HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 01-12-2016 SpecialSpecial Council Meeting 1 of 1 January 12, 2016
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
AGENDA
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 12, 2016, 5:30 p.m.
MEDICINE LAKE CONFERENCE ROOM
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. TOPICS
A. Ponderosa Ponds street reconstruction
B. Begin Oaks sketch plan (Pulte Homes)
C. Set Future Study Sessions
3. ADJOURN
The 2016-2020 Approved Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has a number of street projects
programmed in the area between CR 101 and Vicksburg Lane south of TH 55 and north of CR 6 (see
Figure 1). All of these projects are planned edge mill and overlays with the exception of the Ponderosa
Pond area (Fountain Lane/Garland Lane loop north of 25th Avenue) which is planned for complete
reconstruction.
Figure 1
All of the streets in this area except for one short cul de sac in Fox Run meet the criteria for an edge mill
and overlay including all of the streets in Ponderosa Pond (see Figure 2).
Memorandum
Agenda
Number: 2A
To: Dave Callister, City Manager
From: Doran Cote P.E., Public Works Director
Date: January 12, 2016
Item: 2016 Edge Mill and Overlay Area – Fountain Lane/Garland Lane Loop
Page 1
Figure 2
The reason Ponderosa Pond is planned for complete reconstruction is that there have been 15
watermain repairs (breaks, shear failures and valve replacement) on the Fountain Lane/Garland Lane
loop since the streets last had major work performed on them in 1994 (see Figure 3).
Figure 3
Page 2
Based on the number of watermain failures, staff is proposing to replace the watermain on the Fountain
Lane/Garland Lane loop. Significant excavation must be done in order replace the watermain. It would
be prudent to completely reconstruct these streets since so much work would be performed anyway so
staff is suggesting complete reconstruction of the streets at the same time.
The city’s Public Improvement Special Assessment Policy requires that 40% of the street reconstruction
costs are assessed to benefitting properties which has typically been between $7,000 and $10,000 per
unit. The Policy also requires that edge mill and overlay projects are assessed at $1,000 per unit. Since
these areas will likely be included under one project, there will be extremely disparate assessment
amounts between the properties on Fountain Lane/Garland Lane loop and the rest of the entire area.
This is particularly troublesome for staff since all of the streets meet the criteria for an edge mill and
overlay except for the short cul de sac in Fox Run.
Staff is seeking City Council direction on how the bring this project forward for Council consideration
since the only reason for the proposed reconstruction of the Fountain Lane/Garland Lane loop is to
facilitate the watermain replacement. An alternative to assessing for complete reconstruction in typical
amount in accordance with the Policy would be to amend the Policy to account for street reconstruction
that is a result of the city’s desire to upgrade the underground utilities. Below is an example of how the
Policy could be amended:
The assessment amount is based on the following:
1) Benefited properties shall be assessed 40% of the actual project cost. For
edge mill and overlay projects, the minimum assessed amount shall be
1,000 per unit. In no case shall the total assessed amount exceed the
actual project cost. In the event a street is proposed for reconstruction in
order to facilitate underground public utility upgrades or replacement, and
if the street meets the criteria for an edge mill and overly, benefitted
properties shall be assessed $1,000.
The City Council could set the amount of the assessment under this scenario at a higher amount if so
desired, however, proving that greater amount of benefit may be difficult when, to the novice observer,
the improvements appear to be the same as the edge mill and overlay when completed.
Attached to this memorandum are photographs of the Fountain Lane/Garland Lane loop taken by
Google in 2014. These photos, if compared to the rest of the streets in the area, would show little
difference in surface appearance.
Staff examined utility repair history throughout the city to determine if similar conditions exist where
existing streets have curb and gutter and there has been a concentration of utility repairs. Staff found
two such areas; the Mapledell area had 16 watermain repairs, however, these streets were
reconstructed in 2001 and the watermain was not replaced. Vinewood Lane north of Rockford Road
also had a number of repairs but this street was overlaid in 2009. Based on this information, staff does
not believe a precedent would be set if the council desires to modify the assessment policy as noted
above.
Page 3
Fountain Lane north of 25th Avenue
Fountain Lane at Everest Lane
Page 4
Fountain Lane at 27th Avenue
Garland Lane at Fountain Lane
Garland Lane north of 25th Avenue
Page 5
Pulte Homes plans to submit a development application within the next few weeks for a residential
subdivision at the former Begin Oaks Golf Course site. Their application would include the following
elements:
Reguiding --from P-I (public/semi-public/institutional) to LA-2 (living area 2) *Note: reguiding
requires a super-majority vote, and would be contingent upon Metropolitan Council review.
Rezoning --from P-I (public/institutional) to PUD (planned unit development)
PUD general plan
Preliminary plat
Pulte is requesting City Council feedback on their PUD concept plan. The purpose of a PUD is to allow
for a mixing of land uses and to provide for variations to the strict application of land use regulations, in
order to promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use, while providing the city with a
higher level of design than could otherwise be required. Discussion items include the following:
1) Vehicle Access Points to the Site. The concept plan shows two access points; one at Yucca Lane
in the northeast portion of the site (former golf course entrance) and one along Cheshire
Parkway to the west. There are two additional potential access points to the site; one at the
57th Avenue stub to the north (through the Camelot Overlook neighborhood) where a trail
would be connected, and one at the Berkshire Lane stub to the southwest (through The Reserve
neighborhood) where an emergency-only access and trail would be connected.
Would the two vehicle access points shown on the concept plan be acceptable?
2) Product Mix. The concept plan shows three product types on the site, as follows:
Larger homes on single-family lots in the middle portion of the site
Smaller single-level (age-targeted) homes on single-family lots in the east and west portions
of the site
Row homes (attached multi-family townhomes) in the east and south portions of the site,
and in the model home park in the west portion of the site
Would the product mix/location be compatible with adjacent land uses?
Memorandum
Agenda
Number:
2B
To: Dave Callister, City Manager
From: Shawn Drill, Sr. Planner through Barbara Thomson, Planning
Manager and Steve Juetten, Community Development Director
Date: January 12, 2016
Item: Pulte Homes – Concept plan for the former Begin Oaks Golf
Course site
Page 1
2
3) Row Home Design. The row homes would be designed with the garage doors facing the private
drive or public street, and the main entrances (front doors) would be located on the opposite
side of the buildings. The design standards for row homes is regulated in section 21115.07 of
the city code (copy attached).
Would the row home design be acceptable given the city’s design standards?
4) Private Drives versus Public Streets for the Row Home Areas. Private drives are shown on the
concept plan for the row home areas, and may be approved by the council if all performance
standards outlined in section 21137 of the city code (copy attached) would be met.
Would the private drives be acceptable given the city’s performance standards?
If not, and public streets are required for access to the row home areas:
a. Would the council consider allowing reduced building setbacks (through the PUD) for the
row homes?
b. Would the council consider waiving the requirement for a sidewalk along one side of
public streets in the row home areas?
5) Parallel Parking Bays along Public Streets. The concept plan shows parallel parking bays along
the public streets near the private dog park in the central portion of the site, and next to the
pond in the east-central portion of the site. Those streets would be 28 feet wide (from back of
curb), therefore, parking would be allowed on both sides of the street regardless of installation
of parallel parking bays. In a few previous developments, the city has allowed a limited number
of parallel parking bays in front of homeowner association-owned/maintained amenity lots.
Would parallel parking bays be acceptable along the public streets for this development?
Any opinions or comments provided by the City Council during discussion/review of a concept plan shall
be considered advisory only, and shall not constitute a binding decision.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Design Regulations for Row Homes (Section 21115.07)
4. Private Drive Regulations (Section 21137)
5. Letter/Concept Plan from Pulte Homes
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
December 23, 2015
City of Plymouth
Attn: Honorable Mayor and City Council
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Proposed Begin Oaks Residential Community
Concept Plan
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:
We are excited to share with you our vision for a new and vibrant residential community on the former Begin
Oaks golf course. The site is located east of Cheshire Parkway, south of Lake Camelot, west of I-494, and north
of The Reserve multifamily community. We are grateful that you are willing to discuss our concept plan at your
January 12th study session.
A Powerpoint presentation accompanies this letter. The purpose of the presentation is to provide a high level
view of both the site attributes and constraints which “drove” the concept plan, as well as other framework details.
This letter supports the presentation with more detailed relevant information and to address some specific
questions/issues we’ve received feedback on.
Background
Pulte has an agreement to purchase the Begin Oaks golf course, which terminated operations in 2013 for the
purpose of redevelopment. We have worked diligently to balance the many different attributes and site
constraints in an effort to develop a concept plan which meet City codes, satisfies neighbors, and provides a
beautiful new community for home buyers (see attached Powerpoint presentation). We have met with City staff a
number of times regarding concept plans, beginning in July . On November 30th, we held a neighborhood meeting
at which time we gave a presentation, answered questions, and obtained feedback (548 homes were invited; an
estimated 65 people attended). In general, the feedback was positive. Most questions were whether specific
areas of trees and fences at the perimeter of the site would be removed or preserved. We have also reached out
to and met with Mayor Slavik and some Councilmembers in order to obtain their preliminary feedback.
While taking these steps toward preparing a development application, we have heard some questions and/or
concerns about specific issues by members of the City Council and have worked toward addressing these
issues. Later in this memo we will address the three issues that have been raised: 1) What is a model home
park?, 2) How will the rowhome product function?, and 3) Should there be private drives or public streets in the
rowhome areas? It is these three issues that spurred our request for this discussion.
As developer and builder of numerous other communities in the City of Plymouth (Elm Creek Highlands, The
Willows, Enclave on the Greenway, Aspen Hollow), we know the market very well and what buyers expect and
we are very excited to develop this new community which we believe you will take pride in.
Page 9
Community Vision
In evaluating the various site constraints and positive attributes of the property, a vision for the new neighborhood
coalesced around the following primary attributes:
1. Trails – The property is located immediately adjacent to the Northwest Greenway, the Lake Camelot trail
system, the Three Rivers Park District regional trail along Cheshire Parkway , and a City trail along I-494.
This site has extraordinary access to trails, which connects to strong regional amenities such as French
Lake Regional Park to the south and Fish Lake Regional Park to the north. Our neighborhood design fully
capitalizes on these local and regional trail systems by providing connections between them all.
2. Open Space – Due to shoreland ordinance requirements, a significant amount (50%) of the western half
of the site will be left as open space. We are utilizing the open space to create trail connections, view
corridors, green spaces, and a feeling of spaciousness. The total amount of open space is 16.6 acres
within the shoreland district and 32.6 in total (47.7% of the property).
3. Preservation of Trees/Woods – The existing wooded areas on the southwest part of the property is a
positive attribute which will be valued by future homeowners and the adjoining neighbors. We have
designed the neighborhood to preserve significant wooded areas, including areas that will be controlled
by the homeowners association. We have also worked to preserve most of the perimeter trees, thereby
maintaining some existing buffers from neighboring properties. It should also be noted that there are a
significant amount of mature coniferous trees on site that have been manicured and well maintained. Our
intention is to relocate a majority of these trees on site into green spaces and in areas that buffer the
community from neighbors. Due to the age and size of many of these trees, we do not expect that all will
survive relocation, but we want to try. If we are successful in relocating a significant number of these
beautiful trees, the “curb appeal” of the neighborhood will be immediate and striking. The effect will be
particularly effective around the pond located in the center of the east half of the neighborhood and in
adjacent open spaces.
4. Mixed Residential Uses – The size of the property and the variety of adjacent land uses lends itself to
create a community which offers a number of different types of housing products. Our vision is to create a
beautiful and active community where all ages will interact in their enjoyment of the private trails, amenities,
and open space.
Based on comments heard from City staff, we plan to make the following modifications to the concept plan:
1. Remove most of the parallel parking stalls.
2. Changes to the location of the trail planned along Lake Camelot to meet the desires of the City and to
obtain feasible grades meeting ADA guidelines.
Question #1 – What is a Model Home Park?
Our main entrance to the community will be off Cheshire Parkway. We expect our entry into the community to be
striking - wooded, curvilinear, have views of Lake Camelot, and a genuine sense of arrival. We are proposing
three building products in this community – single family homes, age targeted single level homes, and rowhomes
townhomes). We have designed a “model home park” to be located at the main entrance, consisting of all three
of our building products (see below graphic).
Page 10
The purpose of creating a model home park is to create a logical, orderly, positive buying experience for the
home buyers. A model home park enables us to provide community information and model home tours in an
attractive and convenient manner. It allows us to drive all marketing traffic into our main entrance instead of
driving some of the marketing traffic onto existing Yucca Lane at the northeast corner of the site. The model
home park concept will minimize the amount of traffic impacting existing Yucca Lane residents through the build
out period.
Question #2 – How Will the Rowhome Product Function ?
Councilmember Johnson has expressed concerns about our rowhome product. Please allow us to provide
additional information about this product in an effort to alleviate potential concerns.
The Townhome Market
For a variety of reasons, very few townhomes have been built since the real estate crash began in 2007. Pulte
Homes (“Pulte”) and other builders are now beginning to carefully venture back into the townhome market. Given
the long time period since rowhomes have been built in the Twin Cities, the market environment has changed
significantly, including the tastes and needs of the buying public. In response, Pulte has completed in-depth
consumer surveys and recently designed what could be considered “version 2.0” for rowhomes.
Version 1.0” Rowhome Architecture
One of the primary drivers of sales of rowhomes is and has been affordability. This type of product expands the
range of consumers who can afford home ownership. In “version 1.0” of rowhome design, this was typically
accomplished by having the exterior of the units being identical or nearly identical in appearance. A common
theme was that some or most of the units within a building would have the same exterior elevation. Another
common theme was to have only one or two color schemes for all of the units. Predictably, the end result was
usually not pleasant from the standpoint of aesthetics, as all of the units looked the same. Although this approach
succeeded in broadening home ownership and provided value to the homeowners, in hindsight, perhaps more
could have been done to improve curb appeal.
Version 2.0” Rowhome Architecture
Pulte’s company vision is “Building Consumer Inspired Homes and Communities to Make Lives
Better”. In order for our firm to stay on the cutting edge of what consumers want, we constantly obtain
feedback from the public and from our buyers.
Based on Pulte’s consumer research, we determined that we could create a much more attractive rowhome. We
are very excited with the results and are proposing this new product at Begin Oaks. Pulte’s “version 2.0” design
dramatically improves the historical rowhome architectural themes. Our overall approach is to “individualize
Page 11
and stylize” each unit. The result is individual units which differ in architecture from all other units within the
same building and which vary in color scheme from most other units within our community. This is a
significant advancement in the approach to rowhome architecture. Our new rowhome incorporates the
following individualizing features:
a. Significant number of and varying orientation of windows providing interest to the exterior and
transparency and daylighting on the interior
b. Windows and building corners are wrapped with trim
c. Different types of gables
d. Pediments and brackets within the gables to add interest
e. Window shutters
f. Porches
g. Roof pitch (9:12) to accommodate optional bedroom, bonus room, and/or rooftop terrace
h. Horizontal banding boards between floors to add variety and differentiation
i. Articulation of each unit; each unit is offset in depth from the adjacent units by two feet; this
creates shadows which visually “break up” the front of the building
j. Varied color scheme; for example, our first community in the Twin Cities with this product was
recently designed to have 25 out of 36 units with different color schemes
k. Structural options for the habitable attic such as an additional bedroom, bonus room, and/or a
rooftop terrace, which will vary and positively impact the rear elevations.
Our new rowhome design consists of a three-story, rear load garage townhome comprised of 4 to 7 units per
building. Unit sizes vary greatly, ranging from 1,580 square feet to 2,500 square feet with numerous structural
options and two different sized units available in each building – 20 feet wide and 22 feet wide. The end units are
generally planned to be 22 feet wide and the internal units will be 20 feet wide, thereby providing additional choice
and individualization from the standpoint of floor plan and price point. There are four different floor plans for the
consumer to choose from.
Unique optional structural features for the rowhome units include: open rooftop terraces, a potential bedroom or
bonus room in the habitable attic, rear decks, and third car tandem garage stalls. Most of these options change the
rear elevation, creating even more architectural variability. In addition, we design our rowhome communities to
have varying number of units within the buildings. Given the habitable attic options, the rowhome units are 46 feet
in height to the roof peak.
A summary of the floor plans follows. In general:
First floor contains a rear loaded 2-car garage, with options for a third stall, fourth bedroom, bathroom,
powder room, or flex room on the ground level.
Second floor primarily consists of a kitchen, dining room, and spacious gathering room.
Third floor contains three bedrooms, laundry, and bathrooms (or two owner’s suites in lieu of three
bedrooms).
Above the third floor in what would be considered a habitable attic, owners can choose a number of options
such as an unfinished attic, a bonus room, a fourth or fifth bedroom, and/or a rooftop terrace.
We have included photos of the first of these buildings to be constructed in the Twin Cities, within Pulte’s
Enclave at New Brighton Exchange, located in the City of New Brighton. The first buildings are in the final
stages of construction (as can be seen in the rear photo).
With options for three to five bedrooms, two or three car garages, rear deck, and a rooftop terrace, we
believe that floor plan versatility and individualization of this design is unmatched in the Twin Cities market
and will likely lead to serving a broader demographic market. We anticipate the wide range of options will
Page 12
result in home prices from approximately the mid-$200’s to the mid-$300’s. We’re very excited to have the
City of Plymouth serve as one of the initial locations to launch this innovative and versatile product.
Function and Access
Planning across the country over the last decade has put an increased emphasis on creating communities
with increased walkability, a more urban feel, and the creation of pleasant outdoor “spaces”. Our concept
plan and rowhome designs reflect these trends. The rowhome has been designed to have more of the
living spaces” at the front of the home. In viewing our concept plan, the fronts of the rowhome units are
facing away from the street providing access to the garage. You will notice that the rowhomes have been
specifically oriented with the fronts facing away from the street, often toward open space (and substantially
facing away from power lines and I-494). This brings the focus of these units away from the street (and
from I -494 and power lines) and toward more attractive views. The rowhomes are also strategically located
to act as a natural buffer and land use transition from I-494 and the multifamily community to the south.
This focus on the front areas of these units results in two separate access points to the homes. Family
members will enter the home through the door inside the garage. Guests will likely access the home
through the front door, which is located on the opposite side of the home from the garage (see below
graphic with red arrows signifying two routes for entry to the homes).
Many similar designs have been built in the Twin Cities and many other metropolitan areas, especially over
the past 10 years or so. Pulte has built thousands of these same rowhomes in other markets with a strong
favorable public response. If you are interested in seeing products with similar access, we encourage you
to visit our New Brighton community or the Arbor Lakes neighborhood in Maple Grove, where you will find
a number of examples. A closer example is located north of Bass Lake Road, east of Jewel Lane North,
and south of 72nd Avenue North, also in Maple Grove (east of Lawndale).
It is our hope that this additional information will address any questions or concerns that you may have
about this innovative rowhome product. If not, we will be happy to answer any additional questions at the
meeting.
Page 13
Question #3 – Private Drives or Public Streets in Rowhome
Areas?
When first exploring various concept plans, our approach was to provide public streets in the single family
and age targeted areas and private drives in the rowhome areas. However, the Mayor has expressed
concerns about the use of private drives in Begin Oaks. As a result, we have been exploring alternative
approaches. Unfortunately, as we delve deeper into the issue of private drives vs public streets for the
rowhome areas, a number of complexities and trade-offs have become apparent. Therefore, we felt it
appropriate to approach the City Council with this issue.
Why Private Drives Exist
Single family and twinhome developments typically have publicly owned and maintained streets.
Historically, the vast majority of medium to high density multifamily developments have privately owned
and maintained drives. This is true for the City of Plymouth, the Twin Cities area, and the nation. The
reasons why multifamily developments typically have private drives are varied:
1. Private drives serve only the immediate property, do not act as a through street, and do not carry
much traffic
2. More density is obtained with private streets
3. More efficiency in the use of infrastructure
4. Less public tax expenditure on street snow removal, maintenance/repairs
5. Creating an urban setting with the feel of a neighborhood
6. Since the “grounds” (irrigation, lawn mowing, snow removal, landscaping, etc.) of a multifamily
community will be privately owned and maintained by a homeowners association, it can make
sense for private drives within the community to be privately owned and maintained. This is similar
to a privately owned and maintained retail parking lot and grounds (as well as apartments, offices,
and other commercial uses).
7. More privacy/security
8. Less cut through traffic
9. A variety of functional/practical reasons discussed below
Concerns about Private Drives
The primary concern that is occasionally heard about private drives is that at some point in time the City
may be pressured to take ownership of them. This does occasionally become an issue in certain
circumstances and it is a serious issue. However, there are a very large amount of private drive
communities in the Twin Cities areas and this problem occurs in a very, very small minority of the
communities. These problems are avoidable. From our experience, when the following steps are taken, a
City will not be pressured to take ownership of private streets:
1. Private drives work best in higher density communities - This is a matter of math. Spreading the
cost of streets over a small number of homes (ie: 80 foot wide lots) compared to a large number of
homes (ie: rowhomes) results in a much larger cost per home for any future maintenance/repairs.
At some point, the density becomes low enough that the street costs can become a financial
burden to the residents. There are a few communities with large lots and private streets in areas
where privacy and security are highly valued. Occasionally, we have heard of these types of
communities petitioning their City leaders to take ownership of the streets. Oftentimes, these
problem communities do not even have the legal structure (a homeowners association) to deal
with maintaining streets.
Page 14
2. Budget accordingly – When a homeowners association is created in conjunction with a new
development with private drives, the annual dues need to be set at a rate which will perpetually
accumulate the funds necessary to adequately maintain and repair their streets. The vast majority
of developer/builders, including Pulte Homes, are very experienced in this area. They/we hire
professional management companies to create accurate budgets and collect the appropriate
amount of dues and reserves to maintain/repair the streets in their normal lifecycle. Occasionally,
we hear of inexperienced developers/builders either not creating a homeowners association or not
budgeting for maintenance/improvements of the private drives.
Option 1 - Private Drives for the Begin Oaks Rowhomes
We had planned to provide private drives for the rowhome areas as allowed by City ordinance. This
approach is very fitting for the urban rowhome design that we are planning for Begin Oaks. It would result
in an attractive urban community with maximum efficiencies with regard to minimizing lawn areas, driveway
lengths, and the distance that guests walk to reach the front door.
Our private drive design follows the same City standards as those designed as public streets for thickness
of materials. Therefore, there would be no performance-related issues with regard to private drives and
they would have the same durability as public streets.
Private drives would be 20 to 22 feet wide (per City ordinance). The below exhibit shows the configuration
for privates drives. It would result in 22 foot long driveways with the decks 15 feet from the curb.
Option 2 - Public Streets for the Begin Oaks Rowhomes
We also evaluated the potential to incorporate public streets within the rowhome areas. From an
engineering standpoint, we can create the same spatial relationships as those experienced with private
drives. It would result in public streets 24 or 28 feet wide within a 50 foot wide right-of -way adjacent to I-
494 and 24 feet wide within a 50 foot wide right-of -way in other rowhome locations. It is our understanding
that City engineering staff find this to be acceptable. However, the introduction of a right-of -way line adds
complexities:
Sidewalks – City standards require public streets to have a sidewalk constructed on one side of the
street. This requirement is not well suited for rowhomes. We were planning to construct sidewalks
at the fronts of the buildings instead of the rears in order to better match the function and access
needs of our rowhome design. Also, with the additional driveways associated with a rowhome
product, a sidewalk along the street would produce more vehicular/pedestrian conflicts, which is a
safety issue. We would request that the requirement to construct a sidewalk along a public street
be eliminated in the rowhome areas.
Setbacks - In order to keep the same spatial relationships, setbacks from the right-of -way to the
building faces would be a minimum of 11 feet and to the deck would be a minimum of 4 feet.
Alternatively, the right-of -way could be set at 45 feet wide, resulting in setbacks from the right-of-
Page 15
way to the building faces of 13.5 feet and to the deck of 6.5 feet. With no sidewalks to contend
with, there would be no concern about cars blocking sidewalks.
The above exhibit illustrates a scenario with public streets. The right-of -way line is shown in green. It
should be noted that if greater setbacks are required than those described above, the spatial relationship
between the street and the buildings does not remain the same as experienced with private drives and
some of the goals and intents of a multifamily community begin to break down:
1. Pushing the buildings back further from the street results in a loss of an urban setting with the feel
of a neighborhood
2. Driveway lengths increase from 22 feet, requiring guests to walk a longer distance to get to the
front door; this may not sound like a great difference, but in multifamily design, compactness is
important to make the building and streetscape function as intended
Conclusion on Private Drives/Public Streets for the Begin Oaks Rowhomes
We prefer the use of private drives in the rowhome areas because it is a tried and true method for creating
the traditional multifamily community. It is also allowed by City ordinance and therefore does not create the
need for any variation from City ordinances. However, we would be comfortable with public streets if we
could maintain the same spatial relationships as private drives. In order for public streets to function as a
typical multifamily community, this would require some variations from City ordinance:
In order to keep the same spatial relationships, setbacks from the right-of -way to the building faces
would be 11 feet and to the deck would be 4 feet. Alternatively, the right-of -way could be set at 45
feet wide, resulting in setbacks from the right-of -way to the building faces of 13.5 feet and to the
deck of 6.5 feet.
In order to have the rowhomes function as designed and to eliminate unnecessary
vehicular/pedestrian conflicts, we would request that the requirement to construct a sidewalk along
a public street be eliminated in the rowhome areas.
Since this application will be for a Planned Unit Development, such variations from City ordinances will be
at the discretion of the City Council.
Page 16
We appreciate your consideration in reviewing the above and attached information. We look forward to our
discussion on January 12th.
Sincerely,
Paul Heuer, Director of Land Planning & Entitlement
Pulte Homes
952-229-0722 or
paul.heuer@pultegroup.com
Enclosed exhibits:
Concept Plan
Powerpoint presentation
Photo of rowhome front elevation
Photo of rowhome front elevation (elevated camera)
Photo of rowhome rear elevation (under construction)
Page 17
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
TR
E
E
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
TR
E
E
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
TR
E
E
S
WE
T
L
A
N
D
WE
T
L
A
N
D
PO
N
D
PO
N
D
PR
I
V
A
T
E
DO
G
PA
R
K
PO
N
D
TR
A
I
L
TR
A
I
L
65
S
I
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
L
O
T
S
55
A
G
E
TA
R
G
E
T
E
D
L
O
T
S
55
A
G
E
TA
R
G
E
T
E
D
L
O
T
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
TR
E
E
S
LA
K
E
C
A
M
E
L
O
T
CHESHIREPARKWAY
57
T
H
A
V
E
N
GA
R
D
E
N
V
I
L
L
A
S
A
T
T
H
E
R
E
S
E
R
V
EPR
I
V
A
T
E
PA
R
K
1
55
A
G
E
TA
R
G
E
T
E
D
LO
T
S
RO
W
H
O
M
E
S
55
A
G
E
TA
R
G
E
T
E
D
LO
T
S
EM
E
R
G
E
N
C
Y
AC
C
E
S
S
65
S
I
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
L
O
T
S
65
S
I
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
L
O
T
S
65
S
I
N
G
L
E
FA
M
I
L
Y
L
O
T
S
BE
G
I
N
O
A
K
S
PL
Y
M
O
U
T
H
M
N
10
0
E
A
S
T
S
E
C
O
N
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
H
A
S
K
A
M
N
5
5
3
1
8
9
5
2
3
6
1
0
6
4
4
CO
N
C
E
P
T
P
L
A
N
Begin Oaks” Residential Community
Date: January 12, 2016
1Page19
Who is Pulte Group?
2
Page 20
Who is Pulte Group?
3
Page 21
Our Mission Statement
4
Page 22
How Our Concept Plan Came To Be
5
Page 23
Property Attributes
6
Page 24
Access Options
7
Page 25
Existing Trees/Woods
8
Page 26
Existing Wetlands
9
Page 27
Shoreland District
10
Page 28
Existing Power Easements
11
Page 29
Existing Trails
12
Page 30
Varying Adjacent Land Uses
13
Page 31
Begin Oaks Concept Plan
14
Page 32
Access
15
Page 33
Preserved Trees
16
Page 34
Wetlands
17
Page 35
The Homes
18
Page 36
Single Family Homes
19
Page 37
Single Family Homes
20
Page 38
Age Targeted Single Level Homes
21
Page 39
Age Targeted Single Level Homes
22
Page 40
Rowhomes
23
Page 41
Rowhomes
24
Page 42
Planned Amenities
25
Trails & open
space
Trails & open
space
Dog park
Tot lot (2)
Gathering area
2)
Open play area
Page 43
Park Dedication
26
Page 44
Why Begin Oaks is Good for the City
27
Page 45
Tentative Schedule
28
Page 46
Phasing
29
Page 47
Questions/Comments?
30
Page 48
SPECIAL
COUNCIL MEETING
January 12, 2016
Agenda
Number: 2C
To: Mayor and Council
Prepared by: Dave Callister, City Manager
Reviewed by:
Item: Set Future Study Sessions
Pending Study Session Topics
At least 3 Council members have approved the following study items on the list):
None.
Other Council requests for Study Session Topics:
Review appeal process for massage licenses (KS)
Trail/sidewalk snow removal routes for 2016-2017 (schedule later 2016) (JJ)
Staff requests for Study Session Topics:
Group home licensure (materials provided to Council on December 11).
Attached are calendars to assist with scheduling of study sessions.
Page 1
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
January 2016
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000
Fax: 763-509-5060
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
5:30 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Ponderosa Ponds Street
Reconstruction
Begin Oaks sketch plan
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE
EQC) MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
PARK & REC
ADVISORY
COMMISSION
PRAC) MEETING
Council Chambers
CANCELLED
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (HRA)
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
SUN TUESMON WED THUR FRI SAT
MARTIN LUTHER
KING JR.
BIRTHDAY
Observed
NEW YEAR’S DAY
CITY OFFICES
CLOSED
5:30 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
1. Revenue from paid events
at the Hilde Performance
Center and
2.Vicksburg Barn
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
CITY OFFICES
CLOSED
Modified on 01/07/16 CHANGES ARE NOTED IN RED CHACHANGES ARE MADE IN REDNGES
Page 2
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29
SUN TUESMON WED THUR FRI SAT
February 2016
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000
Fax: 763-509-5060
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
5:30 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Board/Commission
Recognition Event
City Hall Lobby/Medicine
Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE
EQC) MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
PARK & REC
ADVISORY
COMMISSION
PRAC) MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (HRA)
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
3:00 - 7:00 PM
Fire & Ice
Festival
Parkers Lake Park
PRESIDENTS
DAY
CITY OFFICES
CLOSED
Modified on 12/29/15 CHACHANGES ARE MADE IN REDNG
5:30 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Crosswalk
Implementation Plan
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
6:00 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
2016 Council Goals &
Legislative Priorities
2016 Departmental
Work Plans
Medicine Lake Room
6:00 PM
SPECIAL COUNCIL
MEETING
Breweries, taprooms,
and distilleries
Medicine Lake Room
Page 3
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
March 2016
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447 OFFICIAL CITY CALENDAR Phone: 763-509-5000
Fax: 763-509-5060
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
COMMITTEE (EQC)
MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
PLANNING
COMMISSION
MEETING
Council Chambers
7:00 PM
HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
HRA) MEETING
Medicine Lake Room
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
Modified on 12/29/15 CHACHANGES ARE MADE IN REDN
7:00 PM
REGULAR COUNCIL
MEETING
Council Chambers
Daylight Savings
Time Begins
SUN TUESMON WED THUR FRI SAT
PRECINCT
CAUCUSES
1:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Healthy Living Fair
Plymouth Creek
Center
11:00 AM-2:00 PM
Spring Bridal Expo
Plymouth Creek
Center
Page 4