01-26-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I Street Design The subdivision ordinance discourages cul-de-sacs (Section 11.32, Subd. 2, B. 6). The subdivision regulations establish regulations for cul-de-sac design. The ordinance indicates that MNDOT recommends a minimum right of way radius of 50 feet. Permanent dead-end streets are to end in a cul-de-sac in accordance with the City ’s construction standards and specifications. Permanent dead-end roads shall normally have a terminus 50 feet from an adjoining property. (Section 11.32, Subd. 2, H.(2)). The applicants have developed a plan that included a hammerhead at the end of a private driveway in order to provide an emergency access turnaround and to protect trees. The applicants have also provided an alternative plan with a cul-de-sac that would remove more trees. Density The applicant is asking for a 50% increase in density. The City Council may allow a density credit if all of the standards in Section 10.26., Subd. 3 are met. The proposed density is 3.03 dwelling units per acre total or 3.89 dwelling units per dry acres. The density to the east contains approximately 7.658 acres with 24 dwelling units for a density of 3.13 dwellings per acre. The subdivision ordinance prohibits more than four dwelling units per acre of dry buildable land. The subject site is 9.9 acres in area with a 2.2 acre wetland, leaving 7.7 acres available for development. The design and site layout of the increased number of units provided by the density credit needs to be accomplished on a 7.7 acre site versus a 9.9 acre site. This limits the flexibility regarding the use of creative design and site layout to maximize the livability of the units and the preservation of open space and natural amenities. For example, the narrowness of the individual units (20* wide -18.5' from inside wall to inside wall) enables 30 units to be placed on the site while preserving a significant amount of trees and open space. It also enables the costs of the units to be kept at a lower level. However, the narrowness of the units also raises questions about the livability of the units in relation to thee usability of the garage area for two vehicles plus storage and the circulation through the various living spaces of the unit. With a PRD, there should not be a need to make a trade-off between livability of units and preservation of open space. It may be that a lower number of units would enable both of these goals to be accomplished more effectively. It is important that the development provide a quality living environment over the long term in order to continue to provide a benefit both to the City in general, in terms of providing a workable housing alternative, and in terms of the residents living in the development. The City has very little undeveloped land available in the Navarre area to provide alternative housing options. It is important the housing option developed on this site works. •'v I n i48fcimii .1