Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-08-09 Council Work Session Agenda Packet CITY OF CORCORAN Council Work Session Agenda August 9, 2018 - 5:45pm 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Work Plan to Amendments to Development Rights and Open Space & Preservation Plats* 3. Unscheduled Items 4. Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Mary Matze through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: August 1, 2018 for the August 9, 2018 City Council Work Session RE: Work Plan for Amendments to Development Rights and Open Space & Preservation Plats (City File 18-014) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:N/A 1.Background Corcoran uses a development rights program as a method of managing development density in rural areas and Metropolitan Urban Service Areas (MUSA) where municipal services are planned but have not yet been provided. Council asked staff to review the development rights policy and the Open Space & Preservation Plat ordinance to understand opportunities for making it easier for property owners to develop their land. 2.Analysis Development Rights Program Corcoran’s development rights program was developed with the intention of managing development rural areas and areas where municipal services are planned but have not yet been provided. Within the MUSA, developments that are planned for City services are restricted according to minimum lot sizes provisioned by the Zoning Ordinance and density standards identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The number of lots created outside the MUSA that are not planned for City services are restricted by the number of development rights. However, because the sanitary sewer phasing plan is a 20+ year extension to serve the MUSA area, the Code does allow an interim solution for landowners in the Urban Reserve (UR) zoning district with development rights to cluster development in advance of sewer extension. Historically, the development rights program has been more difficult to administer than a minimum lot size and tracking has been a challenge over the years due to inconsistent record-keeping at City Hall. Over the years numerous property owners have disputed development rights assignments because the number is incorrect on the map, or development rights were transferred between property owners without being tracked at City Hall. However, we believe that current development map is as accurate as possible and the City Code provides an appeal process if a landowner can show that the map is in error. Agenda Item: 2 Development Rights and OS&P Memo 2 August 9, 2018 Streets The development rights program was seen in part as a tool to incentivize property owners to construct and pave streets. While installation of a gravel road makes it easier for the property owner to develop their land, it comes at a significant annual cost to the City. Annual costs of maintaining gravel roads is higher than annual maintenance of paved roads. • Is it the Council’s goal to pave roads in Rural Residential areas? Does the current policy of incentivizing higher density (more lots) for subdivisions that provide paved roads still make sense? Density and Lot sizes The Rural Residential areas are designated by Metropolitan Council as Diversified Rural, which allows development at 1 unit per 10 acres. This density minimum is consistent with the current policy for Rural Residential subdivisions with paved streets. The Zoning Ordinance allows property owners served by unpaved streets to develop their property at a rate of 1 unit per 30 acres and those properties served by paved streets to develop at 1 unit per 10 acres. If a property owner with an unpaved street wishes to pave a street, they may do so to increase the number of development rights. If Council wishes to update the policy to allow all land owners to develop at 1 unit per 10 regardless of whether or not roads are paved, consistent with Metropolitan Council policy, they would have two options to achieve this strategy: a. All land owners to develop at 1 unit per 10 regardless of whether or not roads are paved. b. Create a minimum lot size for the Rural Residential and Urban Reserve District. Lot sizes clearly defines for staff, landowners and developers the minimum standards for development. A 10-acre minimum lot size clearly identifies how much land is needed for subdivision. This program is much easier to administer and understand. However, there are a number of challenges to updating the current policy: a. Updating the density standard in the development rights map would significantly change the policy that has been in place for the last 30 years. The program has some challenges, but landowners in rural Corcoran have made decisions based on this program. Changing it to a minimum lot size or minimum program would create winners and losers by allow large lot property owners that have not previously developed land to develop land at a greater density than their neighbors that subdivided property under the old policy (which allowed only one lot per 30 acres). b. Changing to a minimum lot size standard may allow landowners to further develop land that was planned as open space. The City allows developers to cluster homes on smaller lots without a conservation or deed restriction on the large lot intended as permanent open space. Allowing a minimum 10-acre lot size (consistent with Met Council density requirements) may result in increased density in the rural area and inefficient development Development Rights and OS&P Memo 3 August 9, 2018 that disrupts natural resource communities and prevents the city from providing sewered services in the future. Clustered development Council could revisit incentives for clustered development in exchange for development rights. The City currently incentivizes clustered development through the Open Space & Preservation Ordinance. However, there are a number of considerations that Council should discuss related to the standards in that Ordinance. Open Space & Preservation Ordinance In 2004, the City adopted an Open Space & Preservation (OS&P) Ordinance that increased development rights in exchange for the preservation of Open Space. The original OS&P Ordinance was seen as a way to preserve natural resources and farmland. This ordinance was updated in 2011 by a subcommittee to make it easier for property owners to develop their land, and removed many requirements for preservation of natural resources. Current staff was not a part of these discussions. The current Ordinance allows property owners to increase their development rights if they develop under the City’s Open Space & Preservation (OS&P) Ordinance. Under this Ordinance the developer may double or triple the number of units allowed on a site. The current ordinance (approved in 2011) requires that only 25% of the land on the property be preserved (permanently or temporarily) as open space, with 50% of dedicated open space preserved as upland. The definition of upland found in Section 915 of the City Code is “land not classified as a wetland or water body and is generally dry.” Section 940.050, Subd. 1(A) 3 of the City Code allows wetland restoration to be credited towards the required upland. “Wetland restoration (including abandonment of legally tiled areas) will be credited towards the 12.5% upland. One acre of restored wetland shall equal one acre of upland.” This language confusing and has been difficult to interpret on recent OSP applications and should be addressed as part of an ordinance update. It is not clear why the City would allow wetland restoration to count as upland. The 2011 Ordinance allows OS&P plats for land in greenway corridors, land with natural resources, or areas that are identified as “target areas” by the City. The ordinance also allows Council to approve OS&P plats if permanent preservation or restoration is proposed. The ordinance states that preservation and restoration areas shall follow the City’s adopted Design Standards for Preservation and Restoration lands. However, staff notes that while these items have been on the City’s work plan, the City has not: • Developed Design Standards for Preservation and Restoration; • Identified target areas for OS&P Plats. Updates to the OS&P Ordinance in 2011 eliminated standards that encouraged / required: • Permanent open space preservation • Preservation of natural resources Development Rights and OS&P Memo 4 August 9, 2018 • Smaller lot sizes (which allows more land to be preserved) • Higher levels of architectural design • Higher landscaping standards The 2011 OS&P updates focused instead on incentivizing construction of common well and septic. Essentially, without strong preservation and restoration standards, the OS&P standards allow an increased number of development rights without the benefits of meaningful natural resource protection. While the City wants to make land development easier, natural resource protection seems to be very important as well. Because Design Standards and Target Areas have not been developed, the City has accepted OS&P plats whenever requested by a subdivider. No management standards for natural resources, no buffer requirements (except for Shoreland and Wetland), no architectural standards, and no HOA standards have been enforced by the City. • Council should discuss whether or not the OS&P standards are achieving desired natural resource protection or if the OS&P plat is simply giving land owners more opportunities to develop their land. • Council should also discuss whether identifying OS&P target areas is still relevant and if Design Standards for Preservation and Restoration should be prioritized on the 2018 or 2019 Work Plan. Flexible Design Guidelines The current OS&P Ordinance does not comply with the Metropolitan Council policies for the Diversified Rural Areas, which does not allow for permanent preservation of land. The OS&P ordinance allows land to be temporarily or permanently preserved, and the developer is essentially allowed to develop at a greater density than 1 unit per 10 acres. While the Metropolitan Council’s policies support increased clustered density, they do not support permanent preservation of land. Metropolitan Council allows increased density via a “Flexible Development” policy. The reasoning behind this is that if the property owner chooses to subdivide the property with temporary preservation, further development of land is possible on the land in the future. This strategy gives the community and land owners the option to allow land to be preserved for future development and immediate preservation of natural resources. To mitigate the potential for increased density in the rural area, the City could consider adopting Metropolitan Council’s “Flexible Residential” design standards that allow for rural and large lot properties to develop at greater densities than 4 units per 40 acres (or 1 unit per 10 acres) by requiring subdivision designs that preserve land for future development. This strategy gives the community flexibility in that it: a. protects natural resources in the immediate future (until services can be provided); b. preserves land for more urban development in the future, if needed; c. gives the property owner an opportunity to develop the land at a higher density Development Rights and OS&P Memo 5 August 9, 2018 However, if this strategy is used the Metropolitan Council requires that communities develop ordinances that limit development to 25% of the developable land, reserving the other 75% of that land as open space that could be developed in the future. This is significantly more land that is preserved than under the 2004 and 2011 OS&P Ordinances. The following table compares the amount of land and the number of units that could be developed on a 40-acre lot according to the 2004 and 2011 OS&P Ordinances, and what could be developed under the Flexible design standards: Units allowed on a 40 Acre Parcel with 10 acres of unbuildable land and 30 acres of buildable land Unbuildable Acres Buildable Acres Total Required Preservation (Acres) Required Buildable Land to be Preserved (Acres) Max Units 2004 10 30 20 (50% of land) 5 (25% of total open space) 4.5 (150% bonus) 2011 10 30 10 (25% of land) 5 (50% of total open space) 9 (300% bonus) Met Council Flexible Design 10 30 23.5 (75% of developable land) 23.5 Unlimited / Determined by City Staff has included a graphic as an attachment showing a graphic demonstrating the above numbers. Additionally, changing the program will require that the City comply with the density standards (4 lots per 40 acres) for the Diversified Rural areas. Density bonuses would be required to comply with Met Council’s Flexible Design policies. If Council desires to improve the OS&P Ordinance to allow for increased development and preservation of natural resources, staff recommends updating the ordinance so that it achieves increased temporary preservation of land, strengthens design standards, and increases density bonuses for higher levels of design and natural resource management. This could be a modified form of the flexible design guidelines that requires less preservation of buildable land than the current Met Council policy, but more buildable land than currently preserved under the OS&P ordinance. Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the following items: a. Are paved streets still a priority for the Council? • Both the development rights program and the OS&P program require paved streets to maximize the development potential of a site. A landowner gets 1 per 10 acres if they Development Rights and OS&P Memo 6 August 9, 2018 are on a paved road and 1 per 30 acres if they are on a gravel road. The Council could simply shift to 1 per 10 acres regardless of whether or not a street is paved. • An OS&P development requires paved streets in the development and the Council policy is to require paved access to the site as well. Is this still a priority? The Council could eliminate the requirement for paved streets or clarify that they will only require pavement within the OS&P development not leading up to it. b. What are the concerns about the current OS&P ordinance? • The ordinance was drafted in 2004 and we had two OSP developments (Summerhill and Meadow Creek Estates). The recession happened, the ordinance was revised and now we have our first OSP proposal since 2005. We should be careful to separate the impacts of the recession from the ordinance standards. • Should roads be paved? • Are we giving density bonuses for the right things? • Should we give more density bonuses? • Are the design standards sufficient? • The design standards have a build-to line of 75 feet to keep structures closer to the street which would make it more cost effective for residents to connect to sewer and water in the future. Does that make sense given the timeline for possible future sewer service? (the original OS&P ordinance had standard setback requirements) • A PUD is required if a developer strays from the standards. c. What are the Council’s goals for the OS&P ordinance? • Originally, it was created to preserve natural resources and rural character. Is that still the goal? If not, what is the goal of the Ordinance? Summary Recommendations There are several issues with the Open Space and Preservation guidelines that the Council should consider. Staff feels that the primary issues that need to be address with the update are as follows: 1. Staff feels that maintaining the current policy of allowing 1 unit per 10 acres for paved roads and 1 unit per 30 acres for gravel road development is fair and reasonable given cost of providing services. Furthermore, changing this long-standing policy would create winners and losers for those property owners that have developed their land under the current ordinance. 2. The standards for OS & P plats should incorporate stronger natural resource protection and preservation and design requirements. Development Rights and OS&P Memo 7 August 9, 2018 3. The ordinance should require preservation of more open space than is currently preserved in the ordinance (The 2004 ordinance required 50% preservation, the Metropolitan Council requires 75% preservation and the current ordinance only requires 25% preservation). 4. Definitions related to the upland calculation should be clarified and wetland restoration should not be counted toward an upland calculation. The Council could provide direction to staff regarding specific ordinance amendments or ask for additional information to be brought back to a future work session. 3. Action Provide feedback to staff about the issues related to development rights and cluster developments. The Council should direct staff on how to proceed. Attachments 1. Design and Density Bonus Comparison 2004 and 2011 OSP Standards 2. Buildable land graphic 3. Flexible residential development handout from Met Council Design and Density Bonus Comparison 2004 and 2011 OSP Standards 2004 OSP Plat Current Code OSP Plat (2011 Update) Flexible Design Requirements Bonus ranges 5%-15% per bonus item (150% max) 150%-300% Determined by City Qualifying land Rural Residential and Urban Preserve All in Rural Residential and Urban Preserve, but prioritizes • Land with Greenway or Natural Resources by right • Other land may be approved by Council for permanent preservation Diversified Rural areas and as allowed by the City Minimum gross acreage of development 20 Acres No minimum No minimum Percent of land required to be dedicated as open space 50% (permanent) 25% (permanent or temporary) 75% of the developable land Percent buildable required as part of open space 25% of the dedicated acres must be buildable 50% of the open space must be buildable 100% of the open space must be buildable Bonus based on: • Public access • Park dedication • Providing additional land preservation • Preservation of Historic Buildings • Architectural covenants for building, landscaping, lighting and creation of a central meeting place • Natural resource preservation • Natural resource preservation along public streets • Permanent preservation vs. temporary preservation • Septic Services (Private vs. Community) • TBD Open space management standards Yes Land owners must follow “Design Standards for TBD Design and Density Bonus Comparison 2004 and 2011 OSP Standards 2004 OSP Plat Current Code OSP Plat (2011 Update) Flexible Design Requirements Preservation and Restoration”. Standards have not yet been developed or adopted by Council HOA Standards Yes None TBD Lot Standards Lot width 100 feet 200-300 feet, smaller lots allowed as part of PUD TBD Front Setbacks 50 feet 75-foot build-to line 100-foot setback along major streetways TBD Buffer zone 100 feet around lot None TBD Maximum impervious 25% None (except according to Shoreland Overlay District standards) TBD Design standards (emphasis on focal point, preservation of natural features, open space accessibility to residents, pedestrian corridors, native landscaping) Yes None TBD Architectural standards Yes None TBD Percent of preserved land required to be buildable. Total Required Preservation Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 08.09.2018 Development Rights and OS&P • Corcoran, MN OS & P Exhibit 2004 OS&P Existing Condition 2011 OS&P (current standards)Flexible Residential Requirements Wetland (10 acres) 40 Acre Parcel (10 acres unbuildable, 30 upland) 2004 2011 Flexible % Required to be preserved as open space 50% (20 acres)25% (10 acres)75% of buildable land (23.5 acres) % of preserved open space that must be buildable 25% (5 acres)50% (5 acres)100% Max number of units 3.15-4.5 (5%- 150% bonus) 4.5-9 units (150%- 300% bonus) Unlimited / defined by City This exhibit demonstrates the amount of land that would be available for development under the OS&P Ordinance from 2004, updates from 2011, and Met Council’s Flexible Design Guidelines. -20 acres available for development -20 acres Open Space Preservation -30 acres available for development -10 acres Open Space Preservation -6.5 acres available for development -23.5 acres of Open Space Preservation -10 acres wetland (not allowed to be counted toward Open Space Preservation) 30 acres of upland FLEXIBLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK FLEXIBLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EXAMPLES FOR THE DIVERSIFIED RURAL AREA Background Thrive MSP 2040 indicates that land use patterns in Diversified Rural communities are home to a variety of farm and non-farm land uses including very large-lot residential, clustered housing, hobby farms, and agricultural uses. Some Diversified Rural communities are also located in the Long-term Wastewater Service Area (LTSA). These areas are designated to ensure land availability to accommodate growth post-2040 at the edge of the urbanizing area. Purpose The purpose of flexible residential development ordinances and tools in these areas should be to preserve land for post-2040 growth and to accommodate the future extension of regional urban services. In August 2008, the Council adopted Flexible Residential Development Ordinance Guidelines for the Diversified Rural Area that describes the factors communities should take into account if they are considering allowing residential development at densities greater than 4 units per 40 acres in their communities. The Council has since incorporated these guidelines into Thrive MSP 2040. Function For those communities on the edge of the urbanizing area, designated as part of the LTSA, residential development ordinances should provide for interim land uses without precluding the opportunity for future development at densities of at least 3 units per net developable acre to ensure future, cost-effective and efficient regional wastewater treatment services. For areas outside of the LTSA, the Council also encourages the clustering of homes, particularly when communities are considering densities greater than 4 units per 40 acres. Communities should study and assess their landscapes to refine their development priorities. There may be areas within the community that contain an abundance of sensitive natural resources or that the community has identified as a greenway or conservation corridor. These areas may not be most suitable for future urbanization as the capability of the land to support development is low and constrained. In these cases, open space development or cluster development may be adapted to protect those resources to meet the community’s goals. Flexible Residential Development Guidelines In considering ordinances and development that exceeds the 4 units per 40 acres density, communities should apply the following guidelines: 1. Include the need to reserve land resources for efficient future urban development as part of the ordinance purpose. 2. Identify the land characteristics required to support future urbanization. 3. Allow no more than 25% of the developable land in a project to be developed, reserving larger future urbanization parcels. 4. Protect future urbanization parcels with temporary development agreements, easements, or deed restrictions. 5. Provide for the rezoning of the future urbanization parcels to a residential zoning classification at densities consistent with Council policy at such time that urban services are available. 6. Encourage the use of community wastewater treatment systems to serve the temporary cluster. Please refer to the full document, Flexible Residential Development Ordinance Guidelines for the Diversified Rural Area, for more information on these six guidelines. Continue to next page The Fields of St. Croix, Lake Elmo 1 | Metropolitan Council Continue to next page Flexible Residential Ordinance Tools If a community wishes to allow for increased densities within the Diversified Rural area beyond 4 units per 40 acres, the community should use mechanisms to allow for the future development of the land at urban development densities of at least 3 units per net developable acre. There are a number of tools that communities have utilized to meet these goals, including but not limited to the following: 1. Adopt Cluster Ordinances to preserve open space and allow future urbanization. 2. Permit density bonuses for meeting certain specified ordinance requirements. 3. Use of Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations to manage development and preserve open space. 4. Require Build-Out Plans (Ghost Platting) to demonstrate future subdivision for the delivery of urban services. 5. Employ platting techniques along with deed restrictions, easements, and covenants to protect open space for future development. 6. Use of overlay districts in specified areas to ensure mandatory clustering; for example, on land adjacent to urban service areas. If a community adopts regulations to allow densities in the Diversified Rural area which exceed 4 units per 40 acres, the Metropolitan Council will need to review any revised ordinance details to ensure compliance with the community’s Comprehensive Plan and future expansion of urban services. FLEXIBLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT EXAMPLES There are many different development styles a community might use to alow for current development while reserving land for future urban development. This section describes some of the development patterns available to communities. Traditional Rural Cluster The traditional rural cluster above shows that a mandatory cluster district may allow for a defined, limited number of lot splits within a contiguous rural acreage if certain parameters are met, such as specified lot sizes and frontage on a local street. The above example allows for future subdivision of the residual parcel to allow for urban services. This method of subdivision would need to be tracked by the municipality over time to ensure that sufficient land is preserved to allow for a subdivision layout at acceptable densities and access to allow for future urban services. No conventional lots permitted on arterial street Original farmstead Preserved for future urban development Future one-acre parcels reserved for grandchildren One acre parcel sold to son Local street Ar t e r i a l s t r e e t Traditional Rural Cluster 2 | Metropolitan Council Continue to next page Rural Cluster Development Credit: Adapted from Rural Cluster Development Guide, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission The Rural Cluster Development shows a more proactive approach to the preservation of land for future urban service balanced with the preservation of natural resources. The first image shows a conventional large-lot rural development which precludes the provision of urban services due to the ineffective lot layout and inefficiency of multiple or long-distance connection points to urban services. The Council has found that this style of large-lot rural development does not advance the mission of ensuring orderly and economical development in the region. Adapted from Rural Cluster Development Guide, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission Conventional Development Views Acres: 80 Lots: 18 Density: 1 unit per 3.3 acres Minimum lot size: 1/2 acre Common open space: 75% Rural Cluster Acres: 80 Lots: 18 Density: 1 unit per 3.3 acres Minimum lot size: 3 acres Common open space: 0% Views Note: No conventional lots are typically permitted on an arterial street. Rural Cluster v Conventional 3 | Metropolitan Council 3 | Metropolitan Counci Continue to next page The second example, of a rural cluster development, preserves high amenity open space for resource protection and recreation, while ensuring a compact lot layout which allows for effective delivery of urban services. Additional urbanized development may be accommodated in the eastern portion of that site as well. The Rural Cluster Development may utilize a communal septic system until such time that urban services become available. Build-Out Plan (Ghost Platting) The Build-Out Plan, or ghost platting, is a method of master planning for future urban densities in rural large-lot subdivisions. The subdivision is organized in a way that will facilitate a transition to higher density at some future date, perhaps through the use of development or service infrastructure triggers. This is often achieved by restricting the location of buildings to avoid obstructions to future utility and roadway easements. Platting for future urban densities is achieved by establishing lines for future splits of large lots into smaller lots and dedication of rights-of-way and easements for future streets, utilities, storm water facilities, etc. This method of subdivision is another front-loading process which preserves land for future urbanization. Oftentimes, the Build-Out Plan may limit the location and size of the residential footprint to more effectively allow for future subdivision of lots. Build Through Acreages Build Through Acreages can allow for development at lower densities while preserving open space for future development through the platting process. A large outlot can be established to allow for future development at densities that can allow for urban service expansion. The outlot may also be encumbered with deed restrictions, covenants, or easements to provide the interim protection of open space and maintain subsequent triggers for development and service delivery. This method can also be useful in areas in a Rural Residential community designation that may benefit from clustering, but are still undeveloped in the conventional large-lot pattern. In these cases, it may be advisable to preserve land for future residential development if the outlot abuts land within the Council’s Long Term Service Area. Rural yield: 8 houses on ~2.5 acre lots 20 acre parcel Urban build-out yield: Each rural lot divisible into 6-8 urban lots (total 48-80) Build out density: 2.4-3.2 units/acre Ghost Platting Note: In this scenario no conventional lots are permitted on arterial street, but rather all front on local streets. 4 | Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101 metrocouncil.org Main: 651.602.1000 TTY: 651.291.0904 Public Information: 651.602.1500 public.info@metc.state.mn.us LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK pond Initial large lot homes Build-through example Potential future MF development Original outlot developed at urban densities once municipal services are available. Rural yield: 13 houses on large lots Urban yield: 157 houses on the outlot; 3.97 du/ac Build out density could include sewer extension to initial large lot houses and accomodate future multi-family development. The example below, adapted from Bismarck, North Dakota, shows an historic outlot which was subdivided into smaller lots once urban services became available to the east. Build-through diagram Original parcel boundary (approximately 80 acres) A portion of the parcel may be used for rural residential development. An additional portion of the parcel may be used for interim rural residential development if a signicant environmental or open space resource is preserved. The rest of the parcel is platted as an outlot, reserved for future urban development when municipal services are extended. (Adapted from RDG Planning & Design) March 2017