The City of Woodbury has prepared the Cottage Grove Drive Master Plan. She said the intent of the plan is to document existing conditions, provide guidance on lot and home types, roadway design and access management, stormwater management approach, parks and open space, and pedestrian movements.

She said Master plans are required: 1. Prior to opening a development phase or sub-phase. 2. Prior to the approval of a Planned Unit Development for properties with common ownership that are within the existing Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and measure more than 100 acres.

The Plan is intended to provide flexibility to allow either 45’ lots or townhomes, within the dark orange/brown areas above, to ensure diversity of housing products and prices can be achieved regardless of market conditions.

asked if the 2028 Capital Improvement plan for the Bailey Road construction has the intent that no current development is planned and will the existing utilities be utilized and then be switched over.

said allowing the development to occur and then having the new roadway improvement allows it to last much longer.

asked about the Oak trees with the easement and asked if that meant the trees would stay.

said that was correct.

advised that the City Council authorized funding for a search to be conducted to look at Public Safety response times and locations served and the study hasn’t been finalized yet but gave specific details on what that meant for the future.

asked about financial responsibility of the City for the expansion and if we need to engage with Washington County to install more as the residential density grows.

advised that this is a high-level concept plan, so the details aren’t considered as of yet. She discussed the goal of this and what will come in the future.

asked about the high-quality oak trees and asked for confirmation that those were located on private property and would not be part of the greenway corridor. Ms. McCormack confirmed they were and it would not be part of it.

said there are some broad numbers based on the coloring to look at as part of the background information and said it did meet the housing goals. Ms. Swanson asked what the percentage would be of the capped houses. Mr. Searles said they caped from 45 to 50 percent and gave information on this decision and reasoning behind it.

said the value proposition that is proposed within this concept, and the buyer brings a product forward that meets the AMI, they would qualify for the reduction. He said the City sees that there aren’t products and this is trying to bring a different type of product to the marketplace.

asked if the property market as number three (3) which is designated as storm water has an existing property owner currently living there in a house. Ms. McCormack confirmed. He asked if the property owner would be okay with the site being signed up to be a future storm water location. Ms. McCormack confirmed stating the city has met with the homeowner a few times and they have identified a vision for the property to have it as an open space and the existing home can remain. Ms. McCormack said she agrees and is happy to have the open space around the home.

asked about the south of the plan being zoned Urban Reserve and if there was talk of future development in that area or is that part of a sperate plan. Ms. McCormack said Urban Reserve is outside of the city’s phasing and outside of Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA). She said that area is set with the Comprehensive Plan and the Metropolitan Council. She said the City has received guidance that it is not anticipated that the MUSA will be expanded so Urban Reserve land is intended to stay.

asked about the regional basic for the storm water and asked how it worked from a funding standpoint with all of the lots being developed at different stages.

said these types of regional amenities occur through our utility charge approach. He gave information saying this looks at the infrastructure needed over several decades divided by the acreage served that equals a per acre utility charge which is what is proposed here. He said collection will be done acre by acre and said there are also some fund balances within the utility charges to incur some of these expenses where, when development occurs, they will repay that fund. Mr. Searles said those are existing development dollars that we have that are for these plan system improvements that have been banked over the long term and is not a taxpayer dollar.

asked if there was anything preventing the current owners of the existing homes to develop the entire parcel where a home destruction could take place to construct a larger development. Ms. McCormack said when looking at existing PUD’s they need to be in compliance with a Master Plan within the area. She said that is one of the findings of fact that is brought to a Commission and said if it wasn’t in line with that finding there would have to be some type of reason or extenuating circumstance for that to come forward. She stated the city’s goal for all of the future properties coming forward is to have them in line with this Master Plan.

asked if putting this Master Plan in place secures that conservation of those trees and any future development that would want to change that would have to come through the normal Planned Unit Development process. Ms. McCormack confirmed.

asked if there are any examples of other municipality’s doing the 45 minimum lot size and AMI price capping that this is trying to memorialize. Ms. McCormack said housing attainability is at the forefront of all of City’s minds at this time. She gave examples of different areas and what they are doing. She said it is a goal to create smaller lots because the City is hearing from the market that if there are smaller lots given, the attainable housing product would be able to be built.

said that would be additional lots from that reduction. Chair Kollm gave concerns about the math totaling the way we think it will. Mr. Searles gave information on reasoning for this decision and reasons for this.

gave her concerns about people taking advantage of this and whether the City thought about ways to prevent that. Mr. Searles gave information saying the building community understands what their margins are and said they will build in the size, amenities and finishes to support the sales price, which gave comfort in this. He gave other details that caused comfort with this concern. He said it is certainly on staff’s mind.