Units Proposed = 29 Units
+ Density Overrun = 13.2 Units
+ Total density overruns Arctic Lake = 11.73 Units
+ Total unused density Upper Prior Lake = 14.83 Units
+ Total unused density for project = 3.10 Units
+ The density overrun in Tier 3 of the Arctic Lake Shoreland District is allowable based on
Section 9 .11.D.3.a of the Prior Lake Shoreland District Ordinance which in turn
references Section 9 .11.F of said Ordinance.
All Requirements are met to allow the minor density increases as set forth in the above
mentioned sections.
November 21, 1997
i ;-:-',
GLYNWATER
,:
uC~; I 6
I,
Il,
I,'
. ..J;
lL.,/"
Development Plan Narrative
OCtober 15,1997
; "i
;- --'
The proposed development legally described as "(see exhibit "A") is owned by the
applicant, Wensmann Realty, Inc. 3312 151st Street West, Rosemount, MN 55068.
The proposed PUD creates three distinctive townhome communities with three unique
buyer profiles.
Townhomes - The proposed Development Plan includes 17 Four-unit buildings
I-two unit building and I-three unit building that are constructed
as row type dwelling units. (See Exhibit "B")
Buyer profiles of these units include single parents, first time
home buyers and singles. In comparing a similar development
completed in 1997 in Inver Grove Heights with 31 units, only
3 children were under the age of 5, and 6 over age 5. All 31
homes were sold in a 6 month period. Prices range from $110,000
- $140,000.
Coach Homes A design unique to Wensmann Homes includes 28 "Coach Homes"
these 4-unit condominium buildings are built in an over/under
design. (See Exhibit "C"). Buyer profiles again of these units I
include empty nesters, working singles and working couples.
Again using a similar development in Inver Grove Heights for
demographic information, no children were occupying the 16 units
completed out ofa totalof28. Prices range from $119,900
- $185,000.
Doubles
Wensmann Homes has successfully completed and marketed over
85 of these "Signature Townhomes". Townhomes are chosen from
an inventory of custom design plans that blend together. (See
Exhibit "D") Buyer profiles include empty nesters, executives and
working professionals. Of the 85 homes completed in the past
three years only 1 0% have school age children. Many still have
college students or weekend visits from grandchildren.
Prices range from $249,900 - $400,000. The proposed
development includes 46 townhomes, or 23 two-unit buildings.
All three distinctive communities would be controlled by individual townhome
associations. Association dues would cover maintenance of private roads, including
snow removal and reserve fund for future upkeep. Dues would also cover all maintenance
of common areas and buildings, hazard insurance, garbage pickup, reserves and
management functions. In the case of the Coach Homes the dues would also include
water and sewer fees.
Also included is a breakdown of the Shoreland District Analysis as calculated by Pioneer
Engineering. The property does fall within two shoreland districts, the Upper Prior Lake
and Arctic Lake. Site design considerations have been used to minimize the impact on
steep slopes, wetlands and wooded areas. A trail system is proposed to allow for
pedestrian traffic to Arctic Lake and a proposed park. Design consideration of the natural
slopes have also required an extraordinary building design to be planned with extended
foundations to preserve the natural terrain.
Wensmann Realty would like to proceed with the approval process this fall and winter,
with site grading early spring 1998, construction of model homes in June 1998 and
occupancies in September 1998.
/
QUALITY ABSTRACT, INC.
7582 Currell Boulevard, Suite 112
Woodbury, Minnesota 55125
Phone 739-8597 Fax 739-8492
\1. fA. II ,
June 4, 1997
Attn: Nick Koester
Chicago Title Insurance Company
2740 West 80th Street
Bloomington, MN 55431
RE: Abstracter's Certificate
Legal Description: That part of the East 16.00 acres of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section
34, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, lying East of the West 2.0 rods of said East
16.00 acres and Northeasterly of the following described line: Commencing at a point on the West
line of said East 16.00 acres distant 889.30 feet South of the Northwest corner; thence Southerly along
said West line a distance of 185.20 feet; thence Easterly at right angles a distance of 140.00 feet to a
point hereinafter referred to as "Point A"; thence Northwesterly along a line drawn from said "Point A"
to the point of commencement, to its intersection with the East line of said West 1.0 rod the point of
beginning of the line to be described; thence Southeasterly along said line and its Southeasterly
extension to the South line of said Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 and there terminating.
Together with all that part of Government Lot 2, Section 34, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota, lying Westerly of the East 1024.00 feet of said Government Lot 2 and Northerly and
Westerly of the recorded plat of Island View 5th Addition, Scott County, Minnesota.
EXCEPTING therefrom the following described tract: That part of the North 1h of the Southwest 1;4
of Section 34, Township 118, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning
at a point on the North line of said North 1h of the Southwest 1;4 distant 1082.43 feet East of the
Northwest corner; thence on an assumed bearing of East along said North line a distance of 375.00
feet; thence South 580.80 feet; thence West 375.00 feet; thence North 580.80 feet to the point of
beginning.
QUALllY AB~ I HACT, INC. does hereby certify that it has made a search of the public record in Scott
County, Minnesota and discloses the apparent owners and addresses of real estate within a 500 foot
radius of the above referenced property and has shown them as Entries No. 1 to 14, inclusive, on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
Dated this 30th day of May, 1997.
Quality Abstract, Inc.
~/J ;/~,;~I!
t" ~.J
LiceY15e Abstracter
A FULL SERVICE ABSTRACT COMPANY
End Unit
.JJ ' .
II
Ii
II
II
II
BEDROOM II
~ II
9 x 1 06~, II
;,... - _II
'---~-~
<<
Q'\ ~~
~ (~-~~-~= =FUTURE = )
I), , / If .f
'~: .J\ :: (\B~1W ~
.' "'JoG
~ . _ _ _ -'11 ,-- -I I '*"'
('U') ---~
-./ ILJ [~-I
i 0 Iwl_~B
,
FUTURE
--T-'.l
'~
LAUNDRY
GARAGE
20 x 20
\\ fJ .J
- efferson Commons
~
TOWNHOMES
I
FUTURE
FAMILY ROOM
13 x 136
..
". I I I
AI' I I I
# I I I
4( ::: I
- __ I I I I
"'--up
-,
I
I
ON
I
.
I
I
i
I
.
Lower Level
423-4884 Model Center
423-1179 Corporate Office
DECK
10 x 10
OPT. GAS FIREPLACE &
ENTERTAlNMENT CENTER
DINING
11 x 10
F --
,
,
,
,
, .
c::
,
,
LIVING
14 x 136
,
SNACK BAR ' >- "3=.1...
< a:=. "
.............- ".
..: ;1 ~ .-
" c.: =::::.=;
, , ~
[ KITCHEN =- -::
ow 116x12 II
BEDROOM
116x12
MASTER
BEDROOM
13 X 156
Upper Level
(WE~ANN)
!_.---, ------
Floor plam and dimemiom Jre lublect III
chan~e without notice.
. I (!... il
"W '
-efferson Commons
...
TOWNHOMES
Inside Unit
DECK
10 x 10
FUTURE
FAMILY ROOM
13 x 136
DINING
11 x 10
L1VI NG
14 x 136
CU
OPT.
FIREPLACE
e:==
,
,
,
I
.
I
,
,
'" "
t- =.===,= = = = = = =
I':::'. . ..~I FUTURE
II" .,' jAr
I (; . ~< :: ( I . tt.~.
"', ~:.~-,.;:,\. ,: ( .~)
('f;. )
r~H_ <t
~ KITCHEN ::
t' 116x12 11
ON
I', .,.
I :a:
1/ "'::'.
hA~ll
. BATH
iO
I 0
~-:1:'] LAUNDRY
-,------.
-r -
GARAGE
20 x 20
BEDROOM
116 X 12
MASTER
BEDROOM
13 x 156
,
.
Lower Level
(Ope. Plan-See End L.nie Lower Level Plan)
Upper Level
423-4884 Model Center
423-1179 Corporate Office
(WE~ANN)
;.:_._"l_=---~'
Floor plans and dimensions are subject to
change without notl(e.
'e'1 \'\"..rH;m ,,,., l.-I,,,,,,,,,.( In,' .\,,,,,,.:t ll)Q~
-~-_.~_._-
" . ' .. ~'.
He'
w=~~s~ow GR3~_~
LOWER COACH HOMES
DECK
10x8
MASTER
BEDROOM
126 x 14
OPT FIREPlACE &
ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
MAIN LEVEL
BEDROOM
10' x 12 ii'
;,;:-
^,--/" ,
Xi "'-; r
BATH
.Q ~tu LM,~/~'~ II i 1.1111oN
>< >0:: (I) , 'BATH::] .. ,
;o! 9 ,: r--[ rn ow ""
" /' ~ U \..J '--',' ~ l
,I~~o >- ~ KITCHEN' :
W ~...n-if ::~ i ~ - 11 x 12 L..
I 51 I IREFi I ^'
I , ,~
I:
, I
I'
I ON UP
-~
GREAT ROOM
17 x 18
l:
FOYER--z
~~...~t
I
!
DINING
10 x 12
-,
OPT FIREPlACE &
EllTERTAlNMENT CENTER
FUTURE
FAMILY ROOM
18 x 176
",. FUTURE
: . : BEDROOM <
~.,. 10 x 14 <"
.'
~ .
"
. -"" .....
e" ~". ,.'.'.'.''''.. "'<:.'...:::..;
STORAGE
.-1^,
" :1
J ~ i
..4 I 11
jl I Ii!
1l I ;'
\l)
GARAGE
UPPER UNIT
18x22
GARAGE
18 x 22
I
,
I
. I
I
,
"
~:~~~ = =A= = ~
:: "-:Fi.iiiJRE<~"'"
,)' BATH .
l.lil~~0
il!' OPT
q: B.EV
i'l :5
I'
; ! f'
'I IJ'
;11. '."-
j I: : '
i,1 -=i
, I
"
! I STORAGE
I!
1III i i IIII~'
G
-0
~
UPPER
COACH HOME
STORAGE
UN EXCAVATED
I
I
I
I,
: i
! :
; I
, ,
I
LOWER LEVEL
423-4884 Model Center
423-1179 Corporate Office
(WE~ANN)
.,:A!_t"J__~:JI
Floor plans and dimensions Jre subject to
change without notice.
?,-1,'" .,_-,..__ '-.. . .',,_' """--
DECK
13 x 10
: !
DINING
10x9
"t- d.
WI_\]S~OW G133_\]
UPPER COACH HOMES
STANDARD FLOOR PLAN
I
L-
REF ,
, ,KITCHEN ::
~ if ~::i
'I 12X9 ~U
:. rJN
~ ... ... ... ... ... ... - -I ...~..
100 ~~; ,T""
G :2:3 ,;'" "
w ,;,
- "
><7
" /.
OPT I
/EL~
FOYER
ON
jI : 1
J-H
I
I
1
]
GREAT ROOM
246 X 16
OPT AREPlACE &
ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
~--------~---~---------
: ::', ,~~
.
.
.
< ~ M j~-
r~\ ULCL
UBATH~
~ BEDROOM
~ 106x12
BEDROOM 1
14 X 126 <:
<;:
-
423-4884 Model Center
423-1179 Corporate Office
....
WAlK.IN CLOSET
PORCH
13 X 10 OPTIONAL FLOOR PLAN
,V~
MASTER
BEDROOM
176 X 13
DINING
12x9
:F r KITCHEN "
I 0 j I;;
W L :~;;
'I 12x9 .~;r.'h::
: ow
'---------1 hr
10 0 >- ~' ",
. a: ,
. - ~ ,~.. WAlK-IN CLOSET
.~.7'/' '~f ~ V ~
ELEV I ,
L' ~ < : g~
\ .
FOYER :.. tj LC:L
l ON L~ATH~ I
i /\~
V ~ BEDROOM
: 106 X 12
· 'BEDROOM -H
14 X 126 < ~ .
.
GREAT ROOM
246 X 16
~
lj
~
OPT AREPlACE &
ENTERTAINMENT CENTER
,.... -... -......... -it"''''''' "1T'........................ ...
I III "I,
"
MASTER
BEDROOM
176 X 13
.
<.:
.
(WE~~NN)
:...-._..~-=--...
Floor plans and dimensions are subi~t to
change without notice.
'l"t. '.'. ___~__ 11._._ 1__. ,.._..... ,,~.,...
...1r- ---
- I"
The Ma' )~e
_~~TS -A.~~._
"
....
.J
>
;>
FUTURE BEDROOM ~
12x16 :~..:::::
0,
00
0,
-~
"
,
.t~T:;~~~~~:~;~:,:)
:i :: 0 ;mm--'-'r
. ~~~~: ~-;;~::. -.. ~- - -. -~ ~ ~-
...
_1-
.~
~
"
~~
G)~
LOWER LEVEL
~
EOUAl HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
Dimensions ore approximate. Builder reserves the right to alter
plans, features and specifications without no lice.
FUTURE BEDROOM
15 x14
FAMILY ROOM
24 x20
CI'T1ONAl
"""""
rLJl
STORAGE
UNEXCAVATED
PATIO
--
___R_
1\
i:
l
u.
I
I
.
I
MASTER BEDROOM
17x14
o
f()PTlQNA:.~NIJ
_ = ::; ~RTAlNMENT CENTER
=\
,
~ MASTER
BATH
~
U
LIVING
18x16
DECK
10x14
ENTRY
~
11
I I
I I
DINING II SOLARIUM
II
12x14 I I 12x20
II
I I
J
I
BATH cOc
\Q],Q ~ ,,~
< ~ _ KITCHEN
~ a.ostT ... I 13x15 _
BEDROOMlDEN .~!~ g ~q II.
11'xlJ1 !.I v ij P
;LAUNORY I ~
~ -r-
~JI f'.. ____~_---.J
-- ----. -. '..-CO
GARAGE
22x22
MAIN LEVEL
Signature Townhomes
ly Wensl!l~
Model 431-1939
Office 423-1179
@Wensmann Homes, Inc. 1995
All floor plans and elevations on the exclusive property of Wensmonn Homes, Inc.
Copyright infringement could resuh in legol prosecution under federal copyright law.
The Cardina~
-...7:".r:"l'-....:'AI'!i".... .........:...
. ,
-, TV
.' .,-~~'.'1~'S _ ~ ~ ~_
Townhomes
J
BEDROOM
". x 13
FAMILY ROOM
14' x 27'
^
I' :'I"'!,'I:.'1i(l'Ituil^'-.
II, ~ '1', ~':I :!.I;" ,1';h~1
r\./,\~' :"
I - BATH
" I' ~ ,
I \~ \: '.
. .Ie '.'
.~~~
L-:l: I
~
j i; 'j"il
! I ~
: :\
r"!0
\.2-,.J
STORAGE
Standard
End Unit
CII'T
!NItJlT-.r
""""
DECK
12x8
J 1f ,
I
SOLARIUM CII'T. GAS
"""-"'l
--- DINmE UVING
12 x 14' 14 x 12
MASTER
BEDROOM
12 x 15
KITCHEN
13 x 11'
~
CII'T
........
MAIN LEVEL
...1..
ow
ISlNIl
DINING
12" x 16'
18]
~W7<'..'
-----"~
......
-//
;;
(
DEN
11 x 11'
FOYER
FUTURE
BEDROOM
11 x 15
I. ON
I
=="'J...
-
/'1-=::... <::=
, ,
.... '
I
Fl/TlJRE r
WALK.IN ,
II a.OSET I
II ------...
_11______--
---------
~ Ii
]:
GARAGE
21 x21'
-
STORAGE
-
LOWER LEVEL
G:r
--
( ,....... )
WENSMA'NN .
1_1._._k".~
MN 1.,1dm IX.... 1451
Model 431-1939
Office 423.1179
Exterior perspedives, floor plans and dimensions shown are for iUustralive purposes only, wbjed 10
change without notice. Please see our sales consultant far detaih. ~ Wensmann Homes, IlK. 1997.
All floor plans and perspec1ives are bu~der's exdusive properly. Copyright infringement could result
in legal prosecution under federal copyright law.
/ Ji@111\~
"I
IC<
FUTURe
illilllllllJ' BATH-:-;::
\i:rmrl O~
"" - XJ
STORAGE ~
I~
z"'''.
The Oriole
, nW""TlS ~ r - - ~
.) '\ ~ ~ .
FUTURE
BEDROOM
lJ
{%'Pl
Y FIREPucE
1--"
"'-
FUTURE
FAMILY ROOM
F\IT1JRE
WAlK-IN
ClOSfT
-
Standard
Inside Unit
-
FUTURE
BEDROOM
@)WH
LOWER LEVEL
~
eQUAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
Dimensions are appraximate. Builder reserves the rightta alter
plans, features and specificatians withaut notice.
SOLARIUM
13xl1
0F'1' FlRfPlJCE
GREAT ROOM
17x15
BEDROOM
12xll
~
L-^ ^-
WI rllll:1 R ~III
LJj <!:>
o
MASTER
BEDROOM
12x14'
DINING
llx12
BATH
~ ,
:i. ' 111' 11 ~ \'tIM
ON Ilillilv-.( -'l
<~ ;.""'i.------_ - MASTER U
"<<:)!/" '1'\ BATH
J"KITCHEN ~ ~0- O~
llxl0 : ~"
-- l;~><~
DINmE L ~ w
l1x8 LAUNDRY
/ 9 x 6' !....-
GARAGE
21x22
MAIN LEVEL
Solarium Townhomes
1y Wensf!l~
Model 431-1939
Office 423-1179
@Wensmann Hame5,lnc. 1995
All floor plans and elevations are the exdusive property of Wensmann Hame5, Inc.
Copyright infringement could re5uh in legal prosecution under federal copyright law.
. --
The BrrC_l
\":,;.,... --- .~~'~~::<. .r-~-:-..
- 'lfN 1
. ---"'~'r)Q ~ ~
..' ..) d. __
TownhomeS
;.e",:;,'..I=- =
~:;1~!1:11~
~ ~
~ ~
i I
~ ~
=s ~
~ ~
~ =-
~ WAlK.IN _
~ Q.OSET,
"0. Ja..-r-'-'- r
: e " ~q~~;~'/ ; '1,.'
,-~ "_~I~
:!':~"'r' '--.
, 'j .,1 r-t MASTER_
':l, '!I~BA~_: =>
~.'>=:; '*' '...... :
: <!
,
, ,
,
,
,
BEDROOM
14 x 13
@
EClUAI....,...'G
-
DECK
14 x 10
V oJ'J
SHELVING
MASTER
BEDROOM
166 x 16
-
I DFT2-WAY
IFI~
-
" "
i: OPT
I I EtmRTAlNMENT
I I CENTER
'I I'
. I ; l' I ~: "I!: I,
LEVEL II
FAMILY
ROOM
186 x 14
lAUNDRY
13 x 7'
LEVEL I
DECK
14 x 10
. - - v~~ . -
-
SOLARIUM I OPT 2.WAY LIVING
, AREPlACE
21 X 14 - ROOM
OPT
ENTERTAINMENT 21 X 14
CENTER
-
SNo\CI(BAA -
- - . m- -
~ KITCHEN ~~p
13 x 14
I -- ,
I ISlNlO
3... L_
,
r-~-;-;-;--
\ II'
ii')~j I , ;!:
.l~#',ll' "
t--h'
'-___I
OPT
OOOR
OESK
,
':", - -r
':::BArHr- I ELEV
.t~...,..:
~'r'
i ~J
<~
.J.-
~
<~
~
~O
DINING
ROOM
13 x 12
:: FOYER
, ,
I .\ACtED
I OPENING
, .
GARAGE
22 x 22
~-~
-,..
..r-I
-
PATIO
6x4
FUTURE
BEDROOM
126 x 13
"
"
,I
,I
"
"
,I
"
,I
"
"
...
FUTURE
REC ROOM
28 x 13
1\ <..., ^
''r_,,~-:===~ ,r,,,_ ,==-:-oJ "'-f',
;: 'vii :: '\.....' .:: MEQw.ICAl
"_-_",,-,,-_"_-_-_-_-_-,,-..J :;FUTURE. _. ROOM
UTIUTY "BATH - -\ ..
\ I> ~'~;]i ~:- :-~~ ':~~; i ELfV Ii
i
=::1 '
, Ii. I
UP, I I ; , I
STORAGE
STORAGE\ ;7-
LEVEL III
Model 431-1939
Office 423-1179
( ,...,,,,, :\
WENSMANN)
;.:_._l.'_~__;
MN ....ldon u..... 1451
Exterior perspedives, floor plans and dimensions shown ore lor iUustratiYe purposes only, subjed 10
change without notice. Please see our soles consultant lor details. @ Wensmonn Homes, In(, 1997.
All floor plans and pe~ediYes ore bu~der's exclusive property. Copyright infringement could result
in legal prosecution under lederol copyrighllaw.
The Oak
, www"""lwlS1A '__a'
.) V\ _ _
Townhomes
---.,
r~~PVaMJ
I ENnAtAlfWENT Cl:NTtR
'..~
FUTURE BEDROOM
14x13
.' ,'_, .: It ~~~,
:/ '. , ~:;f==.(' ....
:: ''>
...._..._______J'-_J'f
-;=;-r --. n_ u - - - u"
: ~I FUTURE BATH,.?'
I 'I (.. ---:"t
I . . I ,--, :
~~- '.1..~ ,
~h.::::!:L__:"____~ ..p.
'..",+'"
-Hf1
::~
FUTUR~4~~~ROOM i1 ~
:::::::=:::I~ F==========;:
"'+ " ::
. ii
UNEXCAVATED
G:r
ElIUALlOOUSlNG
""""""""
STORAGE
PATIO
6x4
\,;;;.;:;.~
FAMILY ROOM
27x26
,.-- - -,
, '
( ~IWI
'-
I~
r"
"
-', .:~fu-~-~~
........"'.,'
LOWER LEVEL
I
I
DiCK
14,,11
~\~
I ..
I....-~
I
u
t
II
1
I
i
~
11
I
, :
, '
_:
....""" '
:__J
SOLARIUM
13x12
LIVING
16x1S
DINING
lSx13
L-
-
_frJ
- WI 00
.,X U
, /MASTER~
/ BATH
~~~ / O.
1991
~
MASTER BEDROOM
13'xl6"
GARAGE
22x22
ff ~
KITCHEN ""
14x17
':. 8 -
j
"\" (-nn~_nj
/~-:=-..-~rii:.:--':=-
DEN
l1'x13
FOYER
IJU.U..IIP I " III
~llI1IUI JlI ~l
\j, \ .."
lAUNDRY'
[3 W' 0
rue ___}.:
LJ I
=:1
MAIN LEVEL
( '-' )
WE2:~~~~NN
MH 1..1don UnnIt 1451
Model 431-1939
Office 423.1179
Exterior perspectives, floor plans and dimensions shown ore for illustrative purposes only, subject 10
change without nolice. Please see our lilies consultant for detoils.@Wensmonn Homes, IlK. 1997.
All floor plans and penpectives ore builder's exdusive property. Copyright infringement could result
in legal prose<ulian under federal copyrighllaw.
=::------=
The As1en
UPPER LEVEL
OPEN TO BELOW
MASTER BEDROOM
18x18
I
I
OPT. OR\' MR
AM) 1V~
,--
,
I
I
?
~----~.'1 'S~A"- - ,.
.. ) '\ ~ ~
OPEN TO BElOW
IIII
DECK
19.x.l0
-
I"~ j
CLOSET
:E) ~I
~ MASTER BATH /\
~ IrxJf'voDIL--
,
WAlK.IN
,,"-
>v
~
=8
MAIN LEVEL
BONUS ROOM
llxlJO
KITCHEN
13x14
L~
/Y== = = ====,\,
I ,I
, II
I II
.l. DINING ::
I 10x12 II
I II
~. -------------'. !J
J ~ CPT.1Il.f'n ',",
i I
_OP'TlClfW.FlRfPt)C(NIO
I fNTtRTAINMfNf CENTtR
~""'"
"":iI=
i ~ -
LIVING
18x14
SOLARIUM
20x13
PATIO
9x4
r
-fr'F1 "" ~
~--+-i
~Ndv ~ BATH ~
}>,6 b <}'
FOYER
FAMILY ROOM
18x21
I
,
I
OPTIONAl nRf'PI..N:( AND
ENTEFlTAlfrfMfNT aNTEA ...
L__ <-
:- I .,., FUTURE BEDROOM
I .J 13xlJO
~== -->
I --
I
I
: #//,
.......,..,
'>
.
.
.-mt+ J I
.-..-J
~ A'"lf
GARAGE
2Ox24
I.
r
- -
I ,'", II'~ '
I I \ ~ II .. I
I I "" II ~
'8' "
I I II
I I "
I FUTURE "
: .__i BATH::
, " t:::\
'1"10 "~~
:<J :: WH
:~' ------J':m
I ------ I
- - - - - - - - r - - - - : ~; I fUAN
, ,&,;_~~~_..:_ I
OPTIONAL BAR
13x12
, r-,
_______J I
I
_________J
STORAGE
17x22
DEN
l1x14
Model 431.1939
Office 423.1179
...J
UNEXCAVATED
~
EOUAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNIlY
Signature Townhomes
1y Wen~lllann
IN 8uilden lk.... 1458
LOWER LEVEL
~ Wensmonn Homes,lnc. 1995
All floor plans and elevolions ore Ihe exclusive property of Wensmonn Homes, Inc.
Copyright infringement could resuh in legal prosecution under federol copyright law.
Dimensions are approximate. Builder reserves the right to alter
plans, features and specifications without notice.
.('
c'....
GL YNWA TER
SCHEMATIC P.U.D. PLAN
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
,
,
,
,
,
I
, ,
, I ,
_--1..__L_-l
: : : : : \ \ ~
I I I , I ~ I I
I I I I I; I I
I I I I I ,: . I
_ _ ~ __ J ~ J _ _ L _ _ 1 ~ ~ : _ _ ._ _ _ _ .J
I ' ~l: T" - - - - - - - - -
t~n w" ..__}..Jl~:___._ -_._-=-:::-:-::,~-~~'::-:-:"~~::.-::::-:-::~::_-_.
-1 r--~f
L.U
..~.cc:~~.:::.=.~~~~~ r:
~.-~\--.I~U4~ ~
'I ~ 1rdr" ~ ,
I (l' \\-\-. 1. ~ ~
. __---X~~/ \ i
f- . ~)/ '\
-- I
- - I
t I
,: ~ !
t>.- ~./
( ~!J:II:;
I _."\
': - \ \
t'/ 0 \ 'v
,/ }'-..") . \
'v"""
I;
0-:
/)
~
"
.,
"
"
/ j
, ,
{~J
fj
I.~_-
lo'U()f'U':.L(1 LlCAl Dl9,;i4I...llON
n... _' .. ._..... .... _.... _ _, 0.-'. ...... _,~....' 0)........ ... --.-
,':'~'7:::' '::'~-;:::':;i;".."':';:'" -=~":~ -. ... .... --' '0 t.... ... - ....'
._ ...__ _I. .__ _ _ ._- -_. -. --
-- --- _. -- ----.....-
--.. -......--..-- ---....
,- -_. ...._._-~ -.-...'. --
--..-..... -..--.. -_. _.......-
- _.. - --r_ - ..-_.-!-.- --...--
-. -- ...-.. --.. ~- ...,..-.. ...
- '--~. -... --.. .-..--,.. ....-,
.. --.. --.. -- - .-,...... -.... -'-"
-..... --- ""- -..- ....---.
~ g:~:~ =:=::.:. --;:~~~=---
t:-_.... _ _.... .......... _ -.. "<lO -.. -,.., - "" '-' ...."'... '.'
__.. _. -. _,_, _ _ _I _ 0 ""__'" '1:1I20 ,.001 .....- -'"''
~~;.::.~ ~--:~. ::":'00.:' --:"':':'~~"';':::' ;"('.. ,. .' _.,,:".:-
='::':;::2~='=~ =::~~.::-==~....::. w;:::::.:.... ~
,__ _'"' _ ,_ -' .. '_"'_' ,oO I _'_ ~ ,__ ". k...... :1. :...."
,:-. __. ,_ _on, I' _ _ ,,)1.<&1 _, .. _ ...--.."" f 01"
::.::::::.._ .......t.,.... ......_............oH'I..... ~.., ....- ....,. ".-"
"UP~_ '.....nr....'... ,u.,,_\c...oUIatl no..,
'....' ,d' ~, ''- ...... ....,~, .... ......_.. ~....... ., '_'." " I._....,,~ ".- .'~.
......-,.-........"'""-...,.-.
..----..---.-....--.
....._..c.o,_~__
~':::,,~+,;.;:7-=':~~:-,,;::: ::':.~=-:;;}~=,.'=:::~;:~
........ - .. - -' .....-.
..... ---..-::.::.::..-::.:::.:::
.~B&R _ "=-- 1'_.......:::._....._.._
-:.~~~g~::-:. ~=..~ -..-
COVER SHEET
WENSMANN REALTY
0:::
~
4:
~
Z
>-
-l
C-'
SHEET INDEX
1. COVER SHEET
2. EXISTING CONDITlONS
3. SITE PLAN
4. TIE SHEET
5. SCHEMATIC UTILITY PLAN
LECEND
.,.""... I
_+ -.4" MYIll'I_1 L
_--M- --+t- - co.Jt V04l1l
~ -<<-0-" t;.IoltM ......
............. _~_$NOl1",ul6NOtGl .N
____ _<~.. SlQIIM ",-<ll
- ~=.;.:..;..~~/..~,
..~ e'.::;J .. flltU/lfUl.r<I: ~
- ~..iII(r~"AIJ.
. (I ..UCHI~
..,"~I'QI.L
...............
.."IlI","""l'lMl:l ~ '!"
l.....p...nt CILU'KlC XALoC DI n:I1'
LOCATIO:'; ~AP
GL YNWA TER
..."
I--~
I
!
.. J ;l ,-
! >IIlII'I'III' ll~ ,I,::
~ UU !! L!~!H !hfi
i ...!:\.,-~r....:".L.,,'t... '10'1 .....
mimmiUi;;" ..."
'1':;1 ..u...
j r
.
~ '"
-~-
.l
~
~JI~
jd
EJ
a:
~
~
~
~
>
/
"
I:
-'
<
'"
"- a:
, z
z
<
~
Z
~
"-
,-
<;;'
II>
~
'"
o
z
o
U
Q
Z
'"
II>
;:c
ilU
J--'
LJ
~ L:
.J I
lJ..
I ;
'.1'.
i 0:11
!
~I
- -1
1I
'j
II
"
n
"1
t!
I"
Ii!
fll
!Ij
!Ii
,S I
~~:
'.'1
.'ti
! II
~ll
Ir ~I
, ~I
. .
.. 0 - *
'I[ .
. .
'.'
t
~
/
/
.'.
_:PIC'NllBA ~~_
..~--=~l~~~::~~:.
101...... AREA .. <I).OJ71 AC.
AO.AJSTtD TOTAl. ARCA (450)71-J.4643) .. 41.'728 AC
AR(,lS;
COUNTY ROAD a~ A/w .. 3.464) AC.
ON SITE R./W .. 2,a~~ AC.
wET lANDS" i..,JJ AC.
PARle
TOTAl. .. I1.61S1' AC
PONDI VlIET ..-'NOS" .. 94$8 Ae
"'O.AJSTEO PARK AREAS" 11.6176-49458 .. 6.7416 AC.
-T---
I
L...J
,;
/'
/
/
/
I
I
I
I
I
i
..
y,(T LANll
f N
0' ..;
3
-
ai
/
1- /--
--....
Nrr.......
\q~ ~ ot:T lAND
J
-\- --
-::/ ~-
--
----.---4
\
~.
1- - --
~
-~-i-
!i
~
-
-L~
~--
::\
.'/".,
\ (.~
",
DENSITY:
GROSS 122 uNltSI R,721S . 2.91 UNlTS/AC.
NET 122 UNHS/ 3871" . 3.1' UNlTS/AC.
'MPER-..OU$ SURr ACt;
A/W StREETS .. 2.26 AC
PRIVATE STREETS. 090 AC
ORllI[wAYS .. 1,62 AC.
SU61~NGS .. '.27 AC.
TRAIL - 0.'1 AC.
TOTAL .. 10.0$ Ae.
PERCENT ,...PER""OU5 SURr"C( (IWP AREAl "'OJ 10TAl. ARCA
1.( lI.ll/nOli) . 23.111I::
PERCENT wET LAND (9 "'1)/4Z.0)9) .. 224U,
PE~CE~r POND (I_O';4Z.031) .. B%
PERCENT OPEN SPA.CE (AOJ. TOTAl AREA-iMP SURfAC[-'ll€T
LANOS-PQNOS/AOJ. TOTAt. AR[A 1.[.
(42,OJi-IO.O$-t.4:'Jl-I.O:')/42.01t) . :'1.I1~
ZONING.
[XlST\NG A-I AGRICUltuRAL
a-I CQNSERv...RON DISTRICT
:"'-,:::; :.r~~~:;::: ::.::..::- ~ "::
SI TE PLAN
"lIIIoJ(cr
WENSMANN REALTY I GL YNWA TER
PROPOSED ZONiNG; R-2 vRBAH
:iH([T:!M
,71Jt
5 5I'"U'S
~
'/
f .
r
--
"'"
I
]
"
--
"-
"-
.....
.....
J
I..-
,/
r
~ x
.
. ...
-.-
..
1-
_u
00
.......1Ii
."
;~!j
. :j1l i
",- .:
;~~ ~~
~. '.3 t
;; iJ ~
3;~~~
~ i i f~
~i.fciJ
c>:
~
<
~
i"
G
~
(
~
...J
<
W
c>:
z
z
<
~
1Il
Z
~
i
1:
U
0-
W
'"
1Il
W
;:::
~
X
.1,
.!M
~
i
I ;
II
'1
!I
11
"
"
,I
".
I!!
I ~.
II]
H'
'I'
i I
! I
,I.
tt ~
II! ~.:
I'll::
.h ,I;
;'f
il11
II "
6.~ ..
.. li.-.
','
~ i
~ Wl
~-
'" ::::: ~
1- ~
.
:. u! .
.J~
~ i!. n
dl'r;~h:.~
~<"i'l .p
o I;HHid~~~.
~ ~ ~ ~ . V" 0 ~ . ". ! -
2 11'H L i i: ~ \ ". :
J 11'nnllliJ*j
on
i
a:
l!:!
<
~
~
G
I
I
:,: I
I I
I I
,
/
/
/
/
I ;
I :
Iii
--,: J
I :
I '
I I:~
;
,
~
<
\oJ
a:
Z
Z
<
~
Z
~
i
z
:'i
Q.
~
i2
:::>
u
0=
<
::>
\oJ
J:
-u
~V't
_J
i I;
; ::
- "- ;,1
I
(
1\
I
11
I
_-1
. I
it
~l
I,
H
II
I'
'}l
:1,
I"
!ii
fit
'-I
III
! I
1'1
1,1 :-
111~ I
Ilir.I' -
r1~i~;
T
'!II
I{~l
I! "
.Zr'
,a .
.. a:: .,-
...
J
...**~
* PIONEER
~ engineering
*""'**
OMI Engineers' ) .'1],: ,@,mL1'W"I~L ~'Ors · Landscape Architects
tIN 2 5 I9S1
!/
Ms. Jane Kansier
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
November 24, 1997
RE: Glynwater, P.E. # 97139
Dear Ms. Kansier:
Enclosed are ten (10) copies and one (1) reduction of the Schematic P. V.D. Plans for the Glynwater
Addition (Niosi Parcel). Kelly from Wensmann Homes will submit the narrative under separate
cover.
The following comments from the DRC meeting are included on these plans:
· No sanitary sewer or watermain service to the Sioux Community property immediately to the
west.
· Loop internal trail system with the proposed City trail on the west property line.
. Outlot A is now platted as park.
· Additional offsite information south of subject property.
· The private through street is now within the Standard City Right-of-Way (50 feet, 55 feet with
sidewalk)
· Sue McDerment, Prior Lake Engineering Department, verified that a 8" watermain is adequate
for the site and consistent with the Cities Comprehensive Water Plan.
Further changes with the realignment of the west side of the through street ( formerly west cul-de-sac)
are discussed in the narrati ve.
If you have any questions or require any further information or plans for the December 8th Planning
Commission meeting please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
PIONEER ENGINEERING P.A.
AI~;f/j
Nicholas Polta
cc: Kelly Murray. Wensmann Homes
2422 Enterprise Drive. Mendota Heights. Minnesota 55120. (612) 681-1914. Fax 681-9488
625 Highway 10 N.E. . Blaine. Minnesota 55434. (612) 7B3-1880 . Fax 783-1883
....-
,('
DA TE:
December 3, 1997
TO:
FROM:
Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator
Sue McDermott, Assistant City Engineer A ~
Schematic P .U. D. Plan /
Glynwater (Project 97-51)
RE:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject plan and has the following
comments:
1. Show contours within 200 feet of the property boundary at next submittal.
2. Add a sewer stub on the stub street that runs east to the "exception."
~
g:\projects\1997\51g1yn\schemrev.DOC
SCOTT COUNTY \ ~rn ~ rn 0 ~ rn rl
PUBLIC WORKS AND LANDS DIVISION \. ' NOV 3 1991 III \
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT \I\~ 'Ib
600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST IJ \.l
JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 \
(612) 496-8346
BRADLEYJ. LARSON
ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR
Fax: (612) 496-8365
October 31, 1997
Ms. Jane Kansier
Planning Coordinator
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Subject:
PUD of ARCTIC RIDGE
CR 82 east of CR 83
Dear Ms. Kansier:
I have reviewed the application as it relates to Highway Department issues and offer the following
comments / conditions:
· The existing 75' right-of-way as shown is adequate.
. An access permit will be required for each location connecting to the County Highway. The
westerly access appears to be outside of the property boundary.
. Street plans for the construction of the future local road must be reviewed and approved by the
County as it relate to CR 82. Items to be reviewed include profile grade, drainage, radius size,
and pavement section.
. Provide drainage calculations for any drainage entering the County right-of-way with the final
plan submittals.
. A right turn lane will be r.equired along the south side of CR 82. Detail requirements are
available upon request.
. A rock pad is required on the internal street to prevent dirt from being tracked onto CR 82
during the grading operation. Sweeping of CR 82 shall be done as required by the County.
. No ponding, signing, berming or landscaping will be allowed within the County right-of-way.
. Any access, grading, or utility work required within the County right-of-way will require a
permit prior to the work commencing.
An Equal Opportunity/Saftty Aware Employer
Arctic Ridge
Page 2
. Noise levels will increase as traffic volumes increase on CR 82. The responsibility for noise
attenuation lies with the City and the developer.
. We request the opportunity to review the final PUD & construction plans.
We will assume that your approval will adhere to the recommendations listed above unless we
receive notification from you to the contrary.
Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment
~~
Scott Merkley
Transportation Manager
c: Brad Larson - County Engineer
Greg IIkka - City Engineer
sm:\adm\review\pudcupzn .doc
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE:
PLANNING t1Jl. /
Ralph Teschner lJj../
GLYNWATERPUD
(assessment/fee review)
October 22, 1997
TO:
FROM:
RE:
A 45 acre parcel in Section 34-115-22 (pIN #25 934 017 0) is proposed to be developed as
Glynwater PUD. The property currently is NOT served with municipal sewer and water utilities.
At the time municipal utilities become available the subdivision will be subject to the following
City charges:
Stormwater Management Fee
Collector Street Fee
Trunk Sewer & Water Fee
Lateral Sewer & Water Charge
16.8 cents/sq.ft.
$1500.00/acre
$3500.00/acre
150' @ $60.00/ff
The application of these City charges would generate the following costs to the developer based
upon a net lot area calculation of 27.64 acres of townhouse units (1,203,998 sq. ft.) as provided
within the site data summary sheet of the PUD schematic description:
Lateral Sewer & Water Char~:
150' @ $60.00/ff= $9,000.00:
J'runk Sewer & Water Char~
27.64 acres @ $3500.00/ac = $96,740.00
Storm Water Management Fee:
1,203,998 sf@ 16.8/sf= $202,272.00
.collector Street Fee:
27.64 acres @ $ 1500.00/ac = $41,460.00
These charges represent an approximate cost of$2840.00 per lot for the 123 proposed townhouse
units within Glynwater PUD. Assuming the initial net lot area of the PUD does not change, the
above referenced storm water, collector street, trunk and lateral sewer and water charges would
be determined and collected within the context of a developer's agreement for the construction
of utility improvements at the time of final plat approval.
There are no other outstanding special assessments currently certified against the property. Also,
the tax status of the property is current with no outstanding delinquencies.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
H:\SPLlTS\SPL9716. DOC
{
i \.)rr~~ tTi;ff ~ I ~
. DEe - 3 1991 I J
J~
-r;;; hrJE- KAAl S/€-,e..
Fe: (ih- ,Ly j\1 C PI
OXic ~I:E
Proj ect Review Worksheet
DNR - Division of Waters / Metro Region -
Project Name ~L '1tJ'tJN\f'f<-
Srn~M~'-' ?\J.D.
\/"-Je-~ Sm ANN K-eY1t-f(
Project Type (check all that apply):
o Preliminary Plat
./
kj 1" LID
o Final Plat
o Subdivision
o Variance
o Other
DNR Jurisdiction (answer all):
Yes No
Floodplain 0 0
(MS.I03F.IOl)
Yes No
Protected Waters 0 0
(M.S.I03G.24S)
~ No
Shoreland 0
(M.S.I03F.201)
Yes No
Water Appropriation 0 0
(MS.I03G.25S)
Comments
M,
C 6 h1 PU..P/t' ~
())...,
cfde#f~'';'"
7?t/l)
---C
-/n
7'7'er
q sS'IJoX-l. Pt./.LJ. qn~~'.s A~ ~
~./zr./UI'''''~ .q//cnuab4/ d~(,~e..5.
1"" ( rAo,...pjG~dD,:', i,...,-vf .
&~
L,.
d6~
eac:A:..
/Ae. s/ l~. A~.s
*_ee-vr d"Y"1'/'L.a
J
5""'-'r' ;S"~~s., (),/,/>n-,
.'V'k. t",?1~"~'O- .
<'~uV k...
Recommendations and Proposed Conditions
/VO~
~ D~~
Reviewer r-A?\ L'-{NG~ Title AlZDr \-I..'iD2.ct..04I\"flhone 1/2. .,e, (0 Date 12 -/-97