Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 07 2   1 a) b) c) 2    2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 5  At Chair Lillehei’s request, Mr. Dempsey explained the process that would be necessary if the developer had to move the proposed two-unit townhome buildings in Block 2 to avoid the variance.  The Planning Commission concluded, after hearing the history of the Fox Meadows development and the reasoning behind the variance request, that they prefer the proposed variance over a spot rezoning. Motion was made by Drotning, seconded by Maguire to recommend to City Council approval of the Fox Meadows 3rd Addition preliminary and final plat and variance for building setback, subject to the following stipulations: 1. The recommendations listed in the May 16, 2014 engineering report. 2. The following minimum building setbacks are required: Public Right-of-Way = 20 feet Private Drives = 30 feet Guest Parking Areas = 15 feet Between Buildings = 25 feet (except Block 2 = 24 feet) Wetlands = 33 feet; Wetland Buffer = 17 feet 3. The homeowners association shall be responsible for all exterior building maintenance, approval of any exterior architectural modifications, landscaping, snow clearing, and regular maintenance of private drives and common areas. 4. All buildings must meet the design and construction standards of Section 11-58- 21 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. The building plans for the five-unit townhome must verify a 12 inch soffit overhang as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the reta ining walls adjacent to Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 must be certified by a structural engineer that they can handle the proposed townhome buildings. 7. A fence or other suitable safety barrier must be installed at the top of any retaining wall that is 30 inches or greater in height. 8. Landscaping must be installed consistent with the approved landscape plan. Prior to City Council consideration, a revised landscape plan must be submitted showing that all landscaping will be installed on priva te property within the Fox Meadows 3rd Addition plat. All graded areas and the guest parking island must be sodded. A $20,000 cash escrow must be submitted prior to release of the final plat mylars to guarantee installation of the approved landscaping. Ayes: Swenson, Drotning, Maguire, Boerschel, Lillehei. Nays: 0 7. Dodd Crossing Chair Lillehei opened the public hearing to consider the application of Manley Development Inc. for the following, located south of 160 th Street (CSAH 46), west of Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) and north of Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9): A. Preliminary plat of 67 single family residential lots to be known as Dodd Crossing. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 6 B. Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to re -guide a portion of the property from Commercial to Low/Medium Density Residential. C. Zoning Map amendment to rezone a portion of the property from C -1, Neighborhood Commercial District to RST-2, Single and Two-Family Residential District. D. Variance for lot width and impervious surface coverage within the Shoreland Overlay District. Peggy Carlson and Kevin Manley from Manley Development Inc. and Randy Hedlund from Hedlund Engineering were in attendance at tonight’s meeting. Ms. Carlson presented a brief overview of their request. She thanked Cit y staff for their efforts throughout the process. Ms. Carlson reviewed the access issues associated with the County roads surrounding the development and the land swap with the County. She indicated that the neighborhood meeting they held prior to tonigh t’s public hearing was well attended and that one of the comments raised at the meeting concerned headlight glare into the existing homes to the north from vehicles in the Dodd Crossing development accessing Dodd Lane. Ms. Carlson indicated that more trees have been added to the landscape plan adjacent to these existing homes to address this concern. Associate Planner Kris Jenson presented the planning report. Ms. Jenson stated Manley Development Inc. has applied for a preliminary plat, Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, and variance to allow the Dodd Crossing development of 67 single family lots. She indicated that the Comprehensive Plan amendment would re - guide that portion of the property currently guided Commercial to Low/Medium Density Residential. The zoning map amendment would rezone that same portion of the property from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District to RST-2, Single and Two- Family Residential District to be consistent with the remainder of the site. The variance request would permit lot widths for those lots within the Shoreland Overlay District consistent with RST-2 District requirements. Ms. Jenson described the Shoreland Overlay District in the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat. Ms. Jenson stated the DNR tributary that bisects the subject property and is subject to the Shoreland Overlay District requirements was allowed by the DNR to be placed in an underground pipe in the mid -1990s at the request of the cities of Apple Valley and Lakeville. She showed a map of the segment of this tributary that is piped, which stretches from Apple Valley to East Lake. Because of this, Lakeville staff does not feel that this segment of tributary should be subject to the Shoreland Overlay District requirements. As such, staff is pursuing the possibility of the MnDNR removing this segment of waterway from the Public Waters Inventory. She indicated that if this process is successful, it would not be completed prior to the preliminary plat application deadline. Ms. Jenson indicated that all of the lots in the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat meet the lot area, width, and depth requirements of the RST-2 District. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 7 Ms. Jenson commented that the 21 lots that abut 160th Street, Pilot Knob Road, and Dodd Boulevard require increased buffer yard lot depth and setbacks. The developer has submitted a landscape plan that includes the required buffer yard screening. Ms. Jenson indicated that there are three outlots in the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat that will all be deeded to the city. She stated the Developer has been working with Dakota County on a land swap. The County would exchange property it owns at the intersection of Dodd Boulevard and Dodd Lane for additional right of way along Pilot Knob Road (CSAH 31) and 160th Street (CSAH 46). The Dakota County Board will review this proposal in June and the land swap must be finalized prior to consideration of the final plat. Ms. Jenson stated that the developer is proposing a subdivision identification monument sign with the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat, but the location is still being determined. Any subdivision identification monument sign must be located within an outlot and be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Ms. Jenson reviewed the streets and sidewalks/trails that are proposed within the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat. All streets meet the minimum width and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Ms. Jenson indicated that , because of Dakota County access spacing restrictions, Elm Creek Lane will connect with Dodd Boulevard but the access will be blocked by a locked gate accessible to emergency vehicles only until such time that a median is installed in Dodd Boulevard to limit this access to right in/right out movements. Ms. Jenson stated that a tree preservation plan has been submitted by the developer as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. She indicated that the majority of the trees are Siberian Elm, which the DNR has classified as an invasive species. All of the trees are proposed to be removed with the development of the site. Ms. Jenson stated that a neighborhood meeting was held by the developer on April 8, 2014. Approximately 16 residents attended and expressed concerns about the proposed development of the property. She indicated that their primary concern was the number of vehicles that currently cut through their neighborhood to access 160 th Street (CSAH 46) and that the development of this property would increase that number. Ms. Jenson stated that the developer is requesting variances on several lots within the preliminary plat, which are listed in the May 15, 2014 planning report. Ten of the lots require a variance due to the Shoreland Overlay District minimum lot width requirement. The minimum lot width requirement in the Shoreland Overlay District is 75 feet while the minimum lot width requirement in the RST -2 District is 70 feet. All 15 lots within the Shoreland Overlay District are requested to have a variance from the impervious surface coverage limit of 25%. Ms. Jenson stated that the developer estimated impervious surface coverage for the portion of the preliminary plat located within the Shoreland Overlay District at approximately 21%, which meets requirements. However, the impervious surface coverage would increase with Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 8 improvements made by homeowners after the initial house construction, such as sheds, patios, house additions and swimming pools. She noted that the RST-2 District has a maximum 40% impervious surface coverage limit for single family home lots. Ms. Jenson stated that staff recommends approval of the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat, Comprehensive Plan amendment, Zoning Map amendment, and variance, subject to the 9 stipulations listed in the May 15, 2014 planning report. Chair Lillehei opened the hearing to the public for comment. Kyle Anderson, 16060 Dodd Lane Cedrick Murphy, 16140 Dodd Lane Mark Lehr, 16044 Excel Way Loren West, 16123 Dodd Lane Sandy Buckingham, 16138 Excelsior Court The comments/concerns of the people that spoke at the podium are as follows:  Cut through traffic on Dodd Lane.  Single family homes are better than having commercial in this area.  Access from one of the County roads would make more sense than access only from a residential street.  The Dodd Crossing plat should not be approved until the County roads are improved so that the access for the development can be off one of the County roads.  Appreciated the developer hosting a neighborhood meeting.  The access to Dodd Lane is too close to the existing bike path.  Suggested the developer remove one lot so there is no need for the lot width variance.  Concerned about the safety of kids walking and biking in their neighborhood because there are no sidewalks. Motion was made by Swenson, seconded by Boerschel to close t he public hearing at 7:32 p.m. Ayes: Swenson, Drotning, Maguire, Boerschel, Lillehei. Nays: 0 Chair Lillehei asked for comments from the Planning Commission. Discussion points were:  Officer Nic Stevens commented on what the Police Department could do to deter cut through traffic within the existing Dodd Pointe neighborhood . The City could deploy extra law enforcement in the area, request a lower speed limit, put up no through traffic signage, or set up the speed trailer periodically in the neighborhood. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 9  Monica Heil provided background on the County’s position on access to 160th Street (CSAH 46), Pilot Knob (CSAH 31), and Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9). Ms. Heil stated that the Dodd Boulevard improvements are not in the County’s current five year CIP plan..  Mr. Morey provided a history perspective on the County roads that abut the subject property. He described the realignment of Dodd Boulevard through the subject property in the 1990s, the access spacing allowance on Pilot Knob Road that was eliminated with a previous update of the County’s transportation plan, the County’s restriction on access to Dodd Boulevard that was implemented after the Elm Creek Lane access was allowed for the Fieldstone Creek development, and the Pilot Knob Road Corridor Study that was developed several years ago and identified a possible future compact interchange at the Pilot Knob Road/160th Street intersection. He stressed that the subject property has been significantly impacted by these County actions and that the only access for the Dodd Crossing development, until Dodd Boulevard is upgraded to a divided roadway, is at Dodd Lane which is a City street.  Commissioner Drotning commented that residents working with law enforcement will be the best option to address the neighbor’s cut through traffic concerns.  Commissioner Boerschel asked who determines the Shoreland Overlay Districts. Ms. Heil indicated that this is determined by the DNR and then put into the City’s Zoning Ordinance. She stated that it has been nearly 20 years since water has flowed overland through this area. The pond outlets that are proposed to be built with the Dodd Crossing development will discharge from the pond into the ditch system across Dodd Boulevard.  The Planning Commission agreed that rezoning the property from C-1 to RST-2 is appropriate.  Ms. Heil clarified that restricted access to Dodd Boulevard at Elm Creek Lane will likely occur at the time Dodd Boulevard is upgraded, whether it is a County road or City street. Motion was made by Swenson, seconded by Maguire to recommend to City Council approval of the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat of 67 single family lots, Comprehensive Plan amendment to re-guide a portion of the property from Commercial to Low/Medium Density Residential, Zoning Map amendment to rezone a portion of the property from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District to RST-2, Single and Two-Family Residential District, and variance for lot width and impervious surface coverage within the Shoreland Overlay District, subject to the following stipulations: 1. The recommendations listed in the May 15, 2014 engineering report. 2. The recommendations of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Committee. 3. The land swap between Manley Development and Dakota County must be approved by the Dakota County Board prior to final plat consideration by the City Council. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 22, 2014 Page 10 4. The developer shall construct 5 foot wide concrete sidewalks along one side of 162nd Street, Elmdale Way, Estate Boulevard, and Elm Creek Lane and a bituminous trail on the north side of Dodd Boulevard between Elm Creek Lane and Pilot Knob Road. The developer shall receive a credit to the required Park Dedication Fee for the City’s 3/8 share of that tra il construction. The developer shall submit a cash escrow with the final plat for future trail construction on the north side of Dodd Boulevard west of Elm Creek Lane. 5. The existing wells within the plat area shall be abandoned and the existing septic system and buildings shall be removed in compliance with state and local requirements. Building removal shall require a demolition permit from the City prior to removal. 6. Outlots A, B, and C shall be deeded to the City with the final plat. 7. Buffer yard landscaping shall be installed according to the approved landscape plan. A security for the buffer yard landscaping shall be submitted with the final plat. 8. Any subdivision signs must be located within an outlot owned and maintained by a homeowner’s association. 9. The variance is contingent upon final plat approval. Ayes: Swenson, Drotning, Maguire, Boerschel, Lillehei Nays: 0 Break at 8:00 p.m. Reconvened at 8:10 p.m. 8. Cedar Landing Chair Lillehei opened the public hearing to consider the application of The Ryland Group, Inc. for the following located north of 210th Street, east of Hamburg Avenue and west of Cedar Avenue (CSAH 23): A. Preliminary plat of 98 single family residential lots and 45 detached townhome lots to be known as Cedar Landing. B. Zoning Map amendment to rezone property from RM-2, Medium Density Residential District to RST-2, Single and Two Family Residential District. Tracey Rust and Mark Sonstegard from The Ryland Group, and Nick Polta from Pioneer Engineering were in attendance at tonight’s meeting. Ms. Rust presented an overview of their request. Ms. Rust stated that the Cedar Landing plat will consist of two neighborhoods, the Meadow will include 98 single family homes, with access off of 210th Street and Hamburg Avenue. Enclave will consist of 45 age targeted detached townhome dwellings with access off of 210th Street. Ms. Rust indicated that both neighborhoods will have homeowners associations. Planning Consultant Daniel Licht presented the planning report. Mr. Licht stated that Ryland Homes has submitted applications for a Zoning Map amendment and for a preliminary plat of 98 single family lots and 45 detached townhome lots to be known as Cedar Landing. CITY OF LAKEVILLE PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES May 21, 2014 Vice chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall. Members Present: Lori Bovitz, Tom Goodwin, Judy Hayes, Scott Kelly, Howard Lovelace, Jeanne Peterson Members Absent: Bob Swan Staff Present: Parks & Recreation Director Brett Altergott, Environmental Resources Manager Mac Cafferty, Recording Secretary Tamara Wallace 2. Approval of April 23, 2014 minutes Minutes were approved as presented. 3. Citizen comments There were no citizens present. 4. Staff report Staff is currently working with Canada Goose Management to reduce the geese population at Antlers Park due to the safety hazard the droppings cause to the beach. Previously several deterrents have been attempted including harassing the geese as well as the usage of chemical on the grass. The Kenrick Avenue Trail is near completion. The City has reached an agreement with George Warweg for the purchase of approximately 6 acres adjacent to Antlers Park. More information will be available in the future. 5. Dodd Crossing preliminary plat Staff reviewed the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat, and discussed storm water and drainage management, trail and sidewalk locations, and tree preservation. Motion made by Jeanne Peterson, seconded by Tom Goodwin and Howard Lovelace to recommend to City Council approval of the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat, subject to the recommendations as presented by City staff. Ayes: unanimous 6. Cedar Landing preliminary plat Staff reviewed the Cedar Landing preliminary plat, and discussed the proposed park, infiltration challenges, ponds, and tree preservation. Motion made by Tom Goodwin, seconded by Lori Bovitz to recommend to City Council approval of the Cedar Landing preliminary plat, subject to the recommendations as presented by City staff. DRAFT 1 Jenson, Kris From:Patricia Powell <powelltj.jp@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 21, 2014 9:40 AM To:Jenson, Kris Subject:Proposed development - Dodd Crossing - Manley Development Inc. My name is Jay Powell, my wife is Patricia Powell and we live at 16249 Excelsior Dr. Rosemount MN. This is at the corner of Excelsior Dr. and Dodd Ln., the south end before Dodd Ln. crosses Dodd Blvd. We are opposed to any change in the current zoning of the proposed property. We don't believe that Manley Development has a satisfactory plan that would address our concerns for our neighborhood. The informational meeting I attended on Apr. 8 at Lord of Life Church was hardly informational. Perhaps the representative for Manley Development was just bad. Our major concerns were added traffic to our neighborhood, access to our park, and safety for the several children and families that walk on our street. Our neighborhood does not have sidewalks. Pedestrian traffic is heavy on evenings and weekends especially in nicer weather. We already have additional traffic through our street from east bound 160th St. south on Excelsior and Dodd Ln. to access the development south of Dodd Blvd. Even the town home development on Elm Creek Ln. accesses through our little neighborhood to avoid the stoplights at 160th and Pilot Knob and Pilot Knob and Dodd Blvd. I have even seen a taxicab come through just to miss those 2 stoplights. I haven't even mentioned the school bus stop at our corner. District 196 high school, middle school and elementary all have stops at both ends of Dodd Ln. and Excelsior Dr. Manely's proposal only gives access to the development from Dodd Ln., not Pilot Knob or Dodd Blvd. When asked why, the Manely representative said the Dakota County would not allow it. If that were true, how did the County allow Elm CreeK Ln. to come out on Dodd Blvd.? Why would there not be access from Dodd Blvd. directly across from Elm Creek lane? There appears to be room for for a turn lane there since the re is currently a bypass lane provided for those turning south on Elm Creek Ln. from Dodd Blvd. It even appears on the aerial map provided in your letter. I am unable to attend the Planning Commission Meeting due to work my schedule. We don't believe that Manely Development is interested in working with our neighborhood, the city of Lakeville, or Dakota County in a safe and satisfactory development of this property. Their only interest seems to be do sell as many residential lots as quickly as possible and be done with it. We would rather see a commercial development come to this property than this ill- advised, poorly planned and badly explained proposal. Jay Powell 2 3 4 5 6       7  8   9 10 C-1 RST-2 RS-4 RS-3 PUD P/OS RS-4 160TH ST W D O D D LN D O D D B L V D E X C E L S I O R D R F A N N I N G C T EXC EL W A Y P I L O T K N O B R DELMC R E E K L A N E F A L L B R O O K D R ± EXHIBIT A City of LakevilleLocation and Zoning MapDodd CrossingPreliminary PlatComp Plan Amend.RezoningVariance Dodd Crossing Prelim ina ry Plat ± Dodd Crossing 160th St (CSAH 46) Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9) P i l o t K n o b R o a d (C S A H 3 1 ) D o d d L a n e Elm C r e e k L a n e D o d d L a n e E x c e l s i o r D r E x c e l W a y City of LakevilleAerial MapDodd CrossingPreliminary Plat,Comp Plan Amend.,Rezoning, andVarianceEXHIBIT B ± Dodd Crossing 160th St (CSAH 46) Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9) P i l o t K n o b R o a d (C S A H 3 1 ) D o d d L a n e Elm C r e e k L a n e D o d d L a n e E x c e l s i o r D r E x c e l W a y City of Lakeville2030 ProposedLand Use Re-guide fromC to L/MDR EXHI BI T C Legend Rural D ensity Residential Low D ensity R esidential Low /M edium Density R esidential Medium Density Residential Medium/High D ensity Residential High Density Residential Manufactured Housing Office/R esidential Transition Comm ercial Office Park War ehouse/Light Industrial Airport Industrial Public and Quasi-Public Parks Restricted Development Special Plan Area Water Prop osed change from Com mercial to Low/Medium Density Residential L/MDR LDR C C P/QP M/HDR P/QP LDR HDR P P O/RT LDR ± Dodd Crossing 160th St (CSAH 46) Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9) P i l o t K n o b R o a d (C S A H 3 1 ) D o d d L a n e Elm C r e e k L a n e D o d d L a n e E x c e l s i o r D r E x c e l W a y Rezone from C-1 Comm ercial to RST-2 Single and Two-Family Residential DistrictRST-2 RS-4 C-1 PUD RS-3 RM-2 P/OS RS-3 P/OS P/OS RS-3 City of LakevilleZoning Districts Rezone fromC-1 to RST-2 EXHI BI T D Legend Zoning Agricultural Preserve A-P, AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE DISTRICT RA, RURAL/AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT Residential Districts RS-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RS-2, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!RS-3, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RS-4, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RS-CBD, RESIDENTIAL SIN GLE FAMILY CENTRAL BUSIN ESS DISTRICT RSMH, SINGLE FAMILY MANUFACTURED HOME PARK DISTRICT RST-1, SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RST-2, SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RM-1, MEDIU M DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RM-2, MEDIU M DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RH-1, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RH-2, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Com mercial D istricts O-R, OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION DISTRIC T C-1, NEIGHBORHO OD COMM ERCIAL DISTRICT C-2, HIGHWAY CO MMERCIAL DISTRICT C-3, GENERAL COM MERCIAL DISTRICT C-CBD, COMMERC IAL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT OP, OFFICE PARK DISTRICT Industrial D istricts I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT I-2, GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT I-CBD, INDUSTRIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT Special D istricts PU D, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT P/OS, PUBLIC AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C . SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5 + 0 0 6+ 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15 + 0 0 16 + 0 0 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 20 + 0 0 2 1 + 0 0 22+00 23+0 0 24+0 0 25+0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4 SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5 + 0 0 6 + 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15 + 0 0 16 + 0 0 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 20 + 0 0 2 1 + 0 0 22+00 23+0 0 24+0 0 25+0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4 $.8&&1&& 2 + . 1 6                    - 0 1 $                   4 1 # & 6*564''69'56 & 1 & &  . # 0 ' 210& 4116$#.. 64''2.#06+0)&'6#+. /+0  0Q5ECNG 64'' 70&+5674$'&':+56+0)51+. 6121($#..61$'Á .#;'4911&%*+2/7.%* 94#264''61(+456.#6'4#. /+0  2.#06+0)51+.$#%-(+.. 5#7%'4 (+0+5*'&)4#&' #$18'(+0+5*'&)4#&' $4#0%*+0) (#..10.; '37#..;52#%'&&')#4170& ÁZ56#-'5ž+0)4170& ÁZ56#-'5ž+0)4170& 56#-+0)"%1064#%614ž5126+10 64''5.#4)'46*#0 +0.+0'96470- 64''561 %'06'464''+0*1.' 0Q5ECNG 5*47$2.#06+0)&'6#+. #$18'(+0+5*'&)4#&' (+0+5*'&)4#&' 5#7%'4 2.#06+0)51+.$#%-(+.. .#;'4911&%*+2/7.%* 6121($#..61$'Á 70&+5674$'&':+56+0)51+.  /+0 4116$#.. /+0 OCVGTKCNUKHPGEGUUCT[VGORQTCT[QPN[ 2TWPGRNCPVUCUPGEGUUCT[ÁRGTUVCPFCTFPWTUGT[RTCEVKEG 7UGOKPKOWONQCORNCPVKPIUQKNQPVTGGU DTGCMCRCTVRGCVRQVU 2.#06+0)016'5 #NNRNCPVUVQDGPQTVJGTPÁITQYPCPFJCTF[ EQOOGPEKPIWRQPRNCPVKPI VJGVTWPMQTUVGOQHCNNVTGGUCPFUJTWDU6TGPEJGFIKPIUJCNNDGWUGFCTQWPFCNNOWNEJGFCTGCU 5JTGFFGFJCTFYQQFOWNEJ ÁFGGR UJCNNDGUJCNNDGRNCEGFCTQWPFCNNPGYVTGGU 2NCPVUUJCNNDGKOOGFKCVGN[RNCPVGFWRQPCTTKXCNCVUKVG2TQRGTN[JGGNÁKP 1YPGTUJCNNDGTGURQPUKDNGHQTOCKPVGPCPEGCHVGTCEEGRVCPEGQHVJGYQTMD[VJG1YPGT %QPVTCEVQTUJCNNXGTKH[NQECVKQPUYKVJCNNWVKNKNKGURTKQTVQKPUVCNNCVKQPQHRNCPVU 5VCMKPIQHVTGGUQRVKQPCNTGRQUKVKQPKHPQVRNWODCHVGTQPG[GCT 9TCRCNNUOQQVJÁDCTMGFVTGGUÁHCUVGPVQRCPFDQVVQO4GOQXGD[#RTKN 1RGPVQRQHDWTNCRQP$$OCVGTKCNUTGOQXGRQVQPRQVVGFRNCPVUURNKVCPF %QPVTCEVQTUJCNNRTQXKFGQPG[GCTIWCTCPVGGQHCNNRNCPVOCVGTKCNU6JGIWCTCPVGG DGIKPUQPVJGFCVGQHVJG.CPFUECRG#TEJKVGEVžUYTKVVGPCEEGRVCPEGQHVJGKPKVKCN 2NCPVUVQDGKPUVCNNGFCURGTUVCPFCTF##0RNCPVKPIRTCEVKEGU RNCPVKPI4GRNCEGOGPVRNCPVOCVGTKCNUUJCNNCNUQJCXGCQPG[GCTIWCTCPVGG CPFUJTWDENWUVGTU&KCOGVGTQHOWNEJGFCTGCUUJTWDUUJCNNDGCOKPKOWOQHžHTQO ž$ $ 5+<'4116 ž$ $2KPWUPKITC 2KEGCINCWECFGPUCVC$*5   #2 2.#06.+56 -'; 36; #WUVTKCP2KPG $NCEM*KNNU5RTWEG $16#0+%#.0#/'%1//100#/' $ $#EGTRNCVCPQKFGU 0/0QTYC[/CRNG ž$ $#DKGUEQPEQNQT9( 9JKVG(KT $ $$GVWNCPKITC 4$4KXGT$KTEJ $ $/CNWUž5PQYFTKHVž 5%5PQYFTKHV%TCD 5;/ ž$ $2KPWUPKITC #2 #WUVTKCP2KPG ž$ $2KEGCINCWECFGPUCVC$*5 $NCEM*KNNU5RTWEG ž$ $#DKGUEQPEQNQT9( 9JKVG(KT ICNEQPV,WPKRGTWUEJKPGPUKU/CPG[K /,/CPG[,WPKRGT SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5 + 0 0 6+ 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15 + 0 0 16 + 0 0 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 20 + 0 0 2 1 + 0 0 22+00 23+0 0 24+0 0 25+0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 20 + 0 0 2 1 + 0 0 22+00 23+0 0 24+0 0 25+0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB15 943.52 3+00 4+00 5 + 0 0 6 + 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15 + 0 0 16 + 0 0 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4 SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB10 935.76 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+ 0 0 6 + 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4 SB1 930.18 SB2 927.95 SB3 933.11 SB4 937.75 SB5 956.05 SB6 968.91 SB7 954.44 SB8 959.29 SB9 939.42 SB10 935.76 SB11 934.28 SB 12 937.49 SB13 963.79 SB14 969.10 SB15 943.52 C 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5 + 0 0 6 + 0 0 7+ 0 0 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15 + 0 0 16 + 0 0 17 + 0 0 18 + 0 0 19 + 0 0 20 + 0 0 2 1 + 0 0 22+00 23+0 0 24+0 0 25+0 0 26+0 0 27+0 0 28+0 0 29+0 0 30+0 0 31+0 0 31+3 4              Dakota County Surveyor’s Office Western Service Center  14955 Galaxie Avenue  Apple Valley, MN 55124 952.891 -7087  Fax 952.891 -7127  www.co.dakota.mn.us April 28, 2014 City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue Lakeville, MN 55044 Re: DODD CROSSING The Dakota County Plat Commission met on April 21, 2014, to consider the preliminary plan of the above referenced plat. The plat is adjacent to CSAH 31 / 46 / 9, and is therefore subject to the Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance. This site includes a proposed residential development and is bounded by CSAH 9, CSAH 31, CSAH 46 and Dodd Lane (a city street). Access to the site is via Dodd Lane with an emergency access location built along CSAH 9. The CSAH 9 access would be opened at some point in the future. The Plat Commission noted that in the future the CSAH 9 access to the proposed site would need to be a right turns only access if the intersection at CSAH 9/CSAH 31 is a full access. The Plat Commission discussed the potential land exchange between the County and developer for this proposed site. The exchange would benefit the County that would include right-of-way needs for the future interchange (reserve area), which was determined through the Pilot Knob Transportation Study. The exchange would benefit the developer/owner since the ponding for the site could be moved to the County’s parcel. In addition, if the right-of-way needs were met for the interchange, severance damages could be avoided in the future, and the site would include additional buffer area between the residential development and existing/future county roads. Also, a quit claim deed should be executed from the County to the City for Parcels 9, 10, and 14, Dakota County Road Right of Way Map No. 177. Parcels 9 and 10 are in the existing right of way for the Dodd Lane (a city street) and a portion of Parcel 14 would be a new city street to access this proposed development. The County Engineer has agreed to the land exchange. The County will be working with the County Assessors to determine if the land exchange meets MS 373.01 subd. 1. The County Board would need to make formal approval for the land exchanged and authorization of the quit claim deeds. The plan is to have this item go the County Board Physical Development Committee on June 10th and County Board meeting on June 17th for approval. Restricted access should be shown along all of CSAH 9, CSAH 46 and CSAH 31 except for the one approved opening along CSAH 9 for Elm Creek Lane. The Plat Commission has approved the preliminary plat provided that the described conditions are met. The Ordinance requires submittal of a final plat for review by the Plat Commission before a recommendation is made to the County Board of Commissioners. Traffic volumes on CSAH 31 are 16,500 ADT; 22,500 ADT on CSAH 46; and 4,400 ADT on CSAH 9. The anticipated ADT for CSAH 31 by the year 2030 are 36,900 ADT; 36,300 ADT for CSAH 46; and 13,000 ADT for CSAH 9. These traffic volumes indicate that current Minnesota noise standards for residential units could be exceeded for the proposed plat. Residential developments along County highways commonly result in noise complaints. In order for noise levels from the highway to meet acceptable levels for adjacent residential units, substantial building setbacks, buffer areas, and other noise mitigation elements should be incorporated into this development. No work shall commence in the County right of way until a permit is obtained from the County Transportation Department and no permit will be issued until the plat has been filed with the County Recorder’s Office. The Plat Commission does not review or approve the actual engineering design of proposed accesses or other improvements to be made in the right of way. The Plat Commission highly recommends early contact with the Transportation Department to discuss the permitting process which reviews the design and may require construction of highway improvements, including, but not limited to, turn lanes, drainage features, limitations on intersecting street widths, medians, etc. Please contact Gordon McConnell regarding permitting questions at (952) 891-7115 or Todd Tollefson regarding Plat Commission or Plat Ordinance questions at (952) 891-7070. Sincerely, Todd B. Tollefson Secretary, Plat Commission c: ± Dodd Crossing 160th St (CSAH 46) Dodd Boulevard (CSAH 9) P i l o t K n o b R o a d (C S A H 3 1 ) D o d d L a n e Elm C r e e k L a n e D o d d L a n e E x c e l s i o r D r E x c e l W a y City of LakevilleAerial Map Location of pipedTributary #1 ofNorth Creek EXHIBIT O 1 Jenson, Kris From:Skancke, Jennie (DNR) <Jennie.Skancke@state.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, May 13, 2014 9:46 AM To:Jenson, Kris Subject:RE: Public Hearing Notice - Dodd Crossing - Shoreland Variance Kris, I’m sorry I’m not going to be able to provide you with much of a review or comment on this as I’m having to prioritize my work load. My initial review indicates that DNR is not opposed to the minor variances proposed here for lot dimension standards, nor minor variances to the impervious surface. Additionally, I had an initial discussion with the City of Apple Valley yesterday regarding the sections of “North Creek” that are on the DNR public waters inventory and run through Apple Valley and Lakeville. It doesn’t look like we will be meeting tomorrow to discuss, but the conversation will be continued at a later date and I will let you know if I think the City of Lakeville would benefit from being involved. Thank you, Jennie Jennie Skancke - South Metro Area Hydrologist MnDNR | 1200 Warner Road | St. Paul, MN 55106 | T: 651-259-5790 | Jennie.Skancke@state.mn.us From: Jenson, Kris [ mailto:kjenson@lakevillemn.gov ] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 12:19 PM To: Skancke, Jennie (DNR) Subject: Public Hearing Notice - Dodd Crossing - Shoreland Variance Jennie, We spoke a few weeks ago about a development proposal located in nort heast Lakeville at the intersections of CSAH 46, CSAH 31, and CSAH 9. The proposed development’s name is Dodd Crossing. I have attached the public hearing notice, the site location map, and a copy of the most recent set of plans. The Shoreland Overlay District is for Tributary No. 1 to North Creek, which has been piped underground through this location since 1996. This parcel is the last developable parcel along the segment of piped tributary. We spoke about the applicant’s request for a variance from the SOD for lot width of sewered single-family home lots. The SOD requires a minimum lot width of 75 feet whereas Lakeville’s RST-2 district allows interior lot widths at 70 feet. There are 15 lots that fall all or partially within the SOD and an additional three lots in which the SOD crosses a very small corner of the property. Of the 15 lots, 10 require a variance from the SOD to be developed as proposed. As I noted previously, twin homes are also allowed within this zoning district and the SOD would only require a minimum of 115 feet of width. The engineer estimated the amount of impervious surface area at 27%; however I realized his calculations are for the entire development and not just the area within the SOD. I have asked him to provide the total area within the SOD. The public hearing notice includes a variance for this item; if the calculations come through that shows the development does not exceed the 25% maximum then we will notify the Planning Commission of the change. I will notify you of the new impervious surface calculations as soon as I receive them. The RST-2 District also has a 25 foot setback to the garage rather than a 30 foot setback to the garage that twin homes would have, so that helps to reduce the amount of impervious 2 The Planning Commission meeting is on 22 May and my staff report will be distributed to the Planning Commission late next week. I would like to receive your input about the lot width variance and the impervious surface variance (if needed) to include with the staff report. If that time frame will not work for you, then I will provide a verbal update at the Planning Commission meeting and share your thoughts on the variance at that time. I would also like to discuss with you the process to remove this area from the Shoreland Overlay District and what the City needs to do to pursue this possibility. Please advise me as to the process. If you have questions regarding the plat or any of this information, please let me know. Thank you for your input about this request. Kris Kris Jenson, Associate Planner City of Lakeville | 20195 Holyoke Avenue | Lakeville, MN 55044 Office: 952-985-4424 | | www.lakevillemn.gov | Lakeville, Minnesota—Positioned to Thrive The information contained in this transmission including any attached documentation may be privileged and confidential. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the City of Lakeville immediately by replying to this email.      DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 2 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 3 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 4 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 5 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 6 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 7 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 8 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 9 DODD CROSSING PRELIMINARY PLAT M AY 15, 2014 PAGE 10            CITY OF LAKEVILLE DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA DODD CROSSING VARIANCE On May 22, 2014, the Lakeville Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Manley Development, Inc. for a variance to the lot width and impervious surface coverage for those lots within the Shoreland Overlay District within the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The applicant was present and the Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is zoned RST-2, Single and Two-Family Residential District. 2. The property is located in Planning District No. 11 and is classified as Low/Medium Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The lots within the Dodd Crossing preliminary plat are:  Lots 1-9, Block 1  Lots 1 and 30, Block 2  Lots 1, 2, 27, and 28, Block 3 4. Section 11-6-5 of the City of Lakeville Zoning Ordinance provides that a variance shall not be approved unless failure to grant the variance will result in practical difficulties. The criteria and our findings regarding them are: a) That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed lot width and impervious surface coverage will be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan which guides the Dodd Crossing neighborhood for low/medium density residential uses. b) That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Title. The proposed lot width and impervious surface coverage is consistent with the other lots within the development. Lots to the northwest within the Dodd Point 2nd and 3rd Addition are developed with similar requirements as the proposed plat area. 2 c) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Having a portion of the property within the Shoreland Overlay District despite the fact that the tributary creek has been piped below ground for over 15 years is a situation of the property and was not created by the landowner or developer. d) That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic considerations. The proposed lot widths and impervious surface coverage are to keep the proposed lots consistent with those lots in the remainder of the Dodd Crossing plat and the Dodd Pointe neighborhood to the northwest. e) That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The proposed lots will be in keeping with the character of the remaining Dodd Crossing neighborhood. f) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. The proposed lot layout has been designed to minimize the amount of the variance requested and still meet the intent of the ordinance and be consistent with other lots within the plat. g) Variances may not be approved for any use that is not allowed under this section for property in the zone where the affected person’s land is located. Single-family homes are a permitted use in the RST-2, Single and Two-Family Residential District. 5. The planning report dated May 15, 2014 and prepared by Associate Planner Kris Jenson is incorporated herein.