The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-11-26 PACKET 07.2.STAFF REPORT CASE: C12 -033 ITEM: 7.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 11/26/12 APPLICATION APPLICANT: D.R. Horton, Inc. — Minnesota REQUEST: Residential development concept plan for approximately 133 lots for detached single - family homes on 61.5 acres of land. SITE DATA LOCATION: Between Military Road and 70th Street, approximately a third of mile west of Keats Avenue (CSAH 19) ZONING: AG -2, Agricultural District CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: NORTH: Agricultural EAST: Agricultural /Historic Commercial SOUTH: Residential WEST: Agricultural SIZE: 39.5 acres DENSITY: Proposed 2 .16 to 2. dw elling units per acre RECOMMENDATION Review. COTTAGE GROVE PLANNING DIVISION Planning Staff Contact: John McCool, Senior Planner, 651 - 458 -2874 or 0 mccool(a)cottage- g rove. org GACITYFILES\12 CITYFILES\033C D.R. Horton Concept Plan \C12 -033 D.R. Horton Concept Plan SR cover 11- 26- 12.docx Planning Staff Report D.R. Horton Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Proposal D.R. Horton has submitted two concept sketches for a residential development in the Upper Ravine area of the East Ravine. The concept sketches propose the platting of about 134 lots for detached single - family homes on approximately 61.5 acres of land. The property is located north of 70th Street (CSAH 22) and approximately one -third of a mile west of Keats Avenue (CSAH 19). The developer will later apply for a rezoning, preliminary plat, final plat, and final planned devel- opment overlay plan once the City has provided feedback on the overall concept plan. D.R. Horton's two concept sketches are attached. a., D.R. Horton ly Residential Development Concept Plan November2012 .1, Rose of �! w L wi win c >� Location Map Planned Development Overlay (PDO) Plan Procedure The Planned Development Overlay District (PDO) is a tool that will permit and encourage flexibil- ity of site planning with appropriate safeguards and controls. The PDO does not repeal the underlying zoning classifications) of property, but provides some variation to the underlying re- quirements only if the result of the variation is equal or superior to the results achieved with the underlying zoning standards. It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the proposed PDO accomplishes one or more of the following: Planning Staff Report— D. R. Norton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 2 of 11 A. Introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land, natural fea- tures, and open space through clustering of structures, facilities, amenities, and activities for public benefit; B. Improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities through a more efficient and effective use of land, open space, and public facilities through assembly and development of land in larger parcels; C. Provide mixed land use and land use transitions in keeping with the character of adjacent land uses in harmony with the comprehensive plan and the underlying zoning districts; and D. Provide for the clustering of land parcels for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to a parcel by parcel, piecemeal approach and to maintain these parcels by central management including integrated and joint use of parking, maintenance of open space and similar features, and harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. Some examples of the design guidelines for residential development under the PDO zoning are: • Minimum roof pitch must be an 8:12 ratio. • Porches on the front of the dwelling must extend a minimum of six feet from the principal structure. • Exterior wall material changes at corners must wrap around the corner a minimum of 24 inches. • Residential garage doors must have raised panels or similar design features. • Homes having identical architectural design must be a minimum of five lots away from each other. • The front elevation must include a minimum of 30 percent coverage of brick, natural, or artificial stucco material(s) on front elevation. • All residences must be part of the homeowners association. • Landscaping must exceed city ordinance minimums. The Planning Commission is asked to comment on the concept plan and determine if the devel- oper's proposal adequately addresses zoning standards and how their plan is equal to or better than those achieved by the applicable zoning standard. Direction from the Planning Commission and City Council will help the developer in modifying their development plan before filing planning applications for formal review and action. This will also provide the developer an opportunity to prepare responses to design alternatives and to document the benefits of incorporating flexibility from zoning standards. The findings ultimately necessary for city approval must include, but not be limited, to the following: A. The PDO plan is consistent with the intent of the PDO requirements specified in the City Codes. B. The PDO plan meets the standards required for a conditional use. C. Each stage of the PDO plan can exist as an independent unit. Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 3 of 11 D. The area surrounding the PDO plan can be planned and developed in coordination and substantial compatibility with the proposed PDO plan. E. Any density bonus is consistent with the density bonus criteria of the PDO ordinance. F. Any variation of flexibility from zoning standards most similar in function to the proposed PDO plan must produce results equal to or better than those achieved by the applicable zoning standard. G. Other factors related to the project as the Planning Commission and City Council deem relevant. The Planning Commission and City Council may attach such conditions to their actions as they determine necessary to accomplish the purposes of this section. Conformance to the East Ravine Master Plan The proposed concept sketch plans are both generally consistent with the East Ravine Master Plan, which was adopted in June 2006. A comparison between the D. R. Horton development plan and the East Ravine Plan is shown below: CONCEPT SKETCH "A" 1 ` ti++ fir. / �. ) ✓ 7 E Y yr I y� y I �\ ^G ' F Vs pl 1 L WOZNIAK PROPERTY. - - ,. r I t (err I! uu i l 1 1 1 I}( Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 4 of 11 17 ,yl - L j A K . �Y a Ix N tl Yi \� v � N ., n (J HdYU/]ah SiPFFT - WOZNIAK PROPERTY Soriwr:_e G.ove•. MN -. - The two plans are consistent in the following ways: i li .� I r fV , f e 1 • The East Ravine Plan primarily identifies the future development of the applicant's property for detached single- family homes. The developer is proposing detached single - family lots for the property, which is consistent with the East Ravine Master Plan and the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Upper Ravine Area for East Ravine M it �. 17 ,yl - L j A K . �Y a Ix N tl Yi \� v � N ., n (J HdYU/]ah SiPFFT - WOZNIAK PROPERTY Soriwr:_e G.ove•. MN -. - The two plans are consistent in the following ways: i li .� I r fV , f e 1 • The East Ravine Plan primarily identifies the future development of the applicant's property for detached single- family homes. The developer is proposing detached single - family lots for the property, which is consistent with the East Ravine Master Plan and the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Upper Ravine Area for East Ravine Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 5 of 11 The development layout shows a minimum 40 -foot wide green strip along 70th Street. This buffer area includes landscaping and earth- berms. The City has required a 75 -foot wide averaged buf- fer strip along these minor arterial roadways for other projects in the East Ravine area. The proposed open space shown on the concept plan is at the end of a public street that pro- vides public view into the South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) property. This private open space is in the general area where a future neighborhood park (a minimum of five acres) is proposed. Trail connections and landscaped islands are proposed and are acceptable to the City. Entrance features and landscaping are recommended at the 70th Street and Joliet Avenue main entrance. • Access is consistent with city and county transportation standards. • Public street connectivity to adjacent parcels is provided for improving accessibility. • Management of the site's storm water for rate and water quality is conceptually correct. Planning Considerations Property Characteristics The 61.5 -acre site is currently farmland. There are no buildings on any of the three parcels. The site has a moderately sloping terrain with drainage generally flowing toward the SWWD's parcel. Trees and brush exist along the east boundary line of the property. An aerial photo of the property is shown below: 2009 Aerial Photo \ �� q SfNA �. si10 I � ' GaMI SNW q � p Ilexlan G —1. NMIJMC�an � ��• ?° � l� N � t l l I i a> � Sy �� :OU , 4 � 2009 Aerial Photo Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 6 of 11 Zoning The developer is proposing an R -3, Low Density Residential zoning district, for the underlying zoning. The R -3 District already represents approximately 53 percent of the residential zoning district within the urban developed areas of the community. The R -3 development standards are: Minimum lot area Minimum lot width Minimum building setbacks Minimum front yard setback Minimum rear yard setback Corner lot width Minimum side yard setback on a corner lot Current R -3 Standards 10,000 sq. ft. minimum 75 feet 10 feet (house side) 5 feet (attached garage side) 30 feet 35 feet 85 feet 20 feet Proposed PDO 10,000 sq. ft. average 75 feet (average) 10 feet 5 feet 20 feet (house) 25 feet (garage) 35 feet 98 feet (average) 20 feet When the East Ravine Master Plan was adopted in June 2006, the City also adopted an ordin- ance that established six new residential zoning districts. The R -2A, Residential Single - Family District, was intended for detached single - family homes on an 85 -foot minimum lot width and 11,000 square foot minimum lot area. Because of the economic downturn in the last five to six years and that the housing market for new houses tends to be smaller dwellings on smaller lots, the developer is proposing to rezone their property from AG -2, Agricultural District, to R -3, Single Family Residential District with a Planned Development Overlay. The proposed R -3 District and its development standards as highlighted above will be the foundation in determining the unit base count for the site. The PDO is intended to promote creativity and land use efficiencies that will still be compatible with the future land uses in terms of need, convenience, and service. It is the developer's responsibility to demonstrate that the proposed planned development overlay plan accomplishes one or more of the following: 1. Introduces flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land, natural features, and open space through clustering of structures, facilities, amenities, and activi- ties for public benefit; and 2. Improve the efficiency of the public streets and utilities through a more efficient and effec- tive use of land, open space, and public facilities through assembly and development of land in larger parcels; and 3. Provide land use transitions in keeping with the character of adjacent land uses in har- mony with the comprehensive plan and the underlying zoning districts; and 4. Provide for the clustering of land parcels for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to a parcel by parcel, piecemeal approach and to maintain these parcels by central management including integrated and joint use of parking, maintenance of open space and similar features, and harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. Once the City provides the developer with comments and direction, the developer will file a re- zoning application for the underlying zoning classification and Planned Development Overlay. Applications must also be filed for the City's review of a preliminary plat and final PDO Plan. Planning Staff Report— D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 7 of 11 When these planning and zoning applications are approved by the City, the developer must file a final plat application for the City's review and approval. Density The developer's Concept Sketch "A" proposes 133 lots for detached single - family dwellings that results in 2.16 dwelling units per acre (gross land area). Subtracting the 92 feet of right -of -way for 70th Street (CSAH 22) and the Military Road right -of -way, the density increases to 2.31 dwelling units per acre. Deducting the proposed stormwater basins and public /private open spaces /park will slightly increase the net density, but not enough to be greater than three units per acre. This concept sketch proposes to preserve most of the existing trees in the northeast corner of the site and provides more public /private open space as compared to Concept Sketch "B." Concept Sketch "B" layouts 134 lots. This sketch plan provides 54 lots that are 85 feet wide along the east and north sides of SWWD's property. The rest of the lots are about 70 feet wide and are platted all the way to the site's east boundary line, which will require removal of some trees in the northeast corner of the site. Both concept sketches are consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation as documented in the City's Future Vision 2030 Comprehensive Plan. A Low Density Residential land use designation describes this land use as being in the metropolitan urban service area (MUSA) at gross densities of one to four units per acre. Staff finds the proposed density con- forming to the approved development policies for the East Ravine Master Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area. Access /Transportation The Horton project proposes one street connection along 70th Street (CSAH 22). This access is across from Joliet Avenue, which has a collector street roadway jurisdictional classification. The future alignment of Ravine Parkway is a short distance north of this site. Access to all residential lots are from local streets. The local streets have 60 -foot wide right -of- ways. This right -of -way width is consistent with the East Ravine Plan and city ordinance require- ments. The concept plan also proposes a 92 -foot right -of -way dedication north of the section line, which is about the center line of 70th Street. A green space a minimum of 40 feet wide is proposed to be along the rear lot line of the minimum 170 -foot lot depths that have frontage along 70th Street. A sidewalk is proposed on one side of the local streets within the project. City staff is recom- mending and the developer has agreed to a sidewalk on both sides of the entrance roadway (Joliet Avenue) connecting to 70th Street, but only for that segment of roadway between 70th Street and the street labeled Street A. This will provide better safety and pedestrian mobility at the main entrance of this neighborhood. Two future roadway connections are proposed to serve other adjoining parcels. The northerly extension will cross the future trail corridor once Military Road is abandoned. This roadway will eventually connect to Ravine Parkway. The easterly road extension is in the southeast corner of the site. Both future road extensions are best located to serve and logically provide access to fu- ture development. Temporary turn - arounds will be required only for the dead -ended street in the southeast corner of the site. A temporary turn - around is not required for the street at the north boundary line because a house will not front on this street within the Horton site. It is also re- Planning Staff Report — D. R. Norton's Concept Plan November 26. 2012 Page S of 11 quired and the developer has agreed that the street alignment on the westerly ten -acre parcel extend to the northwest corner of the site for purposes of connecting to a future street in the northeast corner of Newland Communities' site. An illustration of this street connection is shown below. Center landscaped islands in the center of the cul -de -sacs are required to be platted as outlots. The Homeowners Association (HOA) is required to own and maintain these parcels. A HOA provides people with shared neighborhood values and an opportunity to enforce regulations that will achieve neighborhood uniformity and values. For instance, a degree of conformity is often required in exterior appearance of single family homes and there are often time limits and /or restrictions to activities that city ordinances may not adequately address. City ownership and maintenance responsibilities for these outlots is not fair to the general public because these remnant parcels are generally integral to only that development and are not considered "public space." Berm and Landscape Buffer A minimum 40 -foot wide green space is shown as an easement for landscaping and berming along the rear lot line of each lot abutting 70th Street. The developer proposes that their home- owner association will be responsible for maintaining this green space. City staff did inform the developer that a buffer strip averaging 75 feet in width is required to be platted as an outlot along 70th Street and that a homeowners association must own and maintain these outlots. The devel- oper has agreed to this provision. Public and Private Open Space Concept Sketch "A" provides approximately 5.3 acres of land for public park/open space. The two largest areas of these parks /open spaces is west of the Joliet Avenue /Street A intersection and Joliet Avenue /Street B intersection. Trail corridors connecting to the SWWD property is also pro- Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 9 of 11 vided at the west end of Street C and at both ends of Street F. Concept Sketch "B" provides similar trail connections, but not as much park land. The Park Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan shows parks and open space for the SWWD's properties. Earlier this year, a park and trail plan for the Upper Ravine area was pre- pared. This illustration proposed a neighborhood park in the northeast corner of Newland Com- munities' 40 -acre parcel and close to Horton's ten -acre parcel on the west side of the SWWD property. Both of Horton's concept plans provide adequate trailway connection opportunities. The developer has expressed concerns that the distance between the proposed neighborhood park and residential lots in the southeast corner of their project is greater than one -half mile. City staff discussed with the developer the intentional concept that public roadways would abut large expanses of open spaces to provide public views and accessibility. This concept was thought to be better than public open spaces behind residential lots that tend to only benefit ad- joining homeowners because public access and views from roadways are obscured by residential structures. An excerpt from the East Ravine Master Plan showing this concept is shown below. City staff and the developer discussed the merits of public frontage for parks and open space and recognize that constructing a public street with lots only on side of the street is costly for any type of development and eventual reconstruction. The developer agreed to evaluate the possibility of increasing the lineal frontage along the west side of Joliet Avenue closest to the SWWD property. The landscaped islands are unique and provide an attractive setting in the cul -de -sacs. A public walkway will continue to exist along 70th Street. Additional trail connections are pro- posed within and along the perimeter of the SWWD's properties to link future neighborhoods and park amenities. The future public park plan for the Upper Ravine area in the East Ravine is shown below. Planning Staff Report — D. R. Norton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 10 of 11 a�iA m m ~ &a m Upper East Ravine Parks and Trail Plan Utilities The City's trunk sanitary sewer is located within the future alignment of Ravine Parkway which is an east -west alignment in the northwest corner of Horton's site and in Military Road. Developing the first phase of Horton's site will require connecting into the existing trunk sanitary sewer lo- cated in Military Road. Norton's future phases in the northwest corner of their site will jointly use a sanitary sewer that will also serve the Newland's property. The city's water trunk water main is located on the northeast corner of 70th Street and Joliet Avenue South. This trunk water main must be extended into Horton's site. Both city utilities are adequately sized to serve Horton's site and other properties within the Upper Ravine area. East Ravine Design Standards — Joint Workshop On August 3, 2011, the Planning Commission, Economic Development Authority and City Council members held a joint workshop session to discuss the East Ravine design standards that were adopted with the approval of the East Ravine Master Plan in 2006. Attendees were informed that some developers and landowners within the East Ravine area believe some key elements of the East Ravine Master Plan (e.g.; Ravine Parkway, lot sizes /widths, buffer strips along arterial road- ways, roadway connections, setbacks, etc.) are not conducive to current new residential devel- opment or new housing construction markets. The attendees acknowledged that the economic conditions has adversely impacted growth for many communities and generally recognized that some flexibility to the East Ravine development standards might be considered. Future Public Park Plan for Upper Ravine Area of East Ravine Planning Staff Report — D. R. Horton's Concept Plan November 26, 2012 Page 11 of 11 The group was generally okay with the concept for reducing the 30 -foot minimum front yard set- back to 25 feet and many considered reducing the ten -foot minimum side yard setbacks. There was no direction given about reducing the 11,000 square foot minimum lot area and 85 -foot minimum lot widths for detached single - family dwellings, but the group was open to the idea of allowing some flexibility to development standards that were initially developed in 2006. The pro- posed Ravine Parkway was clearly an important element for future development within the Upper Ravine area and public views into the SWWD's open space and future neighborhood and com- munity park amenities were encouraged to be preserved. The group reiterated the importance of creating uniform buffer strips along arterial roadways so that an irregular array of fence materials and private back yards would not easily be visible. Since the joint meeting in August 2011, the City has reduced the park fee in lieu of land dedica- tion from $4,200 to $3,200 and the major road fee was reduced by approximately 20 percent for single - family development. Suggested Revisions 1. Temporary turn - around is constructed at the dead -ended street located at the southeast corner of the site. 2. Subdividing the property includes the platting of an outlot paralleling and abutting 70th Street. This outlot shall be an average of 75 feet in width and graded with undulating earth -berms and densely landscaped. An underground irrigation system shall be provided for all turf areas. The developer provides options for how maintenance could be accommodated. 3. The cul -de -sac and lot layout on the ten -acre parcel west of the SWWD property shall be modified to provide a future street connection at the north end of the parcel. With this street connection, a cul -de -sac street is not necessary on the ten -acre parcel. The proposed future street connections crossing Military Road and easterly to the Cedarhurst Mansion property are acceptable. 4. Landscaped islands shall be provided in the center of cul -de -sacs. The islands will be platted as outlots. The homeowners association must own and maintain these outlots. 5. A homeowners association must be created for this development. 6. A sidewalk is constructed on the east and west sides of Joliet Avenue located between 70th Street and Street A. 7. The minimum front yard setback for the living area of a dwelling must not be less than 25 feet and the minimum front yard setback of the attached garage must not be less than 30 feet. A minimum 7.5 -foot side yard setback is acceptable. Prepared by: Attachments: Concept Plan John McCool, AICP Aerial Photo Senior Planner Future Parks and Open Spaces Cottage Grove — Upper Ravine Proposed Standards Goebel & Wozniak Parcels Introduction: From 2004 -2006 the City of Cottage Grove set upon a goal of envisioning an area of the city that would be known as the East Ravine. From this process Resolution No. 06 -111 was adopted approving guidelines and policies for detached single family residential development in the East Ravine Area. One of the core objectives of this resolution is "ensuring that high quality single family residential development occurs in the East Ravine area in order to provide adequate property tax base to support public services and infrastructure needed to serve development ". Since 2006 the housing market has seen some drastic changes that have completely altered the way land is developed and homes are sold today. Our goal in these Proposed PUD Standards for the Goebel and Wozniak Properties is to identify the spirit and intent of the East Ravine Master Plan and its Guidelines and Policies and to adapt them to today's housing market. Our hope is that these measures can retain the city's goals and ideals of high quality single family homes for the area while providing standards that allow developers and builders to feel confident that their projects in the area can be market competitive. Proposed Standards: Lot Standards: Minimum Lot Width: Minimum Lot Area: Side Yard Setbacks: Front Yard Setback: Rear Yard Setback: Max. Impervious Surface: 65' (75' Avg.)* 8,450 sf (10,000 sf Avg.) ** 7.5' 20' House, 25' Garage * ** 35' 50% * Lot Width measured at setback. Density for a site may not exceed that which is achievable by using a 75' wide lot. Developers will have flexibility to illustrate unit count at a 75' wide average lot to determine overall lot count and then provide a smaller lot average width in exchange for expanded open space, tree preservation, etc. ** Developable areas of common ownership (excluding public property) will be spread equally across all lots and used in average lot area calculations. * ** Garages with doors perpendicular to the right of way would be allowed to be within 20 feet of the front lot line. Differing house and garage setbacks will encourage house forward designs. 1. All proposed areas of common ownership shall be HOA owned and maintained. 2. All public stormwater treatment facilities shall have adequate drainage and utility easements over them for continued use and maintenance by the city. Stormwater treatment basins shall be provided in outlots and deeded over to the city for ownership and maintenance. 3. 70th Street (CSAH 22) right -of -way width north of the Section line is required to be 92 feet. 4. Entry roads off of 70 Street from Jensen Avenue South & Joliet Avenue shall be 70' ROW until the first intersections inside the proposed developments. Sidewalk is required on one side of street. S. All local streets shall have 60' ROW width within the proposed developments. 6. A40' Landscape Buffer Easement shall be placed along the 70 Street ROW. This buffer should provide screening to the proposed residents utilizing elements of undulating earth berms and landscaping. 7. No fencing is allowed within the 40' Landscape Buffer Easement along 70 Street. Fencing along this buffer shall be of uniform design, no chain link is allowed. Architectural Standards: 1. Front elevation architectural features should be incorporated on homes. A variety of covered entries, covered porches, columns, garage doors, window sizes and styles, roof styles (i.e. gable, hip, dormer, pitches), and siding details is suggested. 2. Front elevation materials should include, but are not limited to, vinyl, steel, aluminum, cementitious or hard board lap, shake, vertical board and batten, stone, brick, and stucco. 3. For single family structures, a minimum of 10 percent of the front facade, exclusive of windows, doors, and garage doors must be covered by brick, stone, stucco, or cementitious or hard board siding. 4. Brick and stone front facades must wrap around the corners. 5. All covered porches or covered entries, if proposed, must extend a minimum of four feet from the principal structure. Covered porches are not required on all homes. Covered porches or covered entries may be over either a concrete stoop or cedar porch. 6. All residential garage doors visible from a street must consist of decorative detailing such as raised panels, decorative hardware or windows that extend across the width of the top garage door panel. 7. Attached Garage Size —A minimum of 440 square feet. 8. Maximum height of building shall be 35' as measured from the top of foundation. 9. Individuals, builders or groups of builders shall not construct single - family home styles having substantially similar appearance from the street to other single - family homes within one lot on each side, directly across or diagonally across from the same home (5:1 ratio). 10. Where vinyl, aluminum, or steel siding is installed a low or no maintenance trim must be used on windows, doors, and building corners. Q O f2 C'3 °� f6 N v O Q 0 O � O O L O 2 V .. t. • v1 � a . , o � - i = II ,9g 4Q m F F Noi �4 b(p 3t0 r:10 o 1 N v r o a . x Y 'ot N N V E s w N , Z O T is D•R -HOMN* iinrzoiz ft�rxeaiu+s C dmLm « CO. HWY 22t WOZNIAK PROPERTY COTTAGE: GROVE,,MN CONCEPT SKETCH "B" �►� ii��u� ui�ii� u'.y� l CONCEPT DATA Proposed ZonIna POOR -31 �7 \ Gross 511. Area; 015ac *13 witw11 Woznlak West 08ocm K { �_65r —r 10 q Woznlak East 517aoes *g g lo bll ROW 40 ac w19 7 �• *7 70th Street 1 3 lacres 7 - _ _ '! MlllmrVMcf: Uwes 1 ,� � w6 Net Developable Area: 575a 1 c .8 a,5 `�. `� w s `F 5 Proposed Lots; 134 lots 53 @85'wldex 140'deeplypkal R78 j w4 / \ 1 *4 81 @70'wldex 140'deePlyplcal "1. *g O�J P roposed Standards: 77 io - �' *g i. 25'front setback - House _ w3 /[ /\ 9 %\ t2 30'lront setback - Garage door c *g / / i 7.5'17.5'Slde Setbacks 170'1015) 10710'Slde Setbacks(85'lols) t / w2 /7 /�\ 7 25'Sldesetback @ Corner Lots (all) " ��' �' • 30'Rear Yard Setback 7/ 12 Gross Den slty: 11a pn /ec * �., i6 ' i Net D Ity 133 Unja c ,.� I' / x / .�.1 ta23rzL can u q vond 5 T 7 ` 4 '* s ,` b - Reglonal Stormwater Treatment 1 _ / pond exPaml F .n_ &ark ro Wor: an C s 9 70 10 1 1 11 17 0 •i v. 3 15 N ` s 8 ss 13 I, ' 7 1 e - - - e 11 s 10 6 t *S 5 _. 70 w4 ,r 10 9 y 1 ., �. ` � ••�1 \'rte "'*11 3 8 , 1 *3 7 w12 1 1� 3 �w2 1 a PaoJ 1. 2 3 4 Pand w i 2 7 3 4 5 7 1 - Heim &Van Buller x 1Jai*t1 bYVI a l alo lma)� — . CO.fHWY 22 L 70thfi @ ,.y:' WOZNIAK PROPERTY 7 ' "r�.•- , ' " "` COTTAGE GROVE, MN i� I Ir � AM@ ME TRATIVE CRO PROPOSED NW BUFF *40' WIDE BUFFER EASEMENT * UNDULATING BERM OF VARYING HEIGHT WITH LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS * BERM SLOPES VARY (3:1 MAX) *NO FENCING ALLOWED WITHIN BUFFER EASEMENT Front Lot Line • 30' RO � V Street 20' 60 Front Setback to porch Typical House Newland' COMMUNITIES AT THE HFARF OF GREAr LIVING D•R•HORMN ®N® 0' 20' 40' 60' W a 20,2 WOZNIAK & GOEBEL PROPERTIES Westwood COTTAGE G O E, '"' R v MN (min.) Rear Lot Line 92'R.O.W. 40' y • Buffer asement Y �I + Undulating Variety of y °' Berm (4:1 Slope 70th Landscape f + -W' Shown) Street Plantings — ti Ditch LEGEND O Future Park Service Area O Future Rest Area (Historic & Educational Markers) Trail & Parkway Access j Future Park & Open Space ® Future Park & Open Space Storm Water O Regional Basin Area (Restored prairie and wetlands) Restored Oak Savanna Existing Trail -- Future Trail I— r] o 0 o Future East Ravine Pkwy. Ilk b, 4 IF Pro G r 1 v \ ' ii X Y .tar r J. se u� �l' t 1 Westwood 1 4N�> 0 0 mi 1/8 mi 1/4 mi 3/8 mi r , 2j 4 r Ord I � i a ti Ii Future Community ` l r » % neymo sr Park N W F �� Wat_r8 nA�ea rd. Fast Ravine Parkway Alignment aesir c av7r3t`��'�.} Z " iesraE t m � •. Y — t � r. 4/20112 Upper East Ravine Parks and Trail Plan