Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUntitled • • Melanie Curtis From: Melanie Curtis Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11:34 AM To: 'Kelly- Schoborg Land Services, Inc.' Cc: Christine Mattson Subject: RE: Prelim Plat for Willi Abbott Attachments: Subdivision Application Packet-2013.pdf; Survey Requirements -2013.pdf; NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION.docx Kelly— sorry about that, it's been crazy busy here (and it's only getting worse). See the attached Notice of PC action sent to Abbott in April. Preliminary plat application requirements (as taken from the attached Subdivision application): 1. Completed pre-application form. 2. Completed subdivision application form. 3. Subdivision application fee, including special improvement fees for road, extension of municipal services, etc. 4. Certificate of survey meeting all of the City's survey requirements (attached) 5. Bluff analysis or slope analysis for properties with steep slopes. 6. Certified Property Owners List. The Owner/Applicant must to contact Hennepin County Property Identification and Platting to obtain a list of owners within 350' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map MUST be obtained from Hennepin County Property Identification and Platting, A500 Government Center, 300 South 6th Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910. This list is used by the City to notify adjacent property owners of the application. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attached a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Wetland delineation reports, if approved and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD) approvals. 9. Conservation design analysis and master plan. 10. Septic Systems. Site evaluation report and design for septic system drainfield on each lot not served by sanitary sewer. Primary and alternates sites appropriately sized for a 5-bedroom home are required for each proposed lot. Once drain field sites have been verified, snow fencing must be placed surrounding sites to prevent them from damage. Vehicular traffic, such as cars, trucks, earth moving equipment, etc. could compact drain field sites, rendering them unusable, prohibiting the timely completion of the project and or limit the long term use of the property. Snow fencing must be in place prior to the issuance of a building permit. 11. Preliminary engineering layout of proposed new roads (including center line profile), sewer and water lines. 12. Stormwater Management Plan. Two (2) full size and one (1) 8W' x 11" or 11" x 17" for reproduction of proposed plans of the stormwater management plan is required for all Class III subdivision applications. An electronic version is preferred in place of a reduction. It is recommended that the applicant also file for a permit with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for the stormwater management plan. All plans submitted to the City must include the following information: a. Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed and existing subwatersheds on site. b. Proposed and existing stormwater facilities location, alignment and elevation c. Existing and proposed normal, one year and one hundred year water elevations on site d. Existing and proposed site contour elevations related to NGVD, 1929 Datum. e. Construction plans and specifications of all proposed stormwater management facilities. f. All hydrologic and hydrolic computations completed to design the proposed stormwater management facilities. g. All plans must include erosion control and soil borings results if available. 13. Title opinion addressed to the City. 14. Copies of all documents/drawings submitted for the US Army Corps of Engineers and MCWD permits if required. Applicant must provide written commentary of preliminary review comments of both agencies. 15. Special requirements: a. PRDs require conditional use application and fee b. Draft of any proposed covenants c. Landscaping proposals. d. Dockage proposals e. Rezoning require a separate application and fee 1 • f. Flexible applications (variances, vacations) require fee payments per pro ct. Melanie Curtis 952.249.4627 H mcurtis©ci.orono.mn.us From: Kelly - Schoborg Land Services, Inc. [mailto:kelly©schoborgland.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11:13 AM To: Melanie Curtis Subject: Prelim Plat for Willi Abbott Melanie, I don't believe you've sent me the preliminary plat requirements for Willi Abbot's project on Willow Road. Please send me whatever information you can. Thank you. Kelly Brouwer Schoborg Land Services, Inc. 763-972-3221 kelly(a�SchoborgLand.com 2 • • NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 13-3595 PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4620 DATE OF NOTICE: 8 April 2013 TO: Broadway Group LLC COPIES: Attn: Willi Abbott 1000 South Brown Rd Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF REQUEST: Sketch Plan DATE OF MEETING: February 19, 2013 The Orono Planning Commission reviewed a sketch plan for properties including 2350 Watertown Road. No formal motion was made; the Planning Commission offered the following recommendations: • A conservation design master plan must be developed to assist in determining the appropriate lot layout prior to submittal of a preliminary plat application. • Delineation of all wetlands should be conducted. • A master grading plan should be proposed to determine building pad locations and elevations as well as address any stormwater concerns. • The official meeting Minutes are enclosed for further reference. • A pre-application meeting with Planning staff is required prior to submittal of a rezoning application (to RPUD) and preliminary plat application. If you have questions, please contact Planning&Zoning Coordinator, Melanie Curtis at mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4627. • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. l i van ce and conditional use per . ,s 'ect to a covenant ' g d in the title of the p petty and of r Staff recommenda ' ns. VOT . Ayes 5,N 6. #13- 6 C OF ORONO,ZONIN TUDY—ACCESSORY USE STRUCTURE This ite ollows Item o. 7. 7. #13-3595 WILLIA BBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350 WATERTOWN ROAD AND PID 34-118-23-33-0055, SKETCH PLAN REVIEW,7:40 P.M.—8:22 P.M. William Abbott,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated this sketch plan contemplates a rezoning and subdivision to create five new 'A to 1 acre buildable lots and a private road from the original 4.8 plus acres. All of the lots will be served by a new private road with a cul-de-sac off of Willow Drive and will be served by city sewer and water. The proposed subdivision is in conformity with the guiding of this area for single-family rural residential development at a maximum density of two to three units per acre. The proposed plan result in lots between 0.5 to 1.1 acres and reflects a 35-foot front and rear and 15-foot side setbacks. A 25-foot side setback from Willow Drive is also proposed. The proposed single-family development is consistent with existing development in the surrounding neighborhood. There are two existing home sites to the south on larger lots. The property is located in the RR-1B, one family rural residential district,which allows for single-family rural residential uses with a minimum lot size of two dry buildable acres. However,the properties have been included in the area and have been reguided in the 2000-2020 and 2008-2030 Community Management Plans to allow for low-medium density of 2 to 3 units per acre. The overall density of the development is proposed at 1.25 units per gross acre. In order to accomplish the density proposed,the properties must be rezoned from RR-1B to Residential Planned Unit Development District. The development should be expected to conform to the RPUD district standards. The site consists of two separate parcels, the westerly of the two being a vacant field abutting Willow drive,the easterly being a wooded lot containing an existing home which accesses currently off of Watertown road via a long,flag driveway. A creek cuts diagonally through the property from the northwest to the southeast. It appears that some of the area surrounding the creek is mapped as a Manage 2 wetland. When weather permits, a wetland delineation will have to be conducted and shown on the survey. In addition, a 25-foot buffer and 20-foot buffer setback will be required. A copy of the delineation report and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval of the delineation will be required at the time of preliminary plat application. The property is situated generally along the east side of Willow Drive just north of Watertown Road. Access to the property will be via a road and cul-de-sac off of Willow Drive. The proposed lots layout as follows: Page 14 of 23 MINUTES OF THE • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. 1. Proposed Lot 1 will have 0.71 acres total area. There is an unknown area of wetland on this property. This lot will be a corner lot. The front lot line will be the private road frontage. There is 77 feet of frontage proposed along the newly created road. This lot is shown to have 350 feet of frontage along Willow drive. There appears to be an approximate 100'x 50' buildable envelope available and a 2080 square foot home is shown. A vegetated berm is proposed within the 25- foot setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. 2. Lot 2 is proposed to have 38 feet in width at the cul-de-sac and approximately 50 feet at the principal building setback. The suggested home site is set back about 80 feet from the cul-de-sac. It is 90 feet wide at the suggested building site and is proposed to be 0.65 acres. There is an unknown area of wetland on this property. Not shown on the concept plan within proposed Lots 1 and 2 is an easement for the existing sewer line that extends across those lots from Willow Drive to proposed Lot 3. The conceptual stormwater pond location appears to potentially interfere with this sewer line. Whether a formal easement for that line exists must be established. 3. Lot 3 is proposed as a flat lot which has 25 feet in width at the cul-de-sac and 135 feet in total width within the building envelope. This lot is also proposed to have two separate easements: a 20-foot wide existing utility easement containing the Hackberry neighborhood sewer line connection to the Long Lake sewer system, running from west to east and down the west lot line, and a 20-foot wide drainage easement following the creek. The drainage easement cuts the building envelope in half. Curtis noted flat lots are not permitted. The City allows front lot/back lot layouts with special provisions outlined in City Code. 4. Lot 4 is proposed to be 1.08 acre in area and 48.77 feet of frontage. It has an existing home and is proposed to access off of the cul-de-sac. The utility and drainage easements from proposed Lot 3 continue on to this lot. 5. Lot 5 is proposed to contain 0.55 acres in area and 51.9 feet of frontage on the cul-de-sac. a 2,128 square foot home is shown situated in the proposed building envelope. 6. Lot 6 is a corner lot with 83 feet of frontage on the proposed road/cul-de-sac and 235 feet on Willow Drive. A vegetated berm is proposed within the 25-foot setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. The applicant is proposing a 50-foot wide outlot to create a private road with a 100-foot cul-de-sac which conforms to the requirements within the subdivision ordnance for a local private road. The proposed paved width of the private road is shown as 25 feet where the Code requires 24 feet for three to six homes. The cul-de-sac is proposed to have a 70-foot paved diameter,where City Code requires an 80- foot paved diameter. Given the fact that six homes will be served from the proposed roadway and given the shortness of the proposed roadway, parking for guests will be at a premium. Parking on Willow Drive should be avoided. This will not only better facilitate parking but will allow additional options for snow storage. Page 15 of 23 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. It is important to note that here should be a platted corridor to the property to the immediate southeast for potential future road connection to serve that property. This would allow for a future through road from Willow to Watertown. This would provide more options for future development of the property to the southeast and ultimately make for more efficient road maintenance. A Rural Oasis Study and Conservation Design Master plan is required for this project and it should be submitted with the preliminary plat application. Any platting that takes place would require the recording of easements and buffers for the wetland. The property is subject to the standard perimeter, drainage and utility easements around all property boundaries in the plat as well as Conservation and Flowage Easements over the delineated wetlands and wetland buffers. Conservation easements should be provided to protect the views and natural features identified with the comprehensive Conservation Design Master planning process. The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Sewer service is available to these properties via the Hackberry system which discharges to the Long Lake system. Water service is available from the Long Lake system subject to Long Lake approval. Sewer and water fees will be due to Long Lake, subject to the provisions of the Glendale Cove Sewer and Water Agreement. The developer will be responsible for installation of sewer and water laterals to serve the development. Per past City practice,there will not be a connection charge to Orono for sewer or water but Long Lake connection charges will apply. Staff has developed a series of sketches depicting options for consideration. Sketch 1 puts a slight curve in the entry from Willow and also includes a future 50-foot angled corridor from the cul-de-sac to the northwest corner of the property to the southeast. This layout also reduces the length of the outlot driveway to Lot 3 to around 100 feet. Gaffron stated Sketch 2 avoids platting a permanent cul-de-sac and makes use of temporary cul-de-sac easements. This type of layout has been used on occasion in the past. The benefit is that if/when the road is extended to serve the next property,the temporary cul-de-sac can be physically removed and the underlying land can revert back to the appropriate owners via extinguishing the easement rather than vacating a platted road. This option also saves on future survey costs. Both Sketches 1 and 2 end up putting a corridor connection to the next property right at the northwest corner of the parcel,which may be awkward and may not be a reasonable place to connect into that property since you will end up with either a right angle turn or some triangular shaped lots. Sketch 3 shows the cul-de-sac further to the east and north and rearranges the layout so that Lots 1 and 2 become single lots and would access directly to the cul-de-sac. Lots 2 and 3 would also access directly to the cul-de-sac. Lots 4 and 6 would access directly on to the private road but instead of having a connection at the very northwest corner of the neighboring property, it would be moved it south either to the very south end of Lot 5 or between Lot 5 and 4 and 6. Gaffron stated conceptually this is an idea that could work. The potential is that you create the corridor between Lots 5 and 6 with the expectation that that lot is either going to access the driveway off of Willow Drive or the future road. It also forces there to be two new roads or connections off of Willow Drive. Page 16 of 23 • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. Landgraver asked why Staff is confident that that lot will be developed. Gaffron stated in his view every developable property in Orono will someday be developed. If those potential corridors are not dealt with now, it becomes difficult to deal with in the future. Typically the City does not like to maintain cul-de-sacs. Gaffron noted Glendale Cove became a public road and has a cul-de-sac. The development is an RPUD at roughly the same density as what is being proposed in this application. As it relates to Stone Bay, it was developed for high density but it also created narrow private roads within the development. In this case,the City is looking at a road system to serve single-family homes and not twin homes or townhomes. If there is going to be a connection to the next property,the City should put in place a useable road with some idea of how that other property may be developed in the future. Gaffron stated it is possible to plat a 50-foot road down the western side of the property but that he is not sure how it would develop. Schoenzeit asked if that would become a public road. Gaffron stated the City for the last 30 years has required that the connecting roads be platted and have had dualing cul-de-sacs with the connector corridor. Neighbors like cul-de-sacs that do not connect on through. If the City is going to be asked to take that road over in the future,the City would require that connection be made in order to not have to deal with the cul-de-sacs. Gaffron stated he would have every expectation that the next developer will want to come in off of Watertown Road and have their own private road. The question becomes at what point in the future should it become a through road. Gaffron indicated these sketches are all just possible options and that the wetland delineation will provide some better guidance. The need for storm water ponding will also provide some direction. There are a number of unresolved issues at this point that Staff cannot define exactly how this development should be laid out but it is important the City have enough of a road serving this development so parking issues do not develop. Lemke asked why the City would want a public cul-de-sac as opposed to a private cul-de-sac. Gaffron stated in this case they are proposing single-family homes and it is going to end up at roughly 1/3 to1/2-acre zoning. There are very few areas of the City at that density that have private roads. Gaffron stated he has no compelling reason why it should be public versus private,but if it does become public, the City needs to make sure it is to the point that it can be extended in the future if it becomes necessary. Leskinen asked how big the adjoining parcel is. Curtis indicated it is 3.52 acres. William Abbott, Applicant, stated he grew up in the Orono area and observed a lot of different development. Abbott stated he sees an entirely different housing need at the current time rather than what has traditionally been a need for 5-acre lots and larger homes. Abbott stated he is seeing in recent home sales that people are moving into smaller homes on smaller lots. Page 17 of 23 • MINUT • ES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. Abbott stated when he saw this property,he thought this would be an opportunity to do something to meet the needs of people wanting to move into Orono that are unable to afford the cost of a larger home. Abbott stated current home prices for the larger lots keep people out of Orono and they are trying to create a neighborhood of smaller lots and smaller homes. To create that market,they need to look at costs and how to keep them low. It makes sense to look at future development, but by putting in a shorter road and creating less of a scar with the paved road,we create less impact and less expense associated with the development. Orono is looking for that type of development and this development will help meet that need. Schoenzeit asked what the land portion would cost. Abbott stated Lots 1 and 2 would be around 160,Lots 5 and 6 would be in the 150 range, and approximately 175 for the one-acre pieces. Abbott stated it got to the point where there was a saturation of larger homes but now there is more of a balance. Home prices have come down due to the lack of demand. People are looking for more traditional homes. Abbott indicated they are also attempting to provide some variety in lot sizes. Schoenzeit asked if he has an alternate suggestion to the road connection. Abbott stated as it relates to Sketch 3, as long as they have to create an easement,they could create the easement in a different spot. Abbott stated if you put the easement in the location proposed by Mike Gaffron,you will need another piece of land. If you leave the lots as they are and place the easement on the other side,the lot sizes will decrease slightly but will not impact them a ton. Gaffron indicated it would also avoid Lots 4 and 6 from being through lots. Gaffron stated there is a lot of good logic for that proposal. Gaffron asked if the existing house will stay. Abbott indicated at this point they are not sure. If the house were to go away,having the land with the drainage easement there might be a better way to lay it out. Gaffron stated the City wants to avoid having a bunch of lots all having separate access on to Willow Road. Schoenzeit asked if it would be okay if they did the 50/50 split with the Kelly property. Gaffron stated in the past under the City's subdivision codes you would plat half of the road on one side and the other property on the other side would plat the other side. The City has not done that in a number of years but this may be a case where the City should perhaps consider that. Schoenzeit stated since this is a new development,the City would like to see it code compliant as much as possible. Schoenzeit asked whether there will be ample parking on each of the lots. Abbott stated they are not creating the bigger road to serve as parking and that each lot should have plenty of parking. Abbott noted along Willow Drive there is ample parking for special occasions. Page 18 of 23 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday,February 19,2013 6:30 o'clock p.m. Schoenzeit stated with half a dozen homes, you will have a greater percentage of them using the street for parking. Abbott stated if you took out all the driveway cuts, you are left with a little over 200 linear feet and it would allow some parking on the roadway. If Staff feels parking will be a huge issue, Abbott indicated they could come up with another plan. Landgraver stated what happens is that people will use Hackberry Park to park and that he suspects that if there is a 4th of July party, they might use the park and then walk across the street. Gaffron stated you also need to take into account snow storage with cul-de-sacs. Schoenzeit commented the Planning Commission typically considers parking in their applications and that they should not underestimate the need for pre-planned parking. Leskinen commented in her view it is a good looking development and this type of housing is needed in that area. Leskinen stated in her view the parking is a concern and needs to be addressed up front than trying to address it down the road. Schoenzeit stated one of the benefits to the development would be the extra parking spaces. Abbott asked how difficult it would be to relocate the creek closer to the back or in another spot. Gaffron stated in his view it would be difficult since there are wetland issues. Gaffron concurred the creek is in an awkward location but that trying to change it significantly will not be simple given the wetland regulations. Berg noted there are utility easements in that area as well. Abbott stated the egg-shaped area is thought to be a cattail pond and that they are considering that area for the storm water pond. Abbott indicated he is not sure if that will be allowed. The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. 6. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO,ZONING S ' 1 —ACCESSORY USES AND STR.CTURES, 8:22 P.M.—8:43 P.M. Gaffron sta-.. Staff and City Council have e •ressed a concern th.. he City's provis;ens do not adequately reg .to an accessory use or st d cture. The Council, back ovember. adopted a moratorium on accessory uses . •. structures not lis -d in the code, and a study is unde ay t•`look at what kind of standards should be in : ace. The m• atorium is in effect until August 13, 201 '. Staff is in the early stages of the process to re,'-w th• existing standards. Tonight's initial discussion '. go '_to focus on a review of the perfor -once standards the are in place and also take a look at th• e items t it are not listed in the zoning coy`- as accessory uses bu ire generally permitted".,• incidental". Th. e things could be somethi-g like flagpoles, mailboxes,_.rden boxes and garden tr• ises. They are corn en, incidental items t-at people see and people expect t - can just do or have. Page 19 of • • 7 To: Chair Schoenzeit, Planning Commission Members Jessica Loftus, City Administrator / From: Melanie Curtis, Planning &Zoning Coordinator — /"� / ( Date: 15 February 2013 Subject: #13-3595, Broadway Group LLC,2350 Watertown Road (plus PID 34-118-23-33-0055) Sketch Plan—Oliver Hill Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District(2 acre/200' width) CMP Guiding: 2 - 3 units per acre Existing Lot Area: 4.8±gross acres (net of Willow Drive)—wetland area unknown at this time Application Summary: This sketch plan contemplates a re-zoning and subdivision to create five new,%to 1 acre buildable lots and a private road from the original 4.8±acres (exclusive of 33' r-o-w for Willow Drive). 1. Lot 1 is proposed to contain 0.71 acre; 2. Lot 2 is proposed to contain 0.65 acre; 3. Lot 3 is proposed to contain 1.09 acres; 4. Lot 4 is proposed to contain 1.08 acres; 5. Lot 5 is proposed to contain 0.55 acres; and 6. Lot 6 is proposed to contain 0.5 acre. 7. Cul-de-sac road is proposed to contain 0.2 acre. It will be necessary to re-zone the property from RR-1B to RPUD to accomplish the proposed density. All proposed lot areas are listed by total gross acreage; the wetlands on the property have not yet been delineated. All of the lots would be served by a new private road with cul-de-sac extending easterly from Willow Drive. All lots are proposed to be served by City sewer and water. Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, this memo will serve as a foundation for the Planning Commission's discussion with the applicant to bring to light potential issues for discussion and issues to be addressed when the formal preliminary plat application is submitted. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Development Narrative Exhibit C. Concept Plan Survey Exhibit D. Aerial Photo Exhibit E. City Code Excerpts Exhibit F. Summary of Estimated Fees Exhibit G. 2013 Fee Schedule (excerpts) Exhibit H. Glendale Cove Sewer and Water Agreement of January 2012 Exhibit I. 2008-2030 CMP Map 3B-6: 2030 Land Use Plan Exhibit/. 2008-2030 CMP Map 4E-3: Comprehensive Trail System Plan Exhibit K. Staff Sketch 1 Exhibit L. Staff Sketch 2 Exhibit M. Staff Sketch 3 • • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 2 of 6 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Conformity with 2010-2030 Orono Community Management Plan The proposed subdivision is in conformity with the guiding of this area for single family rural residential development at a maximum density of 2 to 3 units per acre. The proposed plan results in lots between 0.5 to 1.1 acres and reflects 35-foot front and rear; and 15-foot side setbacks. A 25-foot side setback from Willow Drive is also proposed. Relationship to Surrounding Development The proposed single-family development with 1/2 to 1-plus acre lot sizes is consistent with existing development in the surrounding neighborhood. Glendale Cove is just north; the Hackberry neighborhood to the west and Long Lake to the east all with lots ranging from 0.3 acre to 0.5 acre. There are two existing home sites to the south on 1.1 and 3.5 acre lots. Overall the proposal is consistent in density with the surrounding development. Conformity with Zoning District Lot Requirements The property is located in the RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential District, which allows for single family rural residential uses with a minimum lot size of two dry buildable acres. However the properties have been included in the area re-guided in the 200-2020 and 2008-2030 Community Management Plans to allow for low-medium density (2 to 3 units per acre).The overall density of the development is proposed at 1.25 units per gross acre. In order to accomplish the density proposed, the properties must be re- zoned from RR-1B (Residential 2 acre minimum) to Residential Planned Unit Development District (RPUD).The development should be expected to conform to the RPUD District standards. General Site Characteristics The site consists of two separate parcels, the westerly of the two being a vacant field abutting Willow Drive, the easterly being a wooded lot containing an existing home which accesses currently off Watertown Road via a long, flag driveway. A creek cuts diagonally through the property from the northwest to the south east. It appears that some of the area surrounding the creek is mapped as a Manage 2 wetland. When weather permits, a wetland delineation will have to be conducted and the edge shown on the survey in addition to the required 25 foot buffer and 20 foot buffer setback. A copy of the delineation report and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval of the delineation will be required at the time of preliminary plat application. Lot Layout and Lot Standards The property is situated generally along the east side of Willow Drive just north of Watertown Road. Access to the property will be via a road and cul-de-sac off of Willow Drive. The proposed lots lay out as follows: Proposed Lot 1: Proposed Lot 1 will have 0.71± acres total area; there is an unknown area of wetland on this property. This lot will be a corner lot. The front lot line will be the private road frontage. There is 77± of frontage proposed along the newly created road; this lot is shown to have 350± feet of frontage along Willow Drive. There appears to be an approximate 100' x 50' buildable envelope available and a 2,080 square foot home is shown. A vegetated berm is proposed within the 25 foot setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. Proposed Lot 2: Lot 2 is proposed to have 38± feet in width at the cul-de-sac, and approximately • • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 3 of 6 50 feet at the principal building setback. The suggested home site is set back about 80 feet from the cul-de-sac. It is 90 feet wide at the suggested building site and is proposed to be 0.65 acre in area; there is an unknown area of wetland on this property. Not shown on the Concept Plan within proposed Lots 1 and 2 is an easement for the existing sewer line that extends across those lots from Willow Drive to proposed Lot 3. The conceptual stormwater pond location appears to potentially interfere with this sewer line. Whether a formal easement for that line exists must be established. Proposed Lot 3: Lot 3 is proposed as a flag lot* which has 25± feet in width at the cul-de-sac and 135 feet in total width within the building envelope. This lot is also proposed to have two separate easements: a 20-foot wide existing utility easement containing the Hackberry neighborhood sewer line connection to the Long Lake sewer system, running from west to east and down the west lot line and a 20- foot wide drainage easement following the creek. The drainage easement cuts the building envelope in half. *Flag lots are not permitted. The City allows front lot/back lot layouts with special provisions outlined in City Code Sections 78-1370 & 82-256. Proposed Lot4 Lot 4 is proposed to be 1.08 acre in area and 48.77 feet of frontage; it has an existing home and is proposed to access off of the cul-de-sac. The utility and drainage easements from proposed Lot 3 continue onto this lot. Proposed Lot 5 Lot 5 is proposed to contain 0.55 acres in area and 51.9 feet of frontage on the cul-de-sac. A 2,128 square foot home is shown situated in the proposed building envelope. Proposed Lot 6 Lot 6 is a corner lot with 83 feet of frontage on the proposed road/cul-de-sac and 235 feet on Willow Drive. A vegetated berm is proposed within the 25 foot setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. Road Layout and Standards The applicant is proposing a 50 foot wide outlot to create a private road with a 100 foot cul-de-sac which conforms to the requirements within the Subdivision Ordinance for a local private road. The proposed paved width of the private road is shown as 25 feet where the Code requires 24 feet for 3 to 6 homes. The cul-de-sac is proposed to have a 70 foot paved diameter, where City Code requires an 80' paved diameter. Given that 6 homes will be served from the proposed roadway, and given the shortness of the proposed roadway, parking for guests will be at a premium, and parking on Willow Drive should be avoided; so the road and cul-de-sac design should not be reduced in size/width from the current code standards. The cul-de-sac should extend further into the site if possible. This will not only better facilitate parking but allow additional options for snow storage. It is important to note that there should be a platted corridor to the property to the immediate southeast for potential future road connection to serve that property. This would allow for a future Ill • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 4 of 6 through road from Willow to Watertown. This would provide more options for future development of the property to the southeast, and ultimately make for more efficient road maintenance. At the time of preliminary plat the proposed plans will be provided to the Long Lake Fire Chief/Fire Marshal for review. The Fire Marshal recently reviewed a preliminary plat for a different property and provided the following comment: According to Appendix D of the 2007 Minnesota State Fire Code, regarding Fire Apparatus Access Roads, a minimum of a 26-foot wide paved road and a 96-foot diameter cul-de-sac is required, or the homes served must be equipped with fire suppression sprinklers. As these review comments were based on an entirely different project they are included in this report purely for academic purposes. The project may require modifications to meet the Fire Marshal's approval. Rural Oasis, Conservation Design &Woodland Impacts The Rural Oasis Study and Conservation Design Master Planning process has been formulated to help determine on a case-by-case basis what natural values should be preserved. This project triggers the need for the developer to conduct and submit a conservation design plan. A Conservation Design Master Plan and Report should be submitted with the preliminary plat application for review. Wetlands on Site and/or Impacted According to the City's wetland map a wetland exists on the property primarily in the area surrounding the creek/drainageway. Due to winter conditions a wetland delineation cannot be completed; a wetland delineation should be conducted and the edge shown on the survey in addition to the required buffer and 20 foot buffer setback. A copy of the delineation report and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval of the delineation will be required at the time of preliminary plat. Establishment of wetland buffers and buffer setbacks will be triggered for the lots containing wetlands. Wetland buffer signage should be purchased by the developer for installation along buffer areas and where the buffer intersects lot lines. Road Improvements and/or Easements Needed The City requires standard perimeter, drainage and utility easements around all property boundaries in the plat as well as Conservation and Flowage Easements over the delineated wetlands and wetland buffers. Conservation easements should be provided to protect the views and natural features identified with the comprehensive Conservation Design Master planning process. Stormwater and Drainage Improvements The developer will be required to provide stormwater management facilities on the site. Additionally, the development is subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, which should be based on an equivalence to the standard fee for the 1/2-acre zoning district given the lot sizes proposed. That fee is $5,765 per gross acre, and at 4.8 gross acres (net of Willow Drive r-o-w) amounts to$27,672. Park/Trail Easement/Fees or Dedication Needed The 2008-2030 CMP Comprehensive Trail System Map (Exhibit J) indicates that a future trail is planned on Willow Drive which stops just short of the subject property. The Park Fee is determined as 8% of the fair market value of the land being subdivided, with a minimum of$3250 per dwelling unit or a maximum of$5,550 per residential dwelling unit. The Hennepin County Assessor will review the value upon receipt of a preliminary plat application. As there will be five new dwelling sites, the Park Fee will be between $16,250 and $27,750. • • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 5 of 6 Utility Locations and Availability The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); sewer service is available to these properties via the Hackberry system which discharges to the Long Lake system. Water service is available from the Long Lake system subject to Long Lake approval. Sewer and Water Fees will be due to Long Lake, subject to the provisions of the Glendale Cove Sewer and Water Agreement of January 2012, which defines the applicant's properties as Category 3 Properties (see Exhibit H). The developer will be responsible for installation of sewer and water laterals to serve the development. Per past City practice there will not be a connection charge to Orono for sewer or water, but Long Lake connection charges will apply. It is important to confirm whether there is an easement for the existing sewer in proposed Lots 1 and 2. If not, such an easement will become a plat requirement. Issues for Discussion Access & Layout Options: There are a number of potential options to accomplish a more functional cul- de-sac layout and road connection to the east. Staff has developed a series of sketches depicting options for consideration. Sketch 1 puts a slight curve in the entry from Willow, and then includes a future 50' angled corridor from the cul-de-sac to the NW corner of the property to the SE. This layout also reduces the length of the outlot driveway to Lot 3 to around 100 feet. A second option is shown in Sketch 2. This option avoids platting a permanent cul-de-sac and makes use of temporary cul-de-sac easements. This type of layout has been used on occasion in the past; the benefit is that if/when the road is extended to serve the next property, the temporary cul-de-sac can be physically removed and the underlying land can revert back to the appropriate owners via extinguishing the easement rather than vacating a platted road. This option also saves on future survey costs. Either of the options shown in Staff Sketches 1 and 2 have some impact on lot shapes and potential house locations. Also, both fix the future through road connection at the very NW corner of the adjacent property, which potentially would make for a less than optimum future connection point. Staff Sketch 3 suggests a rearrangement of lot lines so that 5 lots access via the cul-de-sac and 1 accesses directly from Willow Drive or from a future road that could be located along the north or south boundary of what is shown as lot 5. This has positive and negative aspects. It would potentially provide a better future road location for developing the property to the east. But the second road corridor takes up more real estate and, if located between lot 5 and lots 4/6, lots 4/6 become 'through' lots, a negative aspect. Wetland Delineation & Conservation Design: The applicant should conduct a wetland delineation as well as prepare a conservation design analysis so the site can be more comprehensively analyzed with the preliminary plat application. The wetlands or other natural features may affect lot layout. Miscellaneous: 1. In any of the proposals, the road corridors are directly across from existing homes which front on Willow, and the headlights from cars leaving the site could become an annoyance. • • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 6 of 6 2. Stormwater ponding will have to occur somewhere on site, and should occur within an easement and/or outlot. 3. If developed similar to Glendale Cove, the new road would be a public road, based on the density. 4. The long driveway corridor to access Lot 3 on applicant's layout should be avoided if possible. It puts a driveway into the front yard of lots 2 and 4. Staff sketch 3 avoids this issue via the major change to overall site layout. 5. Applicants should identify their intent for the remnant corridor extending to Watertown Road from the easterly parcel. Staff Recommendation The goal of this review is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City ordinances and how they affect the proposed plat, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. The above memo walks through the CMP and Code requirements for the proposed plat and should provide direction to the developer regarding the plat. During the sketch plan review, the developer should advise whether any of the issues noted present particular problems, so that those issues can be discussed and addressed by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission should review each topic and identify any issues to which the developer should pay special attention. The Staff Sketches should be referenced and used as a tool to examine the variety of options for lot layout yet to be explored. Planning Commission should walk through the report and discuss any potential issues with the developer and give direction where necessary. • , PC Exhibit A City of Orono Subdivision Application Street Address: 7 2750 Kelley Parkway Application# �� SON(' Orono, MN 55356 Date Received: 01 l Z�� i?j Staff: ,I/�� Main: 952-249-4600 Application Fee: .20-'' fax: 952-249 4616 pp �t.k,sH01-'' Mailing Address: Escrow#&$ �I�� V,,L�p'�,'� P.O.Box 66 4 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Notes: PROPERTY INFORMATION: t Site Address: �.. �c� L,Jr, ^E�c.)-\ 0,4,-- 4 �, Ldn6 LS 5 e),21 nn Lc);'6,7 r._ Property Identification Number(PIN): 3 1.-(Ik—Z3-33— )O5 4 if 1/?' --2 3 ,--53 - 00S's (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey) Date Property Acquired (month/year): 0 Abstract 0 Torrens (Please check one) Present use of property: XResidential; number of Units 0 Other(specify) Zoning District: APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status requiredfor each interested party) Name(s): /��0_,-Oci L11 L.(,� Lo r It ) (o6o 1,t Phone (home : Phone cell): (,/7_ -7 S/--7 !77 Address: /rOO S o :3 r u,'t AA._ co c.i za p, 14'1 N 5 --a) Email: (A.3 j l \; LAno :\--- t°v' c%4 \ , co,,A Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Co lete legal names and marital status r gg fired for each interested party) Name(s): 6�a c,c 21 L Lr� t.A.w; \\ 4-b 7 8— Phone (home): Phone (cell): 1/Z `7S ( I n Address: Email: L.i ;\ . ,' ez bLo a e_, r^c; \ 4 Co"1/1 Fax: EXISTING LAND USE: Number of Tax Parcels: Z• Development Size: 3- 11 Acres Dry Land •C Acres Wet Land 1-/. 1 Acres TOTAL, all parcels PROPOSED LAND USE: 0 Division for Tax Purposes ❑ Lot Line Rearrangement Only(no new building sites) RECEIVED'Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Existing Units: New Units: € y JAN 3 0 2013 Total Units: . Proposed Gross Density . .1--- Units per l acres CITY OF ORONO Minimum Lot Size: Square feet dry buildable land Proposed Use(check) /Residential ❑ Other(specify) Minimum Material Required for Complete Preliminary Minimum Material Required for a Complete Final Plat Plat Application Application 1. Payment of fees 1. Payment of fees 2. Completed application form. 2. Signed certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. plat. 4. Certified Property Owners list 3. Title opinion. 5. A list of any other persons you wish notified of this 4. Easements, covenants, etc. application 5. Developers Agreement 1 , - il 5, 6. Letter of Credit i • S APPLICATION FEES: (Planning &Zoning Coordinator to [X] those which apply) Application Base Fees: Cost Total Sketch Plan Review(Class I, II & Ill) $350* Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $700* Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $700* Preliminary Subdivision Application, plus $30/lot(Class III & all non-residential) $850* Final Plat Application (Class Ill) $700* Park Fees (to be determined per Section 82-227) TBD Legal and Engineering Review As incurred Renewal of Class I, II & Ill Subdivision $350 Renewal of Lot Line Rearrangement $350 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Special Improvement Fees: Cost Total Proposed Private Roads, plus $.50/lineal foot $650* + Proposed Public Roads, plus $.50/lineal foot $950* + Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $950* Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension, plus $25/stub $275* + Proposed Watermain Extension, plus$25/stub $275* + Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $250* On-site System, Site Evaluation Review(applicable to rural subdivision) $60/per lot _x$60 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Flexible Application Fees/Miscellaneous Fees Cost Total Variance $700* Vacation of Public Road $100 per benefiting property ($700 minimum per appl) Varies Easement Vacation Associated with a Subdivision $200* PRD Application with Subdivision, $35/dwelling unit x$35 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Total Escrow Amount TOTAL DUE APPLICANT AND/OR OWNER: • Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department • Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do,so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. Owner's Signature: i'^P���r Date: 1 (39 /3 Owner's Signature: Date: Applicant's Signature: Date: RFCEIVED Applicant's Signature: e: JAN 3 0 21113 III CITY OF ORONO • • PC Exhibit B RECEIVED JAN 307013 Orono City Planning Members, CITY OF MOW This letter is in reference to a proposed subdivision, Oliver Hill, located at the northeast corner of Willow Road and Watertown Road (with one existing home, owned by the Martin's, to remain on the corner). My name is Willi Abbott and together with my wife Kimberli, I would like to develop a currently unoccupied piece of land in the community. We have worked together designing, building and remodeling properties since 1990. We are a small, local group working with local tradesmen, most native to the area. We are personally involved with each step of every property from planning and design to building and all the way through the marketing process. For this neighborhood we would personally create the development and be the exclusive builder so as to keep control of the plans intended design and integrity. I grew up in Orono, on Brown Road and attended Orono schools K-12. My wife attended school in the Wayzata district. We moved away for a few years after college, but after starting a family we realized Orono was where we wanted to raise our children (they are currently in 5th, 8th and 10th grade at the Orono schools). Our latest project was a near total rebuild in Long Lake on Grand Avenue (see attached photos). It is very representative of the size, style and quality that we build. While marketing this project we realized the demand for (and lack of product) of homes like this in a similar price range. We sold the house before it was finished and are currently working with six more parties that are looking for a similar home (and would have liked to have purchased this one). Some families are moving into Orono because of the schools and the surrounding small community, while other families are moving back to Orono to retire or because they grew up here and know it is the best place to raise their children. In addition, many existing community members wish to downsize without giving up the amenities and quality construction they are used to. And still more families want to stay in the community but are looking to purchase a more updated and family • S friendly home. These homebuyers are looking for smaller affordable contemporary homes in family neighborhoods. What is evident is the lack of updated and or high quality finished homes of this size and price range in our community. This issue has been addressed in the Orono 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The plan acknowledges that the city will need to allow for approximately 40 new housing units per year through 2030 to accommodate the population growth speculated for the City of Orono. It states, as its second most pressing need, that within the cities urban areas there is a great need for a "wider range of housing options for middle income residents, such as those who grew up in Orono and would like to raise a family here, but cannot find suitably priced homes." In response to this, one of the cities goals is to "make land available for development at a density that might support moderately priced housing at or below the $350,000 to $500,000 range." Research from the plan shows that the northern part of Orono has the best land options and specifically points to an area along Willow Drive north of Watertown Road being reguided at an urban SFR density of 2- 3 units per acre. This area would afford a development to complement the Hackberry Hill neighborhood as well as the abutting residential neighborhoods in Long Lake of similar density. We have the ability and would like the opportunity to create something to help fulfill this need. The style, design, size and affordability of our homes are a great fit for this community. We would like to develop this parcel of land and be the exclusive builder for all lots. This will ensure adherence to our overall concept and plans as submitted, which includes maintaining the character and feel of the surrounding neighborhoods. The properties that we build are typically between 1800 and 2500 square feet and sell for around $400,000. While most are cottage or prairie style, each home has a unique look and floor plan allowing for more character in the neighborhood. We are very mindful of the surrounding homes and neighborhoods during our design phase. Our goal is to build for the demand while staying true to the feel and style of existing nearby properties. RECEIVED 5 • BAN 3 0 2013 ClfiY OF ORONO • • RECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO We carefully custom design our homes with family living in mind. Most floor plans include an open layout, 3-4 bedrooms, main level powder room, mudroom with built-in lockers, 2 family rooms, a fireplace and a master suite. Our homes are finished with a design and quality you would only expect to find in much higher priced homes. To extend outdoor living we incorporate large decks and patios around the homes. We also take pride in the homes exterior by preparing a custom landscape design to maximize privacy and beauty. In this proposal our finished product would be a small neighborhood created with the character and lifestyle modern families are looking for that seamlessly blends into the established neighborhoods that surround it. The design of Oliver Hill follows the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan for developers to be "conscious of the neighborhood, the site and the environment." We hold ourselves to high standards and take pride in what we do. We value integrity and believe it shows in the homes and neighborhoods that we create. We have attached a concept plan for the neighborhood development as well as sketches and photos of homes and floor plans that are representative of what we would like to build in Oliver Hill. Also included, as stated above, are photos of the home we just built and sold on Grand Avenue in Long Lake. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best, Willi and Kimberli Abbott PRo f a� S�-► N D �.f-fiD�1 G 2- OFf-�O M TT <UU 11�1 r /�( '' c�U Ut t.t� � � ,' e '' Vie ' liL.,, 'ir v `* ��� , (.�, .,,,i 1 111 101111 � a n c 6 , , .r y��.1,IF t A. 'd 7 ,, ,, :' „, , , -,' ...„, :. . ."..0-- 1.11 i i i' ' ': , .... ilia, •,:.1, ,,.. .,, ,..,,,, i,.• g 40ialitor' . : ., ", .,,::-'..': ' l'*- -- -- -- - ' .'' bow .a=, :s - ,r * • ii f ► I ■s1 I . . . 1.. ^ ...... Al • RECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO ExPMI L.aoaf FLAciNi D -s1G. Fof - Cl ) .-{-OMB 5 To DE- 131AI LT- IN '"oL-J v:12. 11 ILL .'.... 7 c.,PT IAL DEC" DINING MAArf'[.R [ . — ....r F"..... 1, r . ---lir----H BE DECOhl Hi I:FInf).,.La..tii..t I , HID ROOM F°TR.. Mein Floor Upper Floor e e L UA$TER BEDRCX:h� DINING ROOM aEOROCU itPFN its Rt;r;,^. (♦ M.--; GARA,..F / BEDROOM El t r e e Mato Floor Upper Floor RECEIVED JAN 302013 CITY OF ORONO 5-1(kOPL--0,1-00 F pLps-Nt DEzstON FOR (2) 1-ko6As -Co v7e- ItAll-1-- IN " pl,IVr -- 1411--- II • . .., . • _ 0101,110.110111.00•0110 T arri KiTcH.FN nIN NC, LIVING ROOM BEC130,7M MASTER F.,F0P.00‘.1 II [------Lw ----- *01 I :1AliA(.1- LOrT •,'Mr( r"" . ... ... I _ . . . f,,1. , i, :, Uppor Floor r • - r ........ , kif.411'-v MAEDSPtIER Ei —1 ....1 r- r--- I.. 1 t;A,AT Prc,f.,1 . L lemommo 111...... i . • XM _... Main Floor Upper Floor --, RECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO xPN-M P I- OO FL<N P SI(si.F bI C3) 1 -OM To it-1t L-T- IN " c uV it-LP Hj M ter t DINING ROOM, ,IMSIER rzr,14 - bTCHEN 9'd'J i,'d' wIC L ■■ 13��3•�4'a• GREAT RO N . REC+FC�w+ih ���, Hsi • II �.� DEN BERCOM l" ' (OVElRP to t'�7L'c1.' ' 14'4ni+" a a , Main Floor t pper- Floor RECEIVED rr' 5 9 JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO GRAND AVENUE, 7NG LAKE II.` s fii qr d it M F. ... iii f i. ': _ y y l vrAc !Ili �a !1l a A` MT ' x ■ram-- t Y � ill,0,,� _� •� �i , , • � ,«,' �• ' / , I F • + s'fl . 1 ... . �` ` _ __ , „4F;: 7i!i MANSE II1 ,:. y J :A, '. : w, . ' '�'�; 4,.r. . +w �.g`:' . 4u° haw` £fir X ;. CLEAN CONSTRUCTION SITE �,.#i' LL „ RESPECTFUL WORKERS ,°� ..... _. e : „ EXTRA LARGE % �! OUTDOOR g' j . - , rF.r l .- - '" . LIVING AREAS k . ii gr l' i; � ONE OF A KIND ` WIDE A,OW1 i I KITCHEN -, STAIR ■; _ 4 ..; i CAS II - I -� .I _ y • a �1 ties 2za i ' '. 4 zk ,� `4. r 1 ._ _.,_ VIEW O F " �... MASTER�r`.- r ,. ..'a DECK II1!IIM V't,,. , RECEIVED CURVED GRANITE ISLAND �1n. ..' .if JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO • 0 i TILE FLOORS r IN MUDROOM, LAUNDRY "� r AND ALL 4=' BATHROOMS r o `° CLOSET _ SYSTEMS IN ALL BEDROOMS 1 IP' ,,,,,4'..*..;.,. , li, , ,. --, " , .� } EXTENSIVE USE OF BUILT—INS UPPER LEVEL LAUNDRY WITH TILE FLOOR AND GRANITE COUNTER u . 0. t .., '-g POWDER -. w ROOM i W .. k ps <.' h 111.m.1 V/ MM. r«` Y m wow# '• h v DUAL ,, s a ,x � MASTER M VANITIES , - \ ::::„Z/t?,-:-' L: ,'''. '',,: -:',' iti LONER LEVEL . FAMILY ROOM WITH "< WET BAR AND 11 is F.k , _ GRANITE COUNTER w ECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO GRAND FRONT ENTRIE lITH OTHENFROJEGTS PILLARS, PORCHES AND PATIOS -7 DETAILED F WOODWORK HAND GUT, 5 INCH IS WITH SPRAYED •.., R«1 MI ENAMEL it; r' _ ,,., k I 1 a 1 1 1 ts „. ir, .• , , r .� ; 1 , fig' , » • -^ . •ale . ..r CARRIAGE STYLE GARAGE DOOR FRAMED MIRRORS, TILE FLOORS AND GRANITE COUNTERS IN ALL BATHROOMS SPECIALLY GRAFTED HARDWOOD FLOORS 11# Ifs nM' r r1 y k..... #. ~ " VANITIES CUSTOM DESIGNED 7, AND HAND BUILT SHOWERS AND TUB k "° SURROUNDS TILED `"" WITH UNIQUE DESIGNS , ' RECEIVED JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO OTHEFIPROJEGT5 0 ,.. , .„ SPECIALIZED ir., TY10 FAMILY ROOMS COLOR DESIGNS .. .':- t'' .......7 . ... , , ,. , . . ... .. ,, . 0 Of i . , - . ,—,.......,_.,._...,...._. ...,,.„ ... .,..,. a ::: - * , Z* , . ... . . . . -..... CUSTOM 4 I ...... , -.. ..". BUILT-INS 4 '-'.,- - ,, , . .,1,1.-;!: Jima .........1 '-.1 . ana FINISHED 4* MASTER ... 1 CLOSET 1NITH IR 11 I,', assissiu.agawaili ' — VANITY, , BUTLERS ii i,t 41 ; SHELF AND ' OUTLETS LARGE TIAIO , - •. ' - ''''',,,;-.„„,,,;.„, LEVEL H - ,,,,:06'. - DECK • - l'IM.,4 0.44'.5.':.., ...*-*; IAIITH ....2;.....„ , , 1 wie _ '1: ''.'i,,N, milt—' - BUILT-IN ..... ,T, •-• --.......... .rir, , SEATING t" 1-, - , -,,,ii...: .?.: ,. -',,,::,.. ..V:-;,'..71,:---;Q.:4,. .'*::.,-.;Z'.'4.-4:44,''''''-r*'.-1 ''' i:„4,..= V. .:',:i.e.0:''',,74 .-:,,,'-'''.:1"1.'rt,,,tv•Ii 4.1,....:1 :tV.7,..s„„,,g—.'" 0.-- :4-- -,:,,,,..-.-:!-. ..,4::-.. .--.;.:416e..t.4.46- . 40...,,,,k _.- • ,.--- in 11.:;, If MN - 1 , , ,,,,...,..,.. . ...• ,.,..., ..... %.*.., , !, ,, ,.........*'---- , .• :. --" '-'• '' ^-r.,;, . MOSAIC TILE .5. —4 ,-. i .-‘1, BACLSPLASH MI ... ...._ . •, ., „, .. . -..... - .......... 5. ,,,,,,,_,,,,.„..., ,..... .., , , .. • . : ' * i•::-.: i 3 RECEIVED ,:._ i7,' . r,..,--.) JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO Concept Plan Prepared for: William Abbott ( 5 N 89 20'34" W 214.01 f' I �33. 0 N.- 91.00 -�, 90.01, I \ . CS 7>if Wetlard-----_ (approx. locatbn - per �\ o plat of ULMER ESTATES) •1• I Prop. Lot 1 Prop. ,Lot 2 q (0.71 ac.) (0.6f ac.) zs- • m- ,//1_ N 89 21'00" W 321.28 O // \\ T �r°%no t ► • ",r I 1�----Proposed \ 9e :� °� I I o Settling/ �� —` �co t I `° Drainage i \ Utility Easement o \� i/ j Pond I - - - - N - rn Maple �' i �r, N ^� \ �"3,\ Lane > , /p -'7 ,l ��s4o,°o„ \ N _ I 00111 j�2%2 S%fe�7 >5,-1,. ,i T \ C sq•f i �� �`J / Prop. Lot 3 oQ 1 Bldgi Site �/ll N. i (1.09 ac.) \ o, \ (\j (2080 q.ft.) y' ►�. pl. 0 U o . / 301.28 \ \ ill p8.. , ma' ill, Mir '141/4s \\ Exist. House• 237 r" \ _ r«, $ .fox Location \ Ni a 0 1 s •iii r-r� Prop. Lot 4 " •1 o \ , I z'''ilt o �tn\I 1-10 ��� N. t� I ..„ o r •70 I No / + T i i vV �131.70' \,,.......,_Letsgosed i 83.42 -^; 4-3 N 89 21'00" W 301.28 �s� �� 9� ,f'� . \1/444. /_____9-3c5, 47 ,n\\ i. JJ 1 ?5oposed i • ( 0�� ��li Bldg. Site `\Q �aA�\q�l/; h tn L- \ / N N o Prop. Lot 5 O cti0 °Q (0.55 ac.) 2 SCALE t Prop. Lot 6 so o so so 120 (0.50 ac.) I to o 0 1 1 inch = 60 feet 0 \33. j''00 101.00 - l •./ 100.Of` N 89 20'34" W 234.01 —Z Legend : 1 0 Proposed Tree (deciduous) I I I1 ( RECEIVED Proposed Tree (coniferous) JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO Bearings based on assumed datum. Job Number: 7522 Concept Plan for the proposed subdivision of ) SCHOBORGLot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTA TES, and part of Book/Page: Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Survey Date: LA D SERVICES County, Minnesota. Drawing Name: abbott.dwg INC Drawn by. KLB PID Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: -u 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE m m www.SchoborgLandcorn Delano, MN 55328 = .il & 0 Concept Plan Prepared for: WI i am Abbott I • N 8920'34" W 214.01 ` 1. I 33.Q0 �- 91.00 -'^1- 90.01_ i 1 I • O • 1y ' /� --Wetlard-----_;� / o (approx. locat'on - per \ \ plat of ULMER ESTATES) �1 k aj o I '.O •� I 1 Prop. Lot 1 Prop. I Lot 2 q (0.71 ac.) (0.6.� ac.) o �_ _ l` N 89 21'00" W 321.28 — • • O NC . /_\ . .f— • N 1 fro/� + I 1 • '� / \�!'-----Proposed ' 'e — — �L _] :� °� i I o Settling/ — — — — c° l `O Drainage \ Utility Easement o �� ./ it Pond I rn \ �� — — — f 1 � Maple N \��3,.\ o Lane o i -'7 . � „7 \ _ _ I o l pro l •6'sv Asa `• In m r •/Bid'oOsea,i �8 s,' a \ 1 1 0 / (2J 9i S/te i ��s9 1�p ,/ \ rt Pro osed (--......if��sq,f i <� `�J ,' Prop. Lot 3 o I p Bldgi Site ��l \. `. /' (1.09 ac.) o, (Ni (2080 4q.ft.) -�`' \ o\ o-To __ I N o) / 301.28 \ �\ �� a� Li) ° CU l y 0 0 \ \ m O 66)\ f \f3- 138.¢2\ is ,�,�' �� Exist.House 237 Et Ike • •Appro Location \ I o O l / I o' Prop. Lot 4 fri Z �31.70 I `� / (1.08ac.) \ I� .� I 0 CS (Ni /o 1-- N ) \ �h • <\31.70 N,....... 1 i83.42 -•^; N 8921'00" W 301.28 N� jg / 0 ,. cr /,\ tie a� I Proposed i • (' oP� '24 \ in °'* Bldg. Site I `\Q\aA 19' . i to 1768 s • `0 `1'pk\',' in -- kri `• \ /' N N v N E o Prop. Lot 5 O0 co SCALE m Prop. Lot 6 (0.55 ac.) s0 0 30 60 120 (0.50 ac.) a) ° 1 1 inch = 60 feet 0 a 1\ 33.00 ,•- 101.00 ��" 100.01 1 N 89 20'34" W 234.01 — Legend • 0 Proposed Tree (deciduous) 1 I I 4'i �ll�- Proposed Tree (coniferous) Bearings based on assumed datum. Job Number: 7522 SCHOBORG Concept Plan for the proposed subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTATES, and port of Book/Page: LA D SERVICES INC. Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Survey Date: County, Minnesota. PlD Numbers: 34 Drawing Name: abbott.dwg Drown by. KLB D —118-23-33-0055 n 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: x m- 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE Er- www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 n i , . 1 .,.... 7," . ,, -.,. �.' tit,lblt 'IT Ili 7 2340 s a A . 140 N '- G:•r.ty +' 2330 } '° h • 4 ,,;:, • MAPLE } kr �,� P $. Itzi,___2.4_,1.. e'dt+ 9B o �'q ^;' n . .f N i ry � o k I A. 80 m i � -., ` .� a{�t' V itN. 66 65 """ I 4. 50 51 , w 36 41 0 v \ I.' ps + 22 #6 m 0 d N ' ' 2440 3 '� WA+TERTOWN a a �• m 2430 R t' < sl U ,di` 0 2325 0 0 167 Feet A' 'Ol VO ,:fii),-, F G: 4- Disclaimer: ` ,,,, it.,s H c, This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one.This Site Location drawing is a compilation of records,information,and data located in various city,county,and state offices,and other sources affecting the area shown,and is to be used for reference purposes only.The City of Orono is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. ©Bolton&Menk,Inc-Web GIS 2/15/2013 10:13 AM PC Exhibit E DIVISION 11.-RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 9 Sec.78-621.-Purpose. The purpose of the residential planned unit development(RPUD)district is to provide a district which will allow for the implementation of certain residential housing goals established in the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan("CMP"or"comprehensive plan").The RPUD district is established to accommodate the densities and types of residential development contemplated in the CMP by incorporating the principles of the planned unit development concept.The RPUD district will encourage the following: (1) Flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new techniques of building design,construction and land development; (2) Provision of housing to meet lifecycle,and affordable and moderate cost housing needs; (3) Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses; (4) Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features,including steep slopes, poor soils and trees; (5) High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses,including both existing and planned; (6) Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city;and (7) Development which is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(1),2-26-2001) Sec.78-622.-Exceptions. This section shall not apply to any residential PUD or PRD which has received preliminary or final approval by the city council prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived,unless such application is requested by the property owner and approved by the city council. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(9),2-26-2001) Sec.78-623.-Permitted uses. Within the RPUD district,no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) One-family detached dwellings. (2) Publicly owned parks and playgrounds. (3) Municipal buildings. (4) Multifamily attached dwellings only when consistent within the areas of the city designated as urban area in the comprehensive plan. (Code 1984,§10.20(2);Ord.No.202 2nd series§1(2),2-26-2001) State law reference—State mandated permitted uses,Minn.Stat.§462.357,subd.7. Sec.78-624.-Conditional uses. Within the RPUD district,no land or structure shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Page 1 (1) Public service structures. Public silk structures,including but not limited to electric triission lines,buildings,such as telephone exchange stations,booster or pressure regulating stations,wells,and plumbing stations,elevated tanks,lift stations and electrical power substations,provided no building shall be located within 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district.Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general welfare.Public service structures that have been approved by the city at required public hearings for public improvement projects shall not require a conditional use permit,but such structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set forth in this section; amendments to approved plans involving design and/or placement of these structures will require written notice by the city to all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended plans by the council.Personal wireless services and commercial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service structures.Uses allowed by conditional use permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the PUD master development plan and with the applicable conditional use permit standards of this division.Uses allowed by conditional use permit shall also be subject to site and building plan review pursuant to this division. (2) Assisted living facilities.Assisted living facilities as defined in this chapter,subject to the general conditions and multifamily-specific conditions applicable to uses in the RPUD district. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(3),2-26-2001;Ord.No.75 3rd series,§1,7-12-2010) Sec.78-625.-Accessory uses. Within any RPUD district,the following uses shall be a permitted accessory use: (1) Private garages and parking space. (2) Private swimming pools,tennis courts,and paddocks. (3) Home occupations,as defined in this chapter.All home occupations shall comply with the provisions of section 78-1376,and the licensing provisions of section 26-76,when applicable. (4) Signs,as regulated in this chapter. (5) Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. (6) Gardening and other horticultural uses,including aviaries and decorative landscape features. (7) Communication reception/transmission devices as follows: a. Accessory antennas,which shall be limited to radio and television receiving antennas,satellite dishes,TVROs,and amateur shortwave radio transmitting and receiving antennas.Accessory antennas that are accessory to the principal use of property are permitted accessory uses in all zoning districts,provided they meet the following conditions: 1. Height.A ground-mounted accessory antenna shall not exceed 20 feet in height from ground level. 2. Yards.Accessory antennas shall not be located within the required front yard setback,corner side yard setback or side yard setback abutting a street. 3. Roofs. If vegetation or obstructions interfere with satellite signals at a location in any allowable placement area,the accessory antenna may be placed on the roof of any authorized structure on the premises. 4. Location.Accessory antennas shall not be located within a required yard or setback area or within drainage or utility easements. Antenna towers shall be set back from adjacent property lines a horizontal distance no less than the maximum height of the antenna. 5. Building permits.A building permit shall be required for the installation of any accessory antenna requiring a conditional use permit. Building permit applications shall be accompanied by a site plan and structural component data for the accessory antenna,including details of anchoring.The building official must approve the plans before installation. 6. Lightning protection. Each accessory antenna shall be grounded to protect against natural lightning strikes in conformance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city. Page 2 7. Electrical code.Accessory antenn•trical equipment and connections shall be design•d installed in conformance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city. 8. Color/content.Accessory antennas shall be of a neutral color and shall not be used as signage. b. Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers which do not meet the conditions for accessory antennas may be allowed with a conditional use permit in all zoning districts,provided they meet the following conditions: 1. Height.When an amateur shortwave radio antenna is mounted on an antenna tower,the total height of the antenna and tower shall not exceed 65 feet. 2. Yards.Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers shall not be located within a front corner side or side yard. 3. Setbacks.Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers shall not be located within any required setback area and shall be located no less than the height of the antenna and town from the property line. (8) Privately owned buildings to be used for recreational or social purposes,or for use as storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish. (Code 1984,§10.20(4);Ord.No.161 2nd series,§6,6-7-1997;Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(4),2-26-2001;Ord.No.221 2nd series,§3,9-23- 2002) Sec.78-626.-Development standards. Within the RPUD district all development shall be in compliance with the following: (1) Minimum area;shoreland district limitation. Each site proposed for rezoning to RPUD shall have a minimum area of five acres,excluding areas within a designated wetland,floodplain or shoreland district or right-of-way,unless the council finds the existence of one of the following: a. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding neighborhood such that development as a RPUD will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community. b. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street from property which has been developed previously as a RPUD or planned residential development and will be perceived as and will function as an extension of that previously approved development. c. The property is located in an area where the proposed development provides a transition between a commercial or industrial area and an existing residential area or on an intermediate or principal arterial as defined in the comprehensive plan. d. The property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of significant trees that could be preserved through the clustering of buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed by the existing zoning district. No property located within 250 feet of the ordinary high water level(OHWL)of a protected lake or tributary as defined in article IX of this chapter shall be rezoned to RPUD.However,for a property that is partially located less than 250 feet from the OHWL and partially located more than 250 feet from the OHWL,the portion located more than 250 feet from the OHWL may be rezoned to RPUD at the discretion of the city council when all other requirements are met. (2) Uses. Each property rezoned to RPUD shall only be used for the use or uses for which the site is designated in the comprehensive plan, except that the city may permit rezoning to RPUD on a site designated for commercial use if the city council finds that such use is in the best interests of the city and is consistent with the requirements of this division.If a commercial site is to be rezoned to RPUD,the city may forward a copy of the request to the metropolitan council for review. (3) Sewer availability.A site proposed to be rezoned to RPUD with proposed density greater than one unit per two acres must be in the metropolitan urban services area(MUSA)and must be serviced by municipal sewer. (4) Density. Each development in the RPUD district shall have a density within the range specified in the comprehensive plan for the specific site.If the site is not designated in the comprehensive plan for residential use,the appropriate density shall be determined by the city based upon the city council's finding that such density is consistent with the intent of this division and of the comprehensive plan.Developments with proposed densities in excess of the densities contemplated in the comprehensive plan shall be allowed only on properties which are currently zoned and guided for commercial use,in order to maintain the character and integrity of the areas zoned and guided for residential use. Page 3 (5) Incentives.The city may utilize inc es to encourage the construction of projects whit consistent with the city's housing goals. Incentives may include modification of density(only for properties currently zoned and guided for commercial use)and floor area ratio requirements for developments providing lifecycle housing and affordable and moderate cost housing.Incentives for affordable and moderate cost housing may be approved by the city only after the developer and city have entered into an agreement to ensure that the low and moderate cost units remain available to persons of low and moderate income for at least 20 years. (6) Floor area ratio.Floor area ratios(FARs)shall be limited per the following table: Comprehensive Plan Designation Maximum Floor Area Ratio* Low or medium density residential(up to 50 and including 6.0 units per acre) 0.5 High density residential(in excess of 6.0 units per acre) 1.0 *FAR=Total Building Floor Area/Total Lot Area Individual lots within a development in the RPUD district may exceed these standards as long as the average meets these standards. (7) Development standards for attached and multifamily dwelling structures.Each site rezoned to RPUD and developed for attached or multiple-family dwelling uses shall be subject to the following standards: [removed] (8) Development standards for single family detached dwellings in the RPUD district.Each RPUD site developed for single-family detached dwellings at medium density(i.e.,densities ranging from one unit per acre to six units per acre)shall be subject to the following standards: a. Permitted locations:in areas of the city where smaller single-family detached dwelling lots will allow for clustering to preserve significant natural features,or in areas where a mixture of higher density attached dwellings and lower density detached single-family dwellings will result in a development that does not exceed the overall guided density. b. Minimum SFR lot size:15,000 square feet. c. Minimum lot width at the setback line:90 feet. d. Minimum lot depth:125 feet. e. Minimum front yard setback:25 feet on internal streets within the RPUD site.On exterior or through streets a setback of 35 feet must be provided on local streets and a 50-foot setback on collector or arterial streets,as defined in the comprehensive plan. f. Minimum side yard setback:ten feet along interior lot lines;15 feet on lot lines along the exterior of the RPUD site.Side yards abutting streets must meet the minimum front yard setbacks as noted in subsection(8)e of this section.Structures in side yards abutting another residential zoning district shall meet the side yard setback requirement of the adjacent zoning district. g. Rear yard setback:minimum of 40 feet or 20 percent of the depth of the lot,whichever is less. h. Building height:maximum of 30 feet. All dwelling units,including manufactured homes,shall have a depth of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their width.All dwelling units,including manufactured homes,shall have a width of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their depth. j. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with the state building code. k. Accessory structures shall conform to the setbacks established for principal structures,except as follows: 1. All accessory structures located more than ten feet from a principal structure may be located a minimum of ten feet from a rear or side lot line when that line does not abut a street right-of-way. 2. No accessory structure shall be located closer to the front lot line than the principal structure,regardless of the principal structure setback. Page 4 I. No accessory structure shall occure than 30 percent of the side or rear yard in whi•is located,nor exceed 1,000 square feet in area,nor exceed 12 feet in height. m. Off-street parking shall be provided for at least two vehicles for each single-family dwelling.A suitable location for a garage measuring at least 20 feet by 24 feet without a variance shall be provided and indicated as such on a survey or site plan to be submitted when applying for a building permit to construct a new dwelling or alter an existing garage. (9) More than one building allowed.More than one building may be placed on one platted or recorded lot in a RPUD site. (10) Single housing type permitted.Any RPUD development which involves a single housing type shall be permitted,provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this division and the comprehensive plan. (11) Private recreational area. Each RPUD development shall provide a minimum of ten percent of the gross project area in private recreational uses for project residents.Such area shall be for active or passive recreational uses suited to the needs of the residents of the project, including swimming pools,trails,nature areas,picnic areas,tot lots and saunas.Private recreational area requirements are in addition to the standard park dedication requirements. (12) Ownership.All property to be included within a RPUD development shall be under unified ownership or control,or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved master development plan and final site and building plan. (13) Signage.Signs shall be restricted to those which are permitted in a sign plan approved by the city and shall be regulated by permanent covenants. (14) Landscaping,screening and buffering. a. Landscape plan requirements. Landscape plans shall be prepared by a landscape architect or other qualified person acceptable to the city,drawn to the scale of not less than one inch equals 50 feet and shall show the following: 1. Boundary lines of the property with accurate dimensions; 2. Locations of existing and proposed buildings,parking lots,roads,trails and other improvements; 3. Proposed grading plan with two-foot contour intervals; 4. Location,approximate size and common name of existing trees and shrubs; 5. A planting schedule containing symbols,quantities,common and botanical names,size of plant materials,root condition and special planting instructions; 6. Planting details illustrating proposed locations of all new plant material; 7. Locations and details of other landscape features,including berms,fences and planter boxes; 8. Details of restoration of disturbed areas,including areas to be sodded and seeded; 9. Location and details of irrigation systems;and 10. Details and cross sections of all required screening. b. Minimum landscaping requirements. 1. All open areas of a lot which are not used or improved for required parking areas,drives,trails or storage shall be landscaped with a combination of deciduous and coniferous species,including overstory trees,understory trees,shrubs,flowers and groundcover materials.The plan for landscaping shall include ground cover,bushes,shrubbery,trees,sculpture,foundations,decorative walks or other similar site design features or materials in a quantity having a minimum value in conformance with the following table: Minimum Tree and Shrub Requirements Vegetation Type Size Quantity Page 5 Overstory 2.5-inch bb One tree per 1,000 gross square feet of building footprint area or one tree per 40 lineal feet of site deciduous trees (Caliper) 1 perimeter,whichever is greater. Coniferous trees 6-foot height bb Minimum of 30 percent of required overstory trees must be coniferous Understory shrubs 3-gal.potted or One shrub per 300 gross square feet of building footprint area or one shrub per 30 lineal feet of site 18-inch perimeter,whichever is greater. Ornamental 1.5-inch bb Not required;but two ornamental deciduous trees may be substituted for one required overstory 1 deciduous trees 1(Caliper) deciduous tree(maximum substitution equals 25 percent of required overstory deciduous trees) i Credits for existing trees:The city council shall have sole discretion whether credit shall be granted for existing healthy trees In instances where healthy plant materials of acceptable species exist on a site prior to its development,the application of the standards in subsection(14)b of this section may be adjusted by the city to allow credit for such material,provided that such adjustment is consistent with the intent of this division. 2. A reasonable attempt shall be made to preserve as many existing trees as is practicable and to incorporate them into the site plan. 3. All new overstory trees shall be balled and burlapped or moved from the growing site by tree spade.Deciduous trees shall have a minimum caliper of 2%:inches.Coniferous trees shall be a minimum of six feet in height.Ornamental trees shall have a minimum caliper of 1'/: inches. 4. All site areas not covered by buildings,sidewalks,parking lots,driveways,trails,patios,or similar hardcover shall be covered with sod or an equivalent ground cover approved by the city.This requirement shall not apply to site areas retained in a natural state. 5. In order to provide for adequate maintenance of landscaped areas,an underground sprinkler system shall be provided as part of each new development,except one-and two-family dwellings and additions to existing structures which do not at least equal the floor area of the existing structure.A sprinkler system shall be provided for all landscaped areas,except areas to be preserved in a natural state. 6. Not more than 50 percent of the required number of trees shall be composed of one species.The city shall maintain a list of prohibited species,which shall not be used for landscaping. c. Interior parking lot landscaping. 1. All parking lots containing over 100 stalls shall be designed to incorporate unpaved,landscaped islands in number and dimension as required by the city.All landscape islands shall contain a minimum of 180 square feet.Islands which are necessary to promote the safe and efficient flow of traffic shall not be subject to the 100-stall standard and shall be required by the city when warranted. 2. Parking lot landscape areas,including landscape islands,shall be reasonably distributed throughout the parking lot area so as to break up expanses of paved areas.Parking lot landscape areas shall be provided with deciduous shade trees,ornamental or evergreen trees,plus ground cover,mulch and/or shrubbery as determined appropriate by the planning commission.Parking lot landscape trees shall be provided at the rate of one tree for each 15 surface parking spaces provided,or major fraction thereof.Parking lot landscaping shall be contained in planting beds bordered by a raised concrete curb or equivalent approved by the planning commission. d. Maintenance of landscaping.The owner,tenant and their respective agents shall be jointly and severally responsible for the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy,neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris.Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan,and which have died,shall be replaced within three months of notification by the city.However,the time for compliance may be extended up to nine months by the city in order to allow for seasonal or weather conditions. e. Retaining walls. Retaining walls exceeding four feet in height,and staged walls which cumulatively exceed 16 feet in height or involve more than four tiers,must be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect. Page 6 f. Landscaping performance securiry•ired.When screening,landscaping or other similar rovements to property are required by this division,a letter of credit shall be supplied by the owner in an amount equal to at least 1%times the value of such screening,landscaping or other improvements.The letter of credit shall be conditioned upon reimbursement of all expenses incurred by the city for engineering,legal, contracting or other fees in connection with making or completing such improvements.The letter of credit shall be provided prior to the issuance of any building permit and shall be valid for a period of time equal to two full growing seasons after the date of installation of the landscaping.The city may accept some other form of security in lieu of a letter of credit in an amount and under such conditions that the city may determine to be appropriate.If construction of the project is not completed within the time prescribed by building permits and other approvals,the city may,at its option,complete the work required at the expense of the owner and the surety.The city may allow an extended period of time for completion of all landscaping,if the delay is due to conditions which are reasonably beyond the control of the developer.Extensions,which may not exceed nine months,may be granted due to seasonal or weather conditions.When an extension is granted,the city shall require such additional security as it deems appropriate. g. Screening and buffering. 1. The following uses shall be screened or buffered in accordance with the requirements of this section: Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto used for residential uses at a density of greater than four units per acre shall be buffered from residential lots located in any R district. ii. Off-street parking facilities containing six or more spaces shall be buffered from streets located within 50 feet.Parking facilities shall be buffered with landscape zones. iii. Loading docks shall be screened from all lot lines and public roads. iv. Trash storage facilities shall be screened from all lot lines and public roads. v. Access roads serving multifamily buildings shall be screened as necessary to eliminate the impact of vehicle headlights shining toward adjacent residential neighborhoods. 2. Required screening or buffering may be achieved with fences,walls,earth berms,hedges,or other landscape materials.All walls and fences shall be architecturally harmonious with the principal building.Earth berms shall not exceed a slope of 3:1.The screen shall be designed to employ materials which provide an effective visual barrier during all seasons. 3. All required screening or buffering shall be located on the lot occupied by the use,building,facility or structure to be screened.No screening or buffering shall be located on any public right-of-way or within eight feet of the traveled portion of any street or highway. 4. Screening or buffering required by subsection(14)of this section shall be of a height needed to accomplish the goals of subsection(14) of this section.Screening methods incorporating roofs over storage,trash or mechanical facilities to screen from higher adjacent properties or buildings may be required.Height of plantings required under subsection(14)of this section shall be measured at the time of installation. (15) Architectural standards. a. It is not the intent of the city to restrict design freedom unduly when reviewing project architecture in connection with a site and building plan.However,it is in the best interest of the city to promote high standards of architectural design and compatibility with surrounding structures and neighborhoods.Architectural plans shall be prepared by an architect or other qualified persons acceptable to the city and shall show the following for all structures other than single-family detached dwellings: 1. Elevations of all sides of the building. 2. Type and color of exterior building materials. 3. A typical floor plan. 4. Dimensions of all structures. 5. The location of trash and recycling containers and of heating,ventilation and air conditioning equipment. b. Unadorned prestressed concrete panels,concrete block and unfinished metal shall not be permitted as exterior materials for residential principal and accessory buildings.This restriction shall apply to all principal structures and to all accessory buildings.The city may,at its discretion, allow architecturally enhanced block or concrete panels. Page 7 c. Accessory buildings shall be architOally compatible with principal structures. • d. All rooftop or ground-mounted mechanical equipment and exterior trash and recycling storage areas shall be fully enclosed or screened so as to be not visible with materials compatible with the principal structure. e. Underground utilities shall be provided for all new and substantially renovated structures(the term"substantially renovated"shall mean when the renovations exceed 30 percent of the prerenovation value of the structure). (16) Flexibility.The uniqueness of each RPUD requires that specifications and standards for streets,utilities,public facilities and subdivisions may be subject to modification from the city ordinances ordinarily governing them.The city council may therefore approve streets,utilities,public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements,if it finds that strict adherence to such standards or requirements is not required to meet the intent of this section or to protect the health,safety or welfare of the residents of the RPUD,the surrounding area or the city as a whole. (17) Traffic studies.The city may require a traffic analysis to be prepared by a registered traffic engineer approved by the city to assess potential traffic impacts on local streets.If impacts on service levels of roadways and intersections are anticipated,the project will be approved only contingent upon a traffic management plan that adequately mitigates those impacts.The plan may include travel demand management strategies,use of transit facilities or other appropriate measures to reduce traffic generation,and necessary improvements to road systems.The developer shall have the responsibility to install all necessary road system improvements. (18) Building permits. No building or other permit shall be issued for any work on property included within a proposed or approved RPUD development,nor shall any work occur unless such work is in compliance with the proposed or approved RPUD development. (19) General regulations applicability.The requirements contained in this division pertaining to general regulations for residential districts and performance standards shall apply to a RPUD development as deemed appropriate by the city. (20) Lighting standards.All RPUD developments shall be subject to the general performance standards for lighting in this chapter. (21) Trails.When any portion of the project is within 1,000 feet of a public trail system,pedestrian access shall be provided to the trail system by means of a public trail constructed at the developer's expense.Where public rights-of-way are available,at the city's discretion the trail may utilize the public right-of-way.Trails shall be of bituminous construction,or such other material as may be approved by the city and shall be not less than eight feet in width. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(5),2-26-2001;Ord.No.94 3rd series,§2,9-24-2012) Sec.78-627.-Review of application;procedures. (a) Concept plan review. In order to receive guidance in the design of a RPUD prior to submission of a formal application,an applicant may submit a concept plan for review and comment by the planning commission and city council.Submission of a concept plan is optional but is highly recommended for large RPUDs.In order for the review to be of most help to the applicant,the concept plan should contain such specific information as is suggested by the city.Generally,this information should include the following: (1) Approximate building,road and trail locations; (2) Height,bulk and square footage of buildings; (3) Type and square footage of specific land uses; (4) Number of dwelling units; (5) Generalized grading plan showing areas to be cut,filled and preserved;and (6) Staging and timing of the development. The comments of the planning commission and city council shall address the consistency of the concept plan with this section.The comments of the planning commission and city council shall be for guidance only and,if positive,shall not be considered binding upon the planning commission or city council regarding approval of the formal RPUD application when submitted. (b) Master development plan and rezoning.Approval of a rezoning to RPUD and approval of a master development plan shall be subject to the procedures outlined in this chapter for a zoning map amendment.The master development plan shall contain the following: Page 8 (1) Building location,height,bulk and ere footage; (2) Type and square footage of specific land uses; (3) Number of dwelling units; (4) Detailed street and utility locations and sizes; (5) Parking layout; (6) Drainage plan,including location and size of pipes and water storage areas; (7) Grading plan and drainage plan,including two-foot contours; (8) Generalized landscape plan; (9) Generalized plan for uniform signs and lighting; (10) Plan for timing and phasing of the development; (11) Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; (12) Renderings or elevations of all sides of buildings to be constructed in the first phase of the development; (13) Trail plan;and (14) Lighting plan. Approval of the master development plan shall indicate approval of the listed items in subsections(b)(1)—(b)(14)of this section and shall occur in conjunction with rezoning of the property to RPUD.After rezoning the property to RPUD,nothing shall be constructed on the RPUD site except in conformance with the approved plans and this section.The procedure for notification of and public hearing on the master development plan shall be the same as required for a zoning map amendment by this chapter. (c) Development agreement/financial guarantee. Following the approval of the master development plan but prior to final plan approval, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city relating to the terms of the RPUD development,and shall also provide such financial guarantees as the city requires or deems necessary.Such agreement may take the form of: (1) A development contract; (2) A site improvement performance agreement;and/or (3) Another form of binding instrument as may be required by the city. (d) Final site and building plan.Approval of a final site and building plan for the entire RPUD or for specific parts of the RPUD shall be subject to the procedures outlined in this division.The final site and building plan shall contain information as required by the city,including the following: (1) Detailed utility,street,grading and drainage plans; (2) Detailed building elevations and floor plans; (3) Detailed landscaping,sign and lighting plans;and (4) Detailed trail plan. (e) Substantial compliance.The final site and building plan shall be in substantial compliance with the approved master development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean: (1) Buildings,parking areas,roads and trails are in substantially the same location as previously approved; (2) The number of residential living units has not increased or decreased from that approved in the master development plan; Page 9 (3) The gross floor area of any individ.ilding has not been increased from that approvecie master development plan; (4) There has been no increase in the number of stories in any building; (5) Open space has not been decreased or altered to change its original design or intended use;and (6) All special conditions required on the master development plan by the city have been incorporated into the final site and building plan. Approval of a final site and building plan shall signify approval of all plans necessary prior to application for a building permit,subject to conformance with any conditions on the approval and subject to other necessary approvals by the city. (f) Simultaneous review.Applicants may combine the final site and building plan review with the master development plan review by submitting all information required for both stages simultaneously. (g) Basis for approval;conditions. In evaluating a site and building plan,the planning commission and city council shall base their recommendations and actions regarding approval of a RPUD on a consideration of the following: (1) Compatibility of the proposed plan with this section and consistency with the goals,policies,and objectives of the comprehensive plan and surface water management plan; (2) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the greatest extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general character and appearance of neighboring properties; (3) Creation of compatible relationships between buildings and open spaces both on the site and adjacent to it,incorporating natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development,giving special attention to: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants,visitors and the general community. b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping. c. Materials,textures,colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring structures and uses;and vehicular and pedestrian circulation,including walkways,interior drives and parking in terms of location and number access points to the public streets,width of interior drives and access points,general interior circulation,separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (4) Promotion of energy conservation through design,location,orientation and elevation of structures,the use and location of glass in structures and the use of landscape materials and site grading; (5) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions for surface water drainage,sound and sight buffers, preservation of views,light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses;and (6) Such other factors as the planning commission or city council deem relevant. The planning commission and city council may attach such conditions to their actions as they shall determine necessary or convenient to better accomplish the purposes of this section. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(6),2-26-2001) Sec.78-628.-Term of approval. (a) If application has not been made for a final site and building plan approval pursuant to the approved master development plan for all or a part of the property within a RPUD by December 31 of the year following the date on which the RPUD zoning map amendment became effective or,if within that period no extension of time has been granted,the city council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the property.In the absence of a rezoning,the approved master development plan shall remain the legal control governing development of the property included within the RPUD. Page 10 (b) If construction on the property ince within an approved final site and building plan h•t started by December 31 of the year following the date on which such final site and building plan was approved or,if building construction in a phase of a RPUD approved to be built in phases has not started within this period,or,if within that period no extension of the time has been granted,the city council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the property.In the absence of rezoning,the approved master development plan and final site and building plan shall remain the legal control governing development of the property included within the RPUD. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(7),2-26-2001) Sec.78-629.-Amendments. Major amendments to an approved master development plan may be approved by the city council after review by the planning commission.The notification and public hearing procedure for such amendment shall be the same as for approval of the original RPUD.A major amendment is any amendment which: (1) Substantially alters the location of buildings,parking areas or roads; (2) Increases or decreases the number of residential dwelling units; (3) Increases the gross floor area of any individual building; (4) Increases the number of stories of any building; (5) Decreases the amount of open space or alters it in such a way as to change its original design or intended use;or (6) Creates noncompliance with any special condition attached to the approval of the master development plan. Any other amendment may be made through review and approval by a simple majority vote of the council. (Ord.No.202 2nd series,§1(8),2-26-2001) Secs.78-630-78-640.-Reserved. Page 11 Sec.78-1370.-Special standards for back l•eated after January 1,1994. • Back lots which were created as part of a subdivision that received preliminary subdivision approval after January 1, 1994,are subject to the following special requirements in addition to the standards required in section 82-256: (1) Dimensional standards for back lots shall be as follows: a. Lot area shall be 150 percent of the zoning district requirement.Wetlands may be allowed as area credit for meeting the 150 percent back lot area requirement,as long as the back lot contains sufficient contiguous dry buildable land to satisfy the minimum acreage requirement of the underlying zoning district. b. Lot width measured parallel to the front or street lot line at the street yard setback line of a lakeshore back lot,or at the front yard setback line of a non-lakeshore back lot,shall meet the zoning district width requirement.The street yard or front yard for any back lot will be a yard starting where the narrow access outlot corridor ends and the lot begins.Lakeshore back lots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline,at the lakeshore setback line,and at the street yard setback line. c. The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150 percent of the zoning district front yard requirement. d. The required side yard and rear yard depths for back lots shall be 150 percent of the zoning district yard requirements.The required lakeshore yard of a lakeshore back lot shall meet the zoning district lakeshore yard requirements. (2) A front lot created as part of a front/back lot division shall meet all zoning district area,width and setback standards;except that the required side yard of the front lot adjacent to the access outlot shall be equivalent to the side street yard requirement for that zoning district. (3) Access requirements shall be as follows: a. Access outlots shall be 30 feet minimum width,and shall be wide enough to accommodate drainage,snow removal and screening without encroaching on neighboring properties. b. In approving front/back lot divisions,the city may require that both front lot and back lot share a driveway access within the access outlot if the council determines that creating an additional access to the existing street will be a potential safety hazard. c. Driveways within a back lot shall be located at least ten feet from the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. d. No more than two residences may be served by a driveway located within an access outlot. e. No access outlot may be platted abutting an adjacent access outlot except when the intent is to combine the two access outlots for creation of a public or private road meeting city standards. (4) Screening requirements shall be as follows: a. Driveways constructed in access outlots shall be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the city,at all points to the rear of the required street yard of the front lot,so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yard of adjacent lots. b. The street yard of the back lot shall be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the city,so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yards of adjacent lots. (5) Accessory structures shall adhere to all requirements of this chapter,with the following additional requirements: a. Accessory structures within a back lot shall be allowed no closer than ten feet to a neighboring property's side or rear yard. b. Accessory structures shall not be allowed within the required street yard of a back lot nor within the required rear yard of a front lot which abuts the street yard of a back lot. c. No accessory structure shall be allowed within an access outlot. (Ord.No. 122 2nd series,§2,12-13-1993;Ord.No.64 3rd series,§1,9-14-09) ARTICLE XII.-CONSERVATION DESIGN Page 12 Sec.78-1631.-Purpose and intent. • The City of Orono as a result of the Rural Oasis Study conducted in 2005 finds that there is an intrinsic link between the natural systems and the valued scenic character that exist throughout the community.The requirements of this conservation design ordinance are meant to preserve and enhance this ecological/aesthetic character by requiring: (1) protection and enhancement of drainageways and water quality; (2) protection and enhancement of ecological communities; (3) reinforcement and establishment of ecological connections throughout the city; (4) augmentation and preservation of viewsheds including corridor enclosure and buffering; (5) preservation and improvement of views; and (6) preservation or reinterpretation of local landmarks. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1,1-11-2010) Sec.78-1632.-Applicability. The Conservation Design Master Planning requirements of this article apply to all proposed residential subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments greater than five acres in total area or guided for urban density(greater than one unit per two acres). (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1,1-11-2010) Sec.78-1633.-Definitions. The following words,terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Conservation design means a two-phased approach to design and development that maintains or improves ecological assets, provides infrastructure that works with the land, and incorporates people's instinctive desire to experience nature. Some conservation design strategies include:identifying and avoiding sensitive natural features, planning roads along contours,allowing lots to border natural open space,integrating ecological stormwater management, using smaller lots, and educating developer and buyers about the ecological values of the landscape. The first phase entails an inventory and analysis of the potential development site's natural features,existing land uses,and wetland delineation.The second phase entails analyzing the design implications of the findings from the initial phase, alternative stormwater design, and a conceptual design for road and lot layouts. Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) means the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) displays data on natural/semi-natural and cultural cover types at the highest level of classification. The next four levels of classification each reveal further specifications such as plant types,soil hydrology, hardcover and plant species. Using MLCCS data is the first step in producing a natural resource inventory of a development site. Orono Natural Resource Inventory means an element of the Orono Community Management Plan that displays the ecological connections within and beyond the City of Orono. Corridor enclosure means the nature, appearance and relative degrees of screening provided by roadside vegetation. Corridor enclosure types include: Open enclosure:Long views beyond the right-of-way,no real sense of corridor enclosure. Edged enclosure:Solid wall of vegetation along roadside,views focused along corridor. Tunneled enclosure:Vegetation begins to completely enclose roadway,above and sides,creating a"small scale"roadway experience. Varied enclosure:Enclosure changes rapidly along corridor,short stretches of open,edged,and tunneled corridor. View analysis means the process of determining whether a view is positive or negative. Positive views:Views of natural areas,water bodies,established parks,wetlands,rural and historic land uses. Negative views:Views of structures, particularly multi-family residential, institutional, and commercial and industrial uses.Views of power lines,telephone poles and other utility infrastructure. Landmark preservation and enhancement means preserving and maintaining distinct cultural features, landmarks and unique points of local character,both natural and man-made,to maintain a familiar sense of place in the community. Ecological Management Categories: Level 1:Ecological"off-limits"areas,including wetlands and required buffers,historic drainage. Level 2:Ecological opportunities,including existing degraded drainageways and existing degraded ecosystem remnants. Level 3:Ecological possibilities:Areas suitable for stormwater treatment. Page 13 Note: These Ecological Management•gories are not intended to directly correlate wLCCS M-34X Natural Community Quality Modifiers. Significant tree stand means a grouping or cluster of coniferous and/or deciduous trees with contiguous crown cover, occupying 500 or more square feet of property,which are comprised of deciduous trees six inches or larger in diameter(d.b.h.)or coniferous trees 12 feet or more in height.Additionally,those forest or woodland remnants identified as high,moderate or good quality in the Orono Natural Resources Inventory shall be considered as significant tree stands. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1,1-11-2010;Ord.No.94 3rd series,§9,9-24-2012) DIVISION 2.-BASIC APPLICATION AND PLAN REQUIREMENTS Sec.78-1634.-Application requirements and procedures. The developer shall follow the steps outlined below as part of the development review process: (1) Review and respond to the Goals and Policies for Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management as established in the Orono Community Management Plan and the recommendations contained within the Orono Natural Resources Inventory.The intent is to establish the property's ecological connections both within Orono and as part of the regional ecological system. (2) If the property exists adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study, review and respond to the existing aesthetic and ecological analysis. (3) If the property is not adjacent to a documented corridor in the Rural Oasis Study,developer shall have a qualified consultant prepare a similar analysis and submit it to the city for review. This analysis shall include the documentation of views, corridor enclosure, and landmarks through a plan analysis and photographs. Developer shall be charged a standard fee established in the city fee schedule to cover the expenses of the city in hiring a consultant to review the ecological site analysis submitted by the developer. (4) Additionally,submit a natural resources inventory of the site,including all of the following elements: a. Review of the MLCCS data pertinent to the site. b. Tree survey, including all significant individual trees greater than six feet diameter, and stands of trees, identifying tree species and size. c. Wetland inventory,including delineation reports. d. Topographic survey indicating existing drainage patterns. e. Analysis of the site based on the findings and recommendations of the Orono Natural Resources Inventory with regards to: • Conceptual greenways and open space corridors; • Existence of rare plant communities; • Potential need for proactive management and protection. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1, 1-11-2010) Sec.78-1635.-Basic Conservation Design Master Plan requirements and evaluation criteria. The developer shall prepare a Conservation Design Master Plan for development of the property, consisting of written and visual documentation including maps in an acceptable electronic format,addressing the following topics: (1) Consideration of the existing drainage system; (2) Establishment of a stormwater management system, using multi-cell treatment principles, and defining proposed methods of stormwater phosphorus reduction; (3) Removal of invasive species and diseased trees; (4) Protection of significant tree stands and woodlands that support scenic and/or ecological goals, including mitigation of any such stands to be impacted by development activities; (5) Protection of existing wetlands,including augmentation of buffers,mitigation of impacts,and enhancement of degraded systems; (6) Justification and mitigation of any negative impact to ecological communities."Negative impact" includes any modification to a lower level of ecological community quality,as described by the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System(M-34X Modifiers); (7) Maintenance of ecological connections through site design,as shown on the Orono Natural Resource Inventory; Page 14 till(8) Maintenance and protection of ing positive views, and mitigation of any existing4114roposed negative views using appropriate measures such as site layout,screening,building design and coloration,etc.;and (9) Preservation or reinterpretation of existing landmarks. The planning commission and city council shall evaluate the Conservation Design Master Plan to determine whether the proposed development: (1) Preserves existing drainage patterns and enhances stormwater collection and conveyance by applying an ecologically-based multi-cell stormwater management system that improves ecosystems by reducing reliance on manmade infrastructure, reducing downstream runoff of contaminants,and enhancing ecological connections; (2) Includes a program for the removal of invasive species and diseased trees;protects significant tree stands and woodlands that support scenic and/or ecological goals;and includes mitigation of any such stands that will be impacted by development activities; (3) Protects existing wetlands by implementing new buffers or augmenting existing buffers; mitigates identified wetland impacts; and enhances degraded wetland systems; (4) Results in no negative impact to ecological communities of Ecological Management Categories 1 and 2; results in no negative modification of any ecological communities as described by the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System; and establishes, maintains and improves native ecological communities including natural and semi-natural areas to provide wildlife habitat and support natural ecological functions(i.e.drainage,filtering,buffering,etc.); (5) Establishes or maintains ecological connections through site design, as shown on the Orono Natural Resource Inventory that will enhance stormwater collection and conveyance, promote ecological and wildlife corridors,and provide recreational opportunities for residents; (6) Preserves and where appropriate augments or improves roadway corridor enclosure to promote community aesthetics associated with the city's rural character; preserves open rural views and other aesthetic elements of the landscape;and mitigates the negative visual impacts of development; (7) Preserves, maintains,or reinterprets existing landmarks and unique points of local character, and preserves distinct cultural features that will maintain a familiar sense of place in the community. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1,1-11-2010) DIVISION 3.-DENSITY BONUS STANDARDS Sec.78-1636.-Densitybonuses for urban densitydevelopment. P For residential development in Orono's defined urban area (zoning districts allowing densities in excess of one unit per two acres, and including properties identified in the Orono Community Management Plan for conversion to urban density) within the ranges of the guided density a density bonus may be allowed if the city council finds that the performance bonus requirements of this division have been met.The city council shall determine the extent of density bonus awarded for such properties.Example:Properties guided in the Community Management Plan for a density range of two—four units per acre have a base density of two units per acre; while the high end of the density range is not guaranteed,the city council at its discretion may allow development at a final density of up to four units per acre through the performance bonus process. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1, 1-11-2010) Sec.78-1637.-Performance bonus requirements. Within the urban density area, developers have the opportunity to increase the base density by going above and beyond the Basic Conservation Design Master Plan requirement. By implementing a combination of development enhancements that not only preserve but improve the natural characteristics of the property or preserve and enhance existing landmarks,the developer shall become eligible for a density bonus. The extent of such density bonus shall be determined by the city council. Development enhancements include but are not necessarily limited to the following: (1) Reforestation beyond existing woodland limits; (2) Water quality improvements; (3) Improvements in ecological grade of existing communities; (4) Upgrading of edge buffering to maximum,or tunneled,character;and (5) Major preservation or enhancement of existing landmarks. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1, 1-11-2010) Page 15 DIVISION 4.-LONG-TERM PRESERVATION • S Sec.78-1638.-Preservation requirements. The developer shall establish and implement measures that will ensure the preservation and maintenance of those elements of the development that are determined to require long-term or permanent protection from development or misuse. Such measures may include but are not limited to: conservation easements; deed restrictions; private covenants;transfer of ownership to agencies such as the Minnesota Land Trust or the Nature Conservancy,or to the city via dedication,etc. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1, 1-11-2010) Sec.78-1639.-Buyer education. The developer shall establish covenants documenting the elements of the development to be protected and how they are to be protected, and shall establish a defined program for education of the initial purchasers of lots within the development as to the limitations that affect future use of the property. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1,1-11-2010) DIVISION 5.-RESOURCES Sec.78-1640.-Resources. The primary references for facilitating the conservation design process include the following: • Orono Rural Oasis Study(DSU,2005). • 2008-2030 City of Orono Community Management Plan,Chapter 3A—Environmental Protection Plan(City of Orono,2009). • Orono Natural Resources Inventory (Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services/Bonestroo Natural Resources Group, 2006). • Minnesota Land Cover Classification System(MLCCS). (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§1, 1-11-2010)\ Page 16 • • Chapter 82—Subdivision Regulations Sec.82-256.-Double-frontage lots,access to lots,and front/back lot divisions. (a) Double-frontage lots.Double-frontage and reversed-frontage lots shall be avoided except where necessary to provide separation of residential development from traffic arterials or to overcome specific disadvantages of topography and orientation. (b) Access from any arterial roadway.Lots shall not,in general,derive access exclusively from an arterial roadway.Where driveway access from any arterial roadway may be necessary for several adjoining lots,the council may require that such lots be served by a combined access drive in order to limit possible traffic hazard on such roadway.Where possible,driveways shall be designed and arranged so as to avoid requiring vehicles to back into traffic on any arterial roadway. (c) Front/back lot subdivisions.Flag lots and easement back lots shall not be created.Front/back lot divisions shall be allowed only in conjunction with the creation of an outlot to provide access from the back lot to the public or private road.Such outlot shall not be allowed as creditable lot area for either the back or front lots.Front/back lot subdivisions shall adhere to the following standards: (1) Applicability. a. Front/back lot divisions may be used when existing property dimensions are narrow and deep,such that lot width does not allow for a side-by-side lot split,but acreage is adequate to provide a front lot and a back lot without requiring an area variance when the area of the outlot access corridor is excluded. b. Front/back lot divisions may be used for individual lot splits but may not be used when subdividing a large parcel into numerous lots if creation of a back lot is merely a convenience to the developer rather than supported by unique site factors. c. A front/back lot division shall not be allowed when any existing residence on a neighboring property abutting the proposed access outlot is located nearer its affected side lot line than a distance equivalent to the zoning district required front yard depth. (2) Dimensional standards.Dimensional standards for back lots shall be as follows: a. Lot area shall be 150 percent of the zoning district requirement.Wetlands may be allowed as area credit for meeting the 150 percent back lot area requirement,as long as the back lot contains sufficient contiguous dry buildable land to satisfy the minimum acreage requirement of the underlying zoning district. b. Lot width measured parallel to the front or street lot line at the street yard setback line of a lakeshore back lot,or at the rear of the front yard setback line of a non-lakeshore back lot,shall meet the zoning district width requirement.The street yard or front yard for any back lot will be a yard starting where the narrow access outlot corridor ends and the lot begins.Lakeshore back lots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline,at the lakeshore setback line and at the street yard setback line. c. The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150 percent of the zoning district front yard requirement. d. The required side yard and rear yard depths for back lots shall be 150 percent of the zoning district yard requirements.The required lakeshore yard of a lakeshore back lot shall meet the zoning district lakeshore yard requirements. (3) Dimensional standards for front lots.A front lot created as part of a front/back lot division shall meet all zoning district area,width and setback standards;except that the required side yard of the front lot adjacent to the access outlot shall be equivalent to the side street yard requirement for that zoning district. (4) Access requirements. a. Access outlots shall be 30 feet minimum width,and shall be wide enough to accommodate drainage,snow removal and screening without encroaching on neighboring properties. b. In approving front/back lot divisions,the city may require that both front lot and back lot share a driveway access within the access outlot if the council determines that creating an additional access to the existing street will be a potential safety hazard. c. Driveways within a back lot shall be located at least ten feet from the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lots. Page 17 d. No more than two residences may•rved by a driveway located within an access outl• e. No access outlot may be platted abutting an adjacent outlot except when the intent is to combine the two access outlots for creation of a public or private road meeting city standards. (5) Screening requirements and accessory structure standards.Front/back lot subdivisions shall be designed in a manner such that the screening requirements and accessory structure standards of section 78-1370 can be met. (6) Effective date.The requirements and standards of this section shall apply only to those front/back lot divisions which received preliminary plat approval after January 1, 1994. (Code 1984,§11.31(5);Ord.No.122 2nd series,§3, 12-13-1993;Ord.No.64 3rd series,§2,9-14-2009) DIVISION 3.-ROADS AND PUBLIC WAYS Sec.82-281.-Design standards. (a) Generally. In order to provide for roads of suitable location, width and improvement to accommodate prospective traffic and afford satisfactory access to police, firefighting, snow removal, sanitation and road maintenance equipment, and to coordinate roads so as to compose a convenient system and avoid undue hardships to adjoining properties,the following design standards for roads are required: (1) Road surfacing and improvements. After the sewer and water utilities have been installed by the subdivider, the subdivider shall construct all road pavement,shoulders,drainage improvements and structures,curbs,culs-de-sac,and sidewalks in conformance with all construction standards and specifications adopted by the city and shall be incorporated into the construction plans required to be submitted to the subdivider for final subdivision approval. (2) Rights-of-way. Rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the following performance standard: a. Minimum right-of-way widths. Principal arterial,intermediate arterial As recommended by the State Department of Transportation Minor arterial 80 feet Collector 70 feet ,Local 50 feet Parkway 100 feet Culs-de-sac 50 feet radius b. Rights-of-way are needed for future roadways in the opinion of the city. c. Right-of-way widths or additional widths in existing rights-of-way in excess of the standards designated in this chapter when, due to topography,additional width is necessary to provide adequate earth slopes.Such slopes shall not be in excess of 3:1. (b) Railroads and limited-access roadways. Railroad rights-of-way and limited-access roadways where so located as to affect the subdivision of adjoining lands shall be treated as follows: (1) In residential districts,a buffer strip at least 25 feet in depth in addition to the normal depth of the lot required in the district shall be provided adjacent to the railroad right-of-way or limited-access roadway. (2) In districts zoned for business, commercial or industrial uses, the nearest street extending parallel or approximately parallel to the railroad shall be at a sufficient distance to ensure suitable depth for commercial or industrial sites. Page 18 (3) Streetsparallel to the railroad w•ntersectin a street which crosses the railroad at a shall be at a distance of at least 150 feet g 0 from the railroad right-of-way.Such distance shall be determined with due consideration of the minimum distance required for future separation of grades by means of appropriate approach gradients. (4) Streets crossing the railroads shall be avoided. (c) Intersections. (1) Streets shall be laid out so as to intersect as nearly as possible at right angles.A proposed intersection of two new streets at an angle or less than 75 degrees shall not be acceptable. An oblique street should be curved approaching an intersection and should be approximately at right angles for at least 100 feet from the intersection. Not more than two streets shall intersect at any one point unless specifically approved by the city. (2) Proposed new intersections along one side of an existing street shall coincide with any existing intersections on the opposite side of such street. Intersection jogs with centerline offsets of less than 150 feet shall not be permitted, except where the intersected street has separated dual drives without median breaks at either intersection.Where streets intersect major streets,their alignment shall be continuous.Intersections of arterial roadways shall be at least 800 feet apart. (3) Minimum curb radius at the intersection of two local streets shall be at least 15 feet, and minimum curb radius at an intersection involving a collector street or local streets in a commercial or industrial area shall be at least 25 feet.Alley intersections and abrupt changes in alignment within a block shall have the corners cut off in accordance with standard engineering practice to permit safe vehicular movement. (4) Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least 30 feet in a residential area and 60 feet in a commercial or industrial area.The stopping area shall be designed to provide a maximum grade of two percent. (5) Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot corner that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility,the subdivider shall cut such ground and/or vegetation(including trees) in connection with the grading of the right- of-way to the extent deemed necessary by the city to provide an adequate sight distance. (6) The crown of all streets,including intersections,shall be three percent or less. (d) Typical section. The typical section indicated in this subsection is as determined for a clay subgrade (A-6 soil classification) and may be subject to change.Soil borings may be required to be determined by the city. (1) Private street,residential I Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section (feet) (feet) 3-6 50 24 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Over 7 50 28 78-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface (2) Public street,residential Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section (feet) (feet) 3-10 50 28 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Over 10 50 32 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Maximum cul-de-sac length=1,000 feet Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac=10 (3) Public street,commercial or industrial Page 19 Units R.O.W.* M.P. * Section (feet) (feet) 1+ 70 32 8-inch class 4 18-inch class 5 100%crushed 4-inch 2341 bituminous surface *Right-of-Way Width **Minimum Paved Width (e) Horizontal and vertical control. Horizontal and vertical control shall be as follows: Functional Design Vertical 'Horizontal Class Speed Control Control (mph) Maximum Minimum Gradient Radius (percent) (feet) P ivate street 30 12 275 (residential) i Public street 30 10 275 (residential) Public street 40 8 400 (commercial and . industrial) (Code 1984,§11.33) Sec.82-282.-Off-site premises;roadways. (a) Access to improved public or private roadways. No subdivision shall be approved unless the area to be subdivided shall have adequate access from an existing publicly dedicated and opened roadway or on a private roadway open to travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or between persons and the city.Such roadway must be suitably improved as required by the city,the state or the county. If the public roadway, including but not limited to existing bridges, drainage structures, lighting, shoulders, base, pavement, alignment or sight distance, is not suitable to handle the proposed additional vehicular traffic from the subdivision, the subdivider at his expense will be responsible for first improving the public roadway to a standard acceptable to the city,to ensure that the health,safety and welfare of the citizens presently using the roadway and in the future will be protected and will not be adversely affected by the increased use of the roadway caused by the subdivision. This improvement shall be accomplished prior to final subdivision approval unless the city agrees and the subdivider provides a suitable performance bond to complete the improvements in the subdivider's agreement. (b) Access to improved public roadways over existing private roadways. Wherever the area to be subdivided is to utilize an existing private roadway in order to gain access to the public roadway,such private roadway shall be suitably improved as provided in this section for public roadways. (Code 1984,§11.32(1)) Sec.82-283.-On-site roadways. (a) Grading and improvement plan. Roadways shall be graded and improved to conform to the city's construction standards and specifications and shall be approved as to design and specifications by the city engineer, in accordance with the construction plans required to be submitted prior to final subdivision approval. (b) Topography and arrangement. Page 20 (1) Roadways shall be related apprcStely to the topography. Roadways shall be curve erever possible to avoid conformity of lot appearance. All roadways shall be arranged so as to obtain as many as possible of the building sites at or above the grades of the street. Grades of streets shall conform as closely as possible to the original topography. A combination of steep grades and curves shall be avoided. (2) All streets shall be properly integrated with the existing and proposed system of thoroughfares and dedicated rights-of-way as established in the comprehensive municipal plan. (3) All thoroughfares shall be properly related to specific traffic generators, such as industries, business districts, schools, churches, and shopping centers;to population densities;and to the pattern of existing and proposed land uses. (4) Roadways shall be laid out to conform as much as possible to the topography,to discourage use by through traffic,to permit efficient drainage and utility systems, and to require the minimum number of roadways necessary to provide convenient and safe access to property. (5) The gridiron roadway pattern need not necessarily be adhered to,and the use of curvilinear roadways or U-shaped roadways shall be encouraged where such use will result in a more desirable layout. (6) Culs-de-sac shall be discouraged; proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions or unless in the opinion of the city such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development of adjacent tracts. (7) In business and industrial developments, the roadways and other accessways shall be planned in connection with the grouping of buildings, location of rail facilities,and the provisions of alleys,truck loading and maneuvering areas,and walks and parking areas so as to minimize conflict of movement between the various types of traffic,including pedestrian. (c) Blocks. (1) Blocks shall have sufficient width to provide for two tiers of lots of appropriate depths.Exceptions to this prescribed block width shall be permitted in blocks adjacent to arterial roadways,railroads or waterways. (2) The lengths,widths,and shapes of blocks shall be such as are appropriate for the locality and the type of development contemplated; but block lengths in residential areas shall not exceed 1,500 feet or 12 times the minimum lot width required in the zoning district,nor be less than 400 feet in length from centerline to centerline of adjacent streets.Wherever practicable, blocks along arterial collector roadways shall be not less than 1,000 feet in length. (3) In all blocks,the city shall require the reservation of an easement through the block to accommodate utilities, drainage facilities or pedestrian traffic.Pedestrian ways or crosswalks, not less than ten feet wide,may be required by the city through the center of blocks more than 800 feet long where deemed essential to provide circulation of access to schools, playgrounds, shopping centers, transportation or other community facilities. Blocks designed for industrial uses shall be of such length and width as may be determined suitable by the city for prospective use. (d) Access to primary arterials. Where a subdivision borders on or contains an existing or proposed arterial,the city may require that access to such roadways be limited by one of the following means: (1) The subdivision of lots so as to back onto the arterials and front onto a parallel local or collector roadway;no access shall be provided from the arterial,and screening shall be provided in a strip of land along the rear property line of such lots. (2) A series of culs-de-sac, U-shaped streets,or short loops entered from and designed generally at right angles to such a parallel street, with the rear lines of their terminal lots backing onto the arterial. (3) A marginal-access or service road separated from the arterial by a planting or grass strip and having access to the arterial at suitable points. (e) Road names and street addresses.The sketch plan as submitted shall not indicate any names upon proposed streets.The city shall name all roads at the time of preliminary subdivision approval and assign street addresses. The local postmaster shall be consulted by the zoning administrator. Names shall be sufficiently different in sound and in spelling from other road names in the area so as not to cause confusion. A road which is or is planned as a continuation of an existing road shall bear the same name. (f) Road regulatory signs.The subdivider shall deposit with the city at the time of final subdivision approval the sum of money as determined by the city for each road sign and the installation cost.The city shall install all road signs before issuance of certificates of occupancy for any residence on the streets approved. The city shall place all signs at the developer's expense at all intersections within or abutting the subdivision,the type and location of which shall be approved by the city. (g) Reserve strips.The creation of reserve strips shall not be permitted adjacent to a proposed street in such a manner as to deny access from adjacent property to such street. (h) Construction of roads and dead-end roads. (1) Construction of roads. The arrangement of streets shall provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary for convenient movement of traffic, effective fire protection, for efficient provision of utilities, and where such continuation is in accordance with the city comprehensive municipal plan.If the adjacent property is undeveloped and the Page 21 street must be a dead-end stree•porarily,the right-of-way shall be extended to thSperty line.The city may limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with this chapter. (2) Dead-end roads(permanent).Where a road does not extend to the boundary of the subdivision and its continuation is not required by the city for access to adjoining property, its terminus shall normally not be nearer to such boundary than 50 feet. However,the city may require the reservation of an appropriate easement to accommodate drainage facilities,pedestrian traffic or utilities.A cul-de-sac shall be provided at the end of a permanent dead-end street in accordance with the city's construction standards and specifications. For greater convenience to traffic and more effective police and fire protection, permanent dead-end streets shall, in general, be discouraged and where allowed be limited in length in accordance with this chapter. (Code 1984,§11.32(2)) Sec.82-284.-Road dedication and reservations. (a) New perimeter streets. Street systems in new subdivisions shall be laid out so as to eliminate or avoid new perimeter half-streets.Where an existing half-street is adjacent to a new subdivision,the other half of the street shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider.The city may authorize a new perimeter street where the subdivider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way width within his own subdivision boundaries. (b) Widening and realignment of existing roads. Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or when the comprehensive municipal plan or some other agency indicates plans for realignment or widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads.Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the full width as required by this chapter. (c) Use of reserved land. Land reserved for any road purposes may not be counted in satisfying yard or area requirements of chapter 78, whether the land is to be dedicated to the city in fee simple or an easement is granted to the city. (Code 1984,§11.40) Sec.82-285.-Pedestrian access. The council may require sidewalks or other pedestrian pathways in order to facilitate pedestrian access from the roads to schools, parks, playgrounds or other nearby roads at least five feet in width.Sidewalks shall be five feet in width and pathways no more than eight feet in width. (Code 1984,§11.44) Secs.82-286-82-299.-Reserved. DIVISION 4.-CONSERVATION DESIGN Sec.82-300.-Conservation design required. All proposed residential subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments greater than five acres in total area or guided for urban density (greater than one unit per two acres)shall be subject to the provisions of chapter 78,article XII with regards to conservation design. (Ord.No.67 3rd series,§2,1-11-2010) Page 22 • PC Exhibit F Oliver Hill—2350 Watertown &PID 34-118-23-33-0055 #13-3595 Summary Estimate of Fees* Preliminary Subdivision Plat Application: Preliminary Subdivision Application $850+$30/lot Rezoning RPUD $35/dwelling unit Proposed Private Road $650+$0.50/lineal foot or Proposed Public Road $950+$0.50/lineal foot Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $275+$25/stub Application Escrow (guarantees payment of City's consultant costs) $10,000 Estimated cost of City Engineer's review of preliminary plat $4,500 (Actual cost will be billed to property owner) Final Subdivision Plat Application: Final Subdivision Application, including Legal Review and Filing (w/covenants) (Covers first review of documents, if additional time is required, those costs will be billed to the property owner.) $700 Sewer Connection (Orono project 73-1A) $16,720/unit-likely waived due to developer-installed laterals Long Lake Sewer& Water Water and Drainage Tonnection runk Fee Charges \\ \\\�``\\������` $ (Confirm with Long Lake) Storm $5,765/ac x 4.8 acres=$27,672 (paid for the entire plat) Park Fee (8%of Fair Market Value), but no less than $3,250/per lot and no more than $5,550 per lot x#of new lots $5,550/lot Estimated cost of City Engineer's review of final plat $500.00 (Actual cost will be billed to property owner) Final Subdivision Application Fee is paid with the Final Plat application. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee, Park Fee, Sewer and Water Connection Charges and consultant costs are paid before the final plat is recorded. *Based on 2013 Fee Schedule • • PC Exhibit G N N to i N s �. O 1• U] pop �L a U R c) a M oi R O .a y Q 77 N 7 ppp161 .~-1 a N 1 1 % 1 1 1 I .fi.Rv. 00 00 00 00 00 00 N N N N 00 Eiii d N N N N N N 00 00 00 00 N 0) a o d PO d d a) d 61 � i 0 Q U U (4 (/) cr z vl v) v) ci) o rn CA C. a) E a, a u pD O a) 11 0. d9 a O .+ ++ �+ bA 0. v71, h pp�. O a a a -8 as h O �+ . w, 0 0 0 .. R 0 0 O ,� a) 0a. 7 as o f o . i .. a w o u_ , E 0) : Gir'14 C.a EA t0Q EA •o C 0o . G ,.. a a M d aUi V a o o �y E O . •0 c. E o. 6+ , o.prp - U .E U U o c 1 E E E ; ^po .. o 's, o ^ao 4o Oo OO OO o0 oNM7o ao O ro 1: i. E O O L O O OO OO Oo O O 0 �0000 ViO o O al = a0 © ' o E o ago 5o oo oo oo kno v, pp3000o avn '� o �,I z a� •-E � E aEA EA EAER EAEA EAEA � � � �� E" EAvEA ER w a E 0) at 0 L L R o O r+ +^+ O 0 d ok a E a O RI O1:1 0. bA Q!r 66 C 0 R a rna~ a 0 R .O. z z eta U � ' Z a C. o Ac C • ' O 0, o et R^ ,� �, W c ua W C =.rn .0 w E F+ = L O g o Ct > R u • Z CLO O. O C., "71 'Q : ° C Zba E © z w w E a5 A 0a ai i E W w ' . Q : aZ C..) a..O 3 3 A: U a` o a a," wO a 'c a 41 C.) a a . azat a E R z Z a. a a i. R F. Q O .- ' 0. 3 o c a 0 "" o. ms E � E■ 3 T E E 0ao. ao 'aa 3 a Z A i. Q aea = p o L. a Q dQ W a0 `'"0 cS .;.. 0 W R a ` R 0 6 w , ".� O 161 bD z •U W A A ° p � V W W G C.; '7 ox O CI mRW O ar WA A ao ra Z Q " ❑ uir �" c •c 0 ° ""Ao o a E o R : a +•�Q A aa ` CC ) U E to 1UZ . d yoA A ' © Z AUa W a Wu0 duU au a a Cl.) Z Z g A a. a ZW aW A c 0. w C4 Q Q ow Aa 0 Q a U N a N a • • M N to .-. o) N c Oo �L G 'CZ en O M O .0 y 7 7 7 N N v Va 00 00 00 N N 00 N r IS 00 00 r v vd U c a z a va va i w w w I., i C C C. G O as 44 C. C. Cr ++ eaCC E E CC CCE CCCCo C C I)i v' y C C 0 0 N N O O WA in ER ER 44 G U U A GA 7 O 3 7 E.,O ¢ O a + + C.C. to.-EL av, O 0 cz C.4 0 0 0 BOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C. 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c, C O o =p, O aocc woo oocvivivio i• o O p•�r C.00o poo � � � Nrrv� o WI•-. yg CC N C.-- r o r r '0 CT CT N N N N w FT. ER �.., EA 6R 6R ER EA ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER ER C C +O*' C) eV •O p O Ca., O. •u C c. o. E a ei iC e ' ' e so O i uo C n bD o •y o _ 2 o'u et :a C =t) o a) oCd et a C o y 0w Qo a .2 C .; C. VC •3 i. v a) E CD •i F.. = p e Ga a U' O C bD ga ag C Wv, 'a Z 0 © 'O 'eJ W a O O E . W C C v, .0 © >, i > YE C O •7 a) ea "O U OQ • V ..el n 7.O/ ea r p � A., C UO C . d E 01 z > . ' p `� O a V < W W pZ 3 C p 3c W oaEE ° . CCO) � C � o � aoC° v • 3W = . xS ° v .° ° wWOo x . Erj, c .. a, ea cc i i a�, C e� U U c ee p aII r tdI F. va o U a a , .E .ba "a "aw �° "o "o "a � c Z a CD d Z cu a) 1 - 3 a) t. A W A A CC"„ 0 Z 1 � = o o u o rn u Q "o a.E o o a" a" o 0 0.CA Oa .. aJ Q ° 0 et co 0 0 vl r. a> O i i O 44 i i i C Q z .. Va WWW WWWW U ii eoDC..- aaaaaaa0 W v a, ;. W q '7 N Q > W vaa4 "o as Q • • o) zs 4 ti o) U O O O O d G N N M y N ..-. ~O N L N M M N 00 • R 6,^c a; v, v, O, O QU a a aaa 'I O T. a bD4 Cu C e.. O C. O▪ .• mac' asCI ., Ca +� C c 6U CV D e• -u O y ow Ta y V > -= ,p +L+ -p = ao w h G CJ .0 'C a c' 4, c' 0 G R � 0 GO � d ,, a CD CC v, O '6 I. hI S u ea ea u +O+ ea 7 e0a O O R d ••cn � C O 04 -c c4, O CD ea c" -O 0 c2. O E ^ w a, d °' U m E CD06 ° ° � s � 3N , E E, 4 � � .72 a, i a E - E ; E —. c 'c y -O 6 O a+ ea -4, •5 C, .E a; sac,= .a etE c .. � « � E © Eu i 7 as ^ -: c ^c as "O ea Cn ea R Y a, O E a +' a4' = O w R O d 0 6 9 C 0 e„ r+ L L a ^O• 0 cl w _a 0 as a O .. ^C R '=▪ O r 4 . O O 00 o C w >,�" `n• c en v, en ..•. �r o = O 00 • ; y yam, E yh, Z , c. E 0 u N O -c co a. Ca `n 6 y .E CC O R C © V U -c R -c O 0U �. s°. C4u E e °' ac•oaco dE a, E CI) Q o. O a' 4 E w ea y d y R O CA W O 'A u 6. o L O w. az A -o • E Z W c A 00 Cr C ° C > 6 VC ea R4:1 R O EP 6 O = cO a a' c a. Eyo E ; eto ead O ' •E c , u .0E40 _ bD 'O- , t, a'p v Om U 0. � O a O O c 0.) CD as > n ++ d WaaG W U A = o U5 U e G , L . L a a a' a' d R , Z a 'cam ,, N- � ,c � d U � V N 0 Q Ca CC c� CC C Ca Q, 4 M CO 00 N a ..l 4. 0 U CJ 0 v3 E-, 69 • • c,„ as . as c,„ u b ea O O CS b0 041.4 a.+ > 66 .0 6) 1 . h s = 0 ) 4 u 7 )6, a.)3 w 4 U] a) 7 �L S•". y I. a) 67 L Ca 0 f'Z Tr y w o o 6� .0 +-•' NI et a ev y b o=n c _ F ti m d ICS 0 = u C a y ro U o Y o F O s. .� w F ti'n o� -oo b y v, •- CL w 6 T u � y o �� � s y 0 b w L 3 a 3 Ca 0 W ° a la 0D O. aa ° OA 0 c ea ^ 4. r.O .� '? "c w E to CVI a' " _ ^ � D 4 >`n O .4.. pOo pp - a O RC C oro7 G 'n = N t V N o2 -4-.+ C. .0 C y n y bn ' a, y Ka EZ 0oc Y vv .8.- ^>. o r. , w o3 = oEro > o f L w O oi o 0D v .4 ai a 01)E :? . 0c bD : Ca E W N 2 e N V ' y 8 y L. 3 L 0 u W 0 ,3o. L yF o o O ? ° h o c = " C •• e M1 b £ Eo N V NW w i ' py O w O . . x .T. Gzu a ea as ? co o � � E ° ° ° =�eo ; °� cao Ea y E c ad ffc bD o+ W x s a9 as.o7c s i � � � V� 4. a ° a Cr � °' o X 0. ^ a,0. asy _ ° '-c CB. . F ro0 ° u - C. pv= n. . v n. a ti 'A , EC = y s. o re cnym Eov, a Ci > u o > *i pW C > a a Ow 112, I" .�.. u N 0 0Cr/ 00 4C1oM k a6 C 6 44.CJ R G� 0 00 O .- 000" CUC C.� >, C 69 69 69 69 64 s ss R sW�, u �' u 7 4 C6 rWii = C i 64 `" F CL x '44F- d 'CIO ai i W y C '2 o O, C R p, 0O� a 600 6) elW O E M ‘.0 l� 0.4 6 O O a) O. E9 69 69 > O O CY Cp C. .p a+ a, MI O « 'v u L. C A .,rl c� s. L V a) 0 0.4 C a�i ^O u a) cJ y k 6 C a. w R +••' u W W .fl •� Y W rr C ,= v7 a)CA Y •� O ,b n W = W C C6 6) .a = O 66 . — ., F.. Wo E 4 ^O Gir ,—, .M,i N 0 C. i.r VI o C .� C G a 0 N _ [ 62. �� O O O U = O eCa i N N N Q Y ea as a y i,F s.. ss.. s0. V Ii Ca L C = W et �. 4 •C U Q Q < N y y B C y u QC C y •R - c d 0 4.Z a a = C UZ w 0 C � 0 ° 6) • A C = = ;o • C -o i ai ^a . v, ai ea Z A �? c� a°' cG c� .24 L 3 w w ve oO oo ° CR , , ) a o t �A y u , Q d .sC a 3 °' D w w w w w w ; •o++ WCA .0, 0 U �. C A 0 a) a) E „ Y v) O = O N .4 W L i w 6 d b=A 0 0 0 0 0 Q.)0 .� � L O. 00 0 0 00.r Q s u Z �? n va U y y Q W o o Q u � ^C C. e = O. 0 •y Ga, E Y z 3 > L'. "a o o 8 CC = 44 ew > o 0 0 O R U ` 0 6' N v) cl) yN N — 0. aa1O • • PC Exhibit H Revision 12-14-11 GLENDALE COVE SEWER & WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into effective retroactively to the 1st day of July, 2011 by and between the CITY OF ORONO, a Minnesota municipal corporation("Orono"), and the CITY OF LONG LAKE, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Long Lake"), hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Cities." RECITALS A. The Cities desire to enter into agreements for the extension of water and/or sanitary sewer service to certain properties located within the City of Orono; and B. Under Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 10, the Cities are empowered to enter into agreements for the joint exercise of powers with other governmental units for public purposes, such as the providing of water and/or sanitary sewer service; NOW,THEREFORE,the Cities agree as follows: 1. PURPOSES. This Agreement shall establish the responsibilities of the Cities regarding the operation, maintenance and extension of water and sanitary sewer service from Long Lake to Orono for the properties listed in Exhibit"A"("Glendale Cove Service Area") as shown on Exhibit"B." 2. IMPROVEMENTS. The following subparagraphs (a)through and including (c) apply only to the"Improvements" (defined below) constructed in the Glendale Cove Service Area: a. Existing System. Orono has inspected and approved construction of the existing water and sanitary sewer service to the Glendale Cove Service Area("Improvements"), and Long Lake has inspected and approved construction of the connections of the Improvements to the Long Lake sanitary sewer and water systems. b. Future Extensions. Orono will oversee and shall be solely responsible for the costs associated with the construction of any future extensions to the Improvements (as further discussed in subsection (c) (below). The existing Improvements are located substantially as shown on Exhibit"C,"attached hereto, and will be available for use only by the properties depicted in Exhibits "A" and"B," No further use or extension of the Improvements may be made without express written approval of Long Lake, to be given in its sole discretion. Long Lake shall not be charged for any costs associated with future extensions to the Improvements nor shall Long Lake residents be assessed for costs associated with such extensions. c. Costs. Any extensions to the Improvements for the benefit of Orono properties will be the sole responsibility of Orono which may, in its sole discretion, charge said costs to the developer of the benefitted land or owners of the benefited properties, as determined in Orono's sole discretion. Long Lake will not be responsible for any costs related to the construction of such extensions to the Improvements whether said extensions are located within the boundaries of the City of Orono or the boundaries of the City of Long Lake. 1 i • Revision 12-14-11 3. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. Long Lake agrees to continually supply water to and accept sewer flow from the Glendale Cove Service Area so long as systems are maintained and operable to allow such service. Orono agrees to maintain, at its sole cost, that portion of the water/sewer system that is located within the boundaries of City of Orono, Long Lake agrees to maintain, at its sole cost,•that portion of the water/sewer system that is located within the boundaries of the City of Long Lake. 4. USAGE CHARGES. a. Properties with Sewer Only. All existing Category 1 and 2 developed properties in the Glendale Cove Service Area have connected to available municipal water, and all undeveloped Category 1 properties have municipal water available and will be required to connect to municipal water at the time of development. In the event that any Category 3 properties or other properties currently not within but which later become part of the Glendale Cove Service Area connect to municipal sewer but do not connect to municipal water("Sewer Only Properties"),the use of water billing flows for sanitary sewer billing purposes will not be feasible. Also, the use of sanitary sewer flow metering is not practical or feasible based on the limited number of residences which may become Sewer Only Properties. Therefore, for sanitary sewer billing purposes for the Sewer Only Properties, Long Lake will quarterly invoice Orono a standard flat rate sanitary sewer charge based upon the average calendar first quarter municipal water usage for properties in the Glendale Cove Service Area for each property connected to Long Lake's sanitary sewer system. Orono will provide notification to Long Lake with the number of Sewer Only Properties and shall pay the flat rate for each such Sewer Only Property within thirty (30)days of receipt of the invoice. b. Properties with Water and Sewer. For water and sewer billing purposes, Orono will read the water meters for those properties connected to Long Lake's water system in the Glendale Cove Service Area on a quarterly basis and forward the water usage information to Long Lake. Long Lake will quarterly invoice Orono for such usage at the same billing rate for both water and sewer that is charged Long Lake customers. Orono shall pay the invoice within thirty(30) days of receipt of the invoice. 5. LONG LAKE SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES. Long Lake will bill Orono a sanitary sewer connection charge for each property designated as a Category 3 property in Exhibit A that connects to sanitary sewer in the Glendale Cove Service Area. At any time upon request of Long Lake, Orono will provide Long Lake with the total number of properties connected to the sanitary sewer system, and will also notify Long Lake at the time each new connection occurs. The sewer connection charge will be as indicated.in Long Lake's fee schedule for the current year, and shall consist only of a hookup fee. The hookup fee shall be the same rate as that charged to Long Lake residents. Orono shall pay the invoice within thirty(30) days of receipt of the invoice. Long Lake, with assistance from Orono, shall have the right to audit the number of homes within the Glendale Cove Service Area that have sewer connections. The following applies to the properties within each Category: Category 1 Properties: The Long Lake sewer hookup fee for all Category 1 properties was paid to Long Lake at the time those properties were platted (or in the case of 190 North Willow, was paid to Orono at the time of connection, for pass-through to Long Lake) but no sewer tap fee was paid. The Cities agree that no tap fees will be due for Category 1 properties. 2 • • Revision 12-14-11 Category 2 Property: This property connected directly to the Long Lake sewer system in 2002 and paid the appropriate MCES SAC charges at that time. The Cities agree that no sewer hookup or sewer tap fees are due. Category 3 Properties: These properties are guided for low-medium density single-family residential use in the Orono 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan and represent potential future connections to the Long Lake sewer system. 6. MCES CHARGES. a. MCES Sewer Availability Charges. Orono will issue connection permits for each new connection and will collect the MCES Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) and forward same to MCES. b. MCES Wastewater Charges. Long Lake will be responsible for paying the ongoing MCES Wastewater Charges. 7. WATER CONNECTION CHARGES. Long Lake will bill Orono a water connection charge for each property designated as a Category 3 property in Exhibit A that connects to municipal water in the Glendale Cove Service Area. Connection to the water system for Category 3 properties is on a voluntary basis for each property and is not mandated by Orono. At any time upon request of Long Lake, Orono will provide Long Lake with the total number of properties connected to the water system, and will also notify Long Lake at the time each new connection occurs. The water connection charge will be as indicated in Long Lake's fee schedule for the current year and shall consist only of a hookup fee. Orono shall pay the invoice within 30 days of receipt of the invoice. Long Lake,with assistance from Orono, shall have the right to audit the number of homes within the Glendale Cove Service Area that have water connections. The following applies to the properties within each Category: Category 1 Properties: The Long Lake water hookup fee for all Category 1 properties was paid to Long Lake at the time those properties were platted (or in the case of 190 North Willow, was paid to Orono at the time of connection,for pass-through to Long Lake) but no water tap fee was paid. The Cities agree that no tap fees will be due for Category 1 properties. Category 2 Property: This property connected directly to the Long Lake water system many years ago. The Cities agree that no water hookup or water tap fees are due. Category 3 Properties: These properties are guided for low-medium density single-family residential use in the Orono 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan and represent potential future connections to the Long Lake water system. 8. METERS. Orono, at its sole cost,will install, maintain, service, and read all water meters in the Glendale Cove Service Area but Long Lake will have access to meters for inspection and verification purposes. An Orono employee will be present during such inspections. 3 • • Revision 12-14-11 9. FUTURE SERVICE TO CATEGORY 3 PROPERTIES. The Category 3 properties if redeveloped for residential use at the low-medium density for which they are guided within the Orono 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan, could result in 15-25 additional future connections to the Long Lake sewer and water systems. Long Lake agrees to provide sewer and water service for up to 25 residential sewer and water connections within the Category 3 properties under the terms provided for in paragraphs (5.) and (7.) above. 10. REGULATION OF USE. Orono agrees to regulate and control the use of the sanitary sewer system within Orono so as to prevent the discharge of waste or any storm water, surface water, ground water, roof runoff, or subsurface drainage into the sewer system that is in violation of Long Lake City Ordinances, as such may be amended from time-to-time. In case of any continuing violations of such ordinances after reasonable notice, Long Lake shall have the option to terminate this Agreement per the provisions of Paragraph 16 of this Agreement. 11. LIABILITY; INDEMNIFICATION. Each party to this Agreement shall be liable for the acts of their own officers, employees and agents and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party, its officers; employees and/or agents. Liability and damages arising from the Cities' acts and omissions are governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act,Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Section 471.59, and other applicable law. Each party warrants that they have an insurance or self-insurance program and that each has minimum coverage consistent with the liability limits contained in Chapter 466. This Agreement does not constitute a waiver by either party of limitations on liability provided by Chapter 466 or other applicable law. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies that each party may have for the other party's failure to • fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Each party shall defend, indemnify and hold the other party harmless from any and all liability, on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the alleged negligent or intentional acts of the indemnifying party. Neither party shall be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned by its own negligence or intentional acts. 12. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended to provide for additional connections to Long Lake's water and sanitary sewer systems by written agreement between the Cities. 13. NOTICES. Any notice required hereunder shall be hand delivered or mailed as follows: AS TO ORONO: City of Orono Attn.: City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 AS TO LONG LAKE: City of Long Lake Attn.: City Administrator 450 Virginia Avenue P.O. Box 606 Long Lake, MN 55356 4 110 • Revision 12-14-11 14. DATA PRACTICES ACT. This Agreement is subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. If either party receives a data request affecting data or property of the other party, the party receiving the request shall immediately notify the other party of the request and of the scope of intended disclosure. Each party retains its full rights under the Act, 15. RECORDS. Each party will keep proper books and records to reflect all expenses and receipts relevant to the subject matter of this Agreement. Long Lake agrees that its books will reflect the application of receipts to capital and operating accounts in accordance with sound accounting practice. Each party will have access to all relevant books and records of the other party. 16. DURATION/DISPUTES/TERMINATION. This Agreement begins on the day it was approved and signed by the Cities and is effective retroactively to July 1, 2011 and shall be perpetual in duration unless terminated by the written agreement of both parties. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 24 months advance written notice to the other party. However, Long Lake may not terminate this Agreement unless alternative services are available to Orono on a reasonable basis. Any dispute under this Agreement shall be determined by binding arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the American Arbitration Association (or similar Association reasonably acceptable to the Cities) and judgment resulting from such arbitration may be entered into any Court having jurisdiction. 17. TERMINATION OF PRIOR AGREEMENTS. This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements between the Cities regarding sewer and water issues pertaining to the Glendale Cove Service Area. [NEXT PAGE IS THE SIGNATURE PAGE] 5 • • Revision 12-14-11 Dated: //q/ '2— CITY OF ORONO BY: . .1..„,e t?G/fre,c,, Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor ATTEST: eK44:41(-e. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Dated: f 9 r, z, CITY OF LONG LAKE BY: --Q Tim Hultma ayor AND j<esi { (Jeanette Moe er, City Clerk or Terry Post, City Administrator) 6 1111 • Revision 12-14-I1 "EXHIBIT A" GLENDALE COVE SERVICE AREA The Glendale Cove Service Area consists of the following properties: Category 1 properties: Lot 1, Block 1, Glendale Cove (190 Willow Drive North) PINS #34-1 1 8-23 32 0052 Lot 3, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2340 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-1 18-23 33 0062 Lot 4, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2330 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0063 Lot 5, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2320 Glendale.Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0064 Lot 6, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2325 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0065 Lot 7, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2335 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0066 Lot 8, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2345 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0067 Lot 9, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2365 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0068 Lot 10, Block 1, Glendale Cove (2385 Glendale Cove Lane) PINS #34-118-23 33 0069 Category 2 property: Lot 2, Block 1, Glendale Cove (177 Glendale Drive) PINS #34-118-23 32 0053 Category 3 properties: Lot 1, Block 1, Hunters Green (2340 Watertown Road) PINS #34-118-23 33 0057 Lot 2, Block 1, Hunters Green (2350 Watertown Road) PINS #34-118-23 33 0058 Lot 2, Block 1, Ulmer Estates (xxx Willow Drive North) PINS #34-118-23 33 0055 Unplatted Sec. 34 (2380 Watertown Road) PINS #34-118-23 33 0004 7 • • Glendale Cove Service Area '' A Utility htlotmatlon -- `'N........ 2400 • , :. 4 Sanitary Meal Arnim � ___�..._—_ _ f{�0 _ • -+ Sanitary Structural' �1:1�N ■Air Release '• .. . ■Alr Release MH Ac,., -Chan OUl 58 2625 2485 2445 +dean Out MH Zr� _ l l-i ;j. .. .1 Orb Stop Accurate :5 : i Dump Atli Accurate , - , 1111".:111111111 ,,: .: • . ' o Dander 8tabvn •rr - .Nolatldn v4ve .q+IedevenwoeAw.,. 200 ;� • ■LiftStation - 1 '111,• - ■Lift Station Accurate 155 'L LA-2" Jail�^:�� • •Meter Ikr 180 .. - d 5 h a' •Manhole • -16 !'i IIIIII '��a r •Manhole Roseate , _ a4 IIII Valve 156 141 LJ.A-21 LA-2;. 145 •...• Manbelewl Label r-I H) v .. ®�': u 131•Madtala Accurate 125 b �' ):.,: �N'M. ■Manhole l L. ...-1r i — Sanitary sowe pipe- 109 - t r __Lr`.-,. L.LA_ � •'. .. 126 120 _L!,-10 1 • �' .� • —City Farce Mein Pipe � - -•-'Metro gravity pipe 96 gg 1'; - i; ... .. 1 —Met Ccundl Facets Y 2 —Gay sewer service•, 42" 95 r' U 3 C. 111 I S- L-6 111110_� City'ewer servloo-. 81 80 A1' \�.Aq 6 i . --ceytrevey pipe,not I - ■ O Welter'Structures $5 86 65 -. di a Air Rel WW1 60 1-, •. a Curb Pox Aaalreu L, t4.1111111,-...�'Oew VnlveI .; I yCaw vdve Acaaate 61 LLA-23 51 LA- LL r:+Hydrant tw GV ;, -/-n_12 .. :+Meter wt QV ALF.. 35 38 41 �;;. w';=Nf s Ma t r MH .1, . y, k,. • o Water Tower t' + + Hydrant w/Labia 40 38 . 22 23&0 +liydmfiwlOVMx., 04 1 1.- IIIISt I•' • ,. -. fliydremwRty 2480 • 2440 �;`' 2245 ..__.._-.- W Wet D ,�n , .. . WaterW Pertlka '�"s'Itrc r y., . ill Parks 2570 2520 2460 I 2430 10 2325 • —` _ �n n 1 SCALE 1:2,682 may,,, —`_,.-_-..._.._r -I A .aao s ass .1W . II FCCT • haplAn w'.eomakoa,nelAnhasook_cropiamnormwUoalaentry.ma'r .FIM1ay,.Aap63,211 R4O AM /1/O7—E*% (94C-14.41 elereY PAR I "'Veer. ('4•47-or 771* l'*6:1�I A)L A G C E/ti,Ar9 Code 5 em v't fi:,¢2,-.4, ,,ate•{ III • Glendale Cove Service Area - Property Categories Ems• a - I Utley tntormstlon -Th.. '-� --2400 -1 gingery Plow Arrows �— --s• --c •Weer e Pk Belem - I`NtReleaesMHAe.. . • f ♦Clean Out Olam Out MH 2565 252$ 2485 2446 190 Z e Curb glop Aoarale 225 ODrenpMH `' .. 77 •DurnpMHAooumu - 1 •• •.FhrdlF,p coma" • • ..ry*-25 72 • .4 Flinging Camedle.,. •..,:•',• h.l .-2B o ender Regan 186 - •. ... �' Bandon Vivo `IO •,.�. • r •N ata WIN An... 200 ." 117:4 . ■Lqt aetlon • ■I.1R Slogan Mauna 156 �...• 0' 'L �� . •Meter M.ors 180 5141-,,,, t 163 " •Manhole Aaarale � �®• a i Vein UM 155 141 LLA-21 ` 2s ��,.r �_ •^• Manhole or)Label + .'NMI.�MedsAeAwurots 125 + 131 - •MeMote -16 - -011e Force Mon.ccelm 120 �:�° �F,� i LA iD LL-A-B---I LLA- -DAy Force Mon%k 125 • —Metro OreMtY wpe 96 96 a` 3 -�' . —Mel fband'Form N I—ggeewereaten --242; 95 1- 38 23'50 • 111 •.•-gty sewer eereks, 81 80 r uI ._ . IIIIII '• n 80 _Gab Box Gate LLA-23 61 : 3LLA • .Oen Vain Apemen LLA • -12 +Fq�iMvdOVAn- .i 35 t• 38 41 ' 2340. . • ii% •Meta het 3 oWew Tower 40 36 r 22 t• + HydrrMw/Loat ' 2380 .. . .t +Hydiantww 2480 2440 �� .'' 2298 2245 7 ...... 1Naler qpe t. • ••.. -ll a.- • �.Y•s.. it....'_-.a..—.... ,__5; ._.-Weter See •'— , —w.a Hpa ' ' , - 2186 IN Perk. 2670 2520 2480 2430 10 2325 ..,en 38• s SCALE 1:s,taq • no a 000 400 e. • FEET http9/wow.barwaoo•naA/need_aentkonoinnveDenErerY.rmd Fader.June 10,2011 a.91 Are • • Revision 12-14-11 "EXHIBIT C" GLENDALE COVE SERVICE AREA IMPROVEMENTS (Sewer and Water as-built drawings will be attached here) 9 • • 9Ebb•ELb¢S5:XVA 4blb-ELb£95:9NOHd MI "=`.1111 u.2 Dabla E-. 94ESS NW'3XV1 DNOI 9ARl!MOTIM'N 9bb te! Btl3NNtlld ONY1'StlOA3AUOS WW1'Blf33NION3 it AIO .., N,y.,.,,.nLL .. '"rn --.- a1VNY ^B IlV6 9 ""° ' „"1'ONI`S3JVVIOOSS11 S Ja38NOLID Re 1111.1010.: � ^.� ,, .:i,IIMIM SNOISIAAI yyi. u. ( 7------..\\_, 1 x 4 I : ?' h L 5.--1-: -it i 1 f,"CI w " al t I g; I i ° 3fNanx ]�- W r• au 1� I 4Nv8 r .. LD Z W V N I— .� �& r �;./1 IIi- Z. - a 3 U '1"Ln F-M Z •I :,...i9/. 1 “ "14 `4 a Le „t` p �y :Pi' J J—w a .a it.; m! x 'it? c-: O QLL'w OD • c.o j e 9 a 1 " /J y® (C LU H Z I �� O� A Z 1 W O W Ill W W �Sys�l. c, :•d •` J es YmwF-z O ,�. ;t , _ `; O J iL ~J W I _. a -J° f cpt may. o J W o (.._. I Z 0 -: Ca o J -_a : m I `' 1 b� sd 4 in ii Ill • 9EbbELb'ZSi8 IX7d tbLb•E&Z96 HNONd NV%,„ wanrn:wemt vine ua a 99E95 NN'ENV"ONO"1 i3A1tl0 MO'111M•N Ebb '�"a D>Ha� p NVI 8U tIVId ONYT'SNaAiAuf190fltl�'SM93NIDN3l3A - gal ' do xu+oa.natnea anaVMIs my:1:IWONI`S3tdi00SSV'8 Jd39N0�l�J M1 a "°psICOS3 Ivf(10�9.claw.web: s ��a ana..Iwnaara1141:.:,.4 Ju.a.w.w,a.1 a311=3C SNOISIA321 0 L w _... =4_ LL S Z r LU CI bZ f��J ZZ Z O �V gQ � 1 1. C 1 tep�w� 3R1l�0 B1VON319 x tr:�cm ;,�.,:— .,.. 1-fI-t 1'»I.'i1" 7 ) d 1111 II I I i! ILI I ! !!II: !„,t II moi• f`1I! !:f re.......\ i.arsork ;!' ii;! jjil!LI�Fill !Milli , i i g .13.4144 i!11 1 ! _lilI' I! 1 s,,U I °: :{1' i1 1! I it t111 3 '� liil ' 1.1 IIT, { I 1 Ili! 111111 iiiii 43 �1111111111 i l l 4-' ult 1 ! r I. i II 'i;tll !iiiii:!.: i liiii!ii iii ,: �A !{ ii � rt 'I I �'a>I w°7 9 �`' .�}3 t t11I l I 1 '4141!il 'I i:. I I I .mammw. iI- ill 111~l: jii'! 1;1!�1!1i I� 1 Lay 1 ill !i 1 ` - 'it l Ifiik 1i y ill .i 1 a — bNMIVd It'. i, W + G1 i' 'IF 11'it iiiill 1:j 11 i! 7 f ua((n'. e entM.0 p1IliLll •i :,- i1: 1; 0 m .q, - dOlttNlB G r!!11 I ii' •1°j1�'� i�l l!!'!j N ` I���I I I I I 1 I I LHN M.e ` . I! It f t ! 1 !, I! 0 Q o 11 II 11, i I: 11!i .i!!'i: w 1 11 1 I1 .1 1 ik -aaen.ol !y't 3f . 1 /� a"°°�n'm:n I I i I �I!'.: w ! I .Ilili flF11 lIm9 m1SIX3 . 'yj k� '*'" i'I i f 1, I 1 ! 1 H f i I I £ '' LL�bl�u� ty �� i id i. z qI W > Yr i\E 44 N. :1 Ii' 1. I' ill ip Q ��` sNIM•S 1M�9 l� `• :11 1! I s� ii 4m vis i� Z ..w, \ i' i li I, It• i I (Ii) :: . I Q .a.M I: 1 i l j1 �I ii1. ili i Jl H��R w .-.irp 6 pm reaorms __ "1l'i,J le•4 fk ici 1 il .» k m r 6 !!lE:'ll[ :i : 1..; t,' 11 E ill N l --.i !I '!ii!l!i i! : i l i t i. !` !!f . 0 r Np"i, 6 fi!I!:ii•s!i ,i•,l �,:: 1 ,. Z a.,aT.H 1� OTe �N {!! i• 1 ii Ill l IV' , ! I!, 1INI 6 , I T� l _ 1'J y ;,! jl! II! I I ii! I! I '`; l!I1` 9lHW�6 -j 'I ..a:S�k i�l!li 1, ! I 1 ?t- !:t :'� 0. 9AINC7 MOT1IM t : i.' s .aW'm fd ;i i!iii i!i' ' • it i !i I`I` _it'WI III, : ii:.1. ! tA1i.iT �� C 2'g 9§ rf t il1g f{F tlF H I a so • • • SEil-ELO-306:Xtld 141.1,•EL4•Z98:9NOWd leg �ea,nx roxr,�n xxx - - uw to 9SESS NW'2N 1 ONO,9AItla MO']1IM'N O ewo-w 6tl9NNtlld O 1V 1'8tlOAiAtl116 aNYl'Stl3iMONi 11A(� AT.: 1M11 o' .'ie ro tux'�Il�uo°' sSNVY13'd Ae 3lVO QNI`S3iVI0OSSV t8°Jt139NO D y NO°" O�'"wv'u N.min w�x.x rn SNDISlA3b 0 �z u COvw `--1 sjp 1 irfx iA� a x_ lj , tai -1itf li. 14 41 l • o Z 1 T 1- 0.c -1 s ! 0 4,_,Ig... 3AIHQ 31HQr'J 10 ! l • 1• !LI .. 11:i1 11. Ili it 111 li.; I ,.�.�,� / II ' � • dit • ! .J:4.ou a, \ "'4�°�,gyy�p-'i7:`!:'rt'i.IjF1Ji!-�1:",' �1�}j!; t i';. I :d I E.I !A IIII; y" a Ill,il li • !l llilili' 133!11a' 1 R. Mx4 C•e,':'4.' «-rI•I «!M t'+,i o i' ,'i I IIIII il!I iliM1``iiiiii iii!! 1t1iiitiii 3 1►11111► 1 1 I►111( dl Hid :i1, 0 lliil ill ill I iilil Ili Ii1T111 11€l!hlli lf!1 11 a ,xx 1t�, i+;LI. €ili:s :: 1IIla1 I i'•!TF' :fti•'.ii1 ': I ill1 ,.xe.�.e li 11 fill� 1;! ai illllllll'1i. 1. t I pi.L ill 1 :Il irri I Ili , i illl.. i mate iii .. ( 0.1.1 i i ii!11ji' ;Il I .l it ii!il O E 4,i !II1;11 iiii 1i I Ill 1. c 5 i; I'I'll::.!.: 0° 111111111111111 �, j , ' I: . i( ;i�3 ills it ffi r,e 15, -- :E II' { i1'Q J N I > �!,sFvvo VgOP / it11 • ' '!li �1lit6go.»0 �., � ��� til .. ii1I I i ii ;co V I r 1 /�' j E H I gib ! .. S o , twin!iL .� o li i li i " q1. , . ii€ii.: \A . I a / I ' i gib' f —i ij is a : NI 6 I --s.`*y x IIII Ii:i! :. . „+� !Illii �' I' - �' i B 11 Ilill Ilii I'., ,'il'I .: il il'II€li ill 1 S 9xm-vxx Cc.) e 11117 7ITI`c'I l!1r • t'.:u.E- I N i 0I ox,e- oaf ii!``I yf 1 1 il' t, i ii i J�\` I �.- � ® «}. $ a..: to ►iti O : `�O i€Ii ,:ii•N.,j i : I !. :I i mra eN44 - E l _—_.____.—__ J —_—________— LAI �— ilil'I. ; . ;!Oil!! ..li€li 4"i•ia,..w...111_,..,1 illllll III EI itlilt ::1i t 1 1 • d I g g , p n 1g 9 t 12 ii 1 • 410 PC Exh!bit 1 l U _ ,1 N N a)C C O Ll W U J O !i U CO .. v C v " 1 U 1N ati W M N . V -T d it U i J 3 co O (n Of v H m m Z�� r oo ( Z-, Q 4_ C , ... 9 2 re a o 1-2 I o 'e 1 °o C 0 C V :" E 0 z, a v o o) 3 v lS �,o (tf h ' o Z• E `w rn Z. m O D i E. `o V. O N C O` E i 1! N W � N ~- C " K O -7 - - 0 v E M 15 5 ' 0 = _ E } U N m m 3 3 D t x E o a d =c 71 J o o ^' d rn o !c a m Q o. m m 8 U M : cc cc _, _, 2 2 S 2 o O F 6. 5 a o a cc o N 211_ _11 1111111 n_ Iv m .mw. . main.1� . ,yt..;ti 1' IF,ri - "„1 : / d . - ....a 0.1.11 t,, *Ow gigi `i> /,� �. u.u.u.u�.., i - ,-• it • /4t \11-r ,bil ''s 11 i' . 1 W1r1 1 __ , ` .r( ���1.�I .sl- 1.1 4 ell I1� � �, , ,ice ..ri ./ I)1�#.ii::H- .,C_ , . N j i� rA lL R fi �� ' C- _,„ , c.r. ,,... Fie �111 'r la ,, • ' um 1 : no r HN Ilik-illuill114111112. lortar., f '14,41 -,-c._:-, ,A,,..... _,i......,,, ,::,...„„., N- miles y--i r,+"'` I C(i�. • ' F:� r s %'nv ,..r...� tea. I1 I/a�. �1��%404 lei• � �1 lac. . .• rs� a. ,- + t .Eg. � �4 H ..r I. • • _ PC Exhibit J 03 _ O I - 0 s E jdtn d I. 17 O C v' C F- mm I Cr) ;B I 0m 0_ W 0 F— aNi m a. -u) _ cn o C U) ` O / r-, Q a U N « o c X 5 -c p `sc, W LLU) to I u 1) a OL !) 0 �� E O U a o P s •r" " 8 2. O. a s 1 3. 1 ` [ i • • I 1 _• j ♦ I i 1 s< I 1 j I of x 1 a i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ I 1 i. + �..... Ir I A 1 I i 8,1 I t I w I . } it 11 \ �6 ♦. _I --[- i �' 'Pt 1 r - ♦ ,\ III -- - ;bp — ... j -.._§ • j : 1 I i. ..♦ 1 N 3 q 1 1 - F dp ♦ a 1 1 5. i ++ hg ; K / I. 0 ,F, 1 1 u 1 t _ q+' 1 'NO MO111MI412[O61 4 <..ri C • 1 i _ Np M0117M H1f1O5 —- I r [ -- // '-- -- p /// / • 011 Atl9ltl NJ Ol0 13Ntl1 I �aI i . s 1 c 1 "N ♦ u ! s J 1IV411tl 193N 1 37N3ONO4/aIn. I ` —_.. -._m i • : ♦♦ o �•vi - \♦ j f '♦ w x ♦ O 59 S y '�— "as),; erus "01 i .- i -T �i SrvD 4 t, i ... m • • i 1 o a9'♦ r N 4 t J xa� / is. r �`'♦ I'. m I t 3r a3• I g• ; --s- ---- �'— ----��,o�' o -- i ? 1 -- i 1 1 -- - /' � 1 w m L 1 Concept Plan Prepared for: William Abbott I 5brilf N 89 20 34 W 214.01 \ 35 -:)L ' „ ' t-Orris.' �33.q0 \._ 91.00 : 1 90.0 1. -1 1 4I • \ O ' \ • O I _ Wetlard-----_ c (approx. /ocaton - per \ \ 1 ..,,,VER31) o plat of ULMER ESTATES) �i O 2325 ft) 1 ' I Prop. Lot 1 Prop. 'Lot 2 • � � P P 1 q • TH - 69 t co —•• ^ OrQ��ok4 c:3 1 o co Utility Easement ,..] p......, O Maple N \ 3�\ i 10 Lane I i / Ara • <S • \ TN \ I • — m Proposed B/o9�seo,/ \ ..•9. ,r.ea i T \ rt Bldg Site / S%te'Z�� > 're i i I < / , <\ ,/ Prop. Lot 3 o I,4 p 1 I -'< `� 1 / , ��.,�/ (1.10 cc.) \ ----�---' / \ N N 1 o I 1 N o / i / �.' 301.28 \ o\ Ill F� , `.'� 41 \ S\ o • ����� 0 2 . . j . � � \�► \., „ .� N d 237 \ ,� ; Exist. House \- o . k6 Approx Locaficri o. \ I o O / � �/iii�/ �� \Prop. Lot 4 Mi { 1, i j� \ o �- (1.10 cc.) I / v �' VI; ` `—Proposed Well Location o �y / ?1I�i �P i (per survey by other) N La LO f .4410 9.'12' ---f 10 i --"N1 N 89'21'00" W 301.28 I .\\,...( . ,tom �/ / a� +* / r----J ---i �\ / '�" o, Proposed I J tcj im 11 Bldg. Site I tri N . `" E o Prop. Lot 5 O SCALE co ao (0.56 ac.) o 2 Pr••. of • 60 0 30 60 120 (0.51 ac.) b O 1 inch = 60 feet n 0 Q. 1 33.00 • 101.00 �• - 100.01 I l rN 89 20'34" W 234.01 �' • 1 • Bearings based on assumed datum. Job Number: 7522 SCHOBORG Concept Plan for the proposed subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTATES, and part of Book/Page: 11 LA D SERVICES Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Survey Dote: County, Minnesota. Drawing Name: abbott.dwg INC. Drawn by. KLB n PlD Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055 m 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: x• 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE ff www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 7 Concept Plan Prepared for: William Abbott gll.rrFuiG N 89 20'34" W 214.01 \ - , (7 33.q0 ��91.00 ^1 90.0 . 1 \ _ O ,qI ,-\ tn 10 �___ _ -Wetland----- i (approx. locaron - per \� da ` o plat of ULMER ESTATES) O •�CO I. 1 Prop. Lot 1 Prop. Lot; 2 _ ' (0.73 ac.) (0.67 ac.) o _i • _ /- N 89 21'00 W 321.28 — 11 C • ro T N\l'iii '--.o�� yI i ; J ,..., ,...., L ,„, ...,4 P. , Utility Easement o ______ ____ ______ , , , �- 1 i ��� 1 T Maple N \ ��\ o LaneE rai �'� �o \ �` N m Proposed 16/o.posed i • .9 me T? ` . C — �B1dg i Site 1 1 S/tee--.) >• S,eeo / = O �'� I" i 1 1 <. Prop. Lot 3 0\ q ° o --1--- i ,. v' (1.10 ac.) \ % N r -- / ,,/ �\ 1 i N �F / -.4 — , , 301.28 \ \ . p I / / ^ N y F_ coct p ' h/ h 47 ���� 9�_\4 ����� 0 237 Exist. House• \ o ► �� APP� ocatiai J \Prop. • \ \ o O Lot 4 o�0 (1.10 ac.) I � // / -Proposed � Well Location ^..o i -- (per survey by other) C o t ' V ' NI,4) s.82 10 .33 �- N 89'21'00" W 301.28 •,,,, 0 '-�.. , . -- �� �0 �/ aa�2 i r ---, // o, j Proposed j J LO • 11 -Bldg. Site i I tri `l �('. GL(t�A ,-'/_ - _ Ese I I PI Nlteivrs r � o Prop. Lot 5co I O SCALE m Prop. - 6 (0.56 ac.) 2 60 0 30 60 120 (0.51 +c.) 13 o lb ,- , 1 inch = 60 feet a` 1\33.00 101.00 • �" 100.01 J 1 1 N 89 20'34"'W 234.01 —•� the proposed subdivision of I Bearings based on assumed datum. II: Job Number: 7522 SCHOBORG Concept Plan for Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTATES, and part of Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Book/Page: LA D SERVICES Survey Date: County, Minnesota. Drawing Name: abbott.dwg INC. Drawn by. KLB 0 P/D Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055 m 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: _ Q 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE .7. r- www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 1 Concept Plan Prepared for: William Abbott SYNFP ctiteirt it • H \. . N 8920'34" W 214.01 \ .J ��33.Q0 ,- 91.00 -�`, 90.Of' -1. 1 \ 1\\., 5 ...q 1 . O N .7." II) A'A in O I __------Wetland-----_ (approx. locat'on - per N o plat of ULMER ESTATES) �I \. 2325 •� �. Prop. Lot 7 Prop. ;Lot 2 L+ • •.7706c.) (0.67 ac.) o 1 ^ ^\ N 89 21'00 W 321.28• . � � � • '1 op,\ f 1 0• , C \ ,�9e� — — ,~- o o _ J — Utility Easement o N i Maple ' f \ �3�\ —t o Lane �E r - k o \ N �a, l r._ \ io, oo m Proposed .9.•� , 9 'Pc, ) T I Bldg Site Site >• `�-/, /� i i `�,� i 1, �. /' Prop. Lot 3 o\ I�� o N / I 1. N h / '1,` —� 301.28 \ cn\ I. h / l , O o / • O' IF ��//l����� m d\ 237 ® Exist. House; \` o �jl Approx. Location. o• a \ \ o Oi 28 h,///x--�/ • 6 .\Prop. Lot 4 p., .� - i \ o o- . (1.10 ac.)4 I ' _ 1 `-Proposed Well Location co /i (per survey by other) \ `� lh o CI fri CN / y9.82 104.33 \- N 89 21'00" W 301.28 i\ �" 1\ o��`� -, / J r.+. - >•.o \ ` Q�� % / o,'I Proposed 1 Bldg. Sift. I *mpi f I ---- , i I N L___, I• E ... �'. . Kgc. .4ot O fri CC oo ( ) 2 SCALE m Prop. Lot 6 0.56 ac. 60 0 30 60 120 (0.51 ac.) o , , 0 0 1 inch = 60 feet L- g. 1 33.00 ,/,-- 101.00 1, f00. 1 N 89 20`34" W 234.01 -. P 1 1 Bearings based on assumed datum. Book/Pag✓ob Number:e: 7522 SCHOBORG Concept2, Bl Pock 1,/an for ULMER the proposedESTATES,subdivisionandport of of LA D SERVICES Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Survey Dote: County, Minnesota. Drawing Name: abbott.dwg INC. Lot Drawn by. KLB o PID Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055 rn 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: -3 7 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE 74. www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 • • Subject: #13-3595, Broadway Group LLC,2350 Watertown Road (plus PID 34-118-23-33-0055) Sketch Plan—Oliver Hill This sketch plan contemplates a re-zoning and subdivision to create five new, %to 1 acre buildable lots and a private road from the original 4.8± acres. All of the lots would be served by a new private road with cul-de-sac extending easterly from Willow Drive. All lots are proposed to be served by City sewer and water. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW The proposed subdivision is in conformity with the guiding of this area for single family rural residential development at a maximum density of 2 to 3 units per acre. The plan results in lots between 0.5 to 1.1 acres and reflects 35-foot front and rear; and 15-foot side setbacks. A 25-foot side setback from Willow Drive is also proposed. The proposed lot sizes are consistent with existing development in the surrounding neighborhood. Glendale Cove is just north; the Hackberry neighborhood to the west and Long Lake to the east all with lots ranging from 0.3 acre to 0.5 acre. There are two existing home sites to the south on 1.1 and 3.5 acre lots. While the property is located in the RR-1B, 2 acre rural Residential District, allowing for single family rural residential uses with a minimum lot size of two dry buildable acre the properties were included in the area re-guided in the 200-2020 and 2008-2030 Community Management Plans to allow for low- medium density (2 to 3 units per acre).The overall density of the development is proposed at 1.25 units per gross acre. In order to accomplish the density proposed, the properties must be re-zoned from RR- 1B (Residential 2 acre minimum) to Residential Planned Unit Development District (RPUD). The development should be expected to conform to the RPUD District standards. General Site Characteristics The site consists of two separate parcels, the westerly of the two being a vacant field abutting Willow Drive, the easterly being a wooded lot containing an existing home which accesses currently off Watertown Road via a long, flag driveway. A creek cuts diagonally through the property from the northwest to the south east. It appears that some of the area surrounding the creek is mapped as a Manage 2 wetland. When weather permits, a wetland delineation will have to be conducted and the edge shown on the survey in addition to the required 25 foot buffer and 20 foot buffer setback. A copy of the delineation report and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval of the delineation will be required at the time of preliminary plat application. Lot Layout and Lot Standards The property is situated generally along the east side of Willow Drive just north of Watertown Road. Access to the property will be via a road and cul-de-sac off of Willow Drive. The proposed lots lay out as follows: Proposed Lot 1: Proposed Lot 1 will have 0.71± acres total area; there is an unknown area of wetland on this property. This lot will be a corner lot. The front lot line will be the private road frontage. There is 77± of frontage proposed along the newly created road; this lot is shown to have 350± feet of frontage along Willow Drive. There appears to be an approximate 100' x 50' buildable envelope available and a 2,080 square foot home is shown. A vegetated berm is proposed within the 25 foot setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. • • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 2 of 5 Proposed Lot 2: Lot 2 is proposed to have 38± feet in width at the cul-de-sac, and approximately 50 feet at the principal building setback. The suggested home site is set back about 80 feet from the cul-de-sac. It is 90 feet wide at the suggested building site and is proposed to be 0.65 acre in area; there is an unknown area of wetland on this property. Not shown on the Concept Plan within proposed Lots 1 and 2 is an easement for the existing sewer line that extends across those lots from Willow Drive to proposed Lot 3. The conceptual stormwater pond location appears to potentially interfere with this sewer line. Whether a formal easement for that line exists must be established. Proposed Lot 3: Lot 3 is proposed as a flag lot* which has 25±feet in width at the cul-de-sac and 135 feet in total width within the building envelope. This lot is also proposed to have two separate easements: a 20-foot wide existing utility easement containing the Hackberry neighborhood sewer line connection to the Long Lake sewer system, running from west to east and down the west lot line and a 20- foot wide drainage easement following the creek. The drainage easement cuts the building envelope in half. *Flag lots are not permitted. The City allows front lot/back lot layouts with special provisions outlined in City Code Sections 78-1370 & 82-256. Proposed Lot4 Lot 4 is proposed to be 1.08 acre in area and 48.77 feet of frontage; it has an existing home and is proposed to access off of the cul-de-sac. The utility and drainage easements from proposed Lot 3 continue onto this lot. Proposed Lots Lot 5 is proposed to contain 0.55 acres in area and 51.9 feet of frontage on the cul-de-sac. A 2,128 square foot home is shown situated in the proposed building envelope. Proposed Lot 6 Lot 6 is a corner lot with 83 feet of frontage on the proposed road/cul-de-sac and 235 feet on Willow Drive. A vegetated berm is within the 25 foot proposed setback to screen this lot from Willow Drive. Road Layout and Standards The applicant is proposing a 50 foot wide outlot to create a private road with a 100 foot cul-de-sac which conforms to the requirements within the Subdivision Ordinance for a local private road. The proposed paved width of the private road is shown as 25 feet where the Code requires 24 feet for 3 to 6 homes. The cul-de-sac is proposed to have a 70 foot paved diameter, where City Code requires an 80' paved diameter. Given that 6 homes will be served from the proposed roadway, and considering the shortness of the proposed roadway, parking for guests will be at a premium, and parking on Willow Drive should be avoided; therefore the road and cul-de-sac design should not be reduced in size/width from the current code standards. The cul-de-sac should extend further into the site if possible. This will not only better facilitate parking but allow additional options for snow storage. It is important to note that there should be a platted corridor to the property to the immediate • #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 3 of 5 southeast for potential future road connection to serve that property. This would allow for a future through road from Willow to Watertown. This would provide more options for future development of the property to the southeast, and ultimately make for more efficient road maintenance. Rural Oasis, Conservation Design &Woodland Impacts This project triggers the need for the developer to conduct and submit a conservation design plan. A Conservation Design Master Plan and Report should be submitted with the preliminary plat application for review. Wetlands on Site and/or Impacted According to the City's wetland map a wetland exists on the property primarily in the area surrounding the creek/drainageway. Due to winter conditions a wetland delineation cannot be completed; a wetland delineation should be conducted and the edge shown on the survey in addition to the required buffer and 20 foot buffer setback. A copy of the delineation report and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval of the delineation will be required at the time of preliminary plat. Establishment of wetland buffers and buffer setbacks will be triggered for the lots containing wetlands. Wetland buffer signage should be purchased by the developer for installation along buffer areas and where the buffer intersects lot lines. Road Improvements and/or Easements Needed The City requires standard perimeter, drainage and utility easements around all property boundaries in the plat as well as Conservation and Flowage Easements over the delineated wetlands and wetland buffers. Conservation easements should be provided to protect the views and natural features identified with the comprehensive Conservation Design Master planning process. Stormwater and Drainage Improvements The developer will be required to provide stormwater management facilities on the site. Additionally, the development is subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, which should be based on an equivalence to the standard fee for the 1/2-acre zoning district given the lot sizes proposed. That fee is $5,765 per gross acre, and at 4.8 gross acres (net of Willow Drive r-o-w) amounts to$27,672. Park/Trail Easement/Fees or Dedication Needed The 2008-2030 CMP Comprehensive Trail System Map (Exhibit J) indicates that a future trail is planned on Willow Drive which stops just short of the subject property. The Park Fee is determined as 8%of the fair market value of the land being subdivided, with a minimum of$3250 per dwelling unit or a maximum of$5,550 per residential dwelling unit. The Hennepin County Assessor will review the value upon receipt of a preliminary plat application. As there will be five new dwelling sites,the Park Fee will be between $16,250 and $27,750. Utility Locations and Availability The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); sewer service is available to these properties via the Hackberry system which discharges to the Long Lake system. Water service is available from the Long Lake system subject to Long Lake approval. Sewer and Water Fees will be due to Long Lake, subject to the provisions of the Glendale Cove Sewer and Water Agreement of January 2012, which defines the applicant's properties as Category 3 Properties (see Exhibit H). • 1ft airo The developer will be responsible for installation of sewer and water laterals to serve the development. Per past City practice there will not be a connection charge to Orono for sewer or water, but Long Lake connection charges will apply. It is important to confirm whether there is an easement for the existing sewer in proposed Lots 1 and 2. If not, such an easement will become a plat requirement. Issues for Discussion Access & Layout Options: There are a number of potential options to accomplish a more functional cul- de-sac layout and road connection to the east. Staff has developed a series of sketches depicting options for consideration. Sketch 1 puts a slight curve in the entry from Willow, and then includes a future 50' angled corridor from the cul-de-sac to the NW corner of the property to the SE. This layout also reduces the length of the outlot driveway to Lot 3 to around 100 feet. A second option is shown in Sketch 2. This option avoids platting a permanent cul-de-sac and makes use of temporary cul-de-sac easements. This type of layout has been used on occasion in the past; the benefit is that if/when the road is extended to serve the next property, the temporary cul-de-sac can be physically removed and the underlying land can revert back to the appropriate owners via extinguishing the easement rather than vacating a platted road. This option also saves on future survey costs. Either of the options shown in Staff Sketches 1 and 2 have some impact on lot shapes and potential house locations. Also, both fix the future through road connection at the very NW corner of the adjacent property, which potentially would make for a less than optimum future connection point. Staff Sketch 3 suggests a rearrangement of lot lines so that 5 lots access via the cul-de-sac and 1 accesses directly from Willow Drive or from a future road that could be located along the north or south boundary of what is shown as lot 5. This has positive and negative aspects. It would potentially provide a better future road location for developing the property to the east. But the second road corridor takes up more real estate and, if located between lot 5 and lots 4/6, lots 4/6 become 'through' lots, a negative aspect. Wetland Delineation & Conservation Design: The applicant should conduct a wetland delineation as well as prepare a conservation design analysis so the site can be more comprehensively analyzed with the preliminary plat application. The wetlands or other natural features may affect lot layout. Miscellaneous: 1. In any of the proposals, the road corridors are directly across from existing homes which front on Willow, and the headlights from cars leaving the site could become an annoyance. 2. Stormwater ponding will have to occur somewhere on site, and should occur within an easement and/or outlot. 3. If developed similar to Glendale Cove, the new road would be a public road, based on the density. ! ! #13-3595 15 February 2013 Page 5 of 5 4. The long driveway corridor to access Lot 3 on applicant's layout should be avoided if possible. It puts a driveway into the front yard of lots 2 and 4. Staff sketch 3 avoids this issue via the major change to overall site layout. 5. Applicants should identify their intent for the remnant corridor extending to Watertown Road from the easterly parcel. Staff Recommendation The goal of this review is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City ordinances and how they affect the proposed plat, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. The above memo walks through the CMP and Code requirements for the proposed plat and should provide direction to the developer regarding the plat. During the sketch plan review, the developer should advise whether any of the issues noted present particular problems, so that those issues can be discussed and addressed by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission should review each topic and identify any issues to which the developer should pay special attention. The Staff Sketches should be referenced and used as a tool to examine the variety of options for lot layout yet to be explored. Planning Commission should walk through the report and discuss any potential issues with the developer and give direction where necessary. V/1( l Rri9 M-tt wl )U4) di,t 4t4)71Y1-e- pl/r/ s f(tO Gvn aer,�h ro a� AejTeZ) .0e at. 1�5t5 -fin `I Scv� * L � pvDp i0 (-20114- aad titit,oWN ( fp)/ 'aA t-til -14"-IY 4 1 A • • City of Orono Subdivision Application Street Address: Application# I. --1 S 2750 Kelley Parkway ii. Orono,MN 55356 Date Received: 01 I t ( 13 Staff: Main: 952-249 4600S 1 " i %O— y4 fax: 952-249-4616 Application Fee:KESHo�.- Mailing Address: Escrow#&$ l.> 2Cl;PAV P.O.Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Notes: PROPERTY INFORMATION: , 1 / Site Address: "2.. .s'l) t. 4— .r)c)-) ��- ? - l\,.e-V Un gSS,'5 r)2 d o.- LC) \to L-, ' - Property Identification Number(PIN): 3'-1-1I -2-3-33-OO5a 4 ::11 fr' --23 M33 -fpoSs (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey) Date Property Acquired (month/year): 0 Abstract 0 Torrens (Please check one) Present use of property: , Residential; number of Units 0 Other(specify) Zoning District: APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status requiredfor eachinterested party) Name(s): /3 �1`.q ac:� Q � L. o p .Lc— L, ; \l d -10�0 A, Phone (home : Phone (cell): (-,/Z_ -S/--'7 17 7 Address: 7Z200 SP i3ne)k-,)^ /Zck- tea? z ek ✓LtW 6-S-3Si Email: (,J i l ki ct Woe .4 J,via r 1 . C_o(vN Fax: OWNER INFORMAT N: (Co lete legal names and marital status r gyired for each interested party) Name(s): 3/oei `'� L C C- Go 11'.4-.101*, li- Phone (home): 1 Phone (cell): 6 /z `"7.5-( '"71`n Address: Email: C,i 1\i ,' a blo o - @ g 1 ; \ $ CO CO Fax: EXISTING LAND USE: Number of Tax Parcels: 2— Development Size: -3. II Acres Dry Land •`; Acres Wet Land < ci' Acres TOTAL, all parcels PROPOSED LAND USE: ❑ Division for Tax Purposes ❑ Lot Line Rearrangement Only(no new building sites) RECEIVED Subdivision for New Building Sites „� Number of Building Sites: Existing Units: New Units: JAN 3 0 2013 Total Units: J Proposed Gross Density il- Units per I acres CITY OF ORONO Minimum Lot Size: Square feet dry buildable land Proposed Use (check), Residential ❑ Other(specify) Minimum Material Required for Complete Preliminary Minimum Material Required for a Complete Final Plat Plat Application pp Application 1. Payment of fees 1. Payment of fees 2. Completed application form. 2. Signed certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal 3. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. plat. 4. Certified Property Owners list 3. Title opinion. 5. A list of any other persons you wish notified of this 4. Easements,covenants, etc. application 5. Developers Agreement # 3595 6. Letter of Credit • • APPLICATION FEES: (Planning &Zoning Coordinator to[X] those which apply) Application Base Fees: Cost Total Sketch Plan Review(Class I, II & Ill) $350* Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $700* Subdivision Application (Class I & II) $700* Preliminary Subdivision Application, plus $30/lot(Class III & all non-residential) $850* Final Plat Application (Class III) $700* Park Fees (to be determined per Section 82-227) TBD Legal and Engineering Review As incurred Renewal of Class I, II & Ill Subdivision $350 _ Renewal of Lot Line Rearrangement $350 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Special Improvement Fees: Cost Total Proposed Private Roads, plus$.50/lineal foot $650* + Proposed Public Roads, plus .50/lineal foot $950* + Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $950* Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension, plus $25/stub $275* + Proposed Watermain Extension, plus $25/stub $275* + Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $250* On-site System, Site Evaluation Review(applicable to rural subdivision) $60/per lot _x$60 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Flexible Application Fees/Miscellaneous Fees Cost Total Variance $700* Vacation of Public Road $100 per benefiting property ($700 minimum per appl) Varies Easement Vacation Associated with a Subdivision $200* PRD Application with Subdivision, $35/dwelling unit x$35 *plus, Engineering & Legal Review Total Escrow Amount TOTAL DUE �.- APPLICANT AND/OR OWNER: • Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department • Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and • Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to dq}so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. • The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. • Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. Owner's Signature: �.� i , �r Date: f(30 /3 Owner's Signature: Date: Applicant's Signature: Date: RFICENED Applicant's Signature: 35905JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO • 3-M WARRANTY DEED RECE%VED Individual(s)to Corporation,Partnership or JAN 3 p 2Q 13 Limited Liability Company DEED TAX DUE: $ CITY OF OROlN° Date: January 28, 2013 FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Dean A. Halliwill, a single person, Grantor, conveys and warrants to The Broadway Group, LLC, Grantee, a Limited Liability Company under the laws of Minnesota, real property in Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Lot 2,Block 1, Hunters Green together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto,subject to the following exceptions: Building and zoning laws,ordinances,and state and federal regulations. Restrictions relating to use or improvement of the property without effective forfeiture provisions. Reservation of any mineral rights by the State of Minnesota. Utility and drainage easements which do not interfere with existing improvements. Covenants,Easements and Restrictions of Record,if any.Covenants,Easements and Restrictions of Record,if any. Check box if applicable: n The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. f I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate. Dean A. Halliwill Affix Deed Tax Stamp Here STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this 28th day of January, 2013 by Dean A. Halliwill, a single person, Grantor. 4 NOTARIAL STAMP OR SEAL(OR OTHER TITLE OR RANK) / '!/ )(�41el (...,,Z‹_ `-1-'C) SIGNATURE OF NORTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICIAL _4, HOW B ;Check here if part or all of the land is Registered(Ton-ens)❑ NOTAAYPI MINIESOTA Tax Statements for the real property described in this instrument should be sent to fl*^>>z MYC4tI6NSSI0NE><PIAE$01�311II01i (include name and address of Grantee): THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY(NAME AND ADDRESS): TitleNexus, LLC The Broadway Group,LLC 13100 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 17/0 g' jI rke c s C_ci 'e—Pe( 141( Minnetonka, MN 55305 (952)465-0150 t Z Concept Plan Prepared for: William Abbott N 8920'34" W 214.01 \ , I ' . 33. 0 91.00 ^l, 90.01. —1 .1 O }' Wetland-----_,,' •\ e-._ (approx. locaron — per �\ plat of ULMER ESTATES) 1 &7 ' I Prop. Lot 1 Prop. /Lot 2 q (0.71 cc.) (0.6. ac.) 0 1 . ( — 1— N 8921'00" W 321.28 /� \\ t EN 1 \ 4-0/- iN 1 / �_.---Proposed ' '� . °9� :`'i I I o Settling/ �co t I �O Drainage `Utility Easement o ___J , 9 \ — \\V�/ 1 Pond i \ `� Maple ,r__ N \ ��,� o Lane >' -'� , %�.,,o \ `- N Iin oi Pro osed �2/2 s fe i < .1, /� Prop. Lot 3 N Bldg Sitej� �'L� C") t' i % 1.1 / (1.09 ac.) a I`< O ---� --- / t, N � ! 301.28 \a, 1 404. \ . k et: o Jco <I \ w \ m L. a co �$� �3B 42 kr /i 237 \ \ N'-' \\� '�//t Exist. House• Approx Location \ N I 8 `: O 1 / �b 1 s %iiid%���jj Prop. Lot 4 ,o� Z 31.70 �l! (1.08 cc.) \ 1 i o \ 0 0 s i tn .r ty i Iret31.70' i s, Y / ._ 83.42 �1 N 8921'00" W 301.28 __9„ ccr ^ X. a j rroposed j . !' Q�oaA „g \\� rn �� 1j r6/dg. Site \��0`6``�\ ��1�� to fr) L-- • \\ / N N E o Prop. Lot 5 O m oo (0.55 cc.) Z SCALE Prop. Lot 6 so o so so 120 (0.50 ac.) o ' l 1 inch = 60 feet 1. /—/- 101.00 —�. 100.01 1 N 8920'34" W 234.01 —•- Legend X ' I 0 Proposed Tree (deciduous) RECEIVED Proposed Tree (coniferous) JAN 3 0 2013 CITY OF ORONO Bearings based on assumed datum. Job Number: 7522 Al SCHOBORG Concept Plan for the proposed subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTATES, and part of Book/Page: Lot 2, Block 1, HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin Survey Date: LA D SERVICES County, Minnesota. Drawing Name: abbott.dwg INC Drawn by. KLB ' PlD Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055 34-118-23-33-0058 Revisions: 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 ,_, -,,,,4,-t 5 9 , ,,,.