Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout#13 Bentley Village Sketch PlanSTAFF REPORT DATE: 10/31/2018 REGULAR #13 TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Jennifer Haskamp, City Planning Consultant ITEM: Bentley Village Sketch Plan Review REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner Kristina Handt, City Administrator Jack Griffin, City Engineer Emily Becker, Former Planning Director (Planning Commission Report) BACKGROUND: The City Council is being asked to review a Sketch Plan for a proposed residential subdivision located south of 5th Street N, east of Jade Trail N and west of Keats Avenue N. The proposed Sketch Plan includes 239 single-family attached townhomes on approximately 34.621 acres. A Sketch Plan review requires no formal action by the City Council but is a required step in the city’s subdivision process. General Information Applicant: Paul Heuer, Pulte Homes, 7500 Flying Cloud Drive, Suite 670, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Property Owners: Alan Dale, Stonehenge USA, 6007 Culligan Way, Minnetonka, MN 55345 Location: Part of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 13, Township 29 North, Range 21 West, PID: 13.029.21.43.0001 Request: Sketch Plan Review Existing Land Use: Vacant (RAD) Existing Zoning: RT – Rural Development Transitional Surrounding Area: North – Savona (Urban Low Density Residential); West –Multi-tenant strip mall and Lampert’s lumber yard (Commercial); East – Vacant land (Commercial) and Savona townhomes (Urban Medium Density); South – Vacant land (Rural Development Transitional guided for Commercial development in 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Mixed- Use Commercial in the City’s draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan) Comprehensive Plan: Urban Medium Density Residential (4.5-7 units per acre) Proposed Zoning: Urban Medium Density Residential 2 History: Vacant property Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 9/21/2018 60 Day Timeline – 11/20/2018 Extension Sent – N/A Applicable Regulations: Article XII – Urban Residential Districts (LDR) Chapter 153: Subdivision Regulations PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: The subject Sketch Plan was presented to the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on October 22, 2018. The Planning Commission was asked to provide feedback and comments regarding the Sketch Plan. A summary of their discussion is provided below: • Commissioners generally supported the proposed use and density. • Commissioners suggested that the Applicant consider incorporating ‘amenities’ in both the east and west side of the development (i.e. incorporate similar improvements on the west side as shown in the open space on the east side which contains an off-road trail, pool, firepit, etc.) • Some commissioners indicated that there may be some demand for lower price points than the low-end of the range indicated by the Applicant. This was not necessarily universally agreed to but was suggested for exploration. • Commissioners discussed the proposed deviation from the City’s standard 60-foot right-of- way (ROW), and generally indicated a willingness to consider a narrower ROW provided that all required improvements could be accomplished within the ROW. REVIEW/ANALYSIS: Sketch Plan Review Process. The Lake Elmo Subdivision Ordinance requires a Sketch Plan be prepared and reviewed by the City Council and the Planning Commission as part of the pre- application process for a new subdivision. The Ordinance notes that the purpose of the Sketch Plan review is as follows: Sketch Plan. In order to ensure that all applicants are informed of the procedural requirements and minimum standards of this chapter and the requirements or limitations imposed by other City ordinances or plans, prior to the development of a preliminary plat, applicants are required to submit a sketch plan to the City for review. Per the Ordinance, the City Council is not being asked to take formal action as part of the Sketch Plan Review. The purpose of this process is for the City Council to receive the information submitted and to provide general feedback and comments regarding the proposed subdivision. Staff has completed an internal review of the Sketch Plan which is described in subsequent sections of this staff report and in the identified attachments. Sketch Plan Review. The following staff report provides a high-level review of the proposed Sketch Plan and contemplated subdivision. At this stage in the process, a detailed site plan and engineering data is not required so staff has noted the additional items required as part of any future Preliminary and Final Plat processes. The following sections focus on how the proposed subdivision is consistent or inconsistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and City Code. 3 Zoning Map Amendment. If the Applicant moves forward with the subdivision process, the property will be required to be rezoned from RT – Rural Development Transitional to MDR – Urban Medium Density Residential. The request for rezoning will be evaluated concurrently to the Preliminary Plat process. Density. The proposed development includes 239 units. The site is a total of 34.621 acres with no wetland, proposed parkland, or arterial right-of-way. The net density is therefore 6.9 units per acre. This meets the density requirements for the Urban Medium Density Residential land use densities of 4.5-7 units per acre identified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Land Use. The proposed single-family attached townhomes are a permitted use in the Urban Medium Density Residential zoning district. The proposed residential use is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Lot Dimensions and Bulk Requirements. The Sketch Plan does not provide a lot layout but does identify a “Typical Townhome Lot Detail” (Lot Detail). It is assumed that the typical townhome lot detail generally depicts the lot sizes and orientation that would apply to the Sketch Plan. The following table identifies the dimensions as shown in the “Typical Townhome Lot Detail” and references where the Sketch Plan appears to differ. Standard Required Proposed Minimum Lot Area 4,000 square feet per unit 1,836-2,065 square feet; or 6,310 square feet if the average is used (Note: Additional Description Below) Minimum Lot Width 25 feet per unit 24 feet (interior) 27 feet (end lot) Maximum Impervious Surface 50% 46% Minimum Front Yard Setback 25 feet Narrative indicates this will be met; Typical Townhome Lot Detail shows 22-feet* Minimum Interior Sideyard Setback (principal buildings) 10 feet Narrative indicates this will be met Minimum Interior Sideyard Setback (accessory structures) 5 feet Narrative indicates this will be met Minimum Corner Sideyard Setback 15 feet Narrative indicates this will be met; note additional description below Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet Narrative indicates this will be met 4 *The Applicant stated at the Planning Commission meeting that the Lot Detail is incorrect and was drawn in error. The Sketch Plan (site plan) shows a 25-foot setback which complies with the City’s ordinance. On the attached Applicant’s Sketch Plan submittal, sheet 1 of 3 identifies a conceptual layout of the units overlaid on an aerial, and identifies a “Typical Townhome Lot Detail.” Staff notes that the dimensions shown on the Lot Detail do not meet some of the ordinance requirements, and also are inconsistent with the information shown on the Sketch Plan. Additionally, Staff notes that the Typical Townhome Lot Detail shows interior lots with a lot area of 1,836 SF, and end units with approximately 2,065 SF. If each unit is platted with an individual lot then the proposed lots do not meet the ordinance, unless open spaces can be averaged into the analysis. However, if individual lots are not proposed as shown on the conceptual layout of the units, then the City’s ordinance allows for the lot area to be calculated based on density. If this calculation is performed, then the lot area would average approximately 6,310 SF and would meet the City’s ordinance. This should be clarified by the Applicant at the time of preliminary plat, and regardless of the approach taken, the proposed configuration must meet the City’s lot and bulk standards. Lot Easements. Lot easements (front, rear and side yard) need to be shown on the Preliminary Plat that meet the City’s requirements. Townhome Design. The proposed development consists of two-story attached single-family townhomes (row homes) that include between 4 and 6 units. The Applicant’s narrative states that the design of each unit is “individualized and stylized” so that each unit will differ in architecture and color scheme from the other units within the same building to ensure visual interest and break the potential monotony that sometimes occurs within townhome developments. The Applicant submitted concept renderings/photos of the proposed design of the units which are provided as an attachment to this memo. Additional diversity will also be achieved within the interiors, and buyers will also be able to choose from a range of options for floor plans. Some of the options contemplated within this Sketch Plan include three bedrooms with the option of four; a loft; and a rooftop terrace. Homeowners’ association fees will include maintenance of the yard, snow removal, and exterior of the building. Standards for Single-Family Attached Dwellings (Townhomes), MDR District. The following outlines standards for single-family attached dwellings and provide an explanation as to how these standards are met within the proposed Sketch Plan: 1. A maximum of 8 units shall be permitted within a single building. Buildings with more than 8 units may be allowed as a conditional use. • The maximum number of units proposed within a single building is six. 2. Townhouses shall be located on lots in such a way that each individual unit has a minimum of 15 feet of street frontage. No parking shall be located in the front yard or between the front façade and the street. a. Townhouses that do not meet the minimum requirements for frontage along a street or that have frontage along a private street may be allowed as a conditional use. • As noted on Sheet 1 of 3 of the Applicant’s submittal, the “Typical Townhome Lot Detail” identifies a minimum of 24-feet of frontage for interior units. 3. The primary entrance shall be located on the façade fronting a public street unless the townhouses are approved as a Conditional Use under division §154.454 (G) (2)(a) above; an additional entrance may be provided on the rear or side façade. 5 • Public streets are being proposed and based on the Sketch Plan and submitted conceptual photos/renderings, the primary entrance for each unit is from the street. 4. New housing types should be introduced in limited quantities to increase diversity and housing choice, not to replace whole blocks of existing housing. Therefore, no more than 1/4 of the lineal frontage of a developed block (measured around the entire block perimeter) may be converted to townhouse units, and no further townhouse, two-family or higher-density development is permitted once this threshold is reached. • This is a new development not replacing existing housing. 5. Townhouse units shall be designed to reflect the general scale and character of existing buildings on surrounding blocks, including front yard depth, height and roof pitch, primary materials, facade detailing and size and placement of window and door openings. • The townhomes are comparable in scale and character of the existing Savona townhomes to the east of the development and provide architectural interest with a variety of townhome styles that will vary with each unit within each building. 6. Common open space for use by all residents or private open space adjacent to each unit shall be provided. Such open space shall comprise a minimum of 500 square feet per unit. • A minimum of 539 square feet is provided per unit. Landscaping. A landscape plan is not a requirement of the Sketch Plan review process, and the Applicant did not submit any details regarding contemplated landscaping within the proposed development. The Applicant should note that a landscape plan meeting the City’s Landscape Requirements must be submitted with an application for Preliminary Plat. Buffer Areas. The proposed development is not located in an area that is subject to required buffering. However, the Zoning Code does require more intensive uses to be screened from less intensive land uses. Because the property to the north is single-family detached residential use and the proposed development is single-family attached residential uses, screening will be required in the subject development. Acceptable screening includes masonry wall or fencing in combination with landscape material that is at least six feet in height and provides a 90% opaque screen on a year- round basis. Acceptable landscape material includes trees planted at a minimum of one deciduous or coniferous tree per 40 linear feet along the property line. Additional landscape material such as shade trees or trellises may be required to partially screen views mentioned above. Trails. Sidewalks are shown on the Sketch Plan on one side of each proposed street. The Sketch Plan also identifies one off-road trail through the eastern common area that would provide access to a potential private community gathering/potential pool area. The proposed development identifies a “Future Roadway” near the center of the site that will eventually connect 5th Street North to Hudson Boulevard North south of the proposed development. The City’s trail plan identifies a trail connection between these two roadways, and the proposed development should provide a trail connection consistent with the City’s plans. Amenities. As stated in the Applicant’s narrative, the type of private neighborhood amenities that would best support and fit the proposed development have not yet been determined but will be as their market research will help determine appropriate amenities. At this time, they are considering a pool and fire pit gathering area. There are several open space areas shown on the Sketch Plan that could accommodate these private amenities. At this time, the Applicant has conceptually shown the private pool in the eastern open space area. Ultimately whatever private amenity is proposed, any such improvements will be managed and maintained through the neighborhood Homeowners’ Association. 6 Park Dedication. The proposed development is within a Neighborhood Park search area as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Savona Park was dedicated and developed. Staff has determined and recommends to the City Council that this neighborhood park fulfills the projected Neighborhood Park needs of the area, and that the proposed development will have adequate access to the park which is located approximately 500-feet from the northern border of the proposed development. Given the proximity of the park from the development, the Applicant has proposed to fulfill the City’s park dedication requirements through fee-in-lieu. As per the City’s Subdivision Regulations, the required cash equivalent payment shall be an amount equal to the fair market value of the percentage land dedication for the zoning district in which the subdivided property is located (the MDR zoning district requires 10% of the total acreage being developed), and the amount is to be determined by reference to current market data, if available, or by obtaining an appraisal from a licensed real estate appraiser. In summary, the Applicant will be required to 10% of the value of land as park dedication. Access. Two access points are proposed from 5th Street North, one directly across from Jasmine Road North and one directly across from Junco Road North. An additional access will be provided from a street connecting to 5th Street and ultimately Hudson Boulevard North. The location of the proposed street is a planned connection between 5th Street North and Hudson Boulevard North. Staff recommends that the Applicant either construct the portion of this street adjacent to the development with a temporary turn-around or consider exploring the potential of working with the future development to the south to construct the planned street. Restrictive Easements. There is a 50-foot wide natural gas pipeline easement that bisects the western portion of the property. No buildings or other structural improvements can be constructed within the easement. There are no lots proposed within this easement, and the Applicant should be aware that any potential encroachment into the easement area will be required to acquire appropriate approvals and evidence of the permitted encroachment from the gas pipeline. There is also a 21-inch diameter storm sewer pipe with a 30-foot wide easement on the eastern edge of the property. The Sketch Plan shows some of this storm sewer and easement to remain in its current location and proposes to realign a portion of the storm sewer as part of the subdivision process. Streets. Streets are proposed to have a 50-foot right-of-way with 28-foot wide streets. The Applicant will be required to provide a cross section detailing the proposed 50-foot right-of-way with the preliminary plat application since this is a departure from the City’s Engineering Design Standards that require a 60-foot right-of-way. If the streets are 28-feet wide or more, parking will be allowed on both sides of the streets. All portions of the 5th Street right-of-way located on the Applicant’s property will be required to be dedicated with the final plat. A more thorough analysis can be found in the City Engineer’s Memo which is attached to this Staff Report for review and consideration. Utilities – Municipal Water Supply and Municipal Sanitary Sewer. Public water and sanitary sewer service will be extended to the site. The Preliminary Plat will need to include detailed utility construction plans that meet City engineering standards. Additional review is provided in the City’s Engineer’s Memo which is attached to this Staff Report for review and consideration. Grading. All grading activities shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Environmental Review. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is not required for a development with less than 375 attached units. The proposed development as shown on the Sketch Plan identifies 239 units, and does not meet the threshold for a mandatory EAW per MN Statute 4410.4300. 7 Storm Water Management. The proposed development is located in two watershed districts, the western half is in the South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) and the eastern half is in the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). Staff recommends early planning/coordination meetings with the SWWD and the VBWD to ensure the Preliminary and Final Plat designs are consistent with both watershed district regulations. In addition to the requirements of SWWD and VBWD, the design of the storm water management systems must comply with the City of Lake Elmo Storm Water Management Ordinance, and the City of Lake Elmo design standards manual. The Applicant should note that the City’s storm water and erosion control ordinance standards are different, and in some cases more stringent, than the watershed districts. The storm water facilities must be platted as Outlots and deeded to the City for maintenance purposes. Additional review is provided in the City’s Engineer’s Memo which is attached to this Staff Report for review and consideration. City Engineer Review. The City Engineer’s review comments are attached as well as incorporated throughout this Staff Report. Next Steps. To proceed with the proposed subdivision shown in the Sketch Plan, the Applicant will need prepare a Preliminary Plat application. The Preliminary Plat application process will include additional detail and supporting information as identified and noted throughout this memo. A public hearing will be held as part of the Preliminary Plat process. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City at this time. The Applicant will be required to pay for any amendments needed, if applicable, to accommodate the increase in REC units. Sketch Plan review does not grant the Applicant any development rights or entitlements. When the property develops, it will have urban services and will pay sewer and water connection charges, building permit fees and any other applicable fees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the City Council review the proposed Sketch Plan provided by Pulte Homes of MN, LLC for a 239-unit single-family attached residential development. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application Forms 2. Narrative 3. Subdivision Sketch Plan 4. City Engineer Review Memorandum 10/15/2018 | | | | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | | | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | | | | >> > > > > > DATE: 9-21-18 CITY SUBMITTAL 733 Marquette Ave Ste 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 612.758.3099 www.alliant-inc.com MAIN FAXBENTLEY VILLAGE - SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTAL LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA SITE DATA Dr a w i n g n a m e : X : \ 2 0 1 8 \ 1 8 0 1 6 5 \ c o n c e p t s \ L a k e E l m o C o n c e p t . d w g S e p 2 1 , 2 0 1 8 - 1 1 : 4 5 a m INCLUDED PARCELS = EAST AND WEST NET CONCEPT PLAN AREA EAST PARCEL = 18.894 AC WEST PARCEL = 15.727 AC = 34.621 AC IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE EAST PARCEL = 8.821 AC WEST PARCEL = 7.215 AC = 16.036 AC TOTAL UNITS = 130 TOWNHOME UNITS - EAST (6.88 UPA) = 109TOWNHOME UNITS - WEST (6.93 UPA) = 239 TOTAL TOWNHOMES EXISTING ZONING = MDR - MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING DISTRICT PROPOSED ZONING = MDR - MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE = RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED LAND USE = URBAN MEDIUM DENSITY TYPICAL TOWNHOME LOT DETAIL ℄ R/WR/W TYPICAL PUBLIC ROAD SECTION LEGEND PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN BOUNDARY PROPOSED PRIMARY STRUCTURE SETBACK PROPOSED SIDEWALKS / WALKWAYS / TRAILS PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, CURB, DRIVEWAYS, BUILDINGS, ETC EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER >EXISTING STORM SEWER ESMT ESMT PROPOSED STORM SEWER> SHEET NO. 1 OF 3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | | > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 733 Marquette Ave Ste 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 612.758.3099 www.alliant-inc.com MAIN FAXBENTLEY VILLAGE - WEST PARCEL - SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTAL LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA SITE DATA Dr a w i n g n a m e : X : \ 2 0 1 8 \ 1 8 0 1 6 5 \ c o n c e p t s \ L a k e E l m o C o n c e p t . d w g S e p 2 1 , 2 0 1 8 - 1 1 : 4 5 a m WEST PARCEL GROSS WEST PARCEL AREA = 15.727 AC WEST PARCEL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE = 7.215 AC (45.9%) TOTAL UNITS = 109 TOWNHOME UNITS - WEST (6.93 UPA) LEGEND PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN BOUNDARY PROPOSED PRIMARY STRUCTURE SETBACK PROPOSED SIDEWALKS / WALKWAYS / TRAILS PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, CURB, DRIVEWAYS, BUILDINGS, ETC EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER >EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER> DATE: 9-21-18 CITY SUBMITTAL SHEET NO. 2 OF 3 | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | | || | | | | | >>>> > > 733 Marquette Ave Ste 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 612.758.3080 612.758.3099 www.alliant-inc.com MAIN FAXBENTLEY VILLAGE - EAST PARCEL - SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTAL LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA Dr a w i n g n a m e : X : \ 2 0 1 8 \ 1 8 0 1 6 5 \ c o n c e p t s \ L a k e E l m o C o n c e p t . d w g S e p 2 1 , 2 0 1 8 - 1 1 : 4 6 a m SITE DATA EAST PARCEL GROSS EAST PARCEL AREA = 18.894 AC EAST PARCEL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE = 8.821 AC (46.7%) TOTAL UNITS = 130 TOWNHOME UNITS - EAST (6.88 UPA) LEGEND PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN BOUNDARY PROPOSED PRIMARY STRUCTURE SETBACK PROPOSED SIDEWALKS / WALKWAYS / TRAILS PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, CURB, DRIVEWAYS, BUILDINGS, ETC EXISTING WATERMAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER >EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER> DATE: 9-21-18 CITY SUBMITTAL SHEET NO. 3 OF 3     PAGE 1 of 4  MEMORANDUM           Date:  October 15, 2018      To:  Jennifer Haskamp, SHC, LLC  Re:  Bentley Village  Cc:  Kristina Handt, City Administrator    Concept Plan Review    Ben Prchal, City Planner        Chad Isakson, Assistant City Engineer      From:  Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer          An engineering review has been completed for the Bentley Village Concept Plan. The submittal consisted of the  following documentation received on September 25, 2018:   Concept Site Plans dated September 21, 2018, prepared by Alliant Engineering.   Concept Plan Narrative dated September 21, 2018, prepared by Pulte Homes.      Engineering has the following review comments:    All  public  improvements  constructed  to  support  the  development must  be  designed  and  constructed  in  accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual available on the City website dated March, 2017.    TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS   5th Street North Right‐of‐Way Dedication. The existing collector street to the north of the site (5th Street  North) was constructed by Lennar within a permanent roadway easement. This easement area must be  dedicated to the City as public right‐of‐way as part of this development. Per the City design standards for  5th Street, a 10 ft. utility easement corridor along the south side of the 5th Street right‐of‐way must also  be reserved for small utilities.   5th Street North Site Access. The concept plan proposes three new public street intersections with 5th  Street North; one at Junco Road North, one at Jasmine Road North and the construction of a new north‐ south collector street that will eventually connect 5th Street North with Hudson Boulevard. All proposed  intersections are consistent with approved access configuration along 5th Street North.    Additional Site Access. The new public streets proposed for this development will each have secondary  access to the new north‐south collector street that will eventually connect 5th Street North with Hudson  Boulevard. Access spacing appears to be acceptable along the new collector street.   New North‐South Collector Street Alignment. The proposed north‐south collector street is consistent with  the City’s planning efforts and the proposed street is shown in the approximate location as planned.  However, there are existing sanitary sewer and watermain utilities located in the corridor. The design for  this new collector street must therefore consider the existing location of these utilities and must be  consistent with City right‐of‐way and boulevard design standards.    New North‐South Collector Street Typical Section. The concept plan shows no street width dimensions  located within a 100‐foot wide right‐of‐way. The typical section for this street needs to be determined by  the  City  to  be  incorporated  into  the  preliminary  plan  submittal and may require revisions for a  wider/narrower  street  and/or  right‐of‐way.  In  addition,  per  City  design  standards,  10‐foot  utility  easements must be provided along each side of the new R/W. An 8‐foot wide bituminous trail should be  FOCUS ENGINEERING, inc.  Cara Geheren, P.E.   651.300.4261  Jack Griffin, P.E.                651.300.4264  Ryan Stempski, P.E.  651.300.4267  Chad Isakson, P.E.  651.300.4285      PAGE 2 of 4  provided along one side to connect to the future Hudson Boulevard trail corridor and a 6‐foot sidewalk  provided on the other.   5th Street North Turn Lanes. A traffic study should be completed to review and evaluate the turn lane  infrastructure along 5th Street North necessary to support the development. Eastbound right turn lanes  (RTL) along 5th Street are in place at the intersections of the new collector road and at Junco Road. A  westbound left turn lane (LTL) along 5th Street is in place at the new collector road intersection. An  evaluation should be completed to determine if a westbound LTL is required at Jasmine Road and/or  Junco Road and if an eastbound RTL is required at Jasmine Road.   Turn Lanes Required at intersection with 5th Street. A northbound RLT and LTL must be constructed along  each of the new intersections at 5th Street North (Jasmine Road, New Collector Street, and Junco Road).   Turn Lanes Required at intersection with New Collector Street.  Dedicated RTL should be provided along  each of the new development streets at the intersection with the New Collector Street.     RESIDENTIAL STREETS   The proposed internal street network is well interconnected creating multiple access routes into and out  of the development.   All streets must be public streets and must be designed to meet the City’s Engineering Design Standards  including  street  width  (28‐feet) and  cul‐de‐sac  radii.  All  right‐of‐way  width  must  be  60‐feet  unless  a  detailed typical section can be provided that demonstrates a workable boulevard design using right‐of‐ way widths less than 60 feet.   Typical Public Roadway Section. The concept plan proposes a public street typical section with a 50‐foot  right‐of‐way width. The plan as presented does not yet demonstrate a workable boulevard plan. The City  standard setback from back of curb to hydrants and street lights is 5‐feet. Sidewalks must therefore be a  minimum of 7‐feet from back of curb to maintain a 2‐foot clear zone. This results in a minimum 12.5‐foot  boulevard  or  53‐foot  R/W  (sidewalks  both  sides),  or  minimum  13.5‐foot  boulevard  or  55‐foot  R/W  (sidewalk on one side).   Six  (6)  foot  sidewalks  must  be  provided  along  all  residential  streets  and  as  may  be  required  for  connectivity. Sidewalks may be 5‐feet in width if provided along both sides of the public street. In the  past, the City has required sidewalks on both sides of public streets along collector roadways (future  north‐south roadway) and within multi‐family areas.   The City Standard boulevard must be a 4% grade to the street. The driveway grades shown on the concept  plan typical section are applicable outside of the right‐of‐way only.   Typical Townhome Lot Detail.  The typical detail should be revised to provide a minimum 25‐foot setback  from back of sidewalk to garage door, or back of curb to garage door if there is no sidewalk.    Coordinated landscape plans. The boulevard layout does not accommodate boulevard trees within the  public right‐of‐way. No boulevard trees can be placed within the 10‐foot utility easements. Landscaping  requirements/plans must be planned accordingly.   All street intersections must be at 90 degrees and maintain 50 feet of tangent with maximum slopes of  2.5%. Streets must also meet City standards for horizontal and vertical curvature. Residential maximum  longitudinal grade is 8% with no sidewalks, 6% where there are sidewalks. The first intersection south of  Junco Road and 5th Street North must be revised accordingly.   Surmountable concrete curb and gutter shall be installed along areas with future driveways and B618  curb installed along entrance roadways and roadway stretches with no lots.    Standard 10‐foot small utility easement corridors. City standard 10‐foot utility easements are required  along both sides of all public streets, including 5th Street North, the future north‐south roadway, and  around cul‐de‐sacs. Small utility corridor easements must be shown on the plat/plans and typical sections  and must be provided at max. 4% boulevard grades.     Driveway connections to City Streets. The preliminary plans should include a detailed driveway plan for  each cul‐de‐sac showing each driveway connection, the placement of each hydrant, each no parking sign,      PAGE 3 of 4  each street light, and mail box placement to demonstrate sufficient area to accommodate all boulevard  needs. The concept plan appears to propose too many housing units for the proposed street geometry.   Snow Storage. The preliminary plans should include a detailed snow storage plan to address the high  density  and  clustering  of  paved  driveways  along  the  City  streets  to  ensure  enough  snow  storage  is  available for each property to prevent the placement of snow onto City streets after they have been  plowed. The cul‐de‐sacs are of particular concern.   Traffic Impact Study should be completed and submitted as part of the preliminary plat application to  determine the timing and extent of improvements required for the CSAH 19 and 5th Street intersection  including but not limited to turn lanes and traffic signals.  A financial contribution to CSAH 19/5th Street  intersection and traffic signal should be considered.      MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER   The proposed site is guided in the City’s Comprehensive Plan for Phase I of the Regional Sewer Staging  Plan  and  would  discharge  to  the  MCES  WONE  Interceptor  (Woodbury,  Oakdale,  Northdale  and  East  Oakdale). Sanitary sewer service is therefore readily available to the site. The development is proposing  239 REC units.    The applicant will be responsible to connect to the City sanitary sewer system located along the alignment  for the future collector roadway and extend sanitary sewer into the property at applicant’s sole cost.  Reconfiguration of the sanitary sewer connection points will be required. In addition, the applicant may  be required to stub sanitary sewer mains to adjacent properties if needed to maintain sewer access to all  adjacent parcels (to be reviewed with preliminary plans).   Existing  Utility  Easements.  The  existing  sanitary  sewer  utility  easements  along  the  new  north‐south  collector street must be shown with the preliminary plan submittal and plan revisions may be required to  avoid encroachments/conflicts with these easements.   Any main sewer lines not installed within public right‐of‐way will require minimum 30‐foot easements  centered over the pipe (or wider dependent upon the sewer depths) dedicated to the City and in the form  of the City’s Utility Easement Agreement.     MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY   The applicant will be responsible to extend municipal water into the development at its sole cost and will  be required to construct a looped watermain network with multiple connection points.   It is assumed that all of the property can be served by the City’s high pressure zone. The watermain is  available to be extended to the property by connecting to the existing watermain at the intersections of  5th Street with Jasmine Road (existing high pressure zone 8‐inch watermain), Junco Road (existing high  pressure zone 8‐inch watermain), and the new collector road (existing  high  pressure  zone  12‐inch  watermain.   The applicant may be required to provide watermain stub(s) to adjacent properties if needed to maintain  water access to all adjacent properties (to be reviewed with preliminary plans).   The existing water system has sufficient capacity for domestic service for the proposed 239 REC units.  System capacity is likely adequate for fire suppression as well. However, during preliminary planning the  applicant must provide fire flow demands so that staff may verify adequate fire suppression capacity.   No watermain pipe oversizing is anticipated at this time. Further  review  will  be  completed  as  the  application moves forward through the process.   The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants throughout the property at the direction of the Fire  Department.  All fire hydrants shall be owned and maintained by the City.   Any  watermain  lines  and  hydrants  placed  within  the  development will  require  minimum  30‐foot  easements centered over the pipe. Easements must be dedicated to the City and be provided in the City’s  standard form of easement agreement.            PAGE 4 of 4  STORMWATER MANAGEMENT   The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, VBWD and City rules.    Storm water facilities proposed as part of the site plan to meet State and VBWD permitting requirements  must be constructed in accordance with the City Engineering Design Standards Manual.   Overland emergency overflows or outlets are required as part of the site plan.   To  the  extent  adjacent  properties  are  impacted  by  storm  water  management  discharges,  written  permission from those properties must be submitted as part of the development applications.   Stormwater facilities will likely need to include both storm water ponds (detention) and infiltration basins.  No infiltration basins have been shown on the concept plan. The 100‐year high water flood level (HWL)  for each basin must be fully contained within private property.   The  storm  water  facilities  constructed  for  this  development  should  remain  privately  owned  and  maintained. The applicant will be required to execute and record  a  Stormwater  Maintenance  and  Easement Agreement in the City’s standard form of agreement.   Even as privately owned and maintain facilities, maintenance access roads meeting the City engineering  design standards must be provided for all storm water facilities.   The storm sewer system shall be designed to maintain the City standard minimum pipe cover of 3.0 feet.  Drain tile is required as part of the City standard street section at all localized low points in the street.  Drain tile considerations may impact the storm sewer design and depth requirements at low points.