5.2. SR 06-21-2004
Item # 5.2
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Mayor and City Co.r~
Michele McPherso~irector of Planning
TO:
DATE:
June 21, 2004
SUBJECT:
Consider Woodland Hills Plat Approval
Issue
The City Council tabled reconsideration of the Woodland Hills plat approval from the June
7,2004 meeting to the June 21, 2004 meeting. At the June 7, 2004 meeting, staff asked for
clarification on the Council's intent for Condition 24 of the plat approval:
"Require a iSO-foot buffer from the trail property line to the house and allow the
fmal plat to come back with some minor modifications."
It was staff's interpretation that the Council intended that:
a) the iSO-foot buffer be measured from the trail property line, not the
physical trail;
b) the 1 50-foot buffer includes no grading and no removal of trees within
that 150 feet; and
c) the 150 foot buffer can end within the yards of the residential lots located
adjacent to the Great Northern Trail, but the trees within them must be
protected from grading and removal.
The developer and his attorney argued that the measurement should begin from the
centerline of the physical trail as opposed to the trail right of way.
Attachments
. Buffer Width History
. Cone of Vision Illustration
. Narrower Setback Illustration
. Aerial Photo
Woodland Hills
June 21, 2004
Page 2
. May 17, 2004 Preliminary Plat
. Illustration of 1 SO-foot No-cut/No grade Buffer
. Revised Plat Illustration
June 7. 2004 Discussion Points
During the June 7, 2004 City Council meeting, the applicant's attorney discussed the
following points:
A. the applicant was being treated differendy than other developers in the same area,
B. the City was requesting more park dedication than allowed by law due to previous
payment, and
C. that the 150 foot buffer area required would cause the loss of 11 lots from the plat
and that would be a taking since they have already reduced the number of lots from
what is allowed by City Code.
Applicant's Treatment
While the applicant may have received conflicting recommendations from the Planning and
Parks and Recreation Commissions, he proceeded through the process similar to other
developers. Division 2 of the Land Development Regulations, Subdivision II, Section 30-
372 encourages the "subdivider to avail himself of the advice and assistance of the city to
expedite review and approval of the preliminary plat". The applicant availed himself of
advice from staff and both Commissions. This process has been used consistendy over the
years. As can be seen on the Buffer Width History attachment, the Parks and Recreation
Commission was consistent in its message regarding the need for a buffer along the trail (the
width varied based on the proposal under consideration) and from where the buffer was to
have been measured.
Comparing this plat to Ridgewood is not applicable as the County, prior to consolidation of
the City and township, approved the Ridgewood plat. Ridgewood is also a large lot plat
with only five lots direcdy abutting the trail right of way. Due to the size of the lots, there is
an opportunity for buffer area within the lot itself. As Oak Wilt continues to expand,
however, it is likely that this buffer will slowly be eroded.
In regards to Lafayette Woods, the developer provided more than 10% land dedication (16-
18 acres of high ground plus wedand areas) for 120 acres oEland area. At the time the plat
was considered, the City's interest was to buffer the adjacent neighborhood of Ridgewood,
not the trail. Therefore an extraordinarily wide buffer area adjacent to Ridgewood was
required, not unlike what is being requested adjacent to the trail in this plat.
The density of this plat is 2.17 units per acre versus 2.2 and 1.9 for Lafayette Woods and
Nordic Woods respectively. If the applicant did not provide park dedication in land, it is
possible that the number of lots could be increased to 120-150 lots (2.4 to 3 units per acre).
The drawing referred to by the attorney illustrating lots along the trail right of way was
developed as part of the negotiations for the utility easement to show that the easement
would still allow development of the parcel in a logical and orderly manner.
S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\6 2104 CC memo, doc
Woodland Hills
June 21, 2004
Page 3
Park Dedication Requirements
In 1986, one of the owners processed an administrative subdivision to split a parcel into two
five-acre sites. At that time, a park dedication fee in the amount of $200 was paid. Section
30-327 (b) of the Land Development Regulations states:
"If the City Council, in its sole discretion, determines that the land proposed to be
dedicated is unsuitable for parks, then the tract owner shall contribute to the city, in
lieu of park land dedication, an amount of cash not to exceed the fair market value of
the undeveloped land required to be dedicated, as the City Council shall determine
by resolution from time to time."
Two hundred dollars in 1986 was in all likelihood substantially below the value of Vz acre of
land that could have been requested for dedication purposes.
Section (c) of the same ordinance section allows the City to collect park dedication if a parcel
is further subdivided into more lots, as is the case in this plat.
The attached illustration shows that the total amount of park dedication for the plat of
Woodland Hills is 5.05 acres (5.09 allowed). The land dedication is comprised of an area 147
feet from the trail right of way, and a trail connection to the Meadowvale School site that
will allow connection to Oudot A in Nordic Woods.
Impact of 150 Foot Buffer Area
The "Cone of Vision" illustration was discussed at the Council meeting. This illustration
was prepared by staff to show that a 147 foot buffer would have a similar impact as a 200
foot buffer as a resident was walking down the trail due to a normal line of site of a trail user
(see attached illustration for clarity).
This illustration was prepared based on 10% land dedication as measured from the trail right
of way, not the physical trail itself.
Stafflaid a line over the May 17, 2004 plat to identify the impacts of a 1 SO-foot no cut/no
grade buffer. Of the 13 lots in this area of the plat, the line impacts eight lots. Of the eight,
four are eliminated. The remaining four need minor modifications to meet the ordinance
requirements for size. Staff then analyzed the remainder of the plat in order to relocate the
four "lost" lots. Staff added a lot to the Woodland Court cul-de-sac, converted Oudot C to
a lot (this will have access from Campbell Circle), and added one lot to the end of 195th
Avenue in the southeast comer of the plat. This last lot will encroach into the buffer area in
an area that has had some buffer removed due to utility construction (see aerial photo). The
net result is a loss of one lot to 110 total lots in the plat.
Using the 147-foot line for park dedication and the width of a drainage and utility easement
(5-10 feet) should accomplish the Council's condition 24 for the plat approval of May 17,
2004.
S:\pLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\6 2104 CC memo, doc
Woodland Hills
June 21, 2004
Page 4
Conclusion
Based on the information in the ftle developed by staff, the applicant loses one lot if
Condition 24 of approval is enforced.
S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\6 21 04 CC memo,doc
~
'.
'f'.,
L 't
'\1
j
, ,~..
,~~' ~
. ,.' ;:~~ i
r-
BUFFER WIDTH HISTORY
Date
Au ust13,2003
Se tember 10, 2003
Februa 11, 2004
March 10, 2004
#of
Lots
140
140
135
111
Zonin
PUD
PUD
PUD
R1-c
Buffer re
250-feet
200-feet
200-feet
200-feet based on ori inal PUD
130-feet (allows playground in other park
area
A ril 14, 2004
111
R1-c
Date Meeting Recommendation
August 13, 2003 Park & Rec -Proposed 140 lot PUD concept plan was presented which
(review) had approx. 7 % acres of park land (which would work out
to an area 250-feet in width outside of and parallel to the
Great Northern Trail right-of-way on the east side of the
plat),
-The Commission's consensus was to maintain a green
corridor along trail, they recommended approx. 250-feet
parallel to trail based on the 7 % acres.
September 10, 2003 Park & Rec -The Commission's consensus again was to maintain a 200-
(review) foot wide buffer (this width was based on the now roughly
7-acres of park land in the proposed PUD)
February 11, 2004 Park & Rec -135 Lots proposed under PUD
Meeting Park & Rec still asked for the 200-foot wide buffer
(property line to property line) based on the number
derived from the original 140 lot PUD
March 10,2004 Park & Rec -The Commission was updated on the revised 111 lot plan
(update) which meets the R1c zoning,
-The Commission still asked for the 200-foot wide buffer
(property line to property line) based on the number
derived from the original 140 lot PUD.
- Indicated desire to purchase property.
April 14, 2004 Park & Rec -Discussion centered on playground location and that it
(update) would be best in the clearing of Lot-4, Block-4 & Outlot G.
(this now is a different request by the Park & Rec)
-To compensate lost lots, allow lots (out of buffer) at north
end of proposed park.
- The Commission now asked for a buffer/park land which
is approximately 130-feet wide but suggested a 20'
conservation easement over the rear setback of the lots
adjacent to the buffer.
THIS GRAPHIC WAS CREATED BY CITY STAFF TO ILLUSTRATE THAT 150-FEET FROM THE TRAIL
PROPERTY LINE WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO GIVE THE DESIRED VISUAL BUFFER, THE 200-FEET
ORIGINATED FROM THE ORIGINAL PUD, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED UNDER THE PUD,
I
I
~
I \
i \
\ \
I \
I \\
I \
\
I \
I \~
\~
I \~
\<<"
I \
I \
I
I
I
I
I
---l
<(
0:::
r-
r./1
Q
o
o
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
<
~
ROW
I I
I I
! I {1
I i /
, CONE ' /
I --- I /
, !
\ )
I \ / I
, \ ::::! /,
I \ ~ / I
, r-
I \ / i
rll rPERSON
__ Y I
I
VISION
00'-0
60
OF
147' -0"
DEDICA TE PARK
~
51".
\
o~
0%
(
r/)
~
~
~
~
Cl
~
~
Cl
o
o
~
Cl
~
r/)
o
~
o
~
~
1
~1E:
6/21/2004
DRAWN BY:
CML
SCAlE:
NOT TO SCAlE
CONE OF VISION
GREAT NORTHERN TRAIL BUFFER
~
River
1
-==-
~,~~
,~~
60'-0" RIGHT-OF-WAY
40'-0'
5'-0'
10'-0"
EASEMENT
15'-0"
REDUCED
DATE:
6/21/2004
DRAWN BY:
CML
SCALE:
NOT TO SCALE
4'-0'
8'-0'
'I
:8r=~
~ 1,\1)
\1 '
1 ,,' ;,
',~
NARROWER SETBACK CONCEPT
WOODLAND HILLS
10'-0"
EASEMENT
15'-0"
REDUCED
~
EL~
River
""-
DATt
BY
DE'itLCPER:
8REJJER FAUll.. Y LLLP
A. i1'N: SCOTT BREUER
907 lJAJN ST. SUI~ roo
fJ.X RI~. AIN 55.JJC
PH (76J)-#'-6_
DESOlIFIJ(JI
~
\
~,d
72<JJ6
"Ighl-m.
c.s.AH...
piqt of NI
,
\\
-
IlE3IGHED DRAWN II HERES'Y CfR'llFY 1liAT 'THIS PI-'" WAS PIlEP>WJ)
ALP.c. SY ME OR UNDER W'l" lXRECT SUPBMSlON AHD "fW"T
MLH. I 1M A IXl.Y REGISfERfI) PROfESSK:lfrW.. EHClNEER
UNDER lHE lAWS OF' lHt STATE OF .....aorA.
0iECttll
u.P.c. Wartln P. Comp)on
"""'- ~.HO._
,11
II
J..:...ti,
i
I .
I I
I I
I !
1 I
I i
i
I i
I 8~
I ~T
I I
I
I i
I i
I I
I :
1-1
_I
-----
----------------
----------
i~
<0
C>
<0
z
~
o
..
..
2 I 3
-
IE
-
r
-
,
-
196TH AVENUE N.W.~
- -
3 3
0-
W
W -
f I!:
'" 2
\ ',,---
'''-,
, '------
..
"
II)
L
cr:
W
I lIW11111.DoolIbt
rro ~~[Q13
.ss0CtATE3 faI:: illN52t
~.w~~n:.
&-
.~ \"\\ [:
<X _-::l \ co: If
---;; I :' I u..
j )
, ,..,,~ .:..:m,,. r 2
13
a 9 f " I "IT
7
Q
-
:T:
WOODLAND HILLS
BREUER FAMILY LLLP
ELK RIVER. MN
8
i
'-- ~ L-i
------
'-- :95T}f ~~'E. N.~~. ~
15
16
\
\ \
.,.,--- \ \'
/' - - --..\. \\ \
/"" -,'. ,
""-_-=-------- _~4IJt:_4tU._1If \\ \
\\ \
'\
\, \
\ \
\\ \
'\
\ \ \
\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
~ \\ \
~ '\ \
I~ '\
(l \\ \
~~ \ \
'\ \
,,'\ \
\\
\\ \
'\ \
\\
\\ \
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\ \
\ \ \
\ ,
\\ \
\\ \
\ ,
\\ \
\\ \
'\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
\\ \
_\.;.... ---\
, \
\
\
14
to
17
II
7
16
9
B
17
16
17
18
2
15
13
6
3
11
9
8
10
~I'RO.JO:CT N<>
RIGHT OF WAY EXHIBIT 2-02-0628
SHEET NO, OF SHEETS. 5/10104
N",orWE rI~
r#'~
12
..
\
\
4
9
8
7
6
5
10
3
'5
N.W.
PLA'N SUBMITTED
MAY
17th
CC MTG
6
11
-7-n----
8
~
!
12
\
\
\
\
\
\
:JDtJ
\
\
\\ \
.-- \\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\ \\ \
.~ \\
(\\ \
l\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\\ \
\\
\t-\-
, SI.NI
, CJlSDE1IT
IJNES
\
oonYT ~
.ak
~~
I ! ~
! 19
I i Q3
! \ \
I i~ \ ',---
I ~f '",--
I !
I ! ____-
! -----
! -----
~--
p
3
o
C.
-\
r-
I ~
~/ \~
\ ~
1'--
;z
l?
CI)
o
III
eo
eo
l-
I:::
e:
CI)
L
~
3
2
1 2
- -
i CAMPBEL i
EX~
~
3
).
....
~
~
-<
~
p
~
f?-
7
8
~''IKt'Ii:'m.';s
EX~
\
\ )>
a.,\~
I
J
j
[
[
~
2\
~3 14 15 I \ 16 I 17
---- L
-
0
1~ 1
23
~u
195TH AlE: N.W-
--
I
>>
.,
.
;t
Ii
7
8
s:
Z
0-:
CI)
o
a:
III
::E
::>
"I
17
18
16
15
13
6
4
3
11
10
9
8
12
~'"E ,,_
eo
4
NW,
--S'6
9
7
6
8
10
3
11
7
~
\
\
\
LOTS AFFECTED BY 150-FOOT PROPERTY LINE TO
PROPERTY LINE NO CUT/NO GRADE ZONE
\
l stAB
, f'A5EIlElWT
tItES
_00
. .
.
a
... . . ...
a -. -. .
a __.
a
a ..
- .
. .. II I' II. , . '.
a .
I I
I -, " .1
I lljfll I" .
I ' g" II II I I '.
. .11'111 III
> ' 'II '1111 III
> ' '. I. III,
"
> , , >,
.. > ' . II II
.. . ," '. iii "'.W
"
. . I.. n'
"
"
"
Page 1 of2
Leeseberg, Chris
c c +Jo_ndouJ- /.plat jov-
1+t(Y) 5, at
From: Scott Breuer [scott@scottbreuerhomes,com]
Sent: Monday, June 21,20043:31 PM
To: Leeseberg, Chris
Subject: FW: WOODLAND HILLS EXHIBITS
Chris,
Marty and I have reviewed the revised concept that you forwarded to us and that concept does not work for us,
With the Cities concept there is a loss of four premium home sites that currently back up to the trail and those
home sites have a significant value above a poor home site. Some of the home sites in the Cities concept were
relocated, These home sites would have to be sold at a significantly reduced value because they are now a poor
home site due to their shape, dimensions and location, There would be a loss in profits from the land side along
with the loss in profits from the homes side from the lost and changed home sites,
When I calculate the losses, it is worth it for me to have my attorney take legal action,
You know me well enough to know that I would prefer not to take legal action and have the City spend money on
something valuable like parks and other things to make Elk River a better place to live but, the Council is giving
me no option,
To try and avoid that, we have come up with a concept that is attached where we have a 150' "no cut"
conservation easement that goes from the edge of the trail onto our property, Mr. Beck asked me at the last
meeting if we could make the 150' work from the edge of the trail and after doing the research we can do it as
shown on our Exhibit # 1A which is attached, The property line on three lots does go into the conservation
easement but we will not have to cut trees in that easement to do our grading for those three home sites,
Being the 150' buffer number is arbitrary number hopefully we will be able to settle this tonight so we all can move
forward and focus our attention on something more positive. Thanks for your help
Scott
-----Orig i na I Message-----
From: Scott Breuer [mailto:em000308@isd.net]
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 9:50 AM
To: Scott Breuer
Subject: Fw: WOODLAND HILLS EXHIBITS
---- Original Message ----
From: Matt Halls
To: Scott Breuer Homes
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 2:49 PM
Subject: WOODLAND HILLS EXHIBITS
Matt Halls
Otto Associates, Inc,
(763)682-4727
Otto Associates, Inc, makes no representation or warranties, expressed or
implied, with respect to the reuse of the data provided herewith, regardless
6/21/2004
L
I""
lEiOIP1D<
....00
DESIGHEIl DRAWN
1tI.P.c. ItI.Lk.
caa<ED
1tI.P.C
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''.''''''''0''",""00""",,, I ~
-.s PREPMED BY WE m IMDER wr DRECT SUPERY\SlON
AND TJiA,1 I NIl A DULY UCENSED f'ROI'ESSI(JfML EMGIoIaR ...._
ura:R T11E I.AlIS Of Ttt( STATE or 1iIlNNESOf"- E"": M:h3
'*"till P. CcwnpicIn - -.un:s
l>>.lL llKlOl ~_~~IIC.
WOODLAND HILLS
BREUER FAMILY LUP
ELK RIVER, MN
,
, If><
- ~
S~' -T-- --
,
I
I
,
_ __ :" If><
-i-'---
s. "
TOTAL PLAT A.REA.= 50.95 ACRES
- 5.00 ACRE (CAMPBEL
"" 45.95 ACRES
X 10% :: 4.6 ACRES
+ .31
= 4.91 ACRES
PROPERTY)
PARK DEDIC... nON REQUIRED= 4.91 ACRES
PARK PROVIDED:
OUTLOT A so 5.24 ACRES
OUTLOT E ~ 0.15 ACRES
TOTAl:: 5.39 ACRES
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED:
OUTLOT 8 - 1.61 ACRES
OUn...OT C '" 0.33 ACRES
OUTlOT r .. 0.25 ACRES
TOTAl= 2...19 ACRES
I:
SEcnONS 28
TOTAl
-
- 5IJ.9S AC
,
; \
1l._.,_S.lI:lft-
~~~"
\
~
~HIBIT NO, 1A 2.(J2..()62B
SHEET NO, OF SHEETS IDA'" 6/18104
-~
VICINITY MAP
& 29
,
,
: "If><
__L______
TOWNSHIP 33 RANGE
PROPERTY
LOCA nON
26
V'>
\'I
(J
N
cD
.s:_,.,_1t.
r-,/2 of"" IlL J.,A
------~-~~~--------------------
,'"
i ~ j
! ~ i
:, g l
\ "
",,- ~'
----------
~
(?-
WOODS
\
\
\
\
t
':z
'"
-I
-I
'"
A
5
..
7
Ii
..
rOT AL
:I