Consider Density Transitioning Options for North Brook Meadows (Project No. 21-131); Case of Platinum Land LLC

On September 28, 2021, the City Council approved, with contingencies, the Preliminary Plat for North Brook Meadows.  The project is located at the southwest corner of Nowthen Boulevard and 175th Avenue NW (the "Subject Property") and includes seventy-seven (77) single family residential lots that will be served by municipal sanitary sewer and water.  One of the focal points of discussion during the Preliminary Plat review was on the density transitioning and, more specifically, whether it should be accomplished via an outlot (separate from the individual residential lots) owned by a Home Owners Association (HOA) or if it should be part of each of the residential lots and encumbered by an easement granted to and enforced by the City.  Staff was directed to circle back with this topic for further direction by City Council at a future meeting.

Notification is not required.

There are pros and cons for either option that are outlined below:

Platted as Separate Outlot
Pros:

• Distinctly separate from new residential lots, which generally means less likelihood for tree removal and/or improvements (sheds, pools, etc.) in the transition area.
• Creates a better sense of buffering for existing neighborhood, again due to being separate from the new residential lots.

Cons:

• As a separate parcel, there is no incentive for owners of the new lots to maintain the transition area and after the initial two (2) years (which are covered with a Maintenance Surety via a Development Agreement), no way to ensure replacement of dead trees if the HOA is defunct.
• With no other purpose for an HOA other than to own/maintain this outlot, there is a high probability of it going tax forfeit.  If that happens, either the City would end up with it (along with the responsibilities of maintenance) or some private party may acquire it, which could present other issues.

Platted as Part of Lots and Encumbered by Easement
Pros:

• As part of each new lot, greater incentive for the new property owners to maintain the transition area (trees and ground cover).
• More likely to be irrigated, which is certainly beneficial at least in terms of initial establishment of the tree plantings.

Cons:

• Enforcement of restrictions more challenging for the City.  Possible issues that could arise include:
  • Tree removal to extend 'usable' turf area.
  • Placement of sheds, pools, etc. within the transition area.
• No way to ensure future home owners (not necessarily the original owner, but subsequent buyers) are aware of the restrictions (even though an easement would be recorded against the property).  A Fact Sheet or something similar could be developed, but the City would have no way of ensuring that subsequent buyers are provided this information. 

All costs associated with this item are the responsibility of the Applicant.

Direct Staff and Applicant to proceed with either platting the density transitioning corridor as a separate outlot (owned by an HOA) or to include it as part of each of the proposed new, adjacent lots encumbered by a restrictive easement in favor of the City, based on discussion.  If the City Council determines that an easement is appropriate, it may be beneficial to also direct the Applicant to draft a restrictive easement for consideration as well as a one page Fact Sheet highlighting the purpose of the easement and the "do's and don'ts" within said easement.

Motion to direct Staff and Applicant to proceed with:

• Platting the Density Transitioning corridor as a separate outlot, which would be owned and maintained by an HOA.

-or-

• Include the Density Transitioning corridor as part of each of the proposed new, residential lots and encumber it with a restrictive easement in favor of the City.