The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.l. Rottlund Homes A Major Amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement Allowing Substitution of the Easton Townhome for the Urban Villa Townhome, Case 09-22-AMDAGENDA ITEM: Case 09- 22 -AMD Rottlund Homes A Major Amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement Allowing Substitution of the Easton Townhome for the Urban Villa Townhome AGENDA SECTION: cO'ArKevt PREPARED BY: Jason Lindahl, AICP Planner AGENDA NO. (.I, ATTACHMENTS: 8 -25 -09 Draft PC Excerpt Minutes, PUD Amendment, Resolution, Location Map, Easton Plans, Urban Villa Plans, Harmony 5 Addition Revised Development Plan, Revised Landscape Plan, Revised Foundation Planting Plan, Applicant's Letter. APPROVED BY: 04 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motions: 1. Motion to adopt a resolution approving a Major Amendment to the Harmony Area Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement allowing substitution of the Easton Townhome for the Urban Villa Townhome. 2. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Major Amendment to Harmony Area Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement. ROSEMOUNT City Council Meeting Date: SUMMARY Applicant Property Owner(s): Location: Area in Acres: Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Current Zoning: CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY September 15, 2009 Rottlund Company, Inc. Harmony 5 Addition North of Connemara Trail, South of Bonaire Path and West of Bronze Parkway Approximately 3.5 Acres UR Urban Residential and HR High Density Residential R -3, Medium Density Residential PUD The applicant, Rottlund Company, Inc., requests a Major Amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development (PUD). As proposed, the amendment would allow substitution of the new Easton townhouse product for the originally approved Urban Villa townhouse product. This substitution would take place only on the lots originally assigned to the Urban Villa product in Harmony 5 Addition. Staff recommends approval of this request. Comparison Table Urban Villas vs. Easton Category Urban Villas (approved) Easton (proposed) Finding Unit Design Traditional 2 -Story 3 -level Split Inconsistent No. of Units 8 Buildings Totaling 33 8 Buildings Totaling 33 Consistent Building Setback 20 ft. 20 ft. Consistent Covered Deck /Entry Setback 20' 19.1' to 25.9' Inconsistent Staircase Setback N/A 20' to 9' Inconsistent This application requires a major PUD amendment because the proposed Easton townhouse product is considered substantially different than the current Urban Villas product allowed under the original Harmony Area PUD. The applicant makes this request in response to the shifting housing market and to diversify the exterior appearance of the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review this item on August 25, 2009. Draft excerpt minutes from that meeting are attached for your reference. Staff noted their support for the amendment even though the new units create setback non conformities for one covered deck and all but one of the staircases leading from these decks to the public sidewalk and trail system. Staff finds the deck and staircase non conformities acceptable given the architectural enhancements and overall appearance of the Easton product. After holding the public hearing and receiving no comments, the Commission unanimously voted to recommend the City Council approve this request subject to the condition that the applicant revise the covered front decks on the three units on Lot 3, Block 7, Harmony 5t Addition to include staircases and sidewalks connecting to the public sidewalk and trail system. The applicant has complied with this condition. ISSUE ANALYSIS Unit Mix. Rottlund proposes to replace all of the Urban Villas approved for Harmony 5t Addition with the proposed Easton product. In the initial application all but three of the new Easton units were planned to have covered front porches with a staircase leading to the public sidewalk and trail system. The three exceptions to this design were located on Lot 3, Block 7 along 135 Street just west of the neighborhood clubhouse. Because these units face the clubhouse and not a public street, Rottlund did not plan to extend the staircase to the sidewalk and trail system. However, pedestrian access was a fundamental component of the Harmony development and it was recommended as a condition of approval that the applicant add staircases to these units. Because of the design of the Urban Villas units, there was front door pedestrian access from these three units previously approved. Since the planning commission meeting, these adjustments have been made. Townhome Unit Comparison Generally, the proposed Easton unit compares favorably to the approved Urban Villa product. The most significant difference between these units is their design. The original Urban Villas have a traditional two -story single loaded rowhouse design with a covered front entry. By comparison, the proposed Easton product has a three -level split single loaded design. Elevations and floor plans for both units are attached for your reference. The characteristics of the two townhome products are compared in the table below. 2 Comparison Table Urban Villas vs. Easton Category Urban Villas (approved) Easton (proposed) Finding Footprint Dimensions 3 -Unit 4 -Unit 5 -Unit 78' x 47' 78' x 48' -8" Consistent 104' X 47' 104' x 48' -8" 130' x 47' 130' x 48' -8" Building Height 31' -4" 32' -6" Consistent End Unit Size 1,854 +419 Garage) 2,048 +448 Garage) Consistent Interior Unit Size 1,854 +419 Garage) 2,038 +448 Garage) Consistent Min. Driveway Length 20' 20' Consistent Exterior Materials Vinyl lap siding, shakes brick Vinyl lap siding, shakes brick Enhanced Outdoor Rec. Space Covered Entry 12' x 7 Patio 12' x 6' Covered Front Porch Enhanced The table above demonstrates the proposed Easton unit is comparable to many of the characteristics of the approved Urban Villa unit. The Easton product will have the same number of units and building setback as well as similar footprint dimensions, building height, and unit square footage. It should be noted that the Easton design does create setback non conformities for one covered deck and all but one of the staircases leading from these decks to the public sidewalk and trail system. The covered front porches extend approximately 4.5' beyond the building's front elevation and the staircase extends another 11' beyond the deck. The one deck encroachment is on Lot 2, Block 5 and results in a 19.1' setback, rather than the 20' required. The staircase encroachments vary depending on the width of the right -of -way and the positioning of the building and result in 18' to 9' setbacks. The issue of appurtenances (porches and staircases) on the dwellings is new because the previous building plan had the entire footprint within the building area (and meeting all setbacks) and there were no additional accessory structures proposed. In this instance the dwelling unit footprint is contained within the defined building area (and meeting setbacks) but one deck and 32 of the 33 stairs have some encroachment into the setback. Staff finds the deck and staircase non conformities acceptable given the architectural enhancements and overall appearance of the Easton product. Rottlund redesigned the street facing elevation of the Easton to include a covered front deck. In addition, the applicant added gables to break up the mass of the building and define the individual units as well as brick under each gable and along the entire base of the street facing elevation. It should be noted that these encroachments are covered by the Homeowners' Association (HOA) as the organization is responsible for and will maintain all common areas and the outside of each unit including the decks and staircases. CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a major amendment to the Harmony Area Planned Unit Development (PUD). As proposed, the amendment would allow the substitution of the new Easton townhouse product for the original Urban Villa townhouse product. This substitution would take place only on the lots originally assigned to the Urban Villa product in Harmony 5 Addition. This application requires a major PUD amendment because the proposed Easton townhouse product is considered substantially different than the current Urban Villa product allowed under the original Harmony Area 3 PUD. The most significant difference between these units is their design. The original Urban Villas have a traditional two -story single loaded rowhouse design with a covered front entry. By comparison, the proposed Easton product has a three -level split single loaded design. Generally, the proposed Easton unit compares favorably to the approved Urban Villas product. However, it should be noted that the Easton design does create setback non conformities for one covered deck and 32 of the 33 staircases leading from these deck to the public sidewalk and trail system. The recommendation for approval is based on the information submitted by the applicant and the findings made in this report. 4 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 25, 2009 5.b. The Rottland Company Major PUD Amendment in Harmony Addition (09- 22 -AMD). Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Rottlund Company, Inc., requests a Major Amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development (PUD). As proposed, the amendment would allow substitution of the new Easton townhouse product for the originally approved Urban Villa townhouse product. This substitution would take place only on the lots originally assigned to the Urban Villa product in Harmony 5 Addition. Mr. Lindahl reviewed the elevation plans and differences in the proposed design. Commissioner Schwartz asked for an explanation of what areas the homeowners' association will be responsible for maintaining. Deb Ridgeway with Rottlund Homes approached the Commission and stated the homeowners' association will be responsible for all of the exterior of these buildings including decks, stairs, siding, and roofing. Commissioner Messner asked for an explanation of which unit will extend past the 20 foot encroachment area and Mr. Lindahl showed the Commission on a parcel map. Commissioner Messner asked if this is close to the area where a PUD amendment was previously approved to remove apartments and a senior housing area. Mr. Lindahl showed that area is just south of the currently discussed area. The public hearing was opened at 6:44p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Irving to close the public hearing. Second by Messner. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. The public hearing was closed at 6:45p.m. Commissioner Schwartz stated her agreement that the new design would be a preferable design and the exterior enhancements are a good improvement. MOTION by Irving to recommend the City Council approve a Major amendment to the Harmony Area Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement allowing substitution of the Easton Townhome for the Urban Villa Townhome, subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the covered front decks on the three units on Lot 3, Block 7, Harmony 5` Addition to include staircases and sidewalks connecting to the public sidewalk and trail system. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow-up, Mr. Lindahl stated this item will go before the City Council at their regular meeting on September 15, 2009. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2009 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE HARMONY (FORMERLY BROCKWAY) AREA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AGREEMENT ALLOWING SUBSTITUTION OF THE EASTON TOWNHOME FOR THE URBAN VILLA TOWNHOME WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Rottlund Homes requesting a major amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development concerning property legally described as Lots 1— 2, Block 4; Lots 1 3, Block 5; Lots 1 3, Block 7; Harmony 5th Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the amendment would allow substitution of the Easton townhome for the Urban Villa townhome home currently permitted under the PUD; and WHEREAS, this application requires a major amendment and a public hearing before the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commission held a public hearing on this item on August 25, 2009 and found the Easton product consistent with the spirit and intent of the original Harmony PUD, and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2009, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the application and agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves a major amendment to the Harmony (formerly Brockway) Area Planned Unit Development for Rottlund Homes, subject to: 1. Execution of a major PUD amendment agreement. ADOPTED this 15th day of September 2009, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. ATTEST: Amy Domeier, City Clerk William H. Droste, Mayor RESOLUTION 2009- Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: 2 A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE HARMONY (FORMERLY BROCKWAY) AREA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AGREEMENT ALLOWING SUBSTITUTION OF THE EASTON TOWNHOME FOR THE URBAN VILLA TOWNHOME THIS DECLARATION made this 15 day of September, 2009, by and between THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC., (hereinafter referred to as the "Declarant and the CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner of the real property described as Lots 1 2, Block 4; Lots 1 3, Block 5; Lots 1 3, Block 7; Harmony 5 Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properties and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is subject to a Planned Unit Development Agreement, "Brockway Area Planned Unit Development Agreement" dated September 27, 2004, (hereinafter referred to as the "Planned Unit Development Agreement and WHEREAS, Declarant wishes to amend the Planned Unit Development Agreement as hereinafter provided, which amendment has been approved and consented to by the City of Rosemount, acting through its City Council, as evidenced by the duly authorized signatures of its officers affixed hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, the Declarant declares that the Subject Property is, and shall be, held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the covenants, conditions, and restrictions, hereinafter set forth. 1. The use and development of the Subject Property shall conform to the Planned Unit Development Agreement except as modified herein. A. The permitted housing plans listed in paragraph 1.c of the Planned Unit Development Agreement is amended as follows: Add the Easton Attachment One. 1 2. Except as modified by paragraph 1 of this Amendment, the Planned Unit Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 3. The obligations and restrictions of this Amendment shall run with the land of the Subject Property and shall be enforceable against the Declarant, its successors and assigns, by the City of Rosemount acting through its City Council. This Amendment may be amended from time to time by a written amendment executed by the City and the owner or owners of the lot or lots to be affected by said amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned as duly authorized agents, officers or representatives of Declarant have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF 2 DECLARANT THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC. By Its By The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2009, by and the and for and on behalf of The Rottlund Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, by and on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public Its This Amendment is approved and consented to by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT By: William H. Droste, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA s The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2009, by William H. Droste and Amy Domeier, the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, for and on behalf of the City of Rosemount, a Minnesota corporation, by and on behalf of said corporation. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Rosemount 2875 145 Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 651- 423 -4411 3 And by: Amy Domeier, City Clerk Notary Public ATTACHMENT 1 J I- 0 tn E cr) OL ill 0 to Z 0 z 5 1-; N l4 'iNnowsoei r 0i 5 C) J.NOIA11'7F1 i_z w a i-0 La NI o <0 s, w 1— q- 9 0 4. n w Ui w r I Site Locatioi. dlap Harmony Major PUL., Amendment (II Copyright 2009, Dakota County Map Date: August 12, 2009 1111111111111 alms •li••, A xV l 1 CRAM MIMI II iiiiii IFIri Hill 1111/1111 IIIII i' 41 11111•11. I\ Gila7Ck lartii :11 Il 1.11111111 41.4. 7,.. 71 ..N. ril ite -11 ip i r 1111111111 cam' cilia MEI 111111111111 •aiiiii •11111•111 11111111i linili ilt111 ....,-,,,,,s _:11.iilli Elt1111111 111111111V: rasa •i•iall ••f•li RAMIS 114E11 OM•• 0 i ll=..•.•;,. 1,, ;II 1 sir iU;eZT.JAII ii Z 0 0 t >h W:3 Ul LLJ tn 0 4 9 1-- ow cx L.., oz u o 10 NW i eiNnowsoi Z 0 5 1-- _A J.NOIAIIVI-1 om 5 Ea 8 <0 —1 L11 i—