Agenda - Council - 12/10/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion carded. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Anderson, Kurak, Hendriksen, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Case #4: Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Highlands at River Park 4th Addition: Case of Areon Development Principal Planner Trudgeon stated that Arcon Development has submitted a preliminary plat for the subdivision of property generally located north of Alpine Drive between Zuni Street and Yak/ma Street NW. The property is approximately 4.81 acres in size and the applicant is proposing to develop 10, single-family lots served by City sewer and water. The property is zoned R-1 Residential and is located in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The proposed net density of the plat is approximately 2.2 units per acre. The development will be served from new Yak/ma Street within the Highlands at River Park subdivision by a public cul- de-sac, approximately 500 feet in length. All of the lots meet the minimum dimensional requirements. The grading, drainage, utility, and street plans are generally acceptable subject to the points raised in the Staff Review Letter .dated November 1, 2002, Revised November 22, 2002' The applicant has provided an extensive tree inventory as part of the tree preservation plan. The tree preservation plan has been reviewed by staff and found to be acceptable. The proposed plat is considered Iow density residential and is bounded on the east and north by Highlands at River Park, a low-density single-family development. The development property abuts four lots (3 lots fully back up to the development and the fourth has 25 feet, sharing a common boundary) to the west that are also in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and eligible for redevelopment with single family homes at urban densities. The four lots are all served by septic systems and private wells and range from 0.83 to 0.87 acres in size. The existing houses on these lots are located on one side of the lot, making replatting very feasible. The 'density transition ordinance does not clearly state what the requirements would be, if any, in situations where 'the adjacent property is in the MUSA, zoned the same, but currently consists of larger lots. Subd. 3.b. 1 .(a) of the ordinance would seem to indicate that no transitioning is required. Subd. 3.b.l.(b) of the ordinance could be broadly interpreted to require a Level C Vegetative Buffer (45 foot wide landscape with over story, evergreen, and understory trees). Additionally, there is always the possibility of an 'alternative ~agreed upon by the Developer and the City' if transitioning is determined to be appropriate in these instances. The north half of the property contains an extensive thicket of trees along the western property line that provides for good screening. On the southern half of the property, the trees thin out on the subject property, but there is extensive vegetation on the adjacent property owner's lot line. Given the fact that the adjacent lots are in the MUSA and are configured to be able to be replatted in the future, staff proposes that landscape buffering be used to satisfy the density transition requirements as follows: a) Given the existing vegetation and what will remain, there is no need for additional screening on Lots 4 and 7. b) The addition of new plantings on the rear of Lots 5 and 6 where the existing tree cover will be removed for grading and utility purposes. City Council/November 26, 2002 Page 9 of 23 -20-