HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCRes_82-20CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of-the
City Council of the City of Falcon Heights was held at the City Hall in said
. City on the 26th of May, 1982..
The following members were present: Mayor Warkentien, Councilmembers
Eggert, Larson, Ciernia and Chestovich and the following were absent: None.
Councilmember Larson introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION 82-20
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLATS OF BERNWOOD ADDITION
NOS. 2 AND 3 AND GRANTING VARIANCES IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH
WHEREAS, an application for approval of a variance from the side yard
and rear yard setback provisions of Section 6.4 of Ordinance No. 64, as amended,
known as the Zoning Ordinance, and for approval of the preliminary plats pursuant
to Ordinance No. 69, as amended, known as the Subdivision and Platting Ordinance,
for Bernwood Addition Nos. 2 and 3 have her~taf4rs~ b"eenreferred to the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has submitted its recommendations to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, an application for approval of the final plats for Bernwood
. Addition Nos. 2 and 3 has been submitted to the City; and
WHEREAS, upon notice duly published a combined public hearing was held
before the City Council on the preliminary plats. and final plats for Bernwood
Addition Nos. 2. and 3 at which time all persons interested therein were given an
opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Falcon Heights hereby .finds in accordance with Section 7.2 of the Subdivision
and Platting Ordinance that Bernwood Addition Nos. 2 and 3 as presented to
this Council, and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth, will provide
adequate public space and improvements for the circulation, recreation, light,
air and service needs of the lands therein platted when fully developed and
populated.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to provisions of said Section
7.2 preliminary and final approval is hereby given the final plats of Bernwood
Additions Nos. 2 and 3, copies of which have been presented to the City Council
and are on file in the office of the Clerk-Administrator, and the Mayor and
Clerk-Administrator are authorized and directed to execute the final plats and
such other documents as may be necessary to certify final approval thereof,
subject to the following conditions:
(1) Each single family dwelling shall have not less than 1,100
square feet of floor space.-
(2) Each single family dwelling must be provided with a garage.
(3) No two houses adjacent to each other shall be alike in exterior
architectural style
(4) The terms and conditions set forth in the recommendations of the
City Planner, Carl Dale, contained in his letters of April 21, 1982 and
April 23, 1982, copies of which are attached hereto (Exhibit A) and as a
part hereof.
(5) The terms and conditions set forth in the recommendations of the
City Engineer, Robert Schunicht,in his letter of May 4, 1982, a copy of which
is attached hereto (Exhibit B) and as a part hereof.
(6) The City shall be granted an easement for public drainage purposes
and for such other public uses as the City may request over 0utlots A in
Bernwood Additions Nos. 2 and 3.
(7) The Homeowners' Association Articles of Incorporation, Declaration
of Covenants and Bylaws shall be submitted to the City Council for its review
and approval prior to issuance of the first building permit for construction
within Bernwood Additions Nos. 2 and 3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds that because of
economic conditions affecting the housing industry and the unique, innovative
plans presented by the applicant for development of the land, the conditions for
granting a variance as set forth in Section 7.l of the Subdivision-and Platting
Ordinance and in Section 16.4 of the Zoning Ordinance do exist, and therefore
the regulations. of Section 6.4 of the Zoning Ordinance are varied to the extent
necessary to permit a zero side yard setback on one side of each lot and a rear
yard setback of 20 feet on each lot us platted in Bernwood Additions Nos. 2 and 3.
The motion for the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mayor
Warkentien, and upon a vote being taken the following voted in favor thereof:
• Mayor Warkentien, Councilmembers Larson and Ciernia, and the following voted
against the same: Councilmembers Eggert and Chestovich.
WHEREUPON, said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
0
Willis C. A. Warkentien, Mayor
Attest:
Dewan B. Barnes, Clerk Administrator
Regular City Council Meeting of May 26, 1982
t
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °
Uuu G. Bmu'+trom Y.£.
Robert W. Ru{ene, P.£.
IosrFh C. Ander/ik. P. £.
Bradlord A. Lrmbtlg. P. £.
Richard £. Turner, P.E.
James C. Olson, P:£.
(anon H. Cuuk. P.E.
Keith A. Gurdun. P.£.
Jhumas E. Nuyes. P.£.
Rirhmd I/', F'usrrr. P. £.
Ruben G. Jihunirhr, P.E.
kfun in l.. •S'orvala, P.£.
Donuld C. Bur~ardr, P. £.
Jerry A. Bourdon, P.£.
kfurk A. Hannon. P.£.
.SU'ven Af. Qumrry
Charter A. L'rirkson
Leo M. Puwelsky
Harlan M. Olson
David £. Olson
z,~ss ~ 9.~c Xis s6
&. M~,ra ~~»3
A~.t.,: bps-as6•kboo c c `~~-'~
1956 - ~ ~th - 1981
`May 4, 1982 ~
~ nniversary' '~
~~.ty Council and Planning Commissi~b
~~:ty of Falcon Heights
1644 W. Larpenteur Avenue
~t. P$ul, Mn. 55113
,~te: Aevelopment Plan
American Shelter Corporation
Our File No. 4451
l ,
!,
t.' ~~' r
i P,!S
~,
~• r
:, t ~ !1 ! ~
/ ,,
•~~ t f J~ e~ ~~~"
i,
I ~ ~~ ~~
~~~' ~ ~ .
Aear Mayor, Planning Commission Chairman, Council
_~ and Commission Members:
As per your request, we have reviewed the latest plans from American Shelter
~prporation relative to the development's requirements for storm drainage fa-
olities. The plans were entitled Bernwood Addition No. 1-5 .and were dated
• Aril, 12, 1982.
The Northwest Area Storm Drainage Study recommends that a total of seven (7)
.acre-feet of storm water storage be provided within the American Shelter
Site. We recommend that this total amount of storage be prov~.ded within two
~(~) ponds on the site, located on either side of Prior Avenue toward the
southern end of the site. We also recommend that each of the two ponds have a
seepage structure capable of discharging storm water into the groundwater at a
~`ete of 1 cubic foot per second (cfs). These ponds would function to dis-
charge to the groundwater at the present time but should also be constructed
~n a manner that would allow them to connect to a future storm sewer system
:ghat would convey water from this section of Falcon Heights to the City of St.
~'au l .
'lie proposed Water Retention and Recreation area has sufficient area to pro-
v~de approximately 4.5 acre-feet of storage when it is excavated to a depth of
eight (8) feet below its designated l0U year high water level. We expect the
lligh water level to be approximately 978, although this elevation will have to
be confirmed when final grading plans and house elevations are available. If
4.5 acre-feet of storage is provided in the area designated Water Retention
~~nd Recreation, an additional 2.5 acre-feet of storage will be required at the
`southern end of the commercial area lying west of Prior Ave.
• Page 1.
9484a
City of Falcon. Heights
Falcon Heights, Mn.
Re: File No. 4451
May 4, 7982
•
The proposed plan incorporates a system of swales, open channels and culverts
to convey the storm water from the site to the storm water pond. We recommend
that .this system be replaced with an urban type storm drainage system that
would include catch basins and underground pipe. This urban type system would
eliminate the maintenance problems associated with swales and culverts. Under
this system catch .basins would be installed in each of the four easterly cul-
de-sacs and would be connected to the storm water pond by storm sewer.
In summary, based on our review of the proposed plans, we recommend that the
plan be approved with the following provisions:
1) That seven (7) acre-feet of storm water storage be provided in two ponds.
located near the south end of the development on dither side of Prior Ave-
nue and that each pond have a seepage structure with a capacity of 1 cfs.
2) That an urban type storm sewer system with catch basins and underground
storm sewer be installed in the development.
If we~can be of any further assistance in this matter, please contact us.
Yours very truly, •
BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Robert G. S unicht P.E.
RGS:li
Page 2.
9484a
.' ,
~~/~
DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATE INC.
:arl R. Dale, Principal Planner Phc~e: (~?'17) 738-0174
'166 WINDGATE RUAll WUODBURY MINNESOTA
Apx,~l 21, 1982
P~,ANNING REPORT
~~~
F~~~ P~.anning
Heights,
sslzs
/~~" U
Commission and City Council,
MN
City`of Falcon
By Carl R. Dale, Planning Consultant
S~}~~ect: Suggested Criteria/Guidelines for Development of
Hawkins-Hermes Property
A~'he request of the Plannini; Commission, I evaluated the PUD
Cx eria'euggested by the Tatum Woods Task Force; a ~.engthy and
dQfi~iled'oral report was submitted to .the Planning Co~misaion at
th~'June 12, 1982 public meeting. Detailed written ngtes of my
p~e~entation were presented to the City Staff after tY~e meeting.
It} ~uigmary, I noted that the neighborhood suggestions were headed
i~}'rhe right direction with ~ "typical" 1-family home `subdivision
np~~necessarlly being their pbjcctive ~r urge and devgl'opment of
tl~q;land'in question. I did, however, suggest that certain of
~K~ submitted criteria for a "PUll" should be modified ,:=and sug-
tpep~~d to be more effective, practical, and easier tp°,~understand
~~}f~ interpret for proper administration and enforcemgtlt.
• I'~yggested certain changes, additions, and possible different
~p~~oaches to evaluation of development plans that have been and
ma~-';be proposed in the future. As requested by the Punning
GgO-u~ission, I a~n herewith submitting my suggestions fir the cri-
t~r~a to be utilized in evaluating development plans ~or the property
~~ i~ 'que~t~ion. :
:.
Ssy~rai~ summary comments must serve as the foundation=`and a back-
gx~q~nd for t}~e material hereinafter contained:
1, All prior plans submitted have been evaluated using the various
,'`etandar~is (including locatiunal criteria) containdd in the
-new, proposed Zoning Code nuw under study by the F~lanning
~' Commission (copies of applicable material attached' herewith).
Also, development plans huv~~ been evaluated on the: basis of
~a; City Staff and Consultant's professional education, training,
at}d experience.
2.: Careful examination of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan
'' was also employed since any development plan shoui.d be in con-
fo~m~ty to said Plan. The City Plan text (housing, population,
laid use, etc.) calls for possible housing diversity and an
objective to increase the projected population of the Community
and. the designation of a "PUD" Zoning District €or the land in
question to aid in attaining various stated policies and ob~ec-
tives. Some prior development plans submitted for increased
dwelling unit and population density have been found by the
• Planning Commission to be in conformity to the C3,ty's Land
Use Plan and policy (includes housing and population).
' -1-
± ./'•~
~~___.~ ...~~~... ._... ~.-. rr.+..+u. T --
,•_
ti
3. Criteria now under study must be applied to the specific
land in question since no other large land parcel is avails- •
ble for private development in Falcon Heights and may not
properly apply to smaller developrnents that could occur else-
where in the Community. Further, time and circumstances will
not allow such standarcts to be enacted into law for applica-
tion to the land in question. A5 such, any criteria developed
now must be considered a:; spec.ltic "guidelines" for use by
the Planning Commission and City Council in evaluating develop-
ment plans currently being submitted for approval by Che land
owners.
~4. Since the land may or may not be developed under a "PUD"
Permit, criteria should apply to other possible procedures
such as a rezoning, large scale subdivision plat, or other .
possible administrativ~r ;ippruach to approval of a develop-
. meet plan. Iu other words, criteria employed should result
in sound and good land use regardless of the approval method
utilized.
The basic approach here is to utilize the criteria recommended by
the Tatum Woods Neighborhood `Task Force as the foundation for my
recommendations but with modifications, deletions, and augmenta-
tion I believe to be appropriate and in the geriera~.'public interest.
Also, I have included some sketches that illustrate the number
of dwelling units that may result by location in utilization of
criteria hereinafter suggested.
SUGGESTED_I'LnN__l~,vnl.un'l_L_uN C12I'lE1tIA .
1. Relationship to existing single-.family development.
a. Land Use. ~
1) Uses adjacent to existing single-family homes should
be either single-larnily detached or 2-story (maximum
height) townhomes, "zero lot line" development, du-
` plexes, or similar type housing.
2) If more than one type of housing is proposed, low
density types should be .located at the north and
east portions of the site with higher density types
located to the south and west.
b. Setbacks at p~~,erimcter of site.
1) If single family detached. homes are placed adjacent
to existing homes, the existing zoning required set-
, back should apply. llwelliug units within 130 feet of
:.~ north and east property lines should not be per-
t milted in excess of one (1) dwelling unit per 10,000
sy. ft. of net (excluding public streets) residential
land. Net r~sidcntial land would include any utility
or other ea~,emeuts, comuwn open space, or similar land.
2) The required rear yard setback shall be doubled for
any alt-ached dwelling units (duplexes, townhomes,
quads, etc.) except that one (1) such dwelling unit •
may be located at the required zoning setback at in-
tervals of not less than 75 feet of property line.
-2-
a
~-
s
~t,.
c. Screening.
,~ 1. 50% perimeter screening of. non-single family uses
should be provided with existing or new ,plant materials,
landscaped bermi.ng, or s:Lmilar approved methods. Good,
•~ existing plant materials should be retained at the site
when practicab.lu and feasible at the perimeter and
elsewhere on the site.
F. 2. No vehicular parking area of 5 or more cars should be
visible from existing ho}nes as viewed from a height
of six (6) feet above the ground. Screening shall
be an evergreen or other effective material or ap-
proved technique for year round screening of car
headlights;. there should be at least a ~5~ screen
to a minimum of five. (5) foot height.
d. Access. .
1. Proper access to the existing City Park in the area
should be maint~il.nud for all existing and pgtential
future residents oP the general. z~'eighborhooc~.
2. Pedestrian and bicycle (non-motor.zed) access to near-
by streets (both to the north and east ~.f possible)
should be accomudated.
3. All possible eE[orts to obtain access to Cleveland Ave.
should be pursued if projected traffic volumes to be
generated by development of the subject'site may re-
suit in thru-traffic onto existing residential streets
• in excess (as J~c~r normal st~indards employed by Traffic
Engineers) of th,~t which cou.Ld normally be accomodated
on such residential streets in terms of the public
health, safety, and general welfare. If development
of the subject property may result in excessively
high traffic volumes onto existing residential streets,
vehicular connections to existing single-family home
• areas shall be li.mitud to use for emergency situations
and. pedestrian and bike (non-motorized)`access.
e. Solar Access.
To~the extent feasible ~~nd practicable, soldr access to
existing single-family homes shall be protected in accor-
dance with provisions of the Comprehensive City Plan and
a licable State Statutes.
PP
?, Density/Use Intensity. ~
a. .All or portions of the subject property may';be developed
in strut accordance WLCtl provisions of the existing
zoning although such a "typical." single-family home
subdivision is not considered the most efficient nor
economical way to utilize the laud nor would such a
_ "typical" development bust servo the City's land use,
population, and huusiu~; policies and objeckives as stated
in the Comprehensive Municipal lluvelopment`,Plan.
• b. A satisfactory and desirable development and env~.ronment
in the general public interest could be Achieved by a
"transitional" approach to dwelling unit density as fo'.lows:
-3-
it.
+
~, ~
. ~
1) Land within 130 feet of north and east property lit, •
Dwelling units to be located within this area shall
not exceed one (1) unit per 10,000 sq. ft. of net
(excluding public right-of-way) residential land.
"1Jet" residential land may include utility and other
easements, pording, drainageways, common open space,
and similar land. Dwelling unit types may include
"typical" detached one-family homes, duplexes, quads,
patio homes, townt-omes, "zero lot line" developments
and similar housing types but not including "multiple"
dwelling structures (apartments, condominiums, or
others containing more than seven (7) dwelling
units
.
attached or cont;:rined in one principal building).
Lath home constructed per 10,000 sq. ft. of net land
area "contributes" about 4,000 sq. ft. of land
credit. or justification for the next higher density
in the transitional density concept suggested here.
2) Land located beyond (to west and south) the above
noted but not more than 500 feet from the north and
east property lines.
Dwelling unit density within this area shall not ex-
teed one (~) dwelling unit per 6,000 sq. ft. of net
' residential land (as herein defined but also excluding
20% of the land if' extensive private access drives
or streets are utilized in-lieu-of public streets).
•
Structural (building and paving) coverage shall not
exceed 40% of the net residential land. Permitted
development shall not :Include "multiple" dwellings
as herein, above defined. Development at this density.
(approximately seven units per net residential acre)
shall be permitted on .y •if 1t can be demonstrated that
a the general criteria to be applied to the entire sub-
ject site can be properly accommodated. (See herein)
3) Land located 500 ft. or more distant from the north
and east property lines. ~.
This land mec:.ts general lucational criteria for the
proper location ul mulltiplu dwellings (see proposed
zoning text attactuuents) Multiple dwellings (build-
ings with 8 or more attached dwelling units) may be
permitted in this area u~ to that density now per-
mitted (approximately 2U units per net residential
acre) by zoning regulations of the City under the
following conditions:
1. At least one (1)parking space per dwelling unit
shall be underground (i.e, under dwelling units
within the principal residential building),
2. Not less than 20% of the site area shall be
usable ( fur rep: re;_rt iou) open, .teen space. Any
paved (such as for tennis courts) recreational. •
-4-
i,
• J
~'
t•
space must be in addition t_o the 20% green space
requirement. Un-site, developed recreational faci-
lities (indoor or outdoor) may be required prior to
issuance of building permits based upon evaluation of
need (building types, probable occupant characteristics
such as average age, and other factors).. ~
3. The site and building plans shall be deeu}ed appropriate
and in the genc~rai public interest as may be determined
by the City Council following Planning Commission and
Staff review in terms of traffic generated, design
quality, visual impact, solar. access px'otection, land-
scapist,, screeni.ni.;, energy efficiency, structural
coveraL;e, and sin,il:,r conside~rutlons.
Multiple dwellin~,5 wi eliuut underL;ruund parkir}~ may be per-
mitted at a density nut to cxcec~d a2 units per net resi-
dential acre provided th:,t:
1) Structural coverai;c (building, pavement,~ete.) does
not exceed 6U% u1- the net residential area.
2) The site and buildi.nlg plans shall be deemed appropriate
and in the general public. interest by th~~City Council
following review by the Planning Commission and City Staff.
General criteria applicable to evaluation of proposed development
p~:~ne for the entire: slt~~: •
• ~.' Whether devuluped in ~;~ ,~;~~s or in total, the Applicant must
demonstrate to the sati~;i:,,ction of the City Council that both
on-site and off-site (:s n,ay be applicable) stQ~m drainage
'~ and storage ;.areas arc p rupc~ r and aclpqu~te to px~gtect the
. general public and c+nviru„mcut. Muaiiications~;may be approved
if storm sewer is pruviclc~d. Storm water storage and drainage-
'
. way
s shall not present any hazard to the public and their
. design shall (to the. extant feasible and practicable) be such
as to provide for proper maintenance. and increase their poten-
tial for use as aesthc~ci~• Iucal points. Storm water ponding
areas shall be designed to winimize. the amount of land to have
standing war_r.r during; pc~:,k 1:luudi,il; periods as may be deter-
mined'by proper desi~u and engineering principles.
' 2, Not less than seven (7%) percent ul the total net residential
area of the subject situ siiaal be devoted to usable recreation
(green space and/or paved such a5 lpr tennis co-;ltrts) space.
Depending upon the housing; types and potential pccupant
characteristics (numbers, age, etc.), developed recreational
facil"sties may be required suctr <~s playground equipment.
Cash in-lieu-of on-site developed recreational facilities
may be required exce~_t_ t_h_,t at least 7% of thetotal net
residential area shall bc~ usable, common recreation space
if development proce.ed~; in accordance with the highest densi-
ties permitted under the criteria suL;gested herein.
3. Various criteria affecting traffic, screening,'solar access,
. and restricted density at the north and east p`~operty lines
shall be as noted here.iu.
4, At least 60% of the cutal nut residential area shall be open
- ~-
. .
green space (includes pending areas if any).
. 5. Land in the extreme southwest (near to new City Hall) may •
be suitable for "limited" commercial (office, etc.) use
subject to site and build:ng plan review and .approval in
conformity to applicable criteria.
Some generally applied standards normally used for the proper
location of multiple (8 or inure dwelling units per structure)
dwellings are:
1) Should be located near permanent open space such as a
park, nature preserve, or the like.
2) Project should have. ready access (walking. distance) to
public recreation (~~..irk, playl;round, etc.) or provide ,
private recreatiun.i.L facilities on the site.
3) Distance should be maintained from lower density homes
(1-family and others) if- design produces noise, glare
from lights (car & other), low percentage of green space,
height or bulk out-of-scale with nearby homes, "eye sore"
views such as massive parking or trash storage, and other
design features in conflict with existing residential
amenities.
4) Apartment traffic lu sil.;nificant volumes .must be directed
to the major street system rasher than onto and through
minor residential streets.
5) Gradual increases in density away from one-family homes
in a "transitional" marYner. may be utilized but is not •
always necessary if good site and building design is
employed.
6) By today's planninK standards and housing policy, prime
residential land should be reserved far higher density
housing rather shun L-lamily homes or at least given
equal. consideration. 'Chu logic here is that the number
~ of families exposed to a prime environment for living
should be maximized - not minimized.
•
1
'~ .
'• . e f
+ ` V
!T Y
PA ~4
y
C
U
I•
N D 1Z.T~
on ~
G G•
•~+ o ~
.1 •,~ v
.-i +•~ a
v ~
s b ~,
bG~
v
~a~
a o a
•~+ u a
~ dl N
r-I 3a N
~ 'L7
Q '~ r-I W
~ ~
~+ •rl O r•I
O (A 3
w G
4J ~ O
•v ~v .~ z
a i
a v x ~
o v co
v o v -~
? k, ~ 6
v o
v .x w
~nvo
a~~n~
O H cC D,
q C! L+
b ~.+ •~
~o~~
•~ O G G
,C •rl OJ
M la 'p
O
•.oo q
o .n ~ o
z•`~°
~ v ~ ro
v z o a
~+ s, •,~
~ a a.n
v a q
w.C m o
H 1d ~ U
v
0
z
,.... ~ _ ~.. ~..__ ~ .. s
~ l''I''M''.UX, c~ ~ ~ ^ C
L, /~lL),UoU~~
~ PI>>~ ,1x 7„~' uNiTs
!O. Y NC'r A~. J
I' ~ I'~'.~-.rrX_ /_'S~~ UNITS
~~A~~••=
~ /.2~Ac
C~~
'~ ew
5~~~
i .l i .,7'ix.4M,s/Y'/vk,~L~ ~~NsiTY GCr-+T~X~-~,
~ ~ ~ GouK r f~AV~i~G h"~s.~~t
-p ~ arm
7' ; / ?.3 ra aaS 7'o r~
~, ~~- ~uur,~w~sr ~ ~~.
~~~~ i
C'
Nut ,q~''P'ntti/t2~ts /3Y GT)' GOf/~vaiv
i Gc.~;VT:gi.caA SU~I~ GO.W~1v~~.. LANG
II ~.~, ~ ~O/ D W16/~.~.,~ L11~i1's.
L_ __ _
~ ~ !_--
. ~:*
DESIGN PLANNING ASSOCIATE, INC.
earl R. Dale, Principal Planner Fhorw:1~12) 738-0174,
a, r
7165 WINDGATE ROAD WOOD9URY, MINNESOTA ;55125 ~
April 23, 1982 `
~,
PLANNING REPORT
' Fox: Planning Commission and City Council, Falcon Hgi$hts, MN
By: Carl. R. Dale, Planning Consultant
Subject: Planning review and recommendationq, Re: proposed
Bernwood Additions 1-5.
,,,.
Pl~nnin~ Considerations '
~, ,
l.j This proposed Plat is being submitted in accorda~}ce with
various local Codes and Ordinances which, in my pinion,
allow for the City Council tp apply certain cond~tione; some
~; su~$gested conditions are as hererin-after note~i.'~
2., The proposal is for a "zero" lot line subdiviaio~i of single-
,~ 'family detached homes. This is the most ~fficie~t•and econo-
mical way in which detached single-fami~.y homed fan be built.
The lat sizes proposed are adequate for'" ' , ~,~,,,'de-
~~ ' v e l o p m e n t; ~fr-~~~O~~D~~ `ii~1u~i~i~" ~~,~" ~ ~~ 'ta.~~ ~,
~~~ ~
'; ~~ ' e this type of evelopp-ent
.~ y ~~ ? Bpi .r Y7ti^yy.~ )an'b.y.
' 8 ie - , it is more '~"' in
~. .
certain "' `` ~ '~ ~s~ It must
Asa, hoytever, be
. no that B
. , ~ ... ~~ ~~ ~~~ " 'fit. ~~~
,.
a ~ i :~
E .
3., Such housing is not necessarily intended for lower income
familieq; rather expensive buildin s can be constructed on
lots as proposed. In any event, ~~~' "' .7 '~"" " """ ~"~
~. , .:a,, ~~. ~~.~
~:;
,.
It is not clear from this applica- ~
` yr~ t on ow and moderate income ous n "~s ni"~aed"'~n
~,/ total or i_n Dart. We wou su~~est, however, t at n either
case , a 1 ~ ,.~~~ 'r G d >.+' i
„b ,~. E ~~. ~ ~,:
~ 4, Con derin ', it would ~'" '"" that the
~~~
T ; ,':
a) ~ - "'' could allow a ~"~-~' of about ~a~--~~
~+y- '~ WiYMUWMMr' "~ ^y.... V
,~ ...... - w,
• b) o'rce~ : ''" s would allow }~~~~~units
based o
< F. ..
V
I ~ ~ ~ F , F'
c) A ~tPlcdl~'" pne+`~aaa~.l~.~^$.~~~ibn would
,..,.
a c}c o m o d a~,~t a about ~'7,~ ~~~"~ e d ~ ~ .~, t~ `' t
~~F;~ ., _ ,ed .and ao.i".~QWmGt~'C-' an. ~p6~4'~iA'~ ,~1~i~1~~ng
~ .i~:' p, ~~. ~' ~T"`~g!~,,:~.,~,
' Thus ~t.•4~e. " ,ie~f fi i c i e n t <i ' u ®e '~ ' t. ~Zk ~
e~ .~~:~ ~ ,e~~~~~,M~,~ h a t ~s u e,~ n . the i~~ y
p 't'o e'r
5 The .~, ~ ~ * ~~,~:,,~,,, ,~
• e n'~. a
vi ed :,wr,v~~v ~ ~ . d.x~:~,~~' ~~ and d~.~$'> ",~~? p r°,»
d ~dB~~ although not as ~. '=g~~J~
as might be pose ble u~~,~y"r; "x~,,. t,
opinion is subject to comments from the City Eng~,neer with
respect to utility easements and engineerin u dness of
draina a and ondin °K" "~~ ~• .
.; ,, F,U. P g • ~,'~~, however, ~n
s:
l~
~~~ fi;~ili~ ,~ g P ~n " "„
by the ~~~~,~~' r•a~e~e]„opa- special attention
s ould be pa to screen a cul-de-sacs- from homes
to the east. TY~~.s ,area should be so designed as to pia
~ ~ ..
~'°Land along the east border is ideally suited .„form ~~,--w•~"~"'
use by both existing and future residents wi't;ti '"'" ~`
.. .. ,; .
~~. ,~/' e J" ~~°,~~~~f~~~~ 't h e t r a i l
_vl"- shou a provi ed some type of surface for
_1 ~ y~'~ ~ ~ ~~ and t~~~ cs-~~ax~1;~~.~.'~ ,t ~ r' ~t z ~ d) use .
,C1"~ V' ~ Common open space to the south may be used for both
~ ~ ponding and recreation; a specif-ic plan for development
„~"~ ', should be required.
(~ 6. As 'designed, the zero lot line plat does not provlide "dispersed"
common open space as might be done with townhomes• i~t its sug-,
~ Bested, then, that a condition be to'~B,Q',~",~~pm- `gg~ e
for active or assive recreation) ~o` a". ~„'~t"~'"~~ `~ ~Cn~$he ~~ ~^~
~w. . ~ ., "
fi r they r~ ""' ;^~ . m.~,
a'
~,. M , , ~,
.~~ ~ .. v
7. he remaining s of""vacant land in the total develop-
~U~ ment area ~ ~ in accordance with one of several
.
dens ty optio ernatives that have been """' " '°''
'~ $. Based upon the criteria submitted by me and the Task Force
~.,
,.
b ,.
' it is suggested that an o e ing~ ' " '~"
~~ ~~. .
:r: , ..,~. ,.: r
-
hen total pro~`e ~ ~ensity excee e a w c
could be ccomodated by a " standard " subdivisioln under
R-l~density standards.
RECOMMENDATION
Subject to the conditions,npte~ierein and,~recommenda ,.~f
• the City Enginner, ~ "a~mQnd~~- ` " '' '
.~ '
April 23, 1982
~~-`,f. J. .~
",~l' '.4..1
` ~~
Addendum/Modification to Planning Report (Crater a/Guidelines)
dated April 21, 1982.
Based upon detailed analysis of Plats (Bernwood dditions
1 thru 5) which have been submitted to the City or consi-
deration and approval, the following is offered or your
consideration:
~~~..
~~
r ~
~~ .
\~~'~~
The suggested Criteria/Guidelines (by Car1.D~le) call
for possible consideration of ~;~,' ' ter.,.„3. `' r .~'~'"~'~°'° ~
,a
b~~Thi" s-"-cour~esult in an overall pro ct density
as much as 100X over that permitted by the c Trent R-1
zoning as opposed to the approx. 40~ suggest d by the .
Neighborhood Task Force; while I believe tha~ this could
still be considered good land use density, s'ch an increase
clearly will not meet with approval ~y the T sk Force and
some Planning Commission members and other C ty Officials.
In order to ~~ still h ~. '" ty for
4;%'. -
selection of ,31E ~~ a that 'may with
~; ~ ~1~~~r~`I, I am herewith indiCat n& some
a 3"rlties which result, ~.n pa"t, from
my ev uation of proposed Bernwood gddlti4nsNo. 2 thru
5 x ~,;~~~~
The .~.. ,~•.r':~~ ~ ,,; .
'*~+: ~~;,,;: j y~- platting o f area , , y~,,.L~
(per my enclosed sketch results in some `}"
a aa:fN~dM" ~ e~P a-s'k t s u t o t e f a c t
that ~ ,.":~'~ ,, .Y
Based upon the platting, f, ~y,~x~p;~,~„~~,~~~,~,;~
~41iA~ ~ ~;4.7~r,._ ~, r~~c c•l ~„d 1,~$n~*~i ,i
t propos~atting, the remaining vacant
could be developed in alternate ways with th
results:
1,
2.
1- ,y~
6~ 3.
~ u'`
ri ~ '
~.,, ,,;.~~~~~ .net~'li or ab
This would result in a ';~~,,',: ' ",tom
,~~
dwelling µnits
,~ ~:" 2 "" u n3 t s 'per ;~i-a..~~a~~'~~:,,t7;
This would result in a ''~ "
,~',,
dwelling units "~~'` °' t
• .:,' ,
If A ,.Y3,~is developed in actor ancE
' ~` i~COp1A~~, ~thanare omm ,...
of ~~"~ ~~.r.' 14„ le ~ endec
~'~" i s~"~. ~ d for ~ ~~ s~c~~
»~
or ~;.~~'~?;~~ia~l~ a total of
or ~ than suggested ~by t,
Vie. Under
Tea (8.47 Ac.)
following
ut ~711ti~iit~.
~Y of '~'~.~.'~y
~..a .
with the
,,.,,,.
#~liit
I f ~1J~34~
sults
.., .
.^
4. If ~~ M~;~ is used ~~~;.~-pr c~3DS,~ia1 and.
. a . _~'ttRent~~ ,~„ite per gam, a total pro,je
res~u is or ,~,2::., thaq e:
Q~ Force . ~„~;..~,
,.- ,...,
the .:in~sr,
ct density of
IG:~~4,~,~~C `~`..
5. If used ~l.:j;~°'f.or rbmmeralal and the remainder eveloped ~ -o
is@ ~] ~; ~20~ units.. Q,x,. acre the
for a ~ "t ~~2~~~ 5 .total project
:,~,~ r e s u l ~~ n.~:J1.66~
b~~~e „ ~e d
~ e (it is noted, however, that's the T`k
Force did not consider any portion of site fo commercial
~- use .
..~...~
2, Since thg proposed platting of Bernwood A
dditiona 1 thry S
A ,~ ~ ---~• ~a
., : ~ ,
~,a
d. My suggestion, then, w uld be to
agree with the Tas Force recommendation that:
1)
of 2 )
`,~' ~
"" . r U
3)
t h e ~eci,.t g~ d;,~p,p,~,;~,,;;,,Qx g,~~"d s existing z o n i n g
v.,, r ~ i
("~'Ili`'`~.L8A,~1,,g ~ s o r. units i n .ax e e s e -rn~ f,, k :~~ ~ "- , , the n
~. ,.
,~~~
The eao,t,Qaa..Q~,~e~elane~s•iteuld'--b~4he- ex anpe o~
' and not the general public since the ~'`~
not a g e n e r a"I~ _ ,: ~'.~~,~~ ~ -~e n t a n d
If an
~,gumma
pu is need.
~ T,_.
d t °.,.. ~ n u~, ~~~~~
xeet. ~,
~ .c~-~~ ~ C~ ~
S u b m t t e ~`~~--~ G~ ~/ .
Carl R. Dale
Planning Consultant
~--..( o ~ ,. '
G~~ .,
~j ~/
~t,~..... - ~~ ...
/~
1 ~. i (~~ N ~~v
'a~~ray_.~:~ha na
ni r
~.,~ ~- .
._...~-
_~~-~"
F
ti [,
L~ 4 ~ ~
l.~ /' ~ • < / lr o
~~,,,.
~~~~ 4Q\/I'lL1 { C/. ri~ 1, 1(l. Y'11'llr'ICq 11.i~rrlr~'~1 1'.i 1C)y..)
C~ ~'' ~ 1~v' V t. In ~i ~-t-r ~C r ~ "~' "'1~ ~
~hwlQvlc...r, Gi1'~c.1 -`C.~ ~.u~~~a..l. .,...Ic•
....~~/ /~`` ~GY , ~J 1N Y, r'1^1-'"t~•1 tr li ~l,rr-. ~`..`... IC: rl ~.. Y"1 (l ly' y._~-lU yl ' ~Uv rlC \ I ll r~~
~'~ `IUVr.. Ya~l,_`n:.s ~- , t_~.. ~. F'l C~-t.~.. '/r~VrlC l.r•C._G`~ VYtG~ 'c.. ~C •.-',
/ L /~ 1
/' Yl'l. v 1(,('../'1 +J r l.: ('c ~ 1 (~ lii . C- ~~ \t .-~ r'r 1['._ 'I-IC-~:, 1
V •~(1_VIyC.Y~tiI: (l ~~ ~~ '~.;I 'iC'r YY'1 ~~a_11It~~4'.1• '1 Gi~.'l 11L. `i ~ ~ ~J'~r'1 J k•V:. i 4
C.r tl-t~~C ,~ /~r~r,wr,;c~ ~~c~~a }~\c.~~ ~~Jc~. l - `.1 c .,.~ ! c
rn \ ~
. ~C'•~~j~ ~aa_ ~r~~~;~ ~c~ w, } --,,r~ L-... /~r, ., ,<.[ ... `.~~w 1 }c. •v~.L~.. Wes.. rc (( ....,...., 1
~ l,<.:.. I~.i}
~1~ l!„ l 1' :ti ~ 4 ( i . r ( . '. l~ a ~ C1 ~ ~t a 1 1. a . a 1 '. a 1 1 ~. ~ .
~~) d 1, , "-~,
`'1G. v+ ,,,,,~,, C. ,,.~.. {~,a C.1, r , a.~C--`.>It`. c l- Ll ,•~a. ~"~C-. [1,•~( 1
__
t
t-" •
t.;vK..1c~
a.. =J a. ~ Il J
w
i L ~)
.-rte c . r, ~ ..ar - -1 ~ti-,, ~ ,
_L.
t1. '~L'Iti-~tc. .s'tC r yti. `
1 l
1
~~11Z? ".,rt- ~L'V~. a.~T' +"~ IGI.~, l 1 1 1 { -1~. 1
(~Y4'L_. "Ica
-1_•:
.,..,, tr:_ a.,'~`..va w,Y-..L_~`t>_1.~., 4.~> a_c .c. Yt-. --~• -~
r ~,
1,,, he .,
~~"'cs-+1k. ~ ~ ~ -'-~ L.h C'aa.\r<~, Ic-L, ~ ,_. `~+•.j~t.1ti. .. •1- ~'_IC~41•'- lE: -~ 1-a•r ~-
1x Icw 1~ e~::.lGr,c.~. ~. ICQ~ E
1 tw r c. ~ 1 ! t 1 ~-~
1
u , I~' ~ I t', v i:. ~ LA„1.: ~.. U,..,;~
~.vt
x~
,
II F~ K'~ ~Y. 1... a..ZaJ.. (< a.c. l
~' ~ C•.t~ ~.a -. -1, ..._1. 1..
11
' ci.i ~,
C 1 ~-Y~~a
Y.}r
~
I
}
,
I
„
r ....
~ .
IL._..
1 l (
. 1 , ~'1K v.Y. Y~ fifes. c.. .~ T• I r r. ~.i~
~_ ~~ r.. 1 I. s. ~ 1
c , d 1 ~
a..~
a ... 4~~la:-labl~..
•J ~C v t.• ~1
. .
.
1f
~, . ra ~- ~.a1L,1v.. LL C) LIIp..1:w.~, la-.c
+_t ., t- \ 1
.
a .. ~
_ ~. K.~~ ..._ I/a._. 11 11 11 _
~ 6'-r\ a'. al if a T \r .. L, I C >•
C `
„ , ~, L : I,a... c.
J
.qt'r'/ (~ I'1C1. Nl YaiL ~L~ L~.l~ (..-ate. Ilr'c ~' ~.~ `
'ill C ff 1.~" ` S~
. ( , ', v \'
>Y
ti. ~ ~/
. J tC Y 1"Y'l 1.~. a. -- ~ti. 1 ~' C, a. ~
-x.~&.. '~G ~i. 7 ~ ~ n~ w . _.{i... -X ~ . lam.'
I
V •' bL.,... •-~~~ ~y. -.~• 4c .~ r,, d vs'.1 n G-••~~• :...1`. k ~, ~ hG_~i-
~ u-. ,,J lc., - 1 r.~ ~r1~_~ LAva. rti~c:yr•. .-.c_r~ c.~. ~•~ ('.Ir r..:~
~..4. l'iC r r ~'..a . •.. ~'r ~' ~.
G~ ~' ~-`~IiGay Uh a 1.,, . .. `t~ ~4. c . ., .., , t~ c..1 ~% 1.~r., ~ ',C'v Y+-\ l.~• ~l..~. 'r-:~t •.a~ -.i
1 ~1
h ~ V r•~ rw-, p ~ VC.. • ~• - li ... Cf .~ / 'r ~' V 1 l ,w. • ~ ~ L~4, ~ t
I. ~`
YCC'i r7lfTlk'rvL~ T~C.. i "~'~`a~. t~~c\r~ -~~~, t .•~t~r~t~1.C-~ ~...., ~'ti\ '~'~.. N
~y~k 1
` 'T irk Mt'r ~ ( 11
•~ ~ ~`, ~ G. C 1-Q. .~. c,K ..~.. i~ S.. ..+ ~k:'• v 17~-. w~~_. t.l...a_. ?~CvL'M.f~
~ -fir(.,, ~ .a
1-4 ~ l,,r. 1 c' ~~ r. r r.'fi
z.~ ~ (_ "~ p'. r1 V ~ ~J(... l ` 1 ~,f .~ l~ l v Yr'~ "..r <~.-~'L t.. ~iti 11 11~
(,: CC •iC~ ql.y ~-~::~ t. •'1 ~ l..•~ ~~,~r: .. •~t:i ~-~'~C -~ r-> >•C.~.r'iG.,` b.r. ~`-, ~1 ` \ .
~~ I~K~C~ 1~..
'T wt l't.. rti fY4~ ~ T~ ~~r~~' 'T ~` ~-•ii' i.•..•i1`~YC~Y~C.`- -w-~ -~~hiy 4''•i~-`~['y>
•r1,c•~ ~G ~ G~;~.c.r-~C~ ~~nd::: ~ y ~ kr.tl ~rr~~•~ .r. ~c_•.: 1'r~<
l