Review Concept Plan for Pearson Farm; Case of Capstone Homes

The purpose of this case is to provide preliminary feedback for a future plat currently known as Pearson Farm. This is not an official application at this time, but does merit a policy discussion on several aspects of the proposed subdivision:

1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment (and subsequently a Zoning Amendment)
2. Use of Planned Unit Development District
   • Lot Sizes
   • Setbacks
   • Open space
3. Mandatory Environmental Review
4. Park Dedication and Trail Fees (cash contribution or specified improvements)
5. Cost Share of Trunk Infrastructure
6. Street Access to Alpine Drive (location, alignment, sight lines)

Notification is not required at this time, but will occur with future steps.

As this is a conceptual plan at this point, Staff is forwarding at this stage to introduce the concept early, especially in light of mandatory environmental review required by State Law. The Developer desires initial feedback on the concept before starting the official review process. The entire review process (City, State, Watershed, etc.) may mean a construction start date of approximately July 2017 or later.

The following is a synopsis of key issues and opportunities associated with the aforementioned subdivision processes and requirements.

Comprehensive Plan Amendment

The proposed concept appears generally in line with the Comprehensive Plan, which guides this area for a mix of medium density residential (3-7 units per acre) and a small portion of high density residential (7-15 units per acre). However, the boundaries of the Land Use Districts do not match exactly that of the proposed development concept. The Comprehensive Plan will need to be adjusted slightly to reflect the proposal.

Planned Unit Development

The site is comprised of a mix of R-2 Residential and R-3 Residential to match the Comprehensive Plan addressed above. While a majority of the proposal appears to meet minimum zoning standards, there areas that may deviate slightly from minimums. In addition, a significant amount of open space, of value to the project, may impact net density. Finally, the site is being planned as a whole, and phased over time. Due to these layers of review, a Planned Unit Development may be an appropriate tool to employ at this time.

Mandatory Environmental Review

Due to the number of units, which is a mix of attached and unattached units, State Rules require this project to completed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. A brief synopsis of this process is attached to this case.

Park Dedication and Trail Fees

A total of 334 residential units (estimated), of single family homes + townhomes are proposed to be platted in phases over the next several years.  Park Dedication (cash contribution) and Trail Fees would typically be calculated per the existing fee schedule at the time of development of each phase.  Preliminary discussions with the Developer indicate they may be requesting some Park Dedication credit for private open space within the proposed plat.  Staff has explained the longstanding policy of not requiring or encouraging public 'pocket parks', but rather planning for, and providing Park Dedication and Trail Fee credit for building trail connections within the community, and investing in larger, quality neighborhood and community parks.  The Developer may still include private open space and park-like amenities within the subdivision; however the Park and Recreation Commission is likely to recommend either that Park Dedication (and Trail Fees) be satisfied in cash, or specified improvements that have accessible, recreational value to the community outside of the interior of the proposed subdivision.  Examples of specified, Park Dedication eligible improvements include:

• Pedestrian underpass below Alpine Drive connecting Lake Itasca Community Park with the proposed plat and existing trail(s)
• Segments of the proposed greenway trail between Lake Itasca Park and The COR (within or adjacent to the proposed plat)
• Improvements to Lake Itasca Park, E.g. boardwalk or pier connection to the lake, canoe/kayak station, parking areas, or park development plans
• Trailside improvements to the trail alongside Puma St., which is also an element of the Mississippi River Trail (and U.S. Bikeway #45)
• Any number of potential enhancements/development to the park system in The COR, Eg. splash pad, site development for the water-centric park, or the proposed Municipal Plaza (Happy Days location)—all of which would be of benefit to new residents of Capstone's proposed project.

Arterial Infrastructure Cost Share

The development of the Capstone project, and the City's future business park, will result in the need to construct/ upgrade arterial infrastructure located along Bunker Lake Boulevard/ Puma Street.  Resolution of cost-share agreements for the proposed arterial infrastructure improvements is outstanding and will be subject of negotiation. 

On 12/13/2016, the Council authorized Bolton & Menk to update their arterial infrastructure study for this area, to aid that discussion.  That study should be completed, and back to the Council, by early March (potentially February).  Capstone is paying for 50% of that update study. 

As outlined with the Council in the 12/13/2016 work session, the City should anticipate the need (or request) to fund the initial cost of arterial infrastructure related to the new business park that impacts the Hageman Holdings properties. Hagemann Holdings has indicated that they would oppose any additional assessments at this time.  Likewise, Capstone representatives have indicated to staff they would not be able to move forward with their proposed development without sharing the cost of the arterial infrastructure needed to reach the development. 

In order to have a constructive conversation (i.e. begin the negotiation process) on cost-share agreements for arterial infrastructure, it was recommended that the Bolton & Menk Study be updated.  This will help the City better understand what financial obligation may accrue to the City.  At this point, staff's preliminary estimate is that there may be a $700K-$1.6M City obligation (if split 50:50).  The EDA has roughly funds available (EDA Fund, Loan Fund, and County HRA) that could support this level of obligation for the purpose of extending improvements through the new industrial park.

Street Access to Alpine Drive 

Public Works and Engineering staff recommend elimination of the proposed location of the westerly most residential street's connection with Alpine Drive in the concept sketch submitted.  Alpine Drive as an arterial roadway is a higher speed local road, and a residential street connection should be examined carefully for appropriate sight lines. A cul de sac at this locale (south of Alpine) may be preferred.  The proposed location (within the Developer's concept sketch) of the residential street near the wetland and present low point in Alpine Drive may be suitable for the proposed pedestrian underpass—though preliminary engineering to ascertain its feasibility has not yet been performed.

Another street access opportunity to be considered would be the realignment of Puma Street, east, to line-up with the existing Okapi Street to the north of Alpine.  This could be physically facilitated as the City presently owns 4 acres at this location. This realignment may also yield an area of developable land to the west side of Puma street which could be factored into the suite of obligations and opportunities addressed and negotiated within the Development Agreement.

This case is being handled as part of normal staff duties.

No recommendation at this point. The concept has been reviewed by the Planning Commission (minutes attached), Park and Recreation Commission (minutes attached), and the Environmental Policy Board (minutes pending).

No action requested/recommended. Provide preliminary feedback on concept issues only.