The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11.08.05 Planning Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 A Proud Past - A Promising Future Committed to Providing High Qpallty, Timely and Responsive Service to All Of Our Customers . r AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION November 8, 2005 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) October 11, 2005 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Variance to allow the addition to a residential home within the B-2 Zoning District. (con't) Applicant: David Marsh 204 1 st Street Farmington, MN 55024 . b) Variance to the Floodplain Overlay District Requirements to allow the addition to a residential home within a flood zone. Applicant: David Marsh 204 1st Street Farmington, MN 55024 c) Variance to the Off-Street Parking Requirements in the Vermillion River Crossings Phase I Project. Applicant: Pedersen Ventures 14831 Energy Way Apple Valley, MN 55124 d) Amend the Comprehensive Plan for the Existing and Proposed Park, Trails and Open Space Plan Map Applicant: City of Farmington - Parks 8: Recreation Department - Randy Distad, Parks 8: Recreation Director e) Variance Request - Setback Requirement for a Building from a Minor Arterial Roadway Applicant: City of Farmington Water Board \ 4. DISCUSSION a) Concept Plan Review - U.S. Federal Credit Union - Vermillion River Crossings . b) Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop Meeting - Follow-Up c) Concept Plan Review - Sunrise Ponds - Perkins Property 5. ADJOURN . . . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: '1.tO C/ Planning Commission v r FROM: Lee Smick, AICP City Planner SUBJECT: 1. Variance to allow the addition to a residential home within the B-2 Zoning District. (continued from October 11, 2005) 2. Variance to the Floodplain Overlay District Requirements to allow the addition to a residential home within a flood zone Applicant: David Marsh 204 1 st Street Farmington, MN 55024 DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION The Planning Commission reviewed David Marsh's variance request on October 11,2005. The request was to expand a Nonconforming Use in order to construct an addition to his single family home located at 204 1 st Street. The property is zoned B-2, Downtown Business. The residential use of the property is considered nonconforming, and a variance must therefore be granted before the structure can be expanded in the manner proposed. At the October 11 th meeting, the Commissioners expressed support for the granting of an "expansion variance." However, because the property is within or near the floodplain, a second variance (from the City's floodplain requirements) needs to be considered by the Board of Adjustment. The second variance requires a to-day notice to the Department of Natural Resources for their comments and an approved permit from the City Engineer prior to the change or extension of a nonconforming use. A public hearing was therefore scheduled for November 8, 2005 to discuss the floodplain variance. However, comments from the DNR have not yet been received and the applicant has not yet submitted his buildings plans to the City Engineer for his review. Therefore, the applicant has been notified that the City will continue both public hearings an additional 60 days in order to provide additional time for the missing information to be submitted. . . . ACTION REQUESTED Continue both public hearings as stated above to the December 6, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. R~:pe L,Jct"fuJ <:::,,"y submitt (ed~, _, /' ; ~.~ Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: David Marsh 2 . . . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463.2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Planning Commission \~v FROM: Lee Smick, AICP City Planner SUBJECT: Variance to the Off-Street Parking Requirements in the Vermillion River Crossings Phase I Project - Block 3 Applicant: Pedersen Ventures 14831 Energy Way Apple Valley, MN 55124 DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION The applicant, Pederson Ventures, is seeking a variance (Exhibit A) from Section 10-6-4 of the City Code (Exhibit B) to allow for a shortage of 36 parking spaces in Phase I (Block 3) of the Vermillion River Crossings project. DISCUSSION The applicant proposes 164 parking spaces in Block 3 to provide parking for retail, hotel, and employee parking (Exhibit C). The required number of spaces per the City Code is the following: Retail 25,750 sf: 1 space per 200 sf of retail =129 spaces 25,750 sf: 1 employee per 2000 sf (industry standard for retail) = 13 spaces Hotel 55 Rooms: 1 space per room = 55 spaces 3 employees (employees/shift information from franchiser): 1 space per employee = 3 Total Number of Spaces Required per Section 10-6-4 of the City Code 200 Parking Spaces The 164 parking spaces proposed by the applicant is therefore 36 spaces less than the minimum required by the City Code. The applicant is requesting the variance because of the somewhat constricted surroundings, which include the following: the Vermillion River Crossings roadway (the primary north/south route) needs to be located at the CSAH 50 median cut (Exhibit D) and the storm water ponds need to be located west of the pipeline easement (Exhibit E). The applicant also stated that the hotel needs a certain number of rooms to . . . be financially feasible and the multi-tenant building needs to be of a certain size. However, as the Planning Commission is aware, economic consideration alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Title. The City Code provides the following criteria that must be met for a variance to be approved: 1. Because the particular physical surroundings, or the shape, configuration, topography, or other conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, strict adherence to the regulations of this Title would cause undue hardship. Economic consideration alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Title. The north/south roadway needs to be located at the CSAH 50 median cut and the storm water ponds need to be located west of the pipeline easement, creating a confined area to construct both buildings and a parking lot. 2. The conditions upon which a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other properties within the same zoning classification. The north/south roadway needs to be located at the CSAH 50 median cut and the storm water ponds need to be located west of the pipeline easement, creating a confined area to construct both buildings and a parking lot. Dakota County is allowing full access to the Vermillion River Crossings site only at the median cut on CSAH 50. The DNR, SWCD, MPCA, etc. are requiring storm water ponding on the site to infiltrate runoff before it discharges into the Vermillion River. The only location of the pond is west of the pipeline easement. 3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land. The hardship, if any, was not created by the applicant; it was created the location of the median cut on CSAH 50 and the location of the pipeline to the east of the development. 4. The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality or be injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the parcel of land is located or substantially diminish property values. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality or be injurious to other property in the vicinity. 5. The proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or be detrimental to the public welfare or public safety. The variance would not create any of the above-mentioned adverse effects. Any potential traffic congestion will be alleviated through the numerous accesses to the site. 6. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship. The applicant has designed the development to meet the requirements of Dakota County (median cut) and the requirements of the agencies (DNR, Soil & Water, etc) to provide a storm water pond for infiltration of runoff before it discharges into the Vermillion River. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to meet those needs. 2 . . . City staff members recognize that whether or not the variance criteria are satisfied in this instance may be a close call. The three most obvious options in this instance include the following: 1. Deny the variance, in which case the applicant will have to reduce the square footage of the hotel and/or the retail building until the number of parking spaces matches the City Code's requirements. 2. Approve the variance without any conditions, in which case there will be no effective means of addressing future parking problems if customer and employee parking demands consistently exceed the available spaces. 3. Approve the variance with conditions. One such condition could be a requirement that the "shortage" of 36 spaces be rectified by providing a corresponding "surplus" of 36 spaces within Outlots D and F, which are located within a reasonable distance to the north and south (respectively) of the hotel and the retail building. ACTION REOUESTED Option #3 above seems to make the most sense in this case. The staff recommendation is therefore that the Planning Commission approve the variance request to allow for a shortage of 36 parking spaces in Phase I (Block 3) of the Vermillion River Crossings project with the following contingency: 1. The shortage be later addressed through the creation of a surplus of at least 36 parking spaces within Outlot D and/or F when site plans for these areas are prepared and submitted. Respectfully submitted, t&~.. Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: Pedersen Ventures, Inc. Bob Weigert, Paramount Engineering 3 . . . Oct-21-05 12:36P Paramount Eng;neer;ng 651 771 0544 \~ P.02 \'" \'.; \\ el/l!6/! A City of Farmington 325 Oak StTeet, FarmIBetoD, MN SS014 (651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463..2591 www.d~ftningfnn_mn.us I VARIAN~PUCAnON :.~.?- . J AppliUnt: 'f'tJ S ToJepIvmc: W '-I 3:1 ~ J '1 r.E fax: C1!!) 4.?fJ. - Z LJ ;:; J Address: ?J -e ' ~ ..5 15 S~et i State Zip Code Owaer: ~je.i'11JllJl~~UJfwlyb~JIt:PlL~ Telephone: ~ i/ ?~-2Yf..};;; {}!J'l- f ? '2 -1t;:3J Address: }L,}8.1J FY)A{1~,WLt~ ~lhl.eJ)al)eal MIA/. n571~L-/ Sccct \J 8i1 ~ .., Zip Code Pn......tl\wI~ E IO?J.::,~ ' <?J/ (J(;f);.~j, l,(ttI Address! Le DascrlpdOD (loE, block. pial n.me. _lion. lownsbip, Tml~) C_ Cbm:olZaaiog l>dmot Spt I e ~t- 0.- Land U.. Ct> l<A. 1iY'-e.f'U& Specmc Nahlre of Requall Cgf~r-~:~~h~:-r 5e..e d. 'ffa (,~ .1 "'IJI11l>. SVBMJ'l'TAL REO'E~~ t:l Proofof'~ ~ies of Site Plan ~'PPJ~oa Foe (5200) 0 AbstraetlJlesidenrial LiSI (adjoining property owners only) [) 8o\lOdary I Lot Survey d Torrel~ (OW'lJer's Duplicate Cortific:llte oCTille quired ~D~ /O-(},l-o)- plltllre Q roperty er Dale ---- -lJS ~ Submined to !be I'laDmq Commistion on Public Jleub,g Set for. 1'01' .!liee UK only Advertised iq Local Newspaper: PlaDniDa CommiHiol1 Actlon: _Approved Commeau: _~d CoDditiOlls Set: Pl.nni~ division: Date: olm TOT~L P.01 ex!! /f}/r t? 10-6-4 10-6-4 . Uses Dwellings, multi-family Dwellings, quad; townhouse and two-family Dwellings, single-family Group daycare facility, 13 to 16 persons Group homes, (6 or less persons; 7 to 16 persons; commercial) and nursing homes Health clubs Home occupations Hospitals . * Hotels/motels Kennels, commercial Manufacturing/industrial facilities . 2.5 per dwelling unit 2 per dwelling unit plus 0.25 per unit in common parking space 2 per dwelling unit 1 per employee plus 1 per every 5 clients 1 per employee plus 1 per every 5 clients 1 per 200 square feet 2 spaces in addition to the require- ment for dwelling 1 per 3 beds plus 1 for each 3 employees on maximum work shift 1 per rental unit plus one per employee 1 per employee plus 1 per every 1 ,000 square feet 1 per 600 square feet City of Farmington August 2003 eJ1f15?r 8 1 0-6-4 1 0-6-4 . Uses Offices, personal and professional services 1 per 250 square feet Personal health and beauty services 2 per operator station Public and parochial schools - elementary and junior high Public and parochial schools - senior high 1 per classroom plus 1 for every 30 children 1 per classroom plus 1 for every 3 children Public buildings 1 per employee plus 1 per 200 square feet Restaurant, class II 1 per every 2 customers to maximum seating capacity Restaurants, class I, III, IV and coffee shops 1 per every 3 customers to maximum seating capacity plus 1 per employee . * Retail facilities 1 per 200 square feet plus 1 per employee Warehousing facilities 1 per 2,000 square feet Wholesale businesses 1 per 1,000 square feet (A) Other Locations: Parking spaces may be located on a lot other than that containing the principal use with the approval of the board of adjustment. (B) Grading And Drainage: Any off street parking lot and driveway shall be graded for proper drainage and surfaced with concrete or bituminous material. (C) Lighting: Any lighting used to illuminate any off street parking shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from adjoining premises in any R district. (D) Access Driveways: All off street parking areas shall have access from driveways rather than from public streets. Said driveway access . July 2002 City of Farmington Nov-02-05 01:47P Paramount Eng;neer;ng . . . TO: .FROM: DATE: RF:: Summary: Analysis: 651 771 0544 P.02 PARA"OUNT eJI//err~ ENGINEERlNGBtDES1GN MEMO Lec Smick, City Planncr Bob Wiegert ~ October 20,2005 (revised 11/2/(5) Vm;..tm;e to Parking Spil~C RC(IUircmcl1ls Vennilliol'\ River Cmssing:o; Vermillion River Crossings I.I.C is requesting a variam;e \0 the parking reqllil'cment~ for Lots 1 and 2, Ulock 3. I.ot I and 2, Hlock 3 is somewhal c()Tlsl.ricled hy its ~llrrollndings i.e. the Vermillion River Crossings roadway needs to be loc{lted at the TJ I 50 median cut; the slormwaler ponds needed to be located west of the pipeline easement. The nOlelneeds a certain numher of" moms to he financially fc,asiblc and the multi tenant building needs to he or a certain size. Proposed Pafking: Parking proposed adjaCCI)110 Vermillion River Crosl;ings west of Lot I, Blork 3 = 22 ~paces · Parking Lot = 142 spa\>cs TOlal: 164 spacl's RC{luired Parking: Sl:1aCes Multi Tenant Building: 25,750 sf: 1 space per 200 $f == 12'-) spaces 25,750 sf: 1 employee pe,r 2000 sr* = 13 spuc.:cs 1440 Arcade Street. Suite 200 · St. Paul. Minnesota 55106 · 651-771-0S44 . FAX: 776-5591 Nov-02-0S 01:47P Paramount Engineering 651 771 0544 P.03 . Ilotel: 55 Rooms * t spm:e!wum:::; 55 spaces 3 employces* 1 space/employee ** = 3 Total: ZOO spaces * induslry standard fm rewil huilding ** l:'rnpl{)yee~/shjfl infnnnatiol1 from franchiser The shortage is 36 spacl:s. . . Nov-01-05 12:27P Paramount Engineering 651 771 0544 I .1 I I I : I I I I : r I I I I : I I 41 -l I : I I I I I I I J I ..J . . @11t8r1 J7 I b 1- r- --- -'- --=~ ~-!:::.>.~)- ..,. ~ ~ I- Z~, ! --1 I S>,. U I Q tJ g I t- r-"- - _.- '---1 ""':;"'-_>.. <J _. Z - z :JO I- -..., ". ....>,... u ~ t3!~ 'I \ t-0.J '-~-"" '-... -- '-:::'::" ".. I,/) O...J ltj"" 1;;:' ~ ''''_~_.:''' '.. u ~ ----., -"'- ..,." I () ..'"'46 '- "-- '\ 'It,. _ __ _ h --I ~'1~ .~- 'y: ~~; /"C 10 J -<( ~ ~ ~ ~ O! ~~~ < ~~~ c..w~g / .. -- - --. ..-- . ..,- /" ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~;'~~t . "-..l~. ~..~.... . ......... ;! .. ';,.oeo-- _ I I I I I I I __' ~ .~-- I I I I : I r ,'. .'., I, I I ' I 1. I ( ~~ '\:,' p , .. *-~ I WiiJ (li t- I~. g L.~z)_ _ ~_ ....,..' __' _ ~ _p_~.. _._ _ _ -.. p .- ('!\ - ..- -'-v u -.,,-.- () _..,,- -1-- --"'" ..,.- ff) ... (~ .. It'- _.,., .....__ _ - -It.. ...._..__, _ '''- _0-" ._. P.02 tL LLJ ~V) c! U < ~ z I :J: Z_ ~ 0 V);L' ~ ....I Vl I ~ ..JO : ~~. cx:U w > -"1 . I I I /7 v . . . ~X#18ir..~= -----CJ5"A7f-SO------ ".-e-------{) fJ'Ulfl!o'S-_._'---~ /i- ~_ ~ q. lhej}IMa/r tk' ~1tU! 0l~H~~ 1- _ CBMH 136 " ',~: , ,'~, ,...,llM." 'dl>:,1;) &I/.e/tl., _J .. --" .",' r--h i ~~~;~rE~fii1~~~~:';~f~=5:ci.:t:~:;,- 'Ii ! LOT I : r--------------f-'~l '1 I II I I , . I II I I:~ I': I BLOCK 2 I II OUTLOT D CBMH.l01 I I I I I II . lof' I I I I I I I 'f I . , II I I' 11_ -'_ _ _ _ _ _ - -t rj - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.. I I Or"lAr\ 'Q' CBMH 104' I L C8+12------ J L_ -L~_l.J"./_~_ -1 '.(/'~' .. .Ck::!.. .. _. --- ------'------------------.--, - - - ~ - - -- ,-, " ..- -- ,- -] I I CBMH 102, I: : 1 I ---.,---------..:-~ , I: : , I : , I : , I : , I : '(I " LOT 1 LOCK I J I ~ . . i ! l~-~. " CBMH 100 '7 /. ;!p]~wl I If I li,'I'I"'" j liJ~I;J!1 / /, I jll; ! J!;~I!H~ / / I ( ,Pi! i i~SHEET / /' I I I' 11 / ,'. I " ,', I / /. I " ,: , L- " " I / ! , /1--/ · , ::i?' I ~ ';"""'h; , ,rl,Ji J ~1I 't!l.l /l';/ / lY / . I -- '/,/ / / '!' 'f!::~ / it " , 1/ ,,- ,,'::~:f;,-=~o;'i::~<"! " ',,;//,:W ,: ~ ,/ I I " .. Jii,.,--_wiJ,!(J)'fJ!!/LOT ~ / iJJ,' ~ :L f ::. .rJ:tr-c6~~;~:1};~T -cO '7'~,"L~i, ,}- //11 ~~, "l,,! ,! ..I ' -+i" ..." ~ - /..Ir ',"I' J .a SHfEl')i1~'f ~1\\\\ "- Iii r n (-"---------- ;~r:: I.~~ ~\))j! ! ,/ ! ! i,ll: iii i I,: ~TLOTF Iii! i filiI fI / ! i iilii ~.lj;'! : !i'1 ~}lW I :::; n' ,.,1,1/1/ '\"; .';/l/; /, /, / ''o '\'o \ , /~- """ "0~,il! ;/// ~/' \" \ \\" ///' ............... --~' /: / </ . , \' \" / ;;/ ...... j ~ I ' /,v :'/" -'c '~\ \, /, ___~ ........:,,' __. ,/ / /' ;,>> '\\" \\\\'v;;/~" ~,: ...r......~ /// { OUTLOT G \ /' i,' ......" -- -',</ // \ '\ /\ \''\ ' ,/,---UJ;u:rCCilT I -~,,'i ,/, //'/74, ,,/:_ " \\"-\ / ;: "- /~_ " ,- ~ ~ ~ 0- I J~ ", "'.", \ (......... J I / / I \-..;. " ~~ '- --..... " " ,,/ ,/ / '\ '\, / I I I I { _::ZRJ_ _r-"QJ - - - CBMH 132 ~ CBMH 131 OUTLOT E CBMH 130 - - - ,:.::lR.L-..-_ _ _' R -E:BMH-1+3-,' ". -------.I-J I I ! I I' I . ' I I I I' ! CB 109 I I I I I I }~ I CBMH 107 , '\ \\y\\ ' "t.." .\~ /'> '\ / . . . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us COpy October 14,2005 Mr. Bob Wiegert, P.E. Paramount Engineering & Design 1440 Arcade Street Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55102 VIA E-MAIL & SURF ACE MAIL RE: Vermillion River Crossings - Variance to Parking Space Requirements Dear Mr. Wiegert: On September 11, 2005, I spoke to you by phone concerning the parking space issues for the Vermillion River Crossings Final Plat. During that phone conversation you clarified the square footages of the buildings proposed in Block 3 of the plan. A recalculation of the parking space requirements shows that there is a shortage of at least 18 parking spaces for Lots 1 and 2 of Block 3. This figure does not include whatever employee parking may be required. It also does not include any parking shortages that may be attributable to the remaining lots in Phase I of the development. While speaking to you by phone, I requested that you prepare a parking space analysis for the development and submit it to the City for review. Because adequate parking is an issue in the development, future building square footages may need to be reduced in order to meet the City's parking requirements. From this analysis, you will be able to determine if you will require a variance from the Board of Adjustment (Planning Commission) to meet the parking space needs of the development, or whether your plans need to be modified. As of this date, City staffhas not received your parking space analysis and/or a request for a variance to the parking space requirements. As you may recall in the July 5, 2005 staff memo to the City Council concerning the approval of the final plat, the following was stated: Parking Spaces - With the reduction of square footage in Lots 1 and 2 Block 3, the parking space requirements may become more difficult to meet. The parking space requirements will be reviewed at the site plan stage and if the spaces are deficient in number, the Developer will need to apply for a variance or utilize other means of meeting the parking requirements such as the construction of a parking facility on site. We would like to once again encourage you to be proactive regarding this issue. You may soon be on the verge of initiating grading or utility installations that are based on assumptions regarding the sizes of your parking lots. If a variance from the parking requirements is required, . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us October 14,2005 Mr. Bob Wiegert, P.E. Paramount Engineering & Design 1440 Arcade Street Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55102 VIA E-MAIL & SURFACE MAIL RE: Vermillion River Crossings - Variance to Parking Space Requirements Dear Mr. Wiegert: . On September 11, 2005, I spoke to you by phone concerning the parking space issues for the Vermillion River Crossings Final Plat. During that phone conversation you clarified the square footages of the buildings proposed in Block 3 of the plan. A recalculation of the parking space requirements shows that there is a shortage of at least 18 parking spaces for Lots 1 and 2 of Block 3. This figure does not include whatever employee parking may be required. It also does not include any parking shortages that may be attributable to the remaining lots in Phase I of the development. While speaking to you by phone, I requested that you prepare a parking space analysis for the development and submit it to the City for review. Because adequate parking is an issue in the development, future building square footages may need to be reduced in order to meet the City's parking requirements. From this analysis, you will be able to determine if you will require a variance from the Board of Adjustment (Planning Commission) to meet the parking space needs of the development, or whether your plans need to be modified. As of this date, City staff has not received your parking space analysis and/or a request for a variance to the parking space requirements. As you may recall in the July 5, 2005 staff memo to the City Council concerning the approval of the final plat, the following was stated: Parking Spaces - With the reduction of square footage in Lots 1 and 2 Block 3, the parking space requirements may become more difficult to meet. The parking space requirements will be reviewed at the site plan stage and if the spaces are deficient in number, the Developer will need to apply for a variance or utilize other means of meeting the parking requirements such as the construction of a parking facility on site. . We would like to once again encourage you to be proactive regarding this issue. You may soon be on the verge of initiating grading or utility installations that are based on assumptions regarding the sizes of your parking lots. If a variance from the parking requirements is required, . . . and if you do not apply for one or if the variance request is denied, you will then be required to increase your parking lot area or decrease the size of your proposed buildings, or both. Your range of options will be much greater if you address this issue before you begin submitting site plans for individual lots. Accordingly, we ask that you submit a written parking space analysis (with scaled drawings) that includes the following: 1. Clearly stated projections regarding the number of employees who will be working in the buildings that will be constructed on Lots 1 and 2 of Block 3. 2. Your own comparison of (a) the parking currently proposed for Block 3 and (b) the number of parking spaces required by the City Code. 3. If your analysis confirms that the amount of parking (as initially proposed) does not satisfy the City's requirements, then let us know how you intend to address that deficiency. We strongly encourage you to include in your analysis the parking that will be required for the remainder of Phase I. Admittedly, more is currently known about the size and location of the Block 3 buildings (hotel and multi-tenant building) than the other Phase I buildings. However, it should now be possible to make reasonable assumptions regarding the sizes of all of the Phase I buildings and the approximate number of employees for each building. It is possible that the currently projected parking shortage in Block 3 may be offset by a parking surplus somewhere nearby. On the other hand, if the shortage in Block 3 will be compounded by a shortage in the remainder of Phase I, it will be better if everyone acknowledges that fact now so that steps can be taken to address the problem immediately. If your parking analysis indicates the need for a variance, the next meeting at which such a variance can be considered will be on November 8,2005. In order to have the matter heard on that date, you will need to submit a variance request on or before October 21,2005 to allow for sufficient time for the publication of a public hearing notice prior to the meeting. If you are not able to meet the October 21 8t deadline, or would like to have the variance request heard at a later time, please indicate the upcoming Board of Adjustment meeting at which your request will be considered and submit the required application prior to the applicable submittal deadline: December 13,2005 - Planning Commission Meeting November 23, 2005 - Submittal Date January 10, 2005 - Planning Commission Meeting December 23,2005 - Submittal Date It is important that the review and approval of a parking variance (if required) occur as soon as possible, since site plans for proposed lots in the Vermillion River Crossings project will most likely be submitted in the near future. The Board of Adjustment will require that any required parking variance be granted before the Planning Commission will approve any site plans for the Vermillion River Crossings project. . . . Please let me know if you have any questions concerning the above information. I may be reached at 651-463-1820. Sincerely, ~ Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: Bob Pitner, Pederson Ventures Dick Allendorf, Pederson Ventures Nathaniel Shea, Tanek Bob Knutsen, Property Owner Stan Knutsen, Property Owner Robin Roland, Acting City Administrator Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Randy Distad, Director of Parks and Recreation Pile . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Planning Commission )vPeJ FROM: Lee Smick, AICP City Planner SUBJECT: Concept Plan Review - U.S. Federal Credit Union - Location: Lot 1 Block 1 - Vermillion River Crossings DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION Representatives from the U.S. Federal Credit Union are proposing to construct a 4,500 square foot building on 1.03 acres on Lot 1 Block 1 in Vermillion River Crossings (Exhibit A). The location of the proposed development is directly south of CSAH 50 and west of the north/south roadway. . DISCUSSION Attached to the packet are the Sketch Plan Requirements under Section 10-6-23 (C) of the City Code (Exhibit B). The plan has been forwarded to the Planning Commission for its comments concerning the plan. These comments are intended to be advisory only and do not constitute a binding decision on the concept plan. Concept Plan The proposed location of the building meets the lot width, lot area requirements, all setbacks within the Spruce Street Commercial (SSC) zoning district. The drainage ditch at the northern portion of the site is part of the mitigation plan for the Vermillion River in order to mitigate for surface water runoff before it discharges into the trout stream. This is a requirement ofthe MPCA and DNR. Proposed Use . The proposed credit union meets the permitted use for personal and professional services under the SSC Zoning District requirements. The concept plan shows 4 bays for drive-thru service on the south side of the site. The drive-thru service allows for the stacking of 5 cars in each bay. The drive-thru service will be separated from the walk-in customers to allow for a safe circulation pattern on the site. The applicant proposes a monument sign on the east side of the property near the north/south roadway. A sign permit is required before installation of the sign. The applicant proposes 25 parking spaces. The code requires 18 parking spaces. The applicant has met the off-street parking requirements. . Transportation Road A is the north/south roadway that is the main traffic access through the development. Road A is a public street; therefore the City maintains anything in the right-of-way on the north/south roadway. Service Road B is the east/west connector that will remain private; thereby requiring the developer to maintain the street. In earlier plans from the applicant, an access to the credit union along the north/south roadway was proposed. Shelly Johnson reviewed the plans and recommended that the access from Road A should not be allowed (Exhibit C). As noted in his memo, he is making this recommendation because "future volumes on the access road to CSAH 50 will be of sufficient magnitude where we do not want any curb cuts between CSAH 50 and the service Road (B)". This recommendation also pertains to Lot 1 Block 2 on the east side ofthe Road A. Solid Waste Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor, has reviewed and approved the trash enclosure location. Building Elevations The U.S. Federal Credit Union representatives are awaiting the approval by the Planning Commission of the unifying design themes that are being prepared by Pedersen Ventures. The representatives have expressed their interest in complying with the themes on their building architecture. As soon as the unifying design themes have been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, the Credit Union representatives will submit their site plan with building elevations for review by the planning Commission. . The concept plan does show the location of the roof top mechanical equipment and the applicant proposes to provide roof top screening for the equipment. The screening of the equipment will be reviewed when the building elevations are received. Landscape Plan The Landscape Plan will be submitted with the site plan documents. Engineering The utility plans will be submitted with the site plan documents. RECOMMENDED ACTION The Planning Commission should comment on the concept plan. Respectfully Submitted, . Lee Smick, AICP City Planner cc: Dick Strassburg, Tegra Group - - <'''' E ~~~~o .....z Z Vll\l)o..o-~ 0 z >"- -gZ~~ g. <cO ",,- ts :f c: O~~~O wZ Z .~.~ u ~ -.0 '-0 ...... Q=> Z 0 => ~.18.. 0> W.... :e ~ ~O c €h,s;~ :;63 o ~ 0 ~ om ~alg- "" ~. . 0" E' ~ ."" <C Cil~ 'Ii:: .& z c-a..';n ~ =>u ... ""~ 2'" !~~8~ ~~~~ .s.E ~. ~ "~-~-- (( "- ~/' -\,-' \ <...~ . I"'rt~ QV'O~ . (~ I ! N \ b() \ ..J..J III "- " '" .... s .... => () Z III ~ ~ .... - l;; - \ EXI-f/8/T A ~ t ~ j ! ..--- .-~.-\:-----. ,)) ! I.~ i , i I ~ g d ~~ % . ~ 0 . ~ il ~ ~ ~ 5 Ii u~ i I i I Ii i "! ~i M, ~./' " /' I Ii II l' II Ii il II I I ,I II II ,I 'l I\[i I I I II ,I , , '0 ~ ...-og <!~ ~ o () I 1 - z~ <1::11 -1= Q...- w:=i f--<l: (J)~ . . . ~X!-l (13/f l5 10-6-23: SITE PLAN REVIEW: (A)Purpose: The purpose of this section is to establish a formal site plan review procedure and provide regulations pertaining to the enforcement of site design standards consistent with the requirements of this chapter. (B)Exceptions To Review: The following shall be excepted from the foregoing requirements: 1. Agricultural developments. 2. Single-family detached dwellings. 3. Two-family attached dwellings. ~(C)Sketch Plan: 1. Prior to the formulation of a site plan, applicants shall present a sketch plan to the zoning officer prior to filing of a formal application. The plan shall be conceptual but shall be drawn to scale with topography of a contour interval not greater than two feet (2') and may include the following: (a) The proposed site with reference to existing development on adjacent properties, at least to within two hundred feet (200'). (b) General location of proposed structures. (c) Tentative street arrangements, both public and private. (d) Amenities to be provided such as recreational areas, open space, walkways, etc. (e) General location of parking areas. (f) Proposed public sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage. (g) A statement showing the proposed density of the project with the method of calculating said density also shown. 2. The zoning officer shall have the authority to refer the sketch plan to the planning commission and/or city council for discussion, review, and informal comment. Any opinions or comments provided to the applicant by the zoning officer, planning commission, and/or city council shall be considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the request. t3X)lI13 JI C Memo .11. Bonestroo ....Rosene -=- Anderlik& 1\]1 Associates Engineers & Architects . To: Ms. Lee Smick, City Planner - City of Farmington From: Shelly Johnson Date: November 2, 2005 Subject: Access Review - U.S. Federal Credit Union Project No. 000141-05000-0 Remarks: The U.S. Federal Credit Union site plan dated October 26,2005 has been reviewed with regard to site access. The following provides our comments. The access from Road A should not be allowed. The purpose of the Service Road B is to provide property access. The future volumes on the access road to CSAH 50 will be of sufficient magnitude where we do not want any curb cuts between CSAH 50 and the service road. This includes one-way _bound driveways. We want to protect traffic operations along this major access road and do not ish to set a precedence. I recommend that a singular access to the site from the service road, in the location shown on the site plan, will be sufficient to accommodate the site generated traffic. . Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. www.bonestroo.com o St. Paul Office: 2335 West Highway 36 51 Paul. MN 55113 Pllone: 651-63&4600 Fax: 651.63&-1311 o MilWaukee Office: 12075 N. Corporate PBI1<way. ste 200 Mequon. WI 53092 Phone: 262-643-9032 Fax: 262-241-4901 o Rochester Offlce: 112 7" Slreet NE Rochester. MN 55906 Pllone: 507-282-2100 Fax: 507-282-3100 o Willrnar Office: 205 5th Street SW Willmar, MN 56201 Pllone: 320-214-9557 Fax: 320-214-9458 o St. Cloud Offlce: 3721 23"' Street S Sl Cloud. MN 56301 Phone: 320-251-4553 Fax: 320-251-6252 o Ubertyville Offlce: 1860 West Winches1er Rd. ste 106 Grayslake. Il 60030 Pllone: 847-548-6774 Fax: 847-548-6979 . . . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: City Planning Commission \~V FROM: Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Variance Request - Setback Requirement for a Building from a Minor Arterial Roadway Applicant: City of Farmington - Water Board 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington Water Board is requesting a variance of twenty (20') feet from the minimum setback of fifty (50') feet along a minor arterial (Pilot Knob Road) for the construction of a well house. Plannine Division Review Applicant: City of Farmington Water Board 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Northwest intersection of Pilot Knob Road and 200th Street Location: Attachments: 1. Variance Application 2. Site Plan Existing Zoning: Planned Unit Development, underlying R-3 (Medium Density Residential) Comprehensive Plan: Medium Density Current Land Use: Townhomes . DISCUSSION . . The City Code requires a 50-foot setback from all minor arterials, in this case Pilot Knob Road. As shown on the attached site plan, the applicant is requesting a variance of twenty (20') feet from the required 50-foot setback. Setbacks are measured from the property line I right-of-way. It should be noted that a variance of fifteen (15') feet was granted by the Commission from the 50-foot setback from an arterial road requirement for the new Fire Station currently under construction off of Pilot Knob Road and adjacent to the City's Maintenance Facility. Staff does want to mention that the City's Engineering Division will be holding a public forum for the Home Owners Association of Charleswood on November 17, 2005 to discuss the actual construction plans for the well house. All affected homeowners have been notified of this meeting. The Planning Commission must determine whether the reasons provided by the applicant warrant approval of the variance. The City Code provides the following criteria that must be met for a variance to be approved: 1. Because the particular physical surroundings, or the shape, configuration, topography, or other conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, strict adherence to the regulations of this Title would cause undue hardship. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms ofthis Title. The easement (site) on which the well house is to be located is adjacent to Pilot Knob Road and is only large enough to meet the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health. According to the Minnesota Department of Health the well head has to be located within the easement (site) in such a fashion that the City has complete control of the land within a 50- foot radius from the outside of the well casing. According to Lee Mann, City Engineer, the well house itself has to be located as shown on the attached schematic to allow access by maintenance personnel and fit the grading of the property within the easement, therefore a variance is required. 2. The conditions upon which a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other properties within the same zoning classification. Because of the size of the easement that was granted with the Charleswood Development for the well house, it is not possible to situate the well house on the easement (site) and meet both the City's setback requirements as well as the requirements of the Minnesota Department of Health mentioned above, therefore the site is unique. 3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land. The alleged hardship was not created by the applicant. . . . 4. The granting ofthe variance will not alter the essential character ofthe locality or be injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the parcel of land is located or substantially diminish property values. Currently, the easement area is well screened from Pilot Knob Road by spruce trees and an entrance monument. Due to the construction of the well house some of the existing trees will have to be either removed or relocated to another area within the development. It is the Water Board's intent to maintain the first row of spruce trees and then re-landscape the rest of the site as closely as possible to the conditions that existed prior to the construction of the well house. Therefore, it is staff's belief that the variance would not cause any of the adverse effects mentioned above. 5. The proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or be detrimental to the public welfare or public safety. The variance would not create any of the above-mentioned adverse effects. 6. The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship. The twenty (20') foot encroachment into the 50-foot setback from a minor arterial roadway is the minimum action required to eliminate the variance. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the variance of twenty (20') feet from the required 50-foot setback along a minor arterial to allow the construction of a well house. Respectfully submitted, -7trM-<f kJ~ Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner Cc: Lee Mann, City Engineer . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463.7111 Fax (651) 463.2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.uS II VARIANCE APPLICATION II Applicant: (!fTY ~ f' P/MlJ1/JJ(,:lrJI.) WA7'lfJR 801Ml> Telephone: ({,S'/) Address: 3 '2.. 5' tJA 1< oS' ~ HM..M ING-'flT!\.J Street City '1'3-1'00 MrJ State Fax: (G,SI) t.{,,?> - 6"S7J 1. tJ Zip Code J r.. " Owner: C,7'-j "r- 3'2 S- Street Ff.rfJ.M J JJ r;.:rou Telephone: ~ 'I, 3 ~ /C,ao Fax: ("SI) ~'3 - 14'// Premises Involved: OALC S~ frlt.Il.M I N~ iJ I--f N City State LeT / ~ /3'-1<. I, ChtJ.V'!e'/JwOdd ~ A-dd -h;""" Address! Legal Description (lot, block, plat name, section, township, range) 5SOZY Zip Code . Address: Current Zoning District Specific Nature of Request I Claimed Hardship: S I -:e... 0 f e. 4..'~ Co VII\,~ "'t I'\. J1 f..;( V\ Dep c...~+ 1'\.1 to t.V+ e> 1- "c..l~ Ye tJ'~..ftl.'M<, tv+5 C\u..+; ~ 1\.. ("Cl Hc.~ wed l -h.(J().H~_ . R-3 Current Land Use ~ ,llY) nt'JYJ1l?:S- . SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS o Proof of Ownership 0 Copies of Site Plan o Application Fee ($200) 0 AbstractlResidential List (adjoining property owners only) o Boundary I Lot Survey 0 Torrens (Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Tide Required) ~ }/t1 ~ Signature of Applicant 143/~ . D'ate Request Submitted to the Planning Commission on Public Hearing Set for: For office use only Advertised in Local Newspaper: Planning Commission Action: _Approved _Denied . Comments: Conditions Set: Planning division: Date: 01105 I \ I ~ ", , I , I I 1 , , / , I , I k , , , I I , , I I I I 0/ , \ I \ , \ ~ I , I I , , , I , i I I ,'\.. I , I I , I , , I I \ \ \ I I I \ I \ 1 \ I , \e\ , \ . ~ , , I I \ ~ I I , \ ~ / \ I I \ I I \ \ \ ~ '\ '~ , I , I \ , \ \ I?, , , \ , \ , , I I I , \ , , , \ , \ , I 1 I I I , , , , , 1 I I I ',~ , , I I 1 I I 1 , , I \ \~ I I \ '" I I , , a, \ , \ 1 , , , , \ \ ' I , \ \ , \ , \ I , , \ \ \ @ \ , \ \ ~ , , , \ \ 1 , \ , \ , \ \ , , ' \ , \ (j) \ I \ , , \ \ ~- \ \ ' , , , , \ , ~~ , I , \ , , \ \ / I I I \ , , , \ I , , , , / I I ~ , , , / , I I / , , ',p \ \ , / I I I , , , I I \ ~ , :':>0..., \ , , a', \ \ ' ~ , , \ , \ \ " \ ' , , I , I , \ '~ \ I \ \ , \ \ / 1 I I \ \ 'f' \ / I I I , ? " " I / , I I C2 I , , //0 , 0 1 I , , , , I , , , I / \ , , I , , I I I /' \ \ \ I ::>)i(E , I I / / \ , I , \ \ \ , - , , / \ , , \ I I I / \ \ \0 , ~ , 1 \ I \ , \ \ / m , I I " , , , , I , I , \ il ~ , 1 , ~ , ;'1 , , e, !---'-'_'~~, \ , , , , \ , / , , \ , ~ , , \ , \ "'\ \ '" \ 0 , 0 \ 5' , I en I ~ ;;:! rt>, ", rTJ , , ~ , , , :!; , , , I / , / , / \ . / 9<J_ _-" , ~ / I I / ____"Z6___ -- '--I ----925----0 -------926-_.... . ___ / , / o'r......... /\ \ " d-" \'" I \~.d, ....... ........_ - - c. \ ,"?t-..__ \ ~W:::: ,.( ',< ,,'<^ ,___'\-,-~--------- ,\II, /\ ~ \ ....~~ I" ' I '\ "- I \, "- I 0 -- -:::;~;~::-':,-:- --,,~ ~ ..--- - - - .... "1~ -""' .... ---__-- -9JQ_ / / '~-~--~------=---:I'---------~-'-'~~ _.:t -'" ':----,~/-~*---. ;>IT~ I I I I I I I I 1 ~ o / _.._.9J2::::,-::.__..::::-:::-_:::"_ 1.1i\n;l';A,PIN{; --- '-, --- -- -- :::,...."--.... -', ", --~2_____________-__----____ ---932:- ------ PILOT KNOB ROAD . [E} SITE PLAN n Bonestroo lOa ~~~;rl~k & 1\J1 Associates En91nHB II Ardlltecu SlCtM.TVt'lE: Cfll(lof[SIIIOO. 1lOS[II[, Nll)[,.UIl. A51iOCM1r5. rfC. 2111150 Oo/llE St. Paul Office 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Phone: 6S1-636~4600 Fit)(; 651-636-1311 IHOlE8YCE!mn'THIlTtHlsPL..V1.5PW~~.0R1ltl'Oro'~ 'WM1'1'ItPMf.tl"'IIEOII~NfOlll[C'StII'[1MSIOH NfO '*' rAM" otIl.Y I.IC[NS[~ PROJ"E$SIOfM,I. [JfCINE[ft '*- llNIllR1M[\.lIW$OfTlllSIM[or_ESO'''- "RJNTw.ME: fl. """"" .......,." () o .... FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA WELL NO,8 PUMPHOUSE FACILITY OI.;l &.6 m ~" . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop Meeting --- Follow-Up DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION A joint Planning Commission/City Council workshop meeting was held on October 19,2005. Some of the topics that were addressed at that time were discussed again at a City Council workshop meeting that was held on October 26, 2005. This memo will summarize relevant portions of those two past discussions, and provide (for discussion purposes) further information regarding staff s proposed handling of certain types of pending or anticipated development concept plans. . A. CONCEPT REVIEW PROCESS (SOUTHEAST REGION) The aforementioned discussions that took place on October 19 and October 26 included questions about the desired or preferred processing of concept plans, especially with regard to the timing or sequencing of the required steps in the review/approval process. More specifically, questions were asked about whether concept plans should be reviewed for parcels that are not within the City, or that have not previously been involved in the MUSA review process, or that do not have Comprehensive Plan designations or City zoning classifications. It was suggested to the City Council at its October 26 meeting that the answers to the preceding questions may depend upon the locations of the parcels in question. We have prepared a map (attached) that divides the area east of Highway 3 and south of220th Street/Highway 50 into two zones. The characteristics of, or differences between, the two zones include the following: . Zone B Primaril Townshi arcels Primarily larger (over 60 acres) Few, relativel s eaking No (discussions are in progress with Em ire and Castle Rock More distant Potentially major commercial Primarily agricultural At this stage, it may be appropriate for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the possibility of adopting a concept review policy that takes into consideration the distinctions between the properties located within Zone A and Zone B. Any such policy could, in effect, represent a . "formalization" of the factors that City staff members have previously considered in connection with developments such as the Hometown Addition. More specifically, the proposed processing sequences for Zones A and B are as follows: Step Two Review/Approve Joint Resolution re: Annexation Petition (ifrequiredi Step Three Review/Approve MUSA request (By City Council if under 5 acres; by MUSA Review Committee, Planning Commission and City Council if over 5 acres )5 Adopt Comprehensive Plan designation and zonin classification Met Council review/approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (MUSA and land use) Step Four Step Five Step Six Review/Approve Preliminary Plat Step Seven Review/Approve Final Plat nJa nJa Ste Ste Preliminary Review of Concept Plan (if desired b owner/develo er 2 Finish System Plan Updates (surface water management plan, sanitary sewer plan, water distribution Ian 4 Final Review/Approval of Concept Plan Review/Approve Joint Resolution re: Annexation Petition (if re uired 6 Review/Approve MUSA request (By City Council if under 5 acres; by MUSA Review Committee, Planning Commission and City Council if over 5 acres . Adopt Comprehensive Plan designation and zonin classification7 Met Council review/approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (MUSA and land use) Review/ A rove Prelimin Plat Review/ A rove Final Plat I The City's current practice is to not process an annexation petition or discuss it informally with the affected Township until City staff members believe that there is a reasonable likelihood that proposed development will receive all required City approvals. Minnesota state statutes provide that annexation should not take place until development is "imminent." 2 The scope and complexity of concept plans for the larger Zone B parcels may warrant a "two-stage" concept review process. It may be possible and useful to discuss some general parameters (example: relative proportions of single family detached and multi-family housing) for development even before the system plan updates are completed. 3 The City's preference is for Orderly Annexation Agreements and Joint (City/Township] Resolutions regarding annexation, rather than annexations by ordinance (which is the procedure through which properties are annexed despite the Township's opposition). 4 The completion of the system plan updates does not need to be a prerequisite to the consideration or approval of concept plans for Zone A parcels. Most, if not all, of the Zone A parcels are covered by the City's existing system plans, and the development of the (relatively smaller) Zone A parcels would have a negligible impact on City's systems. Conversely, many of the Zone B parcels are not covered by one or more of City's existing system plans, and development of the ~relatively larger) Zone B parcels would have a significant impact on the City's systems. Steps 3 and 4 could potentially be reversed in some cases, but the City must make a formal MUSA decision and a formal land use decision before Met Council approval is sought. 6 See footnote #1 above. 7 Steps 5 and 6 could potentially be reversed in some cases, but the City must make a formal MUSA decision and a formal . land use decision before Met Council approval is sought. The Planning Commission's comments on this proposed "sequencing" of development plans for parcels located in the southeast region of the FarmingtonlEmpire Township/Castle Rock Township area would be appreciated. . B. SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED (LOW DENSITY) HOUSING VS. MULTI-FAMILY (MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY) HOUSING -- Criteria The other major topic that arose during the October 19 workshop meeting, and that remains somewhat unclear, deals with the circumstances under multi-family or medium-to-high density residential development can or should be considered. City staff members are assuming that any properties that are located within the City limits, and that are currently zoned R-3, R-4 or R-5, can be developed in a manner consistent with those zoning classifications. However, areas have been (and will continue to be) proposed for residential development that do not currently have residential zoning classifications, either because they have not yet been annexed or because they were automatically given an A-I zoning classification upon annexation. The City does not currently have a formally adopted or generally accepted set of criteria that can be considered in order to help determine where and when multi-family or medium-to-high density housing would be appropriate or acceptable. Accordingly, we are proposing the following set of criteria for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider: . 1 Is the proposed development located near existing or proposed major trans ortation corridors? 2 Will the approval of the proposed development complete, or contribute to the com letion of, a necessary or desired roadway connection? 3 Is the proposed development located near commercial or industrial uses, or existing multi-family or medium-to-hi h densi housing? 4 Are there unusual or extraordinary infrastructure costs associated with the ro osed ro"ect? (Brid es, collector or arterial roadwa s, etc. 5 Are there physical features present (wetlands, floodplains, high water tables, steep slopes, power lines, gas lines, railroads, etc.) that render the property in uestion less suitable for low densi residential develo ment? 6 Does the size of the proposed development make the inclusion of a higher- density component desirable? (Suggestion: indicate that a higher-density component is desired for projects of up to 40 acres, and required for projects of 80 acres or more.) 7 Does the proposed project assist the City in achieving its general goal of "rovidin a varie ofhousin es for eo Ie in all sta es oflife?" 8 Does the proposed project assist the City in achieving its Livable Communities Housing Goals regardin affordabili and density? Yes No Unknown In theory, a project that satisfies many ofthese criteria would be appropriate for multi-family or medium-to-high density development, and a project that satisfies none (or few) of these criteria would be less suitable for that type of development. . A number of potential Farmington developments are currently in the conceptual planning stage, so guidance from the Planning Commission with respect to the criteria proposed above would be very useful to property owners, developers, their consultants, City staff and others. This topic will presumably get discussed at greater length at the next joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting on November 30, 2005. ACTION REQUESTED Discuss: (a) the proposed sequencing of development plans for properties located within Zones A and B, and (b) the proposed criteria for multi-family and medium-to-high density housing, and provide comments and recommendations for City staff and the City Council. . . . LEGEND City Boundary - r--I Township Property L-J in Zone A '\: "" & ~ created on November ~, 200!) I t' " . . . "I City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651)463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Planning Commission IqJC/ FROM: Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Sunrise Ponds Concept Plan - Perkins Property DATE: November 8, 2005 INTRODUCTION Neal Krzyzaniak of Bridgeland Development Company has submitted the attached revised concept plan for the Perkins property, which is located east of Trunk Highway 3, west of Cambodia Avenue and north of Bristol Square (Exhibit A). At its meeting on September 13, 2005, the Planning Commission reviewed a concept plan for this site that proposed 174 multi-family units (townhomes). The revised concept that has been attached for your review proposes 110 single-family "Villa Units". I have attached, as Exhibit B, the proposed building elevations for this development. The process for submitting a concept plan is outlined in the City's Subdivision Ordinance and allows the Planning Commission to provide comments prior to preliminary plat submittal. DISCUSSION The property in question consists of two separate parcels of land owned by Neil and Linda Perkins. Both of the parcels are currently located in Empire Township. The two parcels, combined, include approximately 17 acres. The City has received a petition for annexation from Mr. and Mrs. Perkins. In keeping with past practice, the proposed annexation will be discussed with Empire Township representatives as soon as a concept plan exists that appears to be generally acceptable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Staff wants to emphasize that this matter will not proceed beyond the "concept review" stage until the annexation issue has been properly addressed with Empire Township. The City has agreed to accept, review and comment on the concept plan, in part, to help provide Empire Township officials with the information that they will need to review the annexation issue and determine whether they are interested in signing a Joint Resolution regarding the annexation in question. Concept Plan Review The Developer, Bridgeland Development Company, proposes to construct 110 detached townhomes (single-family units; please note attached elevations) on 17.09 acres with a density of 6.44 units an acre. Bridgeland is proposing a detached single-family subdivision with lot widths ranging from . thirty-six (36') to forty-six (46') feet. The setbacks for the single-family homes are proposed at twenty (20') feet in the front, six (6') feet on the side, and ten (10') feet in the rear yards. If the concept plan is approved, the Developer will be requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to designate the property as "low/ medium" density. The developer will also request that the property be rezoned to an R-2 (Low/Medium Density) designation. Inasmuch as the proposed lot widths do not meet the minimum requirement of sixty (60') feet within an R-2 zoning district, the property would have to be platted as a Planned Unit Development. Transportation The development is located adjacent to one existing roadway - Cambodia Avenue. The concept plan proposes a westerly extension of 21 oth Street through the northern portion of the site. The traffic generated by the development of this site will utilize, at least temporarily, Cambodia Avenue and 2l3th for access to and from Trunk Highway 3. The increase in traffic created from the development of this site, and from the anticipated development of nearby properties, will put additional stress on the intersection of 2l3th Street and TH 3, thereby making the 210th connection to Highway 3 critical for the future development of the east side of Farmington (See attached memo from the City's Transportation consultant). . The attached map illustrates the importance of the 2l0th Street connection to Highway 3. Although 2l3th Street would initially appear to the be most logical east/west connection between Highway 3 and the future extension of Biscayne Avenue, the intersection of 213 th Street and Highway 3 is only one block from the existing signalized intersection at Elm Street and Highway 3. MNDoT has therefore indicated that the 2l3th/Highway 3 intersection will probably never be signalized, and in fact, it will probably have to be converted to a right-in, right-out intersection at some point. In addition, details regarding the crossing of the Prairie Waterway on the east side of Cambodia Avenue remain unresolved at present. Potential problems also exist with respect to a potential future Spruce Street connection between Highway 3 and the future extension of Biscayne Avenue. As with 2l3th Street, the preferred method of crossing the Prairie Waterway and the funding required for that Spruce Street crossing have not yet been determined. Questions also still exist regarding whether the west side of the Spruce/Highway 3 intersection can or will be opened to through traffic. If that doesn't happen, the intersection of Spruce and Highway 3 will (like 2l3th Street) be something less than a full intersection. In contrast, the intersection of 210th Street and Highway 3 has the potential of being a full intersection, and one that can be signalized as soon as traffic warrants are met. The creation of this new signalized intersection could lead to redevelopment activity at the northwest and southwest comers of that intersection. Eastbound traffic on the new 210th Street could cross Highway 3 and then take Willow Street and 4th Street to get into the heart of the downtown area. The construction of 210th Street along the southern border of the former bus garage property would help "open up" that property (and the small pocket of adjacent residential properties) for new development, and could ultimately enable MNDoT and the City to close the problematic Highway 3/Chippendale Court intersection (i.e., the former access to the bus garage property). . . . . The proposed 210th Street connection between Highway 3 and Cambodia Avenue, and the partial completion of Cambodia Avenue's "missing link" between 210th Street and 208th Street, will help provide westerly and northerly accesses that may be needed for the development of the Devney and Winkler parcels. The development of those parcels will, in turn, help complete a portion of Biscayne Avenue's "missing link" between 210th Street and 22Sth Street. When that link is completed, Biscayne will be a continuous, straight roadway between Northfield on the south and Rosemount on the north, and as such it will gradually begin to assume an increasingly important role as a north/south alternative to Highway 3 (especially as portions of Biscayne Avenue begin to get paved in connection with adjacent development). The City's Transportation Engineer has indicated that both 210th Street and Cambodia Avenue should be classified as collector streets and should be constructed to that standard (70 feet of right-of-way), and that on-street parking along both sides of the streets should be prohibited. The concept plan currently shows Cambodia Avenue with a sixty-six (66') foot right-of-way. This will have to be revised to show the required seventy (70') feet of right-of-way. The internal roads are proposed to be twenty-four (24') foot wide private streets. It appears that these private roadways are adequate to serve this site. In addition, there is a sixteen (16') foot wide alleyway that bisects the inner block of this development. It is proposed that the garages for the homes within this block will access onto this alleyway. MUSA Extension/Utilities At this time the property is not identified on the City's adopted MUS A Phasing Plan. The property owners were apparently not yet actively considering development when the MUSA Review Committee was meeting during 2004. The City's MUSA Review Committee will have to reconvene to determine if MUSA can or should be made available to this site. It should be noted that the number one criterion identified for MUSA expansion is "proximity of transportation corridors". As mentioned above in the transportation section of this memorandum, the 2l0th Street connection to Trunk Highway 3 is pivotal for the future development of the east side of Farmington. The MUSA Phasing Plan that was adopted on November 15,2004 is not necessarily a long-range planning tool. It is a "snapshot in time" that depicts only those property owners who expressed an interest in development immediately before or during the MUSA Review Committee's deliberations. Sanitary sewer service to this development is located to the west of the property. There will need to be coordination with adjoining property owners to make this connection. Additionally, water service is located to the west and southeast of the property. The watermain will be required to be looped at both locations. Again, coordination with adjoining property owners will be required in order to make these connections. There is at least one well and one septic system on site that will have to abandoned with this development. The concept plan does not provide for any onsite ponding for stormwater management. Staff has discussed this concept with the City's stormwater engineer and he has indicated that no onsite treatment is required for this development because the Wausau Pond located to the west of this property was expanded a year ago to function as a regional water quality pond. However, he did indicate that the existing pond/ditch located just to the south of the property's southern boundary will " . . . . have to be expanded in conjunction with this development. This pond expansion may have some impact to the location of Street C. Park and Trail Requirements Randy Distad, the Parks and Recreation Director, has stated that based on the size of the development he would recommend to the Parks and Recreation Committee that the City take cash-in-lieu of park property from the applicant. Trails and sidewalks will be required in conjunction with this development. The Developer has proposed (Exhibit C) placing the required trails off the Perkins property and on the City owned property adjacent to the stormwater ponds. Staff is generally okay with this proposal provided the Developer pay for the construction of the trails. In addition to the trails, a five (5') foot wide concrete sidewalk is proposed on the southern side of21Oth Street. Homeowners' Association The internal streets (streets A, B, C, D, E, F) and the alleyway will be privately owned and are planned to be narrower than a typical City street. A Homeowners' Association or some other form of governing body will therefore have to oversee the snow plowing within this development. Miscellaneous The developer has provided City staff with some market value information (see attached) regarding a "detached townhome" development on Bloomfield Path in Rosemount. This information will give you some insight into "price points" and resale value. ACTION REQUESTED Provide comments to the applicant regarding the attached concept plan. Respectfully submitted, 7~U~ Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner Cc: Peter Knaeble, Terra Engineering Neal Krzyzaniak, Bridgeland Development Neil and Linda Perkins , , . . I--- ~ g Ii. ~S~~fi e~"~~~ ~~~~~i ~ ~ ~~;8~~ClTI ~~:8girfii\ ~::8Ur!7fl ~ .:~x O\~ !~: ~i !~: !~ _ ~.~ >' - & \: - & > " ~>18 2 g 8 ~ i'! 8 " ~ ~i5l . e 5 . ! . , ~~e i i e i e ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ .ago: AS as E . :.+. . PI 8 - ~ ~ ~ -. ..... & r & ~. SKETCH PLAN ::: ~ """' SUNRISE PONDS 01 5: FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA ~~~~.~pOnld I>)' ':::ww :::.r;=~~"'ond Entl_lI/Iderfnelonoflhe 5tf3t.WiNlnOta.~ P.I....J_l(n~.p.E. Dote:~Re;.No.I0C&4-4 Iq ~. ni EXIH61r A I ()~ Z- ~~;:-~ -'1rmi1 ~ I@,',,~w , rc.iJ W I'-'::J 25 1:::::-.01 c:=J I--__.~ (...;-, I ,", , J ,.c:, ..-: II '-.:~:~~=:_'-_.:'"_:.-:::.:j nHU~~i~~1 Hnii~o~~liI~; ;E.:D....!:I ~~...Fi ~UU~'~51~ nf'o,)UlIII~i!~ .....~ !~~j~~+ ~JR !l.~~!l!l~ ..~ :!1IIiOta ctg ~~ ~liI~lJDaI' q'j -; ai:iQ~ 2i .;;!~ ~~ ~> ;g~ ;~ ~~ TT H~i!i!! j~~1 ~~tii-< e~g :;!n~ ~ N2ij ~ialll~~i ~~- ~ll~ 51 n,/! I !:III:' . ~ ~!'" ; ~. ~ i '===d._\\' U \ \ ~~gli --.... -~~_-.J,i\ \ \ \\ ;\ I) \ v \ iijl -------""' '. \"--\ ffi. I \ R \ '\J -- -- -- \ \ \~ \ \ f!2 \ .il __ r ,'l;.\ \~\\ i~a ," I' '-- -i~:-- ~ii RV~,," ~R2~; \~f 10)(, > ,I ~~ ------!\i-J !~~,~\~\ >1 W~, /JiY {,' . ~I \\"~,, \ /1 V!'~'~lgl; ~~~ ~~ ~~-\~I ~lr~- ~ ~~II~'~~r.': f1. \\\~t;\\\\ '/ ~ t~ i \ I ~.,. ~\.1~ 8 '~8"L,-. ':'I8[~~ ~, '/ j " 'I ~aF ." I "" < ')If?'f') '3 II, R . -~ . 3 I . _3 T: \ -:---" /.(f" ;~~: ~~-B -n_ 1 ~ --;'! ~ ~ :\ )> ;/ Q 1 ~ (t'lI I I I ~ I'';'''' I' ~~) ! I ! ~ \ \~~ \ :;:0 ,~/ iM' n I I!!r h .' I .1 "... I-,' - I I '1.1/i,jl \,~ \ ~/ " ~p c Ie' p,::.rJ~I. l~ :"",,: \\ /,/ ~I I I Jf~ I . ~ at I n ~ . ~~ , "~l!1-1nI" ~l! ~I \ ' ? I I' I I q-:F I - I' 1:0 mJr . T ~ ,..., I~\ \ ~-- -- - , I' l.::..r 1= c -5- - 'h '. ~\ \ ~qq '\'" I I ~. r . r=- C it p,,'. ~~~ ~R'" ." .i ~I! . ~" ~) I ~, I . ~ L:: ~:I . I ":' "-' - ~r 1 ~\ );J f!i.i~~1 "~ ~ :.!S c I c ~.~!"n ,4& ~ ~ \ . .!a ~~ "':~ -1 I !!.r, . c I - ,'- I'';''. Ill' T ~ I i f(ft!\i - \ ~~!il II! I I ~~ ~ - ~ [ hi ~ . ~" ~I J~ ! i ~~_\ \' ~n. /; I I r:;- --' I, "'" T I FrI r- , ~ : I I ~ . '--< II \ i~ f: Ii" ~ . ' I f+-l c -8'Il&'F-I' :r;.::rt\\ '.~ = /,/11 y...J!..r1,. ~ 0 TI ~, I Q,~0 1'1'~1~,\~1~ \.8 !/ / 'tf4' ," T r I ' . I f-1 . H -..., ~ : ~\\ Ir:-rCt\' '....-::1 I, / ~. c..-1.... ~ - ::.'II _ L '!~- til5 Ii ,=.I ~ J ~ [ \ I i-- '~:I -- j', i ~ ~4'''"B'~' '0, ~'~"'~ : III . ' I ~~ ~ Iii J (\ \\' . t\ ' 'JiJ I;J I ,I i'---- (!l~' J ,c"') ~ I ':'-,' I;':' ~ ~ :~ !'\ lIIi: '- . ~\ \ - \ llt /8 ~ ~ '~"'~ I I b ,,~ . ~. _lIJI\i r ~ ~ I ." - ,!!I t ~ !!fA,~ / "- \vct, 0 ~: I ~~ ~ !i ~,! \. '\Fft\ \~\ Ii! II I T ~ . ,-, --~-+=l-,~ ~ "';' . I ,:,U"~~ r: II ~~;.\- -.ln~ \~1 \ Ii I - L::s, ,-..-.-..- , "',. :/1 P-~~'1~ \ ;;1 ',I i 1i.i ci: -, ~W ",If' 11 ~~, !. g '~' ~\' ,l\~"-.~\ _- ~ _ __ if I II I . -1.../I"f " . IHIII.~. ";;::Y //N-...r::::: Vi. :1 ~: . \. t~' ~--- il! / I ~~r, L.::: " ';. i ~ ?::!~~tl/ ~!li. ~ i tlt\ ~ ~.--:~. ~-\ -,----- :: ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ I 11'./ \ .~~\ \ ffl f I I ,:!J/':"~' ' ' , f~ 'i"~1 :\lM<1"> "-..! II! I t\'. \" - ~:~ Ii. - !I. .~ 'L 8~ .L 'L=~\~\V t~~ I ,: .. tt' ~~ fl/il ~'~"~ ~f ~~;; ~_"t..~ I' I! t\ '\ia&t\\ li~ :-:'_-,::::::~'::-a:.1.",SIf.Jl!.L '<:::;~ ~ 4- ~ . . ~ ..~ .~_::i~ - - _-.=-=L- -=-=- _ ~ CAIIBllDLU"'\ .l."'..8 - - ~ _ ---1 ==tl ~ ~ ,= ~---- 511 \ "'..."'..- ,.J.. (C<lU[CTORRD_~~_ -r _ _L ',,1 ' I -~ -=' "'.......... b'~l' - - P y'U 11 1 ---- ..- -[-_::"'<::,:::: <t ::-'~, .. -_ - I""""'''''.!'_'':;- - - ... ~ ~~I , I ~~ - "'~'\"Iil II I i~ ---~--- l a~1 I I I .~.......... "'," t,,! *: I.~ it ..........RjW........ i bl , i '" \1Jl.~I:1 lip ~.I I I I \~1:1~:\1 I ~i I I I ! lL!~) I - !! I ~~ ~2~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~I ';J~!r;J hz !<~ 2~~ ~l~~ E 2 !~ li~~ illi>1i i~1II ~~ ~~~ eoa "'Dll ~~ il!" z;;'~ ~~" n ~'" 2<2 ~o m, !;.~ !t~i!3 ~ g ~~ ~S~ ;;la~~ lS~> t:~ imi ~~~ !;E~ ~~ - f 8~2 ~;~ a~ J ~i:i~ 2~~ ~~ ~~ ~s;;t ~;v; ~ ~lD ii:~i ~ ':' ~ ~~ ~g~ i ~ ~i gli ; i S.iS ~~~ ~ ~ ~, I~~ ~ i ~: ft~~~~~~G1.~~~ ~~~~~~ Z~i !lit 21,..""1:"1. i i~ ~ ~~ ill ~~ !l:l Terra -- ... ,-- ( I ( \ \ \ \ \" \ \ \. i~!~;~i ~,-~!!~ 1l~U1~~, etliif~~ d~~ll .~ <t,:~ ~"" -~~ ~ :1 ~ a -- laollI-".~ 6001 Glllnwood Avenue MinnnpoUa, Minnellll'\. 5$422 763 593 9325 fax.: 763 512 Q717 1 . , . . . .' Z ,iI':, 2. \$~\:;\'~~~~ H~I'~"J,~.'c_~%~~&~i'0,~'l'\\\\\\:," i'l "'~--=--:..--,/" ./ -- ~\\\" ", \. ' .. \il,il' fI('= ~-......... -. - -. \\\: \ \,~\ I ~\ T'- - - ,\ ' " /" , \' '\\".~\~'\. m 11~:111 llmr ~__ ':l~~'I-- :~\'~'" \ \, - I I \ \ /1 ' , \";'ii'''\' ,~(~~\ ,Cll liiilii II!:II --- ":-:_, jf..-\;~~':, 7 ,. T::::' (< / I(! II" '\. .:\~' '^' ,5 --- 4r",~-""......'V$ I ....,( {( \ '-\ \\\, t,\\\ \\' '\\ _: d'~-, 'I/,.:?'=~-. ~~ ~\\ \.. ir -::----- ,........ " \ \ I __/ ~ ,1'0'\ \,i'~ =::: ~_ ~ ~&I}/(@l'/ IIIV~/~ii~n;b 'TI ;:~,,~ - ~ ~o.. 'I M'ij\;.:. ~ ,-' - .~-:.-~;-;".2P'- -w.\, - ~$.?Yt!(jc . , I'I'\: .~ "I I. Yo-I \'..~.;~~~~~ -:~-:...-:- ~~-;/i{,,~1 t. . ",.. ',\\ " "- Y::=='=-""-""===~'~~';"O;. ~!!,.=.= .j//!I", I 'I" ,~" I ' / \1 -t;\;- ---::::::'-'--"';=-~~:.-~',~~':-=:- .=:~~.~'~ \ '~~\I,\,.t~\~J / I~--_- '~ /" ,..' ,:~W?~\) /1 ~\\\ \\~> \. / / /- (~ ", Z>., "" /, '+":'1 ! ~ \ \ 1, ,I - -. - J I ~~ \ \\ \ \ I (/ I \ \ , I ',\.' ~~, ~ (> \ 1\ \ \ \ ~I \ < \ \ \ ; I -:.' "I~i~!!;' 1 / - ~'1 ~i\ ~\$ \ ~ \ \ / / I . \ ' I"" i. / , ,I \ \ I ~ ~ .t' ! / / I', \ 1 I' \ \ /' i .....' IIII \ I \ I I ) ( / .! / 'I:~I ,;1/ /' l /)' \~\\~\\I\I / ...../// -/ I,ll' 1'1,1 /' / ( '"J,\ \, "\~\\ \, -,' ".- I' 'I' '\\'\. -- / ! i 'I I" J , I ; \\\ '\'\- ----/ .' a ) . ,,' ==::::.> "- , .....l 'z, .I" I I \ '\\ \ ''\:,--_/------- \ /[,1 ~i~'\ / I I ( \1\\\ ~~'-=-~--=-==---=-- ,I," I", I I / ' \ \ ~ I I \ , ; ii' ' \ \\ \ I i I I 1 / I \ I \ ~~~~~I ': \ ;, 11)/1 I , /~<< \'\~ .~~~i~ \ I ( / I I ;.ii. : , r-- ,'/ II I;I! \ I \1\' ;~;:iJ .- - '.. . ,'- / ~:' Ir -', ~'q '" I I / ~ ~ I \ ;~~~5 ::-- ' I ,7/.1; , " I ,/ /' "\ 1M; ;- ,'" 'A} ;/'/ ' I I!,' \"',1 (\\, ~M g . :' I. Ii:,''' I Z '> \ \\\ \ R i ::;i1 1/ /' '" I ' Cl , l \ )\11 - 1\ ~!/~/// ~ -'~r==I 1\ \ <_I..... \1\\ fi i I. /' <: Z i'll I ! \ \ \' \ ~5 ) ;,'/ Il;I.',' !.1C:Jl_ll--1 __ '~. \ ~'\\~ ill } 'I { ~---- --- I , \\\\\\~a! i, ; " /1 I!, ", \ '\ J ~ \ \\~ i '} 'i', I" , '1 '\ \ ~ \\R .3 ; .. iJ iii! I \ " , \~\ \ 1\ e ,'/',/,)fll,' ! ) \ \' \ ~ ~'! "11 f!i .__ 0'" c> 1'..0, ( \ ,\\\~ . "'} : '} , , I -" _, "..,J:., . I ~. ,,\ \ \ \ \ " ; ,i l' ' , ~ -- '- . ,," , I ,If If)'" \' \ I I' " 'I If i ' , \: r - '-- ~ '" -- -:::: ~ '(" I II ,I) \, 11 " ! J I, f : , in I,'~ ' \' ~~ (,; \j J . \,::-..:....-- ----- I.. "I I "~I ! f ' -: ~ '- - i ~ __ \ \, '- I, -\::: :-=::..=... -: = -=- ; ,'I I;, ' -.. __I" \ \ \'.... .... \ -~-- - /i ,f'll'f:' ,i: {,_........" ~-.......::.",=---_ ,I,..........~ ,....,..........:r '........ 1\ l, ',- - " I ' : ' '. - .' - _ - "'" 1\ 8 (." ">lii '" 1 \ I ^ 'ij Ii:; ,,~/ ~\e; I.E;, /', l ~.(,/ /' ',I II':' ~U' \ J:' -.( / I /~y:" I '~~ : '.. '. 9 oJ \ //" <::,/\ "," ! I,; "-, '_ I Y --_ -"1< )_!) I \<'(V" I'.; .. I}! ! -. _J \- ,- .- --/I I _ I ' '1< ',u', .r,~, '-::~.""'- .-_._-~~- ,,' ,-- -.".:"",-" . " ~-=:,'::I.;.---'~ ~ ==::.= =::'= = ~:::, ,'__:;;'~,~::; ~ ---\ 1,,'- _ -- <c 1 l ~:. :_ ~ ;"rl-~-~~~~:~Rt't~:;iTr'" _.'C: ~- -~::: - ,-~~~- - --_=.-~/ :-I&:__=~ ;<:~ '~"-~=":=-I~~--"'19~fl'n~;~~'~~~~~,~ -- ~~'l~~ ~\- -'j-- S ' I I I .- , -' . , -....... '1>'" " "'I' , ~ - .~. - ~ / I' " ", \' , \ \~\ . 1\ I i I I \ J -, ~ '\. ,'\ ....\') \ \ \ I , 1 I 1 I ~ L l 1.\ \\t;'~, 1'-, ".'~ :::::. J \. I I / 1 L , \, 'f" j' t \ I I I / l 1\ \. 'I \ q, L _ 'r l', ~_,_ l ,I'd\\"" r \ \ ,-- ( I ( \ \ \ \ \' \ " h\ ~ g ~ ~ :.+. '" 6 ~ ~ I\) ~ ~. o ~ o. U1 - ........ I ~ ~ ~ CD ~ ........ U1 0 (JI '-tib1~. ttm\NIplcw.or ,.port_~by_.or 1.Wld.. my cIIrKl ....pr.Il.'" and =~am ..:- ~,u:.,~, the "~n Jci-II- P'l<< J. Kft6-.. PL. Cale~~fle;. He. ,~".. ..- _........cw...c H~ @ I ! n- , ~ Terra -.... ... EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SUNRISE PONDS FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 6001 Glenwood Avenue Minneapolis. MUlne$ota 55422 763 593 9325 Fax: 763 512 0717 I 1lCl/l'SU3:).ll.fJwld1U'l -,.., l'~ t :j 'b )0 V10S3NNI~ 'N01DNI~~V.:l SONOd 3SI~NnS (S1INn CJ3HOV130 au) NV1d H013>fS L HO ~,g €9L :X1l~ g~€6 €6g €9L ~~vgg eIOSaUU!~ 'slIodeauul~ anua^\( pooMual9 1:009 r./) Q Z o ~ ~ r./) ~ ~ r./) - ....~ 8.I.I8J. -~ I w I ! l Z (I) I I I I ~ I I I L-____.._______________:--____,______...__,_._ ':....~-;~....~".~\.' ~:..~. " I~ ot! HO i :J3TiQ:)} '3A.V VIOOBriVO <( ~ o (f) w z z ~ - Z o ~ " Z ~ a::: <( lL. l \ i, ~ ~ ,: {':~~~ .:.t.~"_"!' ,",',,' . it .1. .;;....; \ \ \- e \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .\ -- Ii \'\ \ \ .\ l \ \ \ \ \ \ . \ \ \ \ ----" \ \ It) ~ It) ..... 1IO ..... N I ........ "- It) 0 0 ..... 8 i . i f ?, j I~; "". I I i---.-- I I / -__ c.J _-.J , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~,- -0--- - . ~ I //'-- .. ,/ .",,;7/ " \8 'j 1L II ' II II ! i I I--~- I Ii ,i ,; 'i ~_'_ i, --- -'-,-iJ ~~"~_ I i -:1:, {II'/IR ~~bi-d , "'.~ . _=' I' A' ',) -. . -. \111 .: I :=,:;':"l ,I I'.! ~._=d I' j'l- j~'"= ! :i-~-l: l .'"! ~ .;~ :1 '! :.,.. _,:\ -'-i! , ~'-:- ' L:"] '1 ; .- ~m_~r- ~ ~~\ .' ~" \.1~'-- \' ~ i \ \ \ .t I /~,;, - jt,-='~ I .', ,,~c<,~'IL~-= i':::::J ~ i;>-'l,~""", iL:'.:!J I :@ 6 !@g] Z 'i/"~=>~ ' "",,~c,-::':::J 0: :2 0 -.. ]~ ~ a CI] ~ ....:: :E.B ~G,,)~~t4-0V') .! ~~ ~ ~ € ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~N-O\ '~ " ': 1/.' \- ;r .D ~. ...! a <ii '- -.. -..; --I ~^....~ 1= 1-2.\0'\<:''''''-\ /IJF 7 IJ1 /) ("\J I~ .J1 ~ ~. "1 o ,J1 ::2 -X o I ~ ~ ~uSO~ ~.,;.:,~,~ v.ttlEJ.. - ~ .-------~ , . . 7 a '. ~ I ..! Q J ... 1: ~ cl '0 .Jl .1f- 'N .... 1 I -, ' , "- Ii ~ ;I~ !' Ij ~ -z Ii Ji I ~ - ,... ~,;.., OHI Blra,: 't.6F 1 \J I 6 l- ~ \.L -+ $ cO o l\J -Z.!:: '2 I a ~ " o '" 1$ 'fJ ::- ~2! ~ a '2::l ec::: q::S ~~\o~~~ :f~~~Cs ;> ~~ ~ ~ ~ -~, -:i1, ,_~~ f.J !O J_, ~ J .! , . :J 8 8 ill ~ c .\ .) 81 Sl cJ 0 1 I~~ -j ...: y1 ~ > ~ 0 -:z . ~ " 48 ~ :, 4 < ::t 03'" ., ~'.. "::i c CJI !~ ~ I I ~ g C:;i . B 8 j; ~ - 2: ".,." . / I' \ J ,t I/i 88 'B~ ~ \ ,~ " I \8-~ B . - , I ill C~.-:_ - j I ., I <, .:, i j 1. 'l ] J " .;j '- I ,.. .... .-J l a " . d 9 vi l- X .!l ci1 o - 1. ~ Q ~ l- e; ") j \i.i d ~ <4 S j ~ V'I c: o ...... ~'.g =.. ~-g .. ~ '2::l ]r.:: q:::cE ~~Oo~~:g =:~r-NO = _.. ("'J N ~ >:C~~;!:~ ~'" 1 ..~~,,,,,.,. EXN18ff.8 3 ~F 7 I \J l- ~ ~ , .,.. -9 rr. ...!l Q c-..J "'2~ "2 4: 0:: \~ '::J <j -:z '$ ~ j: o ., "$ :E .I,'j "I)"":~.'.:'" 1"'.:, ' I'!!\"'~ ~ ~~(;i\0,~c:. Q.LA'f ' ---;-"-"-"~--- eXfft&lr 8 ! ~1J'7 ~ 00 0 '." ! c '"'" -g.g u .. ... .c '" -.J ",-0 "C i:l ;g g -= \11 ::; ... 0 (J ~\c ~ ~ lI') I! ~ f~~~~ '0 ~ ;! i ;; :nv\O$~ I u. N-OO~ c- o V I ~ 'f1 I .. ,< rr- " 1.i1 I ci2 1 a: I Q;:: " ~ I ,I :I , _,. _ __ _,u~1 __ :I Ii i' Ii II 'I,' 1: ,! ~ - 10::0:""1 j i --;- r==:~\'1';"j- l I-"~~_,-,,,~, =,=, ',' , ", --i----~-- ~~~-'J'::r" ._--'1,11, l~ ! ii " " II I:," I' ~ :1 j In \.l : ' ! i... ,,", " 1.,-;' 11'1 '/ // \\f]'~11 JI \ ~ --, '<-- .'" ,]= . ,I i v1 P-] m III~J- ~ 11- i -'-~i- - jj -1: ~.~ tf ~:- ,~ I j u.! ,J W I~ ..; ;: 8 w..! 'Jl \- ./l J 'l Q .f1 -1 :::t II -j 3 ~ i't', w ~ ~ ?-()lO S c.. Mq)~ ll'\~!', L . ~ ..; '" <oil o l <= ~.~ 431.0 "5i-cs 'l:l '" "S <= c?: ~g :; ~'o't;~~ ==~~~~o :=: a."d"\O~!:2 '" -..N - co 0\ -7' ... U $XHII3/r- 8 S"" OJ: ( I- " . (~ V v1 c J \; 4 r- 1 ..", o , ' iJ.. t .::J -I J e, 1 ~ ., ;; if> 'II'" I , Cl VI l" " :l IJ ft~f u.Y . '] . ~ 0 ~ :. <I .' ) ~ ..! - j i .;- J " J ~ ci .~ ~ ~ ft '" d :n ^ '" ; > S "" ~ '" Ii -,Jl I ... I 9 I' {l , \- "" .... ...J CD "~r -J lJv- ~ . CXIfISIT /3 f6 f)1= 7 '""' ..; .. 01) i C "'0.2 ~~ "'i3:; en "0 "='... '8 5 Cl I. ta 0 ~~;.'t;:::::g ~e~:g~~ ;>~~~~~ ... u M~,:, ~ '.1..80Sc. ( ~e.tz.c..) I- \J II.. 1/1 a Cl <f'l dJ c..J u'1 , 0 ~ ~ '1 I J J ,..; ,(1 J :z <:) VI '7 ~ ~ ~ 2: t-- ..,----- -,: I' '. ~ I . I--~ I I n-.. - - ,', ..1 ..:... 11:1 :,: 1:'~ ~I.:J.:. .___...='" --- ..: '" bO ~ .! <: o 13.g - 10.0 ~~ ~ = "2 c Q~ <+::::s ~~~~~~ ~ ~M V'l 00_ =;~~~8 ;>CllC'l-OOo- m EB u v", C~ I = .'" - . J o .; \. :t ~ e"r. ;6:~f (] ~ c-J <I '2 o ~ :2 '1 Q cr :; -:< J pr .. 0 Q ~ 1 ~ // o <ll ':t ~ .. ';%: () ") I I I j \ " .J ;!L'~ r:! S 3= IT] 0 1 d d '" cjO'i ~ I 4 . ,~ I -r;- .' ~ ~ .;; j ~ ,:' j\' ~ ; .:t J 1 .f n ~ EE o .J o II ~ j~ , ,I H.- " ... l~""!l -\l:.l1..~O~c.. 70~7 P. I_,~- . HOUSES FOR SMALL LOTS - 3('" l-V luF LeTS . Lln MW JOHNSON ~ CONSTRUCTION . I . t. . . . >. . . . HOUSES FOR LARGE LOTS - 4&/ GvIOr- L6~ ~ MW JOHNSON ~ CONSTRUCTION . . I , . e , . . . . Resale data for Enclave detached townhomes without basement 14602 Bloomfield Path currently pending, listed at $209,900 Originally purchased for $152,990 in May 2000 Sold again for $184,000 in May 2003 20% increase in 3 years Assuming sold price of $205,000 on current pending deal, 34% increase in 5+ years 14555 Bloomfield Path currently pending, listed at $244,900 Originally purchased for $163,590 in April 2000 Assuming sold price of $240,000 on current pending deal, 47% increase in 5+ years 14571 Bloomfield Path Originally purchased for $164,120 in October 2000, (per tax records, MLS says $169,990) . Sold again for $187,900 in April 2001 Using strictly MLS data, 11% increase in less than one year . 14602 Bloomfield Path Originally purchased for $152,990 in May 2000 Sold again for $184,000 in May 2003 20% increase in 3 years 14522 Bloomfield Place Originally purchased for $165,490 in February 2001 Sold again for $209,900 in May 2004 27% increase in 3+ years 14563 Bloomfield Path Don't have original purchase info Sold for $225,000 (tax info, MLS says $222,000) in November 2003 Sold again for $240,000 in June 2005 7% increase in 18 months 14707 Bloomfield Path Originally purchased for $167,440 in April 1999 Sold again for $240,000 in September 2005 43% increase in 6+ years . _J Thumbnail Report, Single Family Residential, 11/1/2005 . 14563 Bloomfield, Dakota County, Minnesota List #: 2199398 Status: Sold Price: $222,000 Style: (TH) Detached Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: Total Fin SqFt: 1,718.00 Year Built: 1999 14570 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota List #: 2250526 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $229,000 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 2,294.00 Year Built: 2000 l~f I~' , 1 , NtTth-t'NMI l:TItI I' 14563 Bloomfield Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List #: 3013773 Status: Sold Price: $240,000 Style: (TH) Detached Bedrooms: 2 Total Baths: 2 Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,718.00 Year Built: 1999 14707 Bloomfield Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List #: 3077106 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $240,000 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,825.00 Year Built: 1998 14555 BLOOMFIELD Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List#: 3088670 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $240,000 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,651.00 Year Built: 1999 . 14515 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota List #: 2147215 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 3 Price: $252,900 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 3,412.00 Year Built: 2000 14619 Bloomfield Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List #: 3005103 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $250,000 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,641.00 Year Built: 1999 e This Report Prepared By: Yvonne Perkins 612-709-1555 Infonnation Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed. @ Regional MLS of Minn" Inc. All Rights Reserved. Page 1 of 1 Thumbnail Report, Single Family Residential, 11/1/2005 . ~":~:I r ~ 14650 Bloomfield Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List #: 3109051 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Active Price: $249,900 Style: (TH) Detached Total Baths: 2 Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,830.00 Year Built: 1998 ~'" . . ............- ~== I ~:~~ 14602 Bloomfield Path, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 List #: 3080950 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Pending Total Baths: 2 Price: $209,900 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,344.00 Year Built: 1999 ~._' , ......,~"..,' ' . '"..'>"-.. 14787 Bloomfield, Rosemount, List #: 1387213 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Garage: Price: $148,365 Style: (TH) Detached Total Fin SqFt: 1,519.00 Year Built: 1998 '-/r1:_1 .-----.~ 14634 Bloomfield, #0, Rosemount, List #: 1458955 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $169,990 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 3.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,712.00 Year Built: 1999 ~,~ " ";" 1\", ",~,"""".' -.,. -"T.:"r.~ er l:~ 14571 Bloomfield Path, #3101, Rosemount, 55068-3159 List #: 1502385 Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $169,990 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: Total Fin SqFt: 1,815.00 Year Built: 1999 14546 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota List #: 2195781 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $187,800 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: Total Fin SqFt: 1,342.00 Year Built: 2000 r -- e= ~fL' ' ';;:~filfl1 . ~1 14602 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota List #: 2128674 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Garage: Price: $184,000 Style: (TH) Detached Total Fin SqFt: 1,348.00 Year Built: 1999 14522 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota List #: 2242724 Bedrooms: 2 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $209,900 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: 2.00 Total Fin SqFt: 1,618.00 Year Built: 2000 List#: 2072623 14651 Bloomfield, Rosemount, Minnesota 0"" Bedrooms: 3 Status: Sold Total Baths: 2 Price: $211,000 Style: (TH) Detached Garage: Total Fin SqFt: 1,646.00 Year Built: 1999 . This Report Prepared By: Yvonne Perkins 612-709-1555 Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed, @ Regional MLS of Minn,. Inc, All Rights Reserved, Page 1 of 1 ) OCT-27-05 THU 10:27 AM TERRA ENGINEERING ~ o ---- l- N ".:',2 ,- o ~-- . S- I g. ~. Ire.: I .... .... ~' ~,+. Trc..,'1 _.-._. I 6 9 ll.- --\- ... oGI4O .u It>oQI :a.'\1t'If -- .-.. . , \ = ::, ~ : =:::::-: \ - -,- -;<" '\ s \ ;;.' (-. \. -,\S .... \ c.- \,.\-(.\ , .-<- " ,X "\,-, . s:- <:J:. \ ~O' '" 0, ",.-\ 7' - <:;/\ ~ -\ 0" I i I I I I I f I I f I I ) --~ . c9 ~ ~ , c: .~ W . -> ~~ l~ - J ...... '-'- \ .- -'-.-.-.------. f-- ll.~)- - ~ --"; -~ - ~~ ~3-r ~~ o - e- l .,.;. c ~, , ---' c...- 1. ...JIV - IlIIemo .11. Bonestroo II Rosene ~ Anderlik & 1 \J 1 Associates Engineers & Architects . To: Lee Mann Lee Smick Kevin Carroll Date: 6/15/2005 From: Shelly Johnson Re: Traffic Assessment of Devney-Rother Development Proposals Farmington. MN File No. 000141-05241-0 and 000141-05242-0 Remarks: -> The Devney-Rother property development proposals consist of residential land uses. The project sites are as shown on Figure 1. The north boundary of the site(s) is 210th Street while the west boundary, Cambodia Avenue, fronts the upper half of the properties. The north site is the Devney property and the south site is the Rother property. The Rother property is not adjacent to any public roadways at this time. The existing traffic volume data for roadways in the site vicinity was obtained from MnDOT traffic flow maps. The daily volume data on 213th Street was collected by city staff in May of this year. The turning movement counts at the intersection ofTH3 and 213th Street were conducted on May 18, 2005. The volume data is shown on Figure 2. . Site Generated Traffic The proposed land uses are residential and include single family detached housing, multi-family townhome units, back-to-back units and row units. For purposes of this traffic assessment trip rates contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) report titled Trip Generation, 7th Edition, 2003, was used. Single family detached rates were used for the SF proposal while all other units utilized the townhome rates from the ITE report. The estimated peak hour and daily trips are shown on Table 1. . Estimated Traffic Volumes A.M. Peak P.M. Peak No. of Dwelling Hour Hour, Daily Land Use Units In Out In Out (Two-Way) Devney Proposal Single Family 48 10 25 30 20 460 Row, Back-to-Back 288 20 105 100 50 1,690 Sub-total 30 130 130 70 2,150 Rother Proposal Single Family 106 20 60 70 40 1,015 MF-Townhome 96 5 35 35 20 560 Sub-total 25 95 105 60 1,575 Total 55 225 235 130 3,725 Table 1 Estimated Site Generated Traffic Volumes Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. www.bonestroo.com o Sl Paul Office: 2335 West Hi9hway 36 Sl Paul, MN 55113 Phone: 651-631\.4600 Fax: 651-631\.1311 o Milwaukee Office: 12075 N. Corporate Par1<way. Ste 200 Mequon, WI 53092 Phone: 262-643-9032 Fax: 262-241-4901 o Rochester Office: 1127" Street NE Rochester. MN 55906 Phone: 507,282,2100 Fax: 507-282-3100 o Willmar Office: 205 5111 Street SW Winmar, MN 56201 Phone: 32(1.214-9557 Fax: 32(1.214-9458 o Sl Cloud Office: 3721 23'" Street S SI Cloud, MN 56301 Phone: 32(1.251-4553 Fax: 320-251-6252 o Libertyville Office: 1860 West Winchesler Rd, Ste 106 Grayslake, IL 60030 Phone: 847-548-6774 Fax: 847-541\.6979 ~ -- ..... -~_.~- ...... ......... - ... . Memo . t1 ~ Bonestroo e Rosene ~ Anderlik& '\J' Associates Engineers & Architects . Traffic Assessment of Devney-Rother Development Proposals Farmington, MN Page Two June 8, 2005 Vehicular Traffic Assessment The trips generated by the development proposals have been assigned to the area roadway system based upon existing volume tendencies and potential roadway extensions. The roadway extensions assumed for these traffic assignments include the following: . Extend Biscayne Avenue from 210th Street southerly, ultimately to TH 50. . Extend 213th Street from Cambodia Avenue to Biscayne Avenue. . Extend Spruce Street from 14th Street to Biscayne Avenue. The assignment of project generated traffic for the morning and afternoon peak hours is shown on Figure 3. The daily trips generated by the proposed developments are shown on Figure 4. IntersectionIRoadway Analysis The intersection that will be most affected by this development is the 111 31213 th Street intersection. This intersection i. presently controlled by stop signs on the cross streets of 213th Street and Main Street. Assuming a buildout of the projects in five years (for traffic analysis purposes only) the peak hour volumes have been increased for this intersection in order to analyze the operation of the intersection. The project generated volumes have been added to the intersection and the TH 3 volumes have been increased by three percent per year. These volumes are used to analyze the operation of the intersection utilizing the present lanes and traffic control of cross street stop signs. The analysis sheet is attached to the end of this memorandum. The projected volumes are shown on that worksheet. ~ The intersection level of service analysis indicates that both the eastbound and westbound a roaches (Main Street and 213th Street) will not 0 erate efficiently using the volume projec!ions. '!:..he levels 0 service are projected to be E and !:- uring peak hours. These are not acceptable levels of servIce. ,IJ'- ~ r ...-----'-- The estimated volumes that are projected to use 213th Street at project buildout could increase the daily volume along 213th Street to approximately 5,000 vehicles per day. A two-lane roadway such as 213th Street could accommodate the. daily trips at an acceptable level of service. The issue will be at the intersection ofTH 3 with 213thlMain Street. The added volumes on 213th Street are significant enough so that a traffic signal will be necessary to allow vehicles to access TH 3 in a safer manner. However, this intersection is approximately 376 feet north of the existing traffic signal on TH 3 at Elm Street. This distance is not conducive to the provision of good traffic signal timing. Whether or not MnDOT would allow this intersection to be signalized remains to be determined but is felt that they would resist such control at the 213th ~ intersection. The TH 3~ access management study that MnDOT co!:-du..ct~d i~ 200~ concludes that this intersection should T be a secondary mtersection - one that Is nof slgnafizedana could have limited access. . . - _----.....-..-~~~~WIl'O;i"~~~~-_"1 - Bonestroo, Rosene, Ander/ik and Associates, Inc. www.bones.coJ o St. Paul Office: 2335 West Highway 36 Ste 106 Sl Paul, MN 55113 Phone: 651-636-4600 Fax: 651-63&-1311 o Milwaukee Office: 12075 N. Corporate Par1<way, Ste 200 Mequon, WI 53092 Phone: 262-643-9032 Fax: 262-241-4901 o Rochester Office: 1127" StreetNE o Willmar Office: 205 5th Street SW o St. Cloud Office: 3721 23" Street S o Libertyville Office: 1860 West Winchester Rd, Rochester, MN 55906 Phone: 507-282-2100 Fax: 507-282-3100 Willmar, MN 56201 Phone: 320.214-9557 Fax: 320-214-9458 Sl Cloud, MN 56301 Phone: 320-251-4553 Fax: 320-251-6252 Grayslake, IL 60030 Phone: 847-548-6774 Fax: 647-548-6979 .- " ~ - .11. Bonestroo e Rosene ~ Anderlik& '\J 1 Associates Engineers & Architects Memo . Traffic Assessment of Devney-Rother Development Proposals Farmington, MN Page Three June 8, 2005 The other method of accessing TH 3 exists on the south edge of the property and would require an extension of Spruce Street from its terminus at 14th Street. Such an extension would require crossing of the waterway. It has been estimated that approximately 750 vehicles per day would use this extension to travel to/from TH 3. Without that extension, most of those vehicles would probably gravitate to 213th Street with some proceeding south along Biscayne Avenue when it can be connected to TH 50. It should be noted that these analysis assume extension of three roadways: . 213th Street to Biscayne corridor . Biscayne from 21 Oth Street to TH 50 . Spruce Street from 14th Street to Biscayne Corridor The TH 3 intersection with 213th Street is approximately 376 feet north of the signalized intersection ofTH 3 with Elm Street (CSAH 50). This distance presents traffic signal timing issues, assuming signalization of the 213th Street intersection with TH 3, due to the "closeness" of the intersections. Another route for traffic from these proposed developments needs to be developed so as not to create additional traffic issues along 213th at the intersection with TH 3. -A:::A otential connection utilizes the 21 Oth Street corrid e to connect to TH 3, robabl 0 osite Willow Street. .~ch accessibility, to/from the east, needs to be evalua~:5!.-~ll..fu.t.1!.re,potential connection. Such a connectIOn would allow the existing full movement access of213th at TH 3 to be down graded to a right in/right out connection. This woUld ;').;::lt~.. I 9'00"V .&.........'7lOIO'<':''1....u __ " ,.,-e<l_--"""" elimmate the most serious access issue at that locatIOn. --~ --~ . - --" Recommendations ~~. Commence planning for an alternative access !o/from T[ 3 f9r serving these properties. --"""~----.......--_-""'~..-...~"'~~ . ~7. Consider restricting Mai~~.~!h S?"~l.ac~s ~t.Ili).J2.Jig~tj?!.rt~E~ out when altern;'!tive east-wes~ access is provided. .- .~ . Analyze Spruce Street extension to the east to connect to Biscayne corridor. Build this roadway as a part of the development. . Preserve right-of-way for Biscayne corridor south of the subject properties. Build the roadway from 21 Oth Street adjacent to the entire development area. . Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. www.bonestroo.col o Sl Paul Office: 2335 West Highway 36 Ste 106 St Paul, MN 55113 Phone: 651-63&-4600 Fax: 651-63&-1311 o Milwaukee Office: 12075 N. Corporate Par1<way, Ste 200 Mequon, WI 53092 Phone: 262-643-9032 Fax: 262-241-4901 o Rochester Office: 1127" Street NE o Willmar Office: 205 5th Street SW o St. Cloud Office: 3721 23" Street S o Libertyville Office: 1660 West Winchester Rd, Roches1er, MN 55906 Phone: 507-282-2100 Fax: 507-282-3100 Willmar, MN 56201 Phone: 320-214-9557 Fax: 320-214-9458 St Cloud, MN 56301 Phone: 320-251-4553 Fax: 320-251-6252 Grayslake, It 60030 Phone: 847-548-6774 Fax: 647-548-6979 I I -----------~ I I I I I I. s\\s I I I I I I I I ----------, I I ! I 210th ST DRAWING NOT TO SCALE 213th ST ELM ST 1"1 I I- SPRUCE ST I- (f) w z >- <{ () (f) m . J[]J Bonestroo -=- Rosene 'III\lI Anderlik & . 1 \j 1 Associates Engineers & Architects Figure 1 SITE LOCATION FARMINGTON DEVNEY-ROTHER SITES K: \141 \14105241 \CAO\DWG\1410524L Traf-figs.dwg '"! . -..-- << . . . ~ i XX1XX - A.M. PEAK HOUR I P.M. PEAK HOUR I- III W C'I ~ 0 <( I 0 <.) OJ III ...- CD ..- 210th 5T DRAWING I NOT TO SCALE I 10 --- N 10m I ............<0 I 1'0>............ ................N 'L85/47 I 1'....10 I 1 I J ~ ~ +-2/5 10/6.;& rr55/40 2.8501 _ _ _ _1_ - - + - -+- _..J ~11' 213th ST 4/3-+ I I I I NN.... 8/11'4 ...-....<0 ............LO............ I I 1 LO................ "'-<DN 1 0 LO I 1 1 ELM 5T 1 1 C'I 1 0 0 1 ..- ..- ..- 1 I') 1 F I 1 1 1 SPRUCE 5T --1------L-~I- - NOTES: 1.24 HR COUNT (LOCATED BETWEEN TH 3 1 AND THE BACKAGE ROAD) - MAY 2005 I 2. YEAR 2002 MDT INTERSECTION COUNTS - MAY 18, 2005 I Figure 2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA FARMINGTON DEVNEY-ROTHER SITES K: \141 \141 05241 \CAD\DWG\141 05241_ Traf-figs.dwg J[1j Bonestroo Rosene ~ Anderlik & . \J. Associates EngIneers & Architects 1 I XXlXX - A.M. PEAK HOUR I P.M. PEAK HOUR I- (11 w ?: \()< ~g ,ffi o ..- . ! 210th 5T DRAWING NOT TO SCALE t o '- \() ..- 01 F r--.. , ~ 1L15/8 ~ .r-28/15 I' o I'<') , 1O SPRUCE 5T r--.. ~ I I J _+-73/39_\_ _ _ ~ -1- J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I \ ~I I I _ ~ :J =31/1~ ~ --1.. - - -r 4 /14 ~ I 6/~~ I I 01 r--.. , -.t ~ ~ 1/1~ 1L62/35 .-1/1 .r- 40/20 I' ~ r--.. , r--.. ..- 213th 5T 7 /35 ~ 35/117 ~ ELM 5T N o o ..- ..- ..- I') Figure 3 PEAK HOUR PROJECT GENERATED FARMINGTON DEVNEY-ROTHER SITES K: \141 \141 05241 \CAD\DWG\14105241_Traf-figs_dwg . n. Bonestroo' ~ Rosene TRAFFIC ESTIMA TEsi\N ~~~~~j:te~ . Engineers & Architects f~ . . . ~ 1 I- 1II ILl LO?: -< I ..-u C'J1II 1ii 210th ST DRAWING 1 NOT TO SCALE I --- I I I 1 1 I 2450 - - - -1- - - + - -+- _--I 213th ST I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I ELM ST 1 I~ I IC'J I 1 1 I l') I 1 F I I: 1 1 1 750 __.J_~_-J.--I- SPRUCE ST 01 ;;)1 I Figure 4 PROJECT GENERATED DAILY TRAFFIC ESTIMATE FARMINGTON DEVNEY-ROTHER SITES K: \141 \14105241 \CAD\DWG\14105241_ Traf-figs.dwg .11. Bonestroo ~ Rosene ~ Anderlik & . \J' Associates Engineers & Architects "'" " .t::l "@ 0:: toll 'a ::J top Ign ontro on t am t TH3& NB on TH 3 SB on TH 3 EB on Main St WB on 2I3th St Intersection 2l3th St L T R L T R L T R L T R Total Volume 17 587 41 56 520 8 11 5 9 95 3 147 Delay 5.7 6.1 3.3 9.3 3.9 2.0 14.1 12.5 5.1 59.4 135.4 39.3 13.5 AM Peak A A A A A A B B A F F E B Hour LOS Lanes 1 2 I 2 1 1 Queues 24 7 48 - 45 300 Volume 74 629 136 148 609 8 7 4 13 60 6 82 Delay 10.1 7.0 5.0 10.2 4.7 2.9 43.1 44.8 14.3 57.0 57.4 35.8 9.9 PM Peak B A A B A A E E B F F E A Hour LOS Lanes 1 2 1 2 1 1 Queues 52 13 65 - 54 146 Farmington - Devney-Rother Sites Year 2010 AM & PM Volumes S S' C I 213 h StIM . S . . .. I~ I fll\YN I~ ~ ~~.~ LJ-LI-- _ 1m 1~1~ ~ v '1/ Y"'-"--J r ~ ~ ~ ~~b~ q11~ /' l Air 1 ..~~ JIII\\I :tctr!: ..;::..- ~- -""" --- j(;~ llll J ~ SIEWERT --[-;~IIIIIIBf+- Wl ~-~lJ. ~ ---'II II IIII Il-.~ L. 7; :> dl ' ill t::> ~ ~ ~~; t I.LJ =:J OEVNEY ~ e- /1 I Fl V j ~ b 1= R ~ ~ u 1'\ JJ KRAL VI C5 II I ---1 J J;i - I r~ 210TH ~ I Kt.t. / /f"g~1 fftii EE ~opo, PERKIrs---- .."" I 5 1 nmaD~ ~l ~~ I ~trniiJ!!mllJlll/lfl1lilnOlIil ..~lD 21 31H, STREET I [illllJEIillOII][[IIillffittj ~ ~~.. I OJIE rnrn ITIIIJ OIIID M~nEm~tffiEj :::;:: ~g: WINKLER I i 'it! ~ I!j ffiHJj ~ IJ ~ gg ~ t::1- RH H SPRUCE STREET I ....sti ro sed .~ ELJ ~ ~ [I]ill] III EillIJ ITIITIJ BJ]J] LllliJJ HH HtJ ::r tJl=1 1=1 I EII~;~r gg~ g~ I gg~ ~g I ~IIIIII~~ mlia~cw ~9; ~~ - 50 rr m ~ 1m Q II > J ._Il n n T.H nI W-JI f-1I f-- - f-- "\" ~~ H Li --- ./. ,\ --- c--- IDi ~ ;-- K7~ - r-- E8Hlff!ID ~ - OLSON H~ '--- " y,. = ~ ~ ~oom:am~ ~ II Ir ')')I;TU iL fI-- u~ l I---' . --------- ISO 192 ("I" h~ ~ I I I Creat ~d on November 4,2005 I- -