Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-2005 Planning Commission Meeting Packet01 Estimated Times CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANFNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Thursday, April 14, 2005 — 7:00 p.m. 7:00 I. Call. to Order: II. Approval of Agenda III. Approve Minutes of March 10, 2005 (1) IV. Department / Commission Liaisgn 1 Other Reports: A. Commission Liaison: B. St. Croix Crossing Update: C. Other: 7:15 V. Visitors /Public Comment: This is an opportunity for the public to address the Commission with questions or concerns regarding items not on the agenda. Please limit comments to three minutes. VI. Public Hearings: A. Stillwater Crossing LLC: To consider request for Planned Unit Development Amendment, allowing a drive through lane with pick -up window at the west end of the retail center, located at Oren Ave. and 60 St. N. (2) B. Xcel Energy — A..S. Ding Plant (MERP) To consider request for C.U.P. Amendment, pursuant to City Ordinance 308.08, for land reclamation & grading to area west of temporary office trailer buildings, being used as administrative offices during Xcel Energy — A..S. King Plant Rehabilitation Project at 1103 King Plant Rd. (3) A. Oakgreen Village: To consider requests for Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development: Concept Plan for construction of townhomes, known as Oakgreen Village -- Phase I and located to north of 58` St. and west of Oakgreen Ave. (4) VII. New Business: A. Annual Meeting & Election of Chair & Vice Chair (5) VIII. Old Business: IX. Informational: A. Development Project Updates B. Next Meeting: May 12, 2005 — Regular Meeting @ 7:00 p.m. C. Council Representative: April -- Commissioner Wasescha May — Commissioner Runk X. Adjournment 1 • • CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, March 10, 2005 Call To Order: Chair Dwyer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Liljegren, Oswald, Runk and Wasescha. City Planner Richards, City Administrator Johnson and Commission Liaison Alternate Doerr. Approval of Agenda: Chair Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner Oswald, moved to approve the Agenda, as amended carrying "Goal Setting" under New Business to the April Agenda. Carried 5 -0. Approve Minutes of March 10, 20051 Commission Liaison Alternate Doerr that the Commission had received revised Minutes with minor amendments and review one item of change. Vice Chair Runk, seconded by Commissioner Liljegren, moved to approve the Minutes as amended. Carried 5 -0. Department /Commission Liaison Reports /Other Repgrts: A. Commission Liaison: B. St. Croix Crossing Update: Commission Liaison Alternate Doerr discussed the process of several bills moving through the political process and reported that that the next Stakeholders Group meeting is anticipated to be held in May. C. Other: Visitors /Public Comment: There being no visitors to the meeting other than those present for items upon the published Agenda, Chair Dwyer moved to the Public Hearings portion of the Agenda. Public Hearings: ENCLOSURE A. Ruby Tuesday: To consider requests for Variance to Signage and Design Standards, allowing LED Sign Band placement at Ruby Tuesday restaurant, located at 13375 60th St. N. Chair Dwyer noted that City Staff received a request from the applicant to withdraw the application and that there would not be a public hearing held. B. Pine Grove Gardens: To consider requests for Concept & General Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Rezoning from 0, Open Space to R -3, Multiple Family Residential for construction of 26 residential units, within five townhome buildings South of 60th St. and East of Oakgreen Ave. N. City Planner Richards noted that the application before the Commission replaces the former Ackerman Estates application, which was withdrawn. Richard stated that it is staff recommendation that the Commission review the application for consideration of land use, zoning issues and the overall concept plan, prior to moving into details for the proposed project. Richards reviewed the March 4, 2005 planning report as to the requests, provided an issue analysis and discussed the same with the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes Marchl0, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Chair Dwyer opened the public hearing, at 7:18 p.m., for comment and invited the applicant and those wishing to speak to the matter to address the Coraamission. Todd Erickson of Folz, Freeman & Erickson Inc. representing the applicant, introduced himself and noted that the proposed plan was prepared with consideration given to the comments made at the earlier hearing for the withdrawn Ackerman Estates proposal. Mr. Erickson reviewed the site plan and discussed issues such as setbacks, buffer area, roadway size and maintenance, parking elements and snow removal/ storage. Mr. Erickson commented on the utility design and the trail placement being brought back into the wooded area at the site. He noted that the stormwater project is being designed to flow into the Oakgreen regional pond, that the NE corner wetland area of the site will be maintained, that they will be using quality materials and architectural design elements for the construction, and are working to save as many of the existing trees as possible. Discussion ensued among Mr. Erickson and the Commission as to staff recommendation on setbacks, outlot usage, porch elements into common area. Mr. Erickson noted that time is becoming of the essence for his client. Eric Roeske — 5672 Novak Ave. N: expressed his concern as to traffic density, particularly between 58th St. N. and Hwy. 36, noting that Oakgreen Ave. is not currently safe for pedestrian travel. Mr. Roeske stated that he felt something needed to be done on Oakgreen Ave. for pedestrian traffic and about intersection at Oakgreen Ave. and the frontage road, along Hwy. 36 to make it safer. In light of the uncertainty of the Hwy. 36 and related roadway changes, Mr. Roeske asked that consideration be given to the people who live in the area and the pedestrians using the roadways for travel before making any changes to the area around it which would add to the traffic burden in the area. There being no other visitors to the public hearing, Chair Dwyer, seconded by Commissioner Liljegren, moved to close the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Carried 5 -0 Commission discussion commenced as to issues such as Oakgreen Ave. ownership, right -of -way setback requirements, Oakgreen Ave. improvements and manners of roadway improvement funding. Vice Chair Runk, seconded by, Commissioner Oswald, moved to recommend City Council approval of the request for Comprehensive Plan zoning and map change to R-3, Multiple Family Residential, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Pine Grove Gardens development setbacks comply with those required for the R -3, Multiple Family Residential District are complied with; and 2. That the preliminary /final plat for the Pine Grove Gardens development be revised, merging Outlots A & B into one outlot parcel. Carried 5 -0. • • • • New Business: None. Old Business: None. Informational: A. Next Meeting: April 14, 2005 7:00 p.m. -- Regular Meeting B. Council Representative: March — Commissioner Liljegren April — Commissioner Wasescha Adjournment: Vice Chair Runk, seconded by Commissioner Liljegren, moved to adjourn at 8:01 p.m. Carried 5 -0. Respectfully submitted, Julie A. Hultman Community Development Approved by the Planning Commission: Planning Commission Minutes Marchl0, 2005 Page 3 of 3 r • 04/07/05 15:18 UNITED PROP 4 96514390574 April 7, 2005 Mr. Scott Richards Northwest Associated Consultants City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 RE: Stillwater Crossing, LLC Dear Scott: UNITED PROPERTIES VIA FAX: 651.439.0574 As discussed during our meeting on Wednesday, April 6, and on behalf of Stillwater Crossings, LLC, we would like to officially withdraw our application for a PUD amendment to allow a limited drive -thru on the west end of the building known as Stillwater Crossing Shopping Mali. If an ou have questions, please feel free to contact me at 952.837.8508. Y any Thomas B. Noble Co -Owner 9a2.837,8508 NO. ?34 ?02 3500 American Byrd. W., Minneapolis. MN 55431 • 952.831.1000 • Fax 952.893.8293 • www.uproperties.com A member of Oncor international '. , A4ttirciAt 401 r4I41.' ''Ce' MEMORANDUM ENCLOSURE NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4 300 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 703.231.2555 Facsimile: 783.231.2551 pianners@nacplanning.com TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: April 7, 2005 RE: Oak Park Heights — Stillwater Crossings (Lower St. Croix Mall) FILE NO: 798.02 — 05.03 Please be advised that I have discussed the PUD amendment with representatives of Stillwater Crossing LLC, the applicants for this property. They are requesting a withdrawal of the application at this time and will reapply when a potential tenant comes forward. An application for the PUD amendment and a conditional use permit to allow a drive through window would be required at that time. As of this date, a letter of withdrawal has not been received by the City. If the applicant does not submit the letter by the April 14, 2005 meeting, the Planning Commission should continue the item to the May meeting. • ENCLOSURE 3 City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone (651) 439 -4439 • Fax (651) 439 -0574 April 7 2005 MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM: Eric Johnson, City Adxninis RE: Fill Permit Request -- Xcel En Summary Xcel Energy has submitted a request to fill a ditch located at the A.S. King Facility. Please see EXHIBIT 1. City Ordinance 308.08 — Land Reclamation and Grading, requires that a Conditional Use Permit be granted that would allow such activities that exceed 25 cubic yards per acre. The area proposed to be filled is a storm water drainage ditch that services the tower pads directly to the north and would exceed this threshold. This ditch ultimately drains to the St. Croix River via a 36" culvert. The proposed fill area does not alter such drainage plan and its ultimate downstream destination. Xcel Energy has provided a Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Decision, see EXHIBIT 2 which states that the wetlands that are to be filled in, are "incidental" and not naturally occurring wetlands; the ditch is a man -made structure that has taken on some wetland characteristics since construction. Upon review of the submitted information, there appears to be not to be any detrimental social, economic or environmental impacts; and that Staff recommends that the Conditional Use Permit be approved and the fill be permitted as requested by the applicant with the following conditions: 1. Final drainage plans shall be subject to the final review and approval of the City Engineer; 2. Xcel Energy shall submit drainage plans to the Middle St. Croix Water Management Organization for final review, once comments are provided Xcel may then potentially proceed. Comments received shall be provided to the City; 3. Xcel Energy shall submit drainage plans to Minnesota DNR, Ms. Molly Shodeen for review, once comments are provided Xcel may then potentially proceed. Comments received shall be provided to the City. . • II • i 0 • ► y . • 41110 0 " . i . V . ��la .x'\ \ • - 'c x • V.., *. A , • M !/�. M• w 1....r..„1,V.,.. .- •• w **-. ):::::- — x 1A '''' I .... , % ....4- -.4.1-1.v . 7�' . �/,'.r U,rr,,, ,� _ - tt- • ✓ • �lxo+•MM r _ t_ A .. ::: :... i ii: \\ , A.. ' ...\... , 1 „ j .. ..., M# UP 13100. . 4 t � 4 4 =a s�s�s 4 4 4 I 4 / /'• 1 4 4 ,� / 1 `' 1 %j / il % fi Y / f • / I i ., /1 I( i 'i ij ,f , I A if f/ / / 11 II : / Mt) I %O it , 1 I I di 1 . .. I II jj :'ii � 1 ` '1 1 � 1 � .I. ,, I II . f . 1 X11 i 1 I 1 I I I II"\ . II 1 / 1 (1 1 I !I IL . 1. !` I */".4 ► n_ • I • • FIGURE 1. AREA TO BE HLLED FIGURE 2. AERIAL VEW OF FILL AREA • � ya/ f� a, Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Decision Name of Applicant: Xcel Energy, Sharon Sarappo Project Name: MERP Parking Expansion Application Number: 55 -04 -000 (2005) A.S. King Plant of Application (check one : Z Exem Typ e o pp tion Decision ) p • No Loss Decision Date of Decision: March 8, 2005 Check One: ® Approved ri Approved with conditions (see note on page 2 regarding use of wetland banking credits) Denied Summary of Proj ect/Decision (indicate exemption number per MN Rule 8420.0122, if applicable):Subp. 5 Incidental Wetlands. Applicant has shown that impact will occur to a ditch area that was constructed in a historic u•land location but that currentl exhibits wetland characteristics. The im• act area is from the expansion of a gravel parking lot (see attached supporting documents). List of Addressees: Landowner: A.S. King Generating Plant Attn: Mr. Darrell Knutson 1103 King Plant Road Bayport, MN 55003 Xcel Energy Attn: Ms. Sharon Sarappo 414 Nicollet Mali, RS 8 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Notice of WCA Decision.doc Name and Address of Local Government Unit: City of Oak Park Heights Attn: Mr. Eric Johnson 14168 Oak Park Boulevard Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 -2007 WCA Agent Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. Attn: Mr. Ben Meyer 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 n Replacement Plan Decision E Banking Plan Decision Wetland Type/Boundary Decision - Page 1of3 9/16/04 EYti;p. IT • '"l Members of Technical Evaluation Panel: MN Board of Water and Soil Resources Attn: Mr. Les Lernm 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Washington Conservation District Attn: Ms. Jyneen E. Thatcher 1380 W Frontage Rd, Highway 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable): Middle St. Croix WMO 294 North 3 Street Bayport, MN 55003 Department of Natural Resources Regional Office: DNR Ecological Services Section Attn: Mr. Wayne Barstad 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 DNR. TEP Representative (if different than above) MN DNR Water Resources Division Attn: Ms. Molly Shodeen 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 Corp of Engineers Project Manager c Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: Mr. Dan Seemon 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101-1638 Individual members of the public who requested a copy, summary only City Engineer, Oak Park Heights ATTN: Mr. Dennis Postier Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. 2335 W. Hwy 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Government Unit on the above - referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit's Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Minn. R. 8420.0250 any appeal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. Notice of WCA Decision.doc - Page 2 of 3 9/16/04 NOTE: Approval of Wetland Replacement Plan Applications involving the use of wetland bankin g credits is conditional upon withdrawal of the appropriate credits from the state wetland bank. No wetland impacts may commence until the applicant receives a copy of the fully signed and executed "Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits," signed by the BWSR wetland bank administrator certifying that the wetland bank credits have been debited. THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT City of Oak Park Heights f Signature Benjamin L. Meyer, WCA Agent — City of Oak Park Heights Name and Title Notice of WCA Decision.doc - Page 3 of 3 9/16/04 March 8, 2005 Date Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Certificate of Mailing of Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Decision Name and address of local government unit: City of Oak Park Heights Attn: Mr. Eric Johnson 14168 Oak Park Boulevard Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 -2007 WCA Agent Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. Attn: Mr. Ben Meyer 2335 West Highway 36 St.Paul,MN 55113 The undersigned certifies on March 8 , 2005 , he /she mailed copies of the attached Notice of Wetland Conservation Act Decision to the addressees listed thereon by depositing the same in the United States Mail in the City of Roseville , County of Ramsey and State of Minnesota, properly enveloped with prepaid first class postage. WCA Agent - City of Oak Park Heights Title March 8, 2005 Date Page 1 of 1 Certificate of Mailing Decision.doc (April 2003) Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Application for Certificate of No Loss or Exemption* Xcel E �r c Name(s) Applicant s of A i C } PP l 414 Nicollet Mali, RS -8 Street Address Minneapolis , MN City, State, Zip Code 55401 (612 ) 330 -6743 ( 1 Telephone (Day) (Evening) APPLICANT AND PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION LGU:Oak. Park Heights Project Location: 1/4 W _ /4NW UTM Coordinates: X County Name/Number: wash i n g t on Minor Watershed Name/Number: SS . r o ix Size of entire wetland: 1 / 4 acres Wetland type: Circular 39 _^ NWIP EME r x Check one: < 50 %, [] 50% - 80 %, or 0 > 80% Check one: Agricultural land []Non -ag. land PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION Describe the nature and purpose of the proposed project: Parking kin area for staff during construction of air quality system upgrade at the A . S . King Plant. (attach additional pages if needed) • will on / / o /day /yr) and will be completed by 10 1 0 7 1 2005 Timetable: project will b egin 0 3 0 7 2 o o The wetland activity at the above site qualifies for the following under the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) (check one No Loss Determination (attach plans) Exemption # 5 (per MN Rule Chapter 8420.0122) (Note: Applicant is responsible for submitting the proof necessary to show qualification for the exemption claimed.) Description of Exemption Claimed: Incidental wetland. Wetland area was constructed on upland and was con- structed for the purpose of runoff control for stormwater. APPLICANT SIGNATURE • The information provided for this determination is truthful and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I ensure that, in draining, excavating, or filling subject subect wetland under an exemption noted above; appropriate erosion control measures will be taken to tion of the water; the drain, excavation, or fill will not block fish passage; and the drain, excavation, or fill prevent sedimentation water; P activity will be conducted in compliance with all other applicable federal, state, and local requirements; including best management pr protection and water resource rotection requirements established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103H. c 410 (Signature of Applicant) (Date) Page I of 2 BWSR Form WCA Exemption 2(App for Certif No Loss).doc (April 2003) 1 Note: This approval is not effective until the signatures below are complete. No work should begin until the 30 -day appeal window has lapsed, or, in the event of an appeal, until the appeal has been finalized. xc al S ignature • A. LQU has feceived *ciliate documentation for claim of No -Loss or Exemption, and approves this certificate as outlined • , above. This : certificate expires. 4 to 8420:0122, .Subp. 1 or :Subp� 2B, then Item B below shall be completed and signed by the LGU. the LGU shall write "Not.A r livable." in si ature.block below a e a is complete: • ..... ... Pp . .. .. � .. � � .. _ .. . - . . • - • :bias r e c ei ed,: evidence:bf.recordirig'.of Declaration 'of Restrictions and:Coven ants. for Impacted Wetland Under cultural Exo#iption .orm.B } : ate recorded) *APPROVAL OF THIS CERTIFICATE ONLY APPLIES TO THE WCA. Permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with the appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. The Combined Project Application form can be used for this purpose. Notice of the above decision must be mailed to the following parties within 10 working days of the decision: 1. Landowner /Applicant 2. Members of the Technical Evaluation Panel 3. Watershed District or Watershed Management Organization (If Applicable) 4. Department of Natural Resources Regional Office 5. DNR Wetlands Coordinator @ Ecological Services Section 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155 6. Corps of Engineers Project Manager @ Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District ATTN: CO -R, 190 Fifth Street East St. Paul, MN 55101 -1638 7. Members of the public who have requested to receive notice. Page2of2 Application for Certificate of No Loss or Exemption.doc (April 2003) PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: April 7, 2005 RE: Oak Park Heights -- Oakgreen Village: Revised PUD Concept Plan FILE NO: 798.02 - 04.17 BACKGROUND Attached for reference: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: ENCLOSURE 4 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS,, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 753.231.2555 Facsimile: 753.231.2581 planners@nacplanning.com Tim Nolde, representing Anchobaypro, Inc. and Valley Senior Services Alliance (VSSA), has made application for a PUD concept plan approval for that area west of Oakgreen Avenue and north of 58 Street. The area under application at this time consists of approximately 11 acres and encompasses a significant portion of the Central Business District. The City Council approved a PUD general plan and preliminary /final plat on March 9, 2004 for this area. The applicants have revised the plans to remove the apartment buildings and develop the entire area with townhome units. The application is only for the first phase of development that would exclude the single family properties directly adjacent to Oakgreen Avenue and a portion of the property to the west. The applicant has made separate application to the City for consideration of TIF financing for property purchase and removal to allow the second phase. Oakgreen Village Concept Submittal Booklet January 11, 2005 Letter from Tim Nolde February 9, 2005 Letter from Tim Nolde City Council Resolution, March 9, 2004 Previous General Plan Approval Oakgreen Village, Previous Approved Plans Example of Alternative Development Options ISSUES ANALYSIS Adjacent Uses. Uses adjacent to the subject site are listed below: North of Site: South of Site: West of Site: East of Site: Present Zoning — Central Business District Present Use -- Highway 36 oriented commercial development, Undeveloped areas and the Xcel Energy power line easement Present Zoning — 0, Open Space Present Use — The Boutwells Landing development and Undeveloped areas Present Zoning — Central Business District Present Use — Undeveloped area, Wal -Mart and Highway 36 Oriented commercial development Present Zoning -- Central Business District Present Use — Single family residences and Oakgreen Avenue Proposed Project: The general plan for the first phase of development in this area, approved in 2004, was for 87 townhome units. Those plans are included in Exhibit 5. The concept plan for the area included 203 overall units, 111 which were townhomes and 92 apartment units in two separate buildings. The concept plan encompassed the area south of the Xcel power line easement to 58 Street and from Novak Avenue to Oakgreen Avenue. The new plan calls for 96 townhome units in phase one, which is being considered at this time. The second phase includes 53 additional townhomes in the area that is not totally under control of the applicants. Anchobaypro has submitted to the City a request for Tax Increment Financing (T1F) to address purchasing and removal of those remaining homes. The previous conceptual approvals allowed for a total of 203 units; the new proposal is for a total of 149 units or a 54 unit reduction. All of the townhomes would be "for sale" and have sales prices beginning at $179,900. The proposed roadway network is almost identical to what was previously proposed. Novak would be constructed as the north /south street from 58th Street to 60 Street. Nutmeg Avenue would connect Novak and 58 Streets. Both of these streets would be public. The plans indicate 59 Street connecting Oakgreen Avenue and Novak Avenue. The roadway is not proposed to be constructed at this time, but the City would take the right -of -way as part of the plat. Comprehensive Plan. The 1988 Comprehensive Plan designates this area north of to Business Street and west of Oakgreen as Central Business District. The Central Business District Urban Design Study designated this area for residential and a mixed use precinct similar to what has been proposed in this concept plan application. The residential area is concentrated on the east side of the site and is oriented around the 2 • • • • existing wetland similar to the CBD Plan. Additionally, the CBD Plan called for small box commercial with residential development west of the proposed Novak. While not identical to the Central Business District Urban Design Study Master Plan, the current proposal is similar in general land uses for how the area would develop. Development interests have also shared plans with the City incorporating this area into a large commercial development. The City would need to revise its Comprehensive Plan to accommodate large scale commercial development in this area. Zoning. The subject site north of 58 Street is proposed to remain zoned CBD. The PUD approvals will be applied to the CBD District as a conditional use. The CBD District allows multiple family structures as a conditional use. The use of the PUD would allow flexibility in how the project is configured in terms of building orientation and use of private driveways for access. The PUD general plan would finalize the plan and a development agreement would be executed between the applicant and the City addressing the project. Subdivision. A preliminary plat has been submitted by the applicants for the development. The plat establishes 80/90 foot rights -of -way for Novak Avenue, 50/60 foot wa ri ht -of - for Nutmeg Avenue, and 66 foot right -of -way for 59 Street. right-of-way g The preliminary plat includes 50 feet of right -of -way on the east side of the property for Oakgreen Avenue as recommended by the City Engineer. The total right -of -way required for Oakgreen Avenue will be 100 feet. The individual townhome units would be platted separately with the surrounding property as outlots. Outlot A is created as a separate parcel with the dedication of the 59 Street right -of -way. The City Attorney has indicated that this outlot will need to be tied to the ownership of the townhome areas so that it remains under their responsibility and maintenance. The preliminary /final plat will be considered in detail as a part of the general plan of development of review for this project. Park Dedication. Park dedication is based upon the specifications of Section 402.08 of the Subdivision Ordinance. The residential area to be platted would be subject to park dedication. The applicants have been advised that a property appraisal would need to be provided to calculate the park dedication amount. A small tot lot park is planned within the development that would be privately maintained by the association. The Subdivision Ordinance indicates that a credit for such areas can be granted by the Cit y policy Council. This will be a olic decision of the City Council with input of the Planning Commission and Park Commission. CBD Standards. Section 401.301.E.6 of the Zoning Ordinance provides the CUP standards for allowing residential use in the CBD. The standards are as follows: Two family, townhomes and multiple family dwellings, provided that: a. At least two parking spaces per unit must be provided for on site, or proof is shown of Ai arrangements for private parking nearby. b. No physical improvements, either interior or exterior, may preclude future re -use for commercial purposes. c. Unit floor areas must comply with Section 401.15.C.6. d. Compliance with conditional use requirements of Section 401.03.A.8. e. The development does not conflict with existing or potential future commercial uses and activities. f. The density standards imposed as part of the R -3 Zoning District are complied with. g. Adequate open space and recreational space is provided on site for the benefit of the occupants. h. The development does not conflict or result in incompatible land use arrangements as related to abutting residential uses or commercial uses. 1. Residential use be governed by all applicable standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Building Code, Housing Code and Fire Codes. j. Residential and non - residential uses shall not be contained on the same floor. k. Residential uses shall be provided with a separate entrance, and separately identified parking stalls. The Planning Commission and City Council will need to review these issues as part of the concept plan review. In particular, the concept plan review should addresses Items d, e, f, g, and h. These issues will be addressed as part of this report. Project Density. Section 401.15.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the density thresholds for residential properties. Townhome projects require 4,000 square feet of land area per unit excluding right -of -way and wetlands. The Phase One development consists of a total area of 481,702 square feet. The 96 units planned for that area would result in an area per unit of 5,018 square feet. The calculations for the second phase would result in an area per unit of 4,638 square feet. Proposed Street/Access. As indicated, the proposed street network is almost identical to the previous plan. Novak Avenue has been moved slightly to the east and 59 Street has been reoriented around the proposed stormwater pond. The Nutmeg Avenue /58 Street intersection is at the same location. Novak is planned at an 80 foot/90 foot right -of -way with a 34 foot width street that will widen at the 60 Street and 58 Street intersections to accommodate turn lanes. Nutmeg Avenue is planned at a 50 foot/60 foot right -of -way with a 34 foot width and a 4 r • turn lane at 58 Street. 59 Street is planned with a 66 foot right -of -way and a street width of 34 feet. The Planning Commission has previously discussed the need to provide adequate separation between the residential uses in the east portion of the CBD and the commercial areas to the west. The City Engineer has indicated that 80 feet of right -of- way will give adequate area for significant boulevard tree plantings along Novak Avenue. Additionally, the applicant proposes to preserve the existing pine grove near the Novak Avenue /58 Street intersections and plant a screen of trees between Novak and the townhome units. The plan includes an extensive system of private trails that would intersect with the City's trail system. A continuation of the trail along the Xcel power line easement is planned to extend to Novak Avenue. A five foot sidewalk is also planned on the City right -of -way on the north side of 58 Street. The plans do not show, but the City will likely require, a City sidewalk on the west side of Novak Avenue. Private sidewalks would be provided on both sides of Nutmeg Avenue and throughout the development. The Park Commission should comment on the proposed private and public trail system that is planned for this development. Private Driveways. The plans include an extensive system of private driveways to serve the townhome units. All of the driveways are 24 feet in width and stop with a • "hammerhead" dead -end. Most of the driveways are between 200 and 300 feet in length, which could create issues for emergency vehicle access, especially with the 24 foot driveway widths. The Police Chief and Fire Chief will comment on the design prior to the Planning Commission review. There will be 20 foot driveways between the front of the garage and the private driveway area. This minimal distance will create issues for accessibility and visibility with the large numbers of units on each private driveway. The average sedan is 16 feet in length, a Suburban is 18 feet in length, and a crew cab pick up truck is 22 feet in length. Large vehicles will hang out into the private roadway and restrict access and visibility. Snow removal will also be an issue on the long, narrow driveways. Setbacks. Within a PUD, the base district setback requirements (CBD) are applied only to the perimeter of the project. The CBD requirements specify no front, rear, and side yard setback requirements. The PUD section of the Zoning Ordinance specifies that buildings should be located at least 20 feet from the back of a curb line from roadways as part of the internal street pattern. Additionally, the ordinance species that no building within the project shall be nearer to another building by one -half the sum of the building heights of the two buildings. All of the buildings will meet the minimal requirements of the PUD section of the Zoning Ordinance relates to setbacks. The buildings are spaced adequately from the right -of- way and curb and adequate separate is provided to meet basic requirements. Traffic. The applicant's engineer has provided vehicle count information for the proposed development. The City Engineer has requested additional information and analysis of how the development will affect the existing level of traffic on Oakgreen 5 Avenue and 58 Street. Analysis of the traffic impacts of the development will be done by the City Engineer. Tree Preservation /Landscaping. The applicant has provided preliminary information on existing tree coverage and a landscape plan. The City Arborist will review the detailed tree preservation plans and landscape plans as part of general plan of development review. The existing conditions map indicates the tree masses that would be removed to accommodate the development. While many of the trees are dead, not of significant size, or of desirable variety, there are groupings of trees that could be preserved with a more sensitive development plan. Park. The applicants have provided a small park area that would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. More detailed plans of the park would be required for general plan of development review. Grading and Drainage. A grading and drainage plan has been submitted with this proposal. The City Engineer will comment on any issues with the plan at concept plan stage. A more detailed plan review would be conducted as part of the general plan of development. Utilities. A utility plan has been submitted. The utility plans will be subject to City Engineer review and approval at the general plan of development stage. Lighting. A preliminary lighting plan has been submitted. The lighting plan will be reviewed as part of the general plan of development. Architectural Appearance. The application materials include preliminary drawings of the proposed townhome units. The structures are basic townhome row units with small porches, varying roof lines with brick and lap siding. Overall, the architecture of the townhomes is favorable but there is concern with so many of the same types of units in the development. The applicant should consider varying the style and architecture between buildings as part of the general plan submittals. Parking. Two spaces within an enclosed garage are provided per unit. Thirty -five guest parking arking spaces are proposed in various locations throughout the development. The plans also allow for 20 feet of driveway in front of each garage door. As indicated, this may be a minimal allowance with the long driveways and 24 foot width driveway. Development Contract. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City should approval of the concept plan and general plan of development be granted. As part of the contract, the provisions for street and utility construction, as well as payment for area changes, would be included. The contract will specify conditions of approval and issues related to phasing the development. 6 1 RECOMMENDATION I CONCLUSION As part of its review, the Planning Commission should first look at the Comprehensive Plan and determine from the goals and plans what is the most appropriate development for this property. Previous plans have indicated a residential component of the CBD for this area, but commercial developments may also be appropriate. If residential use is preferred for this property, it should be noted that this is the last large parcel in the City that will accommodate that type of development. The City should and can be selective in the type of development that it would allow there. Planning staff does not support the current concept plan offered by the applicants. The development is not sensitive to the natural features of the property, is too dense, and the design is clearly intended on maximizing the unit count of the project. The PUD process is intended to bring innovative and unique development to a site. This project is not innovative or unique. An example of an alternative design for single family housing on approximately the same size parcel is shown in Exhibit 6. More details of this project will be provided, as an example, at the Planning Commission meeting. Section 401.06.A indicates the purpose of the PUD. The Planning Commission should consider if this concept plan is appropriate based upon the fundamental goals of a PUD as stated below: 1. Innovations in development to the end that the growing demands for residential, commercial, and industrial projects at all economic levels may be met in greater variety in tenure, type, design, and siting of dwellings and by the conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments. 2. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics such as natural topography and geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion. 3. An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets thereby lowering housing costs and public investments. 4. A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Oak Park Heights Comprehensive Plan. 5. A more desirable environment than would be possible through the strict application of zoning and subdivision regulations of the City. 6. To give the landowner and developer reasonable assurance of ultimate approval before expending complete design monies while providing City officials with assurances that the project will retain the character envisioned at the time of concurrence. 7. To allow variation from the provisions of this Ordinance including setbacks, height, lot area, width and depth, yards, etc. where deemed necessary by the City Council. 8. Higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and experienced land planners, architects, landscape architects and engineers. 7 9. More convenience in location and design of development and service facilities. If the Planning Commission finds that the concept plan is acceptable, staff will prepare a resolution for approval with the appropriate conditions. The Planning Commission has the option of sending the recommendation directly to the City Council or approve the resolution at its May meeting. A recommendation of denial could follow the same process. 8 10. A creative use of land and related physical development which allows a phased and orderly development and use pattern. • • a a, o • 4, • L • ,„ • • n n it fr 4 r * • r , i • \ 1 ,1tod • ••• 1 11' • • 4 t y • t • r‘r • 1" • .• o.. 0 - 0 * > —I 0- CD m ct- 5. (1) 6 -A 0) > :H 53 0 0 13 er 5 0 5 5 H - C LIJ c (D CD 0 CD cl) x a) a) x .- - a .... CD =' cl $) A , u) = cD u) a) St CD 1 0 3 9 = CD 5 0 al u 0 o a) a CD r:;* c --4.1 M AD CD 5 s Q. 0 CL CD CD r-t: (ID 0 C/) ‘< eL CD 2-1 Fe - 5 0 CD E. = co o --.. o c m- 1 c 5 RI < a) (n. a) E 5' CD .13 CI Cn 0 k< 0 0 C: 0 rilta) r-TzFD 2 , 5 a) a) (r) < c = 6 5 a o a) - i co 3 C: CD N -II CD O a) c r 3 w CD 0 , -__- 5' 0 = ti a 0 v u, cp •b, 0.) (n 0 c: 0 x . ' CD : c" 1 3, l 0 0 co CD :3 C CD OM 0 0 CD 0 CD 1:3 "4N 6 e.P. = a) = CD C(1) CD ti 0 _ _ to Ci *--,- 0 CD .. •-■ --h CD ic t a: * 3 0 ) . * CD 0 cl) a (D m < CD 0 C --1 f sl I CD cp cu ci) :3 g C 0 -0 3 0 CO a) =. 8 .- a) a) - • c = ) > a * .-..: = c: v Eu . 3 li) . i o o 0 ..., c cp c o E '-'" -f-t. 3: CD ,-,, =- Z -0 * CY. ..e, r FC-- 0 .1..„ cr i'6% 3 in = 3 ,P... =-- ii)"' ( c' ii CD < ;..1 5 -6' 03 CI. S CD 0 CD 0 CD --s 0 — CD - 0 a 2) ") NL# ..4. ' CD r-i- 0 CD 0 cD 0 3 CD ca cp iii 5 o c i: ,,' c - 0 cn ~ 02 a) 0 --, o ( D ( 7 ) - g CD * 0. 2) > ii X (0 2) ,a 0_ a = . -0 Ri::-- • =.* --* CD ..< D- 5 CD < ci @ c 0) ....-T .-- c...D cr g co ci) (r) CDC = C = Ci) 0 W • `< - 0 , ) Cn 0 8-7. 0 0) CO a ---4 - i 5 . a 0 , Z C D cn * (1) imil co 7-1: . E, c = c . • = (a ...... = 0 cn 5 cr a- a) cp 5 ..< sa 5 0 in 5 5 5 ° st.- o rpmg ( n , . . a S ( c l u ) o) :T ::1 c 1 1 - 1 c a. --, co cn 0 - 0 Fin ( a) , 5 Z 13 in = 5 ( 4, -4 0.) c CD - o = CD = -0 X li. i‘ CD St a 63 0 - u) cl.) ) 3 liu: ) = . ,.., = co -. r...:.. 0 * - e - 5* al- c C1 () CD Ur 5 0 m * a) ,76' < 0 0 C 0 R - ED - a. ED = n c - =, eL o 91. ) ,-4., CD - 0 0 CD CD ___ • = 0 0 C = c D 0 ( = 1 Er -4. 0) (cp E" GI a) c = 5 a) ,.-p. * cl- —CD a) (7)' 5 5 .. , .,,, = ca o ,.,-- < a. ,..... E O tti cp .•-•• -0 ma - 0 Cn : 0- ) 0 " ▪ Cn = = • ,..: 3 0 '4- 'Ll. 0 Cl) ....,-- s:D = = -, :3 " " 0 'ch 6 cn CD 0 al a) o st) m - ra.4. wan 0 0 * m CD P CD co Do 3 R. c7) ) `. * 2-P- cr 0 CD * < a a 73 3 -, , 0 co a) 0) a) 0 • CD c 0- --, --- ca 0 o --.. CD -0 "'ft = a) 0 cp a) 3 cn -4- CD C = at3 a) cri 0 g - 5 * w Fp' 0) • CD 0 -0 5• .-..- cu = 0 ) ci) o.) ....• cu 0 r-4. "63 ca. co —4, a) --, 6 a. a) C D ., . < i "D CD 0 CD --s 0 Oa C D 6 0 CD 0) o 5= a. 0 * 6 sa) a) r3 = 0 CD 0 :,?.., :3 < 2) :a. = = m- X E) 5 0 ) m a cl. CD = 7-1: -0 CD 0 cu 0 (a a) a 3 13 .5. o 0 0 . ) trz 3 cn ( a ...< u) 0 CD Z = o r-t-. E -0 - c - 3 (-/-)' a) CD cD 3 rt -, ,--.- cD — 74: 2 c p CD 2 = E = 3 c CD CD a) a) E (J) 0 CD .., 5 5 < (t) .....,,. ..-:,-.. c p co • 0) c r 6 * 5 R a) = a) ° = (7)* 0.) E 0 st CD a 2 A-" (/) . o x .< , 1\3 = —• a) .c.... - 0 cp (0 ,--+: = .6 iti 2 CD .., cn o w ED * cp ,..., 0 c cn = (c, 2) r 9 0 . ) 2) CO C a CD (a * ct) 3 0 .......- ,.., -• 9.), ,4- ..-+: u) c . --h '' 9 * = F13 Cam (D 0 — 0 Cr. u) E. -i 5 ( c ) .) a) = (0 cn ...... m — EP co pa ,- .., 0 2) .... = w --7, a) 5- up o ---.., 0 co Fr) w 0 0 a) al 5 --, CD (C) 0 ca c:L o 1 410 o Z a � 2 • * c 12 0 r E2 w Z 13 Z4 QE �Z °o La 4 4i 41 oi i sx co 4 CO y Pift4 C44 Ct C.1 (I) cq ro v **1 :3 Ct °°*1114 6-5 10 0) • c 0: a * 7 1 0 C D a t < I ) 6 * =- > :3 CD CD. cp 0 C X. ca 0 - c p 2 CD fij < -6 cp i t" 3 CT =. 1 ( C 14 D" c ; C) (1) 5 r = 2 2 = CD rid- CO in 0 - - o 0- - 0 3 cp .... = 3 0 - CD Of) CD = - ( D 0 '0 ca --, a) 0 < ..., CD 9 :" = w m. ;r ,, < • 2) < cr x: m 0 0 • •...t., * CI 5P+. 3 el = . _-. ca cn, oa c. m a) N u) (A 5 a _ eL eL • --.1 5 w = ii3 c7) 0 ,-... :"... (0 = :3 co a) co w o -...1 = 5 = (7 2) (/) 0 (D ,-+ C co C3 5` ( D ,cp —. 3 _.+, :7 5.. a) a) 3 ,-+. fa., ,.., CD :=1 CI CD = =. ...... 1/4 (n (4 0 (1) - To CD co 3 5 `• C ( I ) = 1:1) a) w o :3 o cD - 7' --3 --1 CC1 * k ai ta k !.... Q . : 0:- l (D i :s1 c) co a) 5 c t.% ( 3 %...., -0 r-4 CD C = — , 0 n a) CD ED.,. ... ( 7 < n- u c a (D 0 a a o :3 — 7 ,... pp. < dillo .,.. 0 %. < CD m 0 Ci9 7D CD 0 --3 emit" = -1 0 es+ 2 X = = ,.., 0 , ,, , ,D ,< 0 ii) CD 0 c a n 0 m <, 0 a 0 0 m c - 3 a %,., ,-.... = , ,....... ,..., ,.., Z I- 0 0 C 0 *' 0) %) = 3 0 p. * 0 ....... E) 2 - 6 5 - 2 ) a) CDF\j- ,-+ :3 CD (D3) t.4. = = M 0 = = 0 CD 0 40 4 g ; g 3 2 F a F 5 • • 3 CD Er —1 CD =(D cD w CD M 1 "0 0 0 (C1 - C 3 En • CD 0 CD Cn � cr - o cD 0 0„) (1) (1) eL (0 — -3 0 r-f• CL 0 ED ••••ta cD ="` •••••p. CD ca Co_ 0 CD C ";•1 cl) CT Cn CD 0 CD w 3 CD 0 - 0 CD = 0 0 CL D" CD 0 3 CD 0 0 0 < ct: CD a a „ %.J Q ) CI) cD 0(D 0 n c CD CL (D (D 3 5 a) cD 0 - 0 0 0 (1) CD = 5 cf 0 c 0 cD 0 CD - 0 00 0 X CD Cf) cl) rzt. CL 0 a) r 5 a) a) < st. ED cr CL CD, CO= "1 0 = ° -05 " 0 0 cr B 2 Fps cD 3 co ;,„ CD 5- os o 03 w 0 (e, W 0 = 0 (13 c eL 0 cl) CD ° 0 cD CO CD 0 co CD Lt Y 0 0 0 0 0- a 5" (1) (n..... =-'"` 5" co - a FD CD 8 F -,•".- 73 a 1 D : FD" 0,) 74: 0.) q co cr a) iii, a) 0 c ci. CD ,...,.. , CL c rbt - CL: -' - w : 0 .. -3 5 3 c l 9, < a) co * 0 a) ca. w 3 6 - cv , 0.) -0 t I il- (—:„) ,‹ ... , 0 up 0 „, ci) < a 5 a) 3 c --- = N) (1) w 0 CD I CI) -EN. =" u) = 0 Zi Fir g g c h.) a) a) 0 0 5 = 5) Fa kw ,° 0= a) a) = = 0 0 C 0 s t 0= --, 3 CD amj , Q. — : 0 CD a) -- 0) a) n w cn = ...... m 0 ,7......: = (0 cn - 0 " t. a) 0. w 5"T ;: "i3 o m = st -, CD Y * = 0 0 a p. 0 = < 0 -00 =-. = 0 (T) co = cp = CL a. a 74 ; 0' ; . a 0 —I = = CD CD — CI 51) 3 a.. 3 "0 z 0 0 o> sa) Ci) o a) 0 * > 0 0 < :0 ED "0 c "0 ED 0 - w a ci) 73" 0 C Cn a CD — Z00 0 0 - < ED ED CD < 0 o c 0.. a) 3 a 0 a) cn 0 o a) 0 ,C (0 ED 0 yJ • * . CI * md. 0 0 z 0 0) CD a z 0 0) MIMI D. Nam 4 4 14 5 1 _ cq • - ELriak4 'slings= Nk,. naktk likte* - b, 0,) tri F D ot) - I�rwn 0) ca) ( 7i 7 ci) Fe) • fl) o A ) ..rr r cr) o 0 - 0 * CD r : ..r.. ,4_ M r n CD -63 SP,. O (0 ct) rrr. V3 F 0 IS:k.S. U WS. N %.4( 1 4 q4, 4 ‘ .4 , ..`" , X ' t�L.''7�+ .�SIr �: '' a 41AA dam ` M k , 1 1 �‘‘....\ I 1 4W1 i li' -41 1 l \ i l — i §,'N § 1 lb,r , IlbA..iA41.01:AlkalSkk 'IN ' gRplitrZlierw' V‘Vilvi1/41% i t,,-4,_.4. ' � ate '� ® i i * s � ..: �., 1 ,, 6, 6_0, t , fit. 4 SXAMI NViSiLN■:`,UkciiWt % t 1 - wok.„- - 0‘ , k...v h'N-k1.-„F;,060.kolki*-k.-T-) -s1 , ` + •:t�.�:.:� ;'ran co al 2) 0) co 76 9Q - 2 15 '2 0) - 0) -- > c a) _c (1 3 FDI C() a) T. c 4_, 0) CO 0 E lc 2. -0 2 can ( 4.- "E cn > - ::".' O C C- CO a) ... ,....., , j , a) cy) -t zci 0 .c "C. c U) a) ) = C • -c = E 2 0 a) 2o — 4— CD E '''''' 0 -C (1.) ...c .I4 W ..g. ....- -5 4 'C CCIC - 0 co a) c • , v L. 4... 3 c a) a CL -E. £: as E a) .4,-. 0) O Q 0) ..c C O c 0) (1) C3) ' Cil "5" c tl.' N a) :2 (1) .c 0 70 a = F- 0 En U) (0 0.. ,-- 110Eff:MOMMIT' - -.41mc"7.4.N% c. womig.monoiommosolosoive0 iil cl g ,..:; , kl ,r,„ I' ",1 \..111.6. klit'ho,J i 1:4 41, • tT 43 CD CD 0 CD 0 5 . 0 0 0 0 (0 0 0 fn 0 0 0 (I) rif 0 sa) cn (r) (C) (0 0 F13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (/) 0 0 0 0 0 cp -. a a 0 to' < g .) 5 a) cc) a. n- - c) — CD O ED a) 0 O m" co -a CD 0 - 5 o 0 . co O m- a tD cD 5 < 0 X to X . 0 z a) Pa O (/ 0. a • n CD — 6 0 o a 0 0 , 1( cp 0 5 5 0 co cr , " if sn 9. -0, o o c 0 cr 0 CD r.t O L CI ., 0_ =- S 0 O * < r- jc: CD • 0 0 G) (0 OAKGREEN t, 59 60 • 62 63 64 '65 Uhi g N 410. ‘1,1! - 11 -16! 10111eigt4.4 :P‘ , Nac. r i r- firti ptim:".4.211-' 2 "Te‘' 1:16, tolkk N kt:ilk.111 _AL , J Ft o n r o Z 0. ••• 41 " rend „lone ci q • ,EtrAti 'W ale% se • ir ;, litraMIMA.,'WIKk`11:716--1:"4272;351'11 ci rn cCy o • o C 4 o _ • : o- , 5- CD -0 CD o D CD v CD 3 a 0 0_ • o o' CJ 0. CD O "a • 0 cn � ri. CD 0 c0 cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ct) 5' 0 0 0 0 to C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 :, 0" o cD r CD CD. • =.! 0 CD cn w#� o 0 0 0 o. Cll 0 co • 0 CD cr) O u , C CD O 3 co 0. cD co o � p 0 0 td O 0 CD 0 . O co m • - 0 HsM- m * a cD O < `C3 � � v g ow rn 7-7 at G) 0 0 0 0. 0 0 cr o. 0 0 3' 0 0 3 YM 0 4 - c?) co a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 o "'I o, (7 a) (0 0 0 0 0 0 co 0) 0 0 0 5. 0 0 4 -0 0 t in` ro a cp D • 0 � mo o .. CD CD • Cif 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Err 0 0 0 0 - 0 Z.'s) i c ' . i 1 i 1 0 i* 8 r 0 14 i i g i z cif 6 E r2, = rit4 rineara MEE ENE IN www wwwia. ` �'�►�` 1 1. 1 ' \�►'i►�,h .,r _�..,.�� istafro Lish k 411-,41%Amb MA(1`14MNP14171K i Bahia 1' ISODDLI hawk 8 A 0 71 x a • 111111NIMISINI )N FoNDAv N3 TiONVO EFL us i00 IOCUOSO E0 8 • 0 C•1 cn CO re) Lr re) re) re) rn re) r r■I CO t D • z a 0 LT_ z • L g z co re L L J W EjZ tu WO- rT z 0 5 6 0 z WO L" 0 p 8 1E2 w E o o 0, a. P "JA V 3 3 2 2 III 11111 11111 1111 1111 Nkti nun NEM LJ P 't4 201 IMMO. IF;00 o 4 1/ • F2 Na3NDXVO • i • CIA 1/rl1 J%/'1 - LOVES 11180N ' ^ 7 "1'lAA / /1/1tT v 1 1341.1.E fV 8 Ns Ix if pAe X �. . !RI. * 'p! Ql 3 *fat RI q ad A a S .G,9, MOt?I W6t1 33S 3N17 ISV3 MOLY W6L1 •* 03S 3NI7 1341 i; A OAKG ozr too /5, 9 s *z co•ro NUM Awn% 2 oo»rs 3 te ralos t 3 A V f N YJi � pz; so. ro TVZ9Z i 9T,9O.TOM A 380 vv ".M9o.ros At .*C r0.10 N co `V . „i a $ �" 6 ir9 Q330 M ,fl,tato N 033a J � t✓AlIAf ii.l3 Vf Y �� Y �l O 1 l ;lSfY3 .+M'ff1 ." Ca 4 ta Rit O if §§PS 2 mo m MgiP stg Tu � rA 1 4 pi g bqf WOK • f !! g' 1! 01 o 4 1 42- , i 8 Z A r H � 9TVZZ x„ iz, so. rox �. 4 /1 AA I\ I V /_.1�i V 1 - /Y11 V PJ (0 Lacy r IV 6 OP to Ai 071 0 -11 tal a x a rOt t1t tit W w N r.+ PTI -1 rs • .9 VSSA VIOS3NNIIN `511-1013H )111Vd NVO HIIION 30V111A N331:ONVO -40:0===•ftas— ,g .0-.6 1 1 ____ 1 J J • I4' -Il" OAKGREEN VILLAGE NORTH OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA VSSA IIIUIIIa IIIIIIIIIIIII Mme IMIHIMIM HflJON D'fflIA NJJI!NVO VSSA `dlOS3NNIW `S1HJI3H )121`dd NVO z u t 4 D r M OAKGREEN VILLAGE NORTH OAK PARK HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA VSSA C ■ MEIN. ■ • MINN ■ MINI ■ ■■ • • • I= I ■NNIN ■ • :�• II.M■ i 1 .'1 :6iciiu:Y:;a iwsta 03 70 A nt, . rtr�i . t, UJ 7' • z W J z 0 J — 0 Z J __.1 T z u.. : t ul (.r:f.f .�. .1.11•11. . —. .—. III MEM .N: ■ME ■ ■.•-• ■EM.■ OMEN■ MINIM ■ OM= ■ •Mir ■—■ ;�1};I4 kS. + .....`.t; 1 �:� 7 : 1 � 1 ;t} , It��:�;l�Yi.��� ., •,rtv n,.`e'�fl Hr n VSSA `dlOS3NNIW I S1HD13H )IbVd NdO HflION JDV11IA N]JJ!D)VO . { ■ � a1iiil! l 1 I� t'h ESC t;� 1 t' f liSi it(i E r Id 'Gu lit •�.; 11, (I ...11111. � 'AP !i alr I I iN •• - 4 L . 1— ►1- W J z J 0_ U U t— J v 0 Oc m z 0_ J J U OC m • • 6 "3 . 4-4 5'-0" - 6'3" -10 4 3' -10"1 "-6 1 is0-19G I , ` � 1 sOn9c _ 1 111 C MEI IBM , ." ' . c,, ,_ quo 11 0_. _ 01 to rt 1 s ongE 1 pOnG6 60-1 IrOncE NMI tang K OInG i I MINI NMI NNE Mil 1 ......1 —.a.. T ■ir N MI _ N : It ,- 1 _ MP 4D mil; 5 4 1 4 i n .9-19 1 ,4 Eirl .0-4€ I .4 . IP , _,...__.; _ _ _ _ ____. *1 NM.= . ,.. rim t is : :4 . 1;1 — .01-4 pang k il..,' 11 111 % A - = NMI MIN 0 , in .,.." ""a'' 11,11411 CAM O►/- IIIIIIZI o T o EMI . � b 1 1 �.. P' alp ' k " ' ,..s. 110 do.] .... , :y i n - - ilk t 1iilmi. - � Q ,, .9",r1 .G"',r ` 11 l :~' --' �Si ' X4.7 _.. ... may MOW �� l A 1111 I I _ ° '" , d ti Y ,I • • L FLOOR PLAN • ' P.O. 119 STILLWATER, MN 55082-0119 • 651439 -4187 .. ANCHOBAYPRO, January 11, 2005 Mr. Eric Johnson City Administrator City of Oak Park Heights P.O. 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Dear Eric: Throughout the part 18 mouths we have worked on the Oak Green Villas development. We received general plan approval for the first phase of our town homes consisting of 87 units. We had earlier received "Concept Approval" for the whole development, which consisted of approximately 203 • units. We had 111 town home units and 92 apartment units in that plan. Throughout the planning and meeting process, questions of density arose. At this time we are prepared to submit a "scaled down" plan in conjunction with our application for tax increment financing assistance for the Oakgreen portion of the plat. The new configuration removes the. 92 apartments and replaces them with 39 town homes the total unit count of this amended application is 158 units: effectively reducing the density by 45 households. All of the town homes would be " for -sale" and have sales prices beginning at the $179,900 level. . We plan on submitting our materials in time for the March planning meeting. Please keep us advised to any other necessary informaion you might need before then. Could you please forward this letter to the councilmember's? Thank you for your time and please feel free to call me with any questions. Sincerely, Tim Nolde Anchobaypro, Inc. Cc Dan Lindh • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• EXHIBIT 2 • • • • • • • Anchobaypro, February 9, 2005 Dear Members: Sincerely, Tim Nolde Anchobaypro, Inc. City of Oak Park Heights Council and Planning Commission Members 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 RE: OAKGREEN VILLAGE NARRATIVE FOR REAPPLICATION P.O. 119 STILLWATER, MN 55082 -0119 651-439 -4187 Please find enclosed our application and the appropriate fees for Oakgreen Villas. You are aware you approved a similar plan to this approximately one year ago. The major change is the inclusion of the land conceptually approved earlier and the lowering of the density by eliminating the apartment buiklings and replacing with town homes. This plan involves two phases, with Phase Two covering the area in our proposed TIP' district, which will be addressed at another forum. Because of the size and nature of the development, our grading will include all of Phase One at the initial construction stage. We desire that Nutmeg and Novak Avenues' remain as public streets and all other interim: roads in the development remain private. Our plan includes a "tot lof'ipatk area which we propose remains private. Staff Wised some concern about the style of town home proposed instead of our apartment buildings. Our decision is guided by the affordability and differing product factors, in as -such as these units are closer to the power lines and the commercial aspects of Highway 36. We see no other logical alternative. Since we are decreasing the density from 90 units to 36, we thought the governing bodies would welcome this change. The fact that the "hammerhead" and parking areas are not totally well liked by staf should not be a deterrent in your decision - making process. These concepts work the best and have been given careful consideration by our engineers'. We feel we have accommodated all parties concerned and hope you feel the same. We look forward to working with you to bring about a nice project. • • • . • • • • w • • • • • • • t • 1 • • • • • . • • EXHIBIT 3 • e4 • follows, to wit: and and RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION E5TABLISHIlVG FINDINGS OF FACT AND RESOLUTION OF TBE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE REQUEST BY VALLEY SENIOR SERVICES ALLIANCE FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE AREA NORTH OF 58 STREET AND WEST OF OAKGREEN AVENUE, KNOWN AS OAKGREEN VILLAGE BE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has received a request from Valley Senior Services Alliance for planned unit development general plan and preliminary/final plat approval for the area north of 58 Street and west of Oakgreen Avenue, known as Oakgreen Village, and after having conducted a public hearing relative thereto, the Planning Commission of Oak Park Heights recommended that the application be approved with conditions. The City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights makes the following findings of fact: 1. The real property affected by said application is legally described as SEE ATTACHMENT A 2. The applicant has submitted an application and supporting documentation to the Community Development Department consisting of the following items: SEE ATTACHMENT B 3. The site is zoned CBD, Central Business District and a planned unit development general plan and preliminary/final plat approval is required for the project; and 4. The City staff prepared a memorandum dated December 31, 2003 reviewing the request; and 5. The memorandum from City staff recommended that the request be approved with conditions; and EXHIBIT 4 1. SEE ATTACHMENT A 2 6. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their January 8, 2004 meeting, took comments from the applicants and public, closed the public hearing, and recommended that the applicant be approved subject to conditions. NOW, 'i] IJ REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY 1kLE CITY COUNCIL, FOR THE CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS 'THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE FOLLOWING: A. The application submitted by Valley Senior Services Alliance for planned unit development general plan and preli. ' /final plat approval for the area north of 58 Street and west of Oakgreen Avenue, known as Oakgreen Village, and affecting the real property as follows: Be and the same as hereby approved the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights subject to the following conditions: The preliminary /final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and City Attorney. 2. The final plat must be revised to include additional right -of -way, as determined by the City tY Engineer, for turn lanes at the intersections of 58 th Street North with Oakgreen Avenue North, Nutmeg Boulevard, and Novak Avenue North. 3. Proposed street right -of -way widths, pavement widths, and intersection designs are subject to City Engineer review and approval. 4. The proposed "drop off lane" in the public street right -of -way in front of the apartment buil ding on Nutmeg Boulevard is subject to Public Works Director review and approval. 5. The applicant must comply with Xcel Energy's requirements, as specified in a March 26, � p 2003 letter to Todd Erickson from Xcel Energy, for construction of a pond within the Xcel Energy easement. The applicant shall resubmit the development plans to Xcel Energy to assure compliance with all utility requirements. Written approval from Xcel Energy shall be provided to the City. 6. On the final plat, Nutmeg Street North must be changed to Nutmeg Boulevard subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and Washington County. 7. The applicant must either give the area for 59 Street to the City in fee without credit toward park dedication requirements, or language must be included in the development contract with the applicant that the City reserves the option for taking an 80-foot-wide right-of-way for 59 Street in the future without payment to the owner. The right -of -way dedication or option shall be approved by the City Attorney and included in the development agreement. • • • 1 • 8. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, all existing wells must be identified, capped and • abandoned in conformance with Minnesota Rules. 9. If the house at 5830 Oakgreen Avenue North, on the subject property, continues to be occupied after construction begins in that area, an acceptable sewage disposal solution must be provided subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 10. If the townhomes east of Nutmeg Avenue are constructed before the apartments, the applicant must continue the sidewalk to provide a connection to Oakgreen Avenue North at the time that the townhomes are constructed. 11. Sidewalks and timing for construction are subject to review and approval by the Parks Conunission, City Council, and City Engineer. The sidewalks shall be included as Plan A improvements as part of the development agreement. The final location of the sidewalk/trail on 58* Street shall be addressed in the development agreement. The 58 Street sidewalk/trail shall be paid for by the developer, including a reasonable escrow deposit for five years of maintenance if such location is determined to be in the City right -of -way. 12. The Park Commission recommends a cash park dedication for Oakgreen Village North. Park dedication must be paid at the time of recording of the final plat. The specific terms of the dedication will be addressed in the development agreement. 13. The submitted photometric plan is subject to the review and approval of City staff A • revised lighting plan, incorporating standard City street lighting, shall be submitted subject to City staff review and approval. The City Council shall determine who will pay for fixture installation, maintenance and operating costs. 14. The site plan does not include lights on buildings. If lights are proposed on the buildings, they must be illustrated on the building plans, details submitted, and the photometric plan niust be revised to include them subject to City staff review and approval. 15. If signage is proposed, a plan and details must be submitted for City review and approval. Two monument signs shall be allowed for the development, subject to final review and compliance with the City's Sign Ordinance. 16. The landscape plan must be revised to comply with the City Arborist's recommendations found in a report dated December 28, 2003. The revised plan is subject to City Arborist review and approval. 17. Grading, drainage, erosion control, and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Storm water issues are also subject to review and approval by the applicable watershed authority. 18. The proposed vinyl lap siding must be changed to steel or Hardiboard lap siding subject to final review and approval of the City Planner. 19. The applicant shall dedicate the wetland area north of 58t` Street (Outlot H) to the City. 20. The applicant is required to enter into a development agreement with the City in a form acceptable to the City, and subject to review and approval of the City Attorney. 21. The site plans are subject to review and approval of the City Fire Inspector. 22. The applicant's traffic study for the Oakgreen Village development shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 23. The former Stillwater Auto Salvage Yard, located to the west of the proposed Novak Avenue, shall be "cleaned up" including removal of all automobiles and hazardous waste, fences, and buildings as described in a plan to be provided by the applicant and approved by City staff. The cleanup of the property shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit, but no later than August 1, 2004. 2004. ATTEST: Approved by the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights this 9th day of March Eric k Johnson, City Administrator 4 • David Beaudet, Mayor • 0 u W 0 itf + „, . rr�rr; 1 iiimammu,' e� ....r gales -1- 'ulimiti liP -..7.2.1witemlipitetrittigar .1 II wv P r 1 0jEglit l i r i glig#6 3 1 11 01.--- ----------- I -- ”' ,s_< mei al,11111111 VII RIF t i c) pm .. A `���, rrrrrrr� I v+ + 01IIIIIIIIID io3 • , `1 < 1 / 1 1 / (1 -se 1 / I t �r ,� 2n . ) 4 r � c P _ A /f MOW J I i 1 • 1 1:& ' r • I a. ' r� g60 • ■ r • • 1 • • • � ' r ti • • • Q armor 111 ret fff filiftlifftft fraffiliff fiffilftftifiiff Ifftliififf !E ISNiiir ffE NE fffffSIEfff 55ffEr3iff1555 !CffliriiEi ss jj�� V J rIJ gg MJr�� aa i3sfi!J$l! g :t it!littliiilt 2a +At *lka2 14i 431114144 =141 31143141441 14414111141141 44441144444 2?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? ? ?? 2 ? ? ? ?1? ?? ? ? ? ?: ; ? ? ? ? ? ?x? ? ? ? ?x ? ? ? yes IIIiiliIij iiiiiiiiiii ose iii x iiiii til 1111111111111 1111#11111#1#1 1flI1II!!HH ffiliffiffiffiliff 515115EUUEEflUUNEE I ail *XsiiS3..vew - 0010100111111 44J441JJJ2Juu=JJ13 ?? ?222 ? ? ? ?22 ? ? ? ? ?? ii 1111111111#11111.1 Y4.�wYv • s 4 0 Memo City of Oak Park Heights To: Planning Commission From Julie A. Hultman Date: April 7, 2005 Re: Annual Meeting & Election of Chair and Vice Chair ENCLOSURE 5 John Dwyer and Mike Liljegren's appointed terms culminate May 31, 2005. John will be completing his second full -term appointment and Mike his first. As to Commissioner Terms the Bylaws state that (1) appointments shall initiate and be established b y city (2) unless extended by special order of the � council resolution; City Council for a period of one year, no member shall serve more than two consecutive terms on the Planning Commission. Staff asks Commissioners Dwyer and Liljegren to advise them as to whether or not they wish to seek reappointment so that they may follow the necessary steps for Council to take action. As to Officer Terms, the Bylaws state that (1) the officers shall be elected from among its appointed members, (2) for terms of two years; and that no member shall serve as Chair or Vice Chair for more than two consecutive terms. The election of officers, if a term is up is to be held at the commission annual meeting. Chair - Should John remain on the Commission, assuming he seeks reappointment and the City Council grants a one -year term extension, he could remain as the Chair until March of 2006, when his second full term as Commission Chair would end, with the annual meeting and election of new Chair. If John does not wish to seek reappointment or in the event a one -year extension of his appointment is not granted, the Commission will need to elect a new Chair. Vice Chair - Mike Runk is currently the Vice Chair and is currently in his second term in this position, which will end March of 2006, when a new Vice Chair will need to be appointed.