6.1. SR 12-04-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Case File: 06-03 Page 3 Council, the Met Council strives for a density range between 3-5 units per acre in areas served by their sanitary sewer in order to maximize their investment in this utility. Additionally, the lot size and density is somewhat a function of the direction provided by the City. In July of 2005, then Planning Director McPherson received a memo dated July 12,2005 (attached) outlining the basis for the number of lots. This basis followed the methodology established by Staff. The density is based on the number of 14,000 sq ft lots plus adjacent street ROW (14,000 with an assumption of 20% for adjacent right of way), applied to the whole property, exclusive of the 40 acre wetland, which provided a mathematical possibility of 570 lots. The density is 2.6 units per acre. The developer then proposed a plan with 500 lots to the City Council in April of 2005. In January, a plan was presented with 469 units. With the Council direction regarding lot size minimums, the number of lots dropped to 452. Concern: Staff sensed that some concern regarding the density was based on the scale of the development, and the incomplete information provided to the Commission comparing this project to other projects in the community. The gross density proposed is 1.67 units per acre. Net density, exclusive of the school and County Right of way, is 1.88 units per acre. Staff has prepared an exhibit, imposing the layout of the subject plat over existing, established neighborhoods in the City's urban services district. Based on this review, it appears that the density and park/ school donation is consistent with these other neighborhoods. Concern: Lot size too small In January, the City Council discussed the project, and directed the applicant to provide an absolute minimum lot size of 9,750 square feet, and an overall average of 11,000 sq feet. A copy of the minutes are attached for the Commissions information. The developer made modifications to the plat, maintaining the minimums established by the City Council. The actual average is 12,815 square feet. Discussion requested comparisons to R-1b (12,000 sq ft), R-1c (11,000 sq ft) and R-1d (14,000 sq ft). The attached table shows the lots meeting these established standards. Concern: Transitional Lot size. There was discussion regarding the lot size along the east and north sides of the development. There was an apparent desire to create a transition between the urban district and rural areas. Some of this concern came from adjacent (Bums Township) property owners. There are 43 lots within the plat along the east boundary. These lots average is size 14,800 square feet, and only 2 are less than 11,000 sq ft. Assuming additional buffer or transition between residential uses is appropriate, additional landscaping could be required. Concern: A statement was made regarding the number of trees lots due to the development. It is clear that significant trees will be lost due to street and utility construction, lot grading, and eventually house construction. It is also clear that the City is not in a position to require all trees to be retained, due to the nature of development. Should the property be developed as a rural district, there is no guarantee that more trees will be saved. As a PUD, the City has more opportunity to negotiate the preservation of the trees. It should be noted that the City is working on addressing S,\PLANNING\Case Files\2006\Plat\p 06-03 Liberty Heights Estates\StaffReport to PC workshop 11-28-06.doc