The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-12-2005 Planning Commission Meeting PacketVIII. Old Business: X. Adjournment CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Thursday, May 12, 2005 — 7:00 p.m. Estimated Times 7:00 I. Call to Order: II. Approval of Agenda III. Approve Minutes of April 14, 2005 (1) W. Department f Commission Liaison 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. 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. (2) B. Ron Gullickson: To consider requests for garage Variance and Conditional Use Permit allowin g a tri-plex residential dwelling in an R -2 residential zoning district, located at 5480 Stagecoach Trail, N. (3) C. Pine Grove Gardens: To consider requests for Concept and General Planned Unit Development (PID) and Rezoning from 0, open space to R- 3, multiple family residential for construction of 26 residential units, within five townhome buildings, located south of 60t St. and East of Oakgreen Ave. N., to be known as Pine Grove Gardens. (4) VII. New Business: A. Annual Meeting: Election of Chair and Vice Chair & Commission Vacanacies (5) B. Central Business District Update IX. Informational: A. Next Meeting: June 9, 2005 — Regular Meeting @ 7:00 p.m. B. Council Representative: May — Commissioner Runk June — Commissioner Oswald CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, April 14, 2005 ENCLOSURE Call To Order: Vice Chair Runk called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Lil' e en Oswald and Wasescha. City Planner Richards, City Administrator Johnson and Commission Liaison McComber. Absent: Chair Dwyer. Approval of Agenda: Vice Chair Runk noted that Stillwater Crossing and withdrawn their application and requested the same be removed from the public hearing portion of the Agenda. Commissioner Liljegren, seconded by Commissioner Oswald, moved to approve the Agenda, as amended, removing "Stillwater Crossing LLC" from under Public Hearings. Carried 4 -0. Approve Minutes of March 10, 2005: Commissioner Liljegren, seconded by Commissioner Oswald, moved to approve the Minutes as presented. Carried 4-0. Department /Commission Liaison Reports /Other Reports: A. Commission Liaison: B. St. Croix Crossing Update: Commission Liaison McComber provided a brief update, nothing that the next Stakeholders Group meeting is now anticipated to be held in July. • C. Other: Visitors /Public Comment: There being no visitors to the meeting other than those present for items published Agenda, on the ublished A enda, Vice Chair Runk moved to the Public Hearings portion of the Agenda. Public Hearings: A. Xcel Energy A.S. King 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. City Administrator Johnson provided a report as to the request of Xcel Energy to fill a ditch at the A.S. Kin facility, not�n. that a conditional use permit is required per City Ordinance 308.08: Land King tY noting Reclamation & Grading. Johnson discussed the request and reviewed proposed conditions, subject to Planning Commission approval should they recommend approval. Vice Chair Runk g public opened the ublic hearin for comment. There being no visitors to the public hearing, Commissioner Liljegren, seconded by Commissioner Oswald, moved to close the public hearing. Carried 4 -0. Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2005 Page 2 of 4 Commissioner Oswald, seconded by, Commissioner Liljegren, moved to recommend City Council approval, subject to 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 Oration for final review. Once comments are provided to Xcel Energy and provided to the City, they may potentially proceed. 3. Xcel Energy shall submit drainage plans to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for review by Molly Shodeen. Once comments are provided to Xcel Energy and provided to the City, they may potentially proceed. Carried 4 -0. B. 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 58t' St. and west of Oakgreen Ave. City Planner Richards reviewed the April 7, 2005 planning report as to the requests, provided an issue analysis and discussed the same with the Commission. Vice Chair Runk opened the public hearing and invited the applicant and those wishing to speak to the matter to address the Commission. Tim Nolde -- Anchobaypro, Inc., introduced himself and noted that the proposed plan was prepared with consideration given to the City Council's concerns and questions at the time of receiving approval to the original plan in 2004. He feels that they have followed process and stated that he feels blindsided by the recommendation of the planning report. Joy Linder — Pondview Condo Resident: expressed her concern as to 59th St., noting that it is basically their driveway and parking. Discussion was had as to the proposed outlook of this in light of the project itself and potential Hwy. 36 and service road changes. Lisa Anderson — Pondview Condo Resident: expressed her concern as to density and 59th St., noting that she does not want to see 59th St. constructed. Allen Black — Sr. Housing Partners, introduced himself as the co- applicant to this project and stated that the also felt that they had a proposal that met approvals. He stated that one of the long -range plans for the project has been to provide affordable housing to the area and that he believes that there is a need for the type of housing being proposed. Valessa Caspers — 1395056th St. N.: expressed concerns as to the traffic at the 58th St. and Oakgreen Ave. intersection, to the amount of traffic to the area in g density. and densi . She stated that she would like to see that the best use of the property is made and that ultimately she is not sure how she feels about the project proposed. She encouraged decision making to be right so as to respect the feelings and needs of the people living in the area. 4 .' • • • Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2005 Page 3 of 4 There being no other visitors to the public hearing, Vice Chair Runk, seconded by Commissioner Oswald, moved to close the public hearing. Carried 4 -0 Commission discussion ensued as to a variety of issues, including density, traffic, roadway design and safety, affordable housing, land use, status of the central business district and its affect upon the proposal, greenspace and park area, among others. Commissioner Wasescha expressed that a moratorium should be made until the fate of the central business district was determined and moved to recommend that it be so. Discussion ensued as to a moratorium and the earlier issues of concern. Commissioner Wasescha withdrew his motion. Commissioner Oswald, seconded by, Commissioner Wasescha, moved to recommend City Council denial based upon the areas of concern expressed by the Planning Commission. Carried 4 -0. New Business: A. Annual Meeting & Election of Chair and Vice Chair: City Administrator Johnson noted a brief conversation he had with Chair Dwyer indicating that he may not be inclined to seek reappointment. Commissioner Liljegren stated that he would be seeking reappointment. Commissioner Oswald announced his intention to resign, agreeing to stay on until his seat can be filled. Discussion was had as to terms and the bylaws. Vice Chair Runk, seconded by Commissioner Wasescha, moved to recommend that the City Council reappoint Commissioner Liljegren to a second full term with the Planning Commission. Carried 4 -0. The annual meeting and election of Chair and Vice Chair was continued to the May meeting, when they had all Commissioners present. Old Business: None. Informational: A. Development Project Updates: City Administrator Johnson and City Planner Richards updated the Commission as to potential public hearing applicants for May, noted that discussion of the Comprehensive Zoning and Parks Plans were in the future; and that a draft of the Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint may be available in October. B. Next Meeting: May 12, 2005 7:00 p.m. — Regular Meeting C. Council Representative: April -- Commissioner Wasescha May — Commissioner Runk Adjournment: Vice Chair Runk, seconded by Commissioner Liljegren, moved to adjourn at 8:01 p.m. Carried 4 -0. Respectfully submitted, Juli - A. Hultman Community Development Approved by the Planning Commission: Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2005 Page 4 of 4 • • • MEMORANDUM ENCLOSURE 2 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 783.231.2555 Facsimile: 783.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: May 5, 2005 RE: Oak Park Heights -- Oakgreen Village Revised PUD Concept Plan FILE NO: 798.02 -- 04.17 Based upon the comments of the Planning Commission at their April 14, 2005 meeting, Tim Nolde of Anchobaypro, Inc. requested the City Council not to take action on the concept plan for Oakgreen Village but rather send the project back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Nolde has made revisions to the concept in response to Planning Commission and City staff comments. Anticipating that a new concept plan submittal would have been made last week, City staff scheduled a public hearing for the May 12, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. A formalized concept plan was not received until May 4, 2005. It is recommended that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, take comments from the public and discuss the concept plan. The Planning Commission should then continue the public hearing and discussion until the June meeting. The applicant will then make a full submission of the required information. The revised plan eliminates Nutmeg Avenue and the second easterly access point onto 58 Street. The total number of units has been decreased from 149 to 120 with this most recent submittal. The units adjacent to the Xcel Energy easement would be one level townhomes but the southerly units would remain as previously proposed. IIMI NM ENCLOSURE 3 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacplanning.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Ann Kluessendorf / Scott Richards DATE: May 3, 2005 RE: Oak Park Heights — Ronald Gullickson Property: 5480 Stagecoach Trail North FILE NO: 789.02 - 05.04 BACKGROUND Ronald Gullickson of 5480 Stagecoach Trail North has requested to expand his lawful non - conforming three unit dwelling. These changes will require a conditional use permit for his expansion and a variance for the proposed number of required garage stalls. Attached for reference: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Site location map Site plan Proposed elevations Floor plan — main level Floor plan -- lower level ISSUES ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan Oak Park Heights Land Use Plan designates the subject site as Highway Business/Warehouse. Zoning The subject site is zoned R -2 (Low & Medium Density Residential). Within this district, a multiple family dwelling structure of not more than four (4) units may be allowed through a conditional use permit. • • Conditional Use Permit The existing dwelling consists of three units of the following proportions: Unit 1: Unit 2: Unit 3: Three (3) bedrooms, one (1) bath and attached garage space Three (3) bedrooms, one (1) bath One (1) bedroom and one (1) bath According to submitted application materials, the expansion of the existing structure would add two rooms; one (1) room to Unit #2 and one (1) room to Unit #3. This expansion would be two stories in height and add approximately six hundred ninety (690) square feet of floor area. The applicant has not indicated the proposed uses of these additional rooms. According to Ordinance, any structure lawfully existing shall not be enlarged, but may be continued at the size and in the manner of operation upon such date except as hereinafter specified in the R -2 district or, subsequently amended. The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to allow the structure as a legal three unit multiple family dwelling in accordance with Section 401.26.E. That section of the Ordinance provides the following conditions for review: 3) Multiple family dwelling structures of not more than four (4) units, provided that: a. The proposed site contains at least three thousand five hundred (3,500) square feet per dwelling unit. Lot is approximately nineteen thousand two hundred and sixty (19,260) square feet in area, which would accommodate six thousand four hundred twenty (6,420) square feet per unit. Applicant meets this criterion. b. The proposed site is located adjacent to a collector or minor arterial street. Subject site is located adjacent to Stagecoach Trail, an Oak Park Heights collector street. Applicant meets this criterion. c. At least one (1) garage space is provided for each dwelling unit. One (1) garage space is provided for all three units. Applicant does not meet this criterion. d. The proposed site is landscaped and screened with planting materials in compliance with Section 401.15.E. of this Ordinance. A landscape plan was not submitted with application. Applicant does not meet this criterion. e. The proposed structure design is reasonably compatible with its low density residential environment, as determined by the City Council. Yes, the structure is consistent with the existing architecture of a single family home as well as its surrounding context of other single family homes. The applicant meets this criterion. 2 Variance f. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8. of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. In general, the proposed plan meets provisions of this Ordinance. One (1) garage stall is currently provided on the subject site for the three unit dwelling. Ordinance Section 401.15.F.(9)(v) states that for multiple family dwellings, at least two (2) free spaces are required for each unit. A total of six (6) spaces, three of which are enclosed will be required for this property. Mr. Gullickson has proposed one (1) additional garage space which would total two (2) spaces for three units. According to submitted application materials, the proposed location for this additional garage stall and construction plans depicting size and dimensions are not shown. A revised site plan shall be submitted with the two (2) garage stalls and at least four (4) with outside parking spaces clearly delineated would be needed to determine if this condition can be met. A deviation from the literal Ordinance provisions are granted in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. A variance shall not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that: 1) Undue hardship would result if the variance is denied. 2) Literal interpretation of the provisions would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district or deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to a reasonable use. 3) The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do no result from the actions of the applicant. 4 Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the dame district under the same conditions. 5) The request is not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings in the same district. 6) The request is not a use variance. 7) The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the intended purposed of the applicant. 8) The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses. ACTION REQUESTED Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider one of the following actions: Conditional Use Permit 1. Approval of the CUP, based on a finding that the proposed addition is consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 2. Denial of the CUP, based on a finding that the proposed addition is inconsistent with the zoning requirements. Variance 1. Approval of the Variance, based on a finding that the two (2) garage spaces provide sufficient parking for a three unit dwelling. 2. Denial of the Variance, based on a finding that the variance does not meet the Section 401.26.E.(3)(c) requirement of at least one (1) garage space for each dwelling unit. • STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Planning staff recommends approval of the CUP. The addition of two (2) rooms appears to be consistent with the City's regulations relating to such structures. This recommendation would include the following conditions: 1) Location of the expansion meets the R -2 standards for setbacks. 2) Expansion construction is consistent with the architecture and materials of the existing home. 3) Revised site plan is submitted with two (2) garage spaces and four (4) outside parking spaces with driveway clearly delineated. 4) Landscape plan is submitted with screening /plantings demarked in accordance with Section 401.15.E. With regard to the variance, planning staff does not recommend approval. The Zoning Ordinance Section 401.15.F.(9)(v) states that for multiple family dwellings, at least two (2) free spaces are required for each unit. Mr. Gullickson's existing three unit dwelling is non - conforming, as it only provides one (1) garage space for three tenants. The addition of one (1) garage space would not bring the property up to zoning standards. As a result, there would not appear to be any unique condition or hardship that would justify the variance. _ i 20 a 18 s� ' IT M0 16 !• 15 AD 14 !a 13 $4 • !2 11 21 19 MIA i 1 1 1 • N GG' / 1 4 _, • tr AL ;we ktp 8EACH"S RESERVATIO CROFUT'S RESERVATIO N 21 1tTY JF DA 7/; MINNESOTA STATE P.RISt 2410 r Real Eata Graphics, Ins 0 cOPYR1OHT 1MT J-2S-9? EXHIBIT 1 ttl 21 • • c • -- r _ �_ r . 1 O 7. ,, 072 3 Z c „ a1), Ai • , 9;,.: 0 1 Id 2 t 1 i i • „ , 1(C ' t f` 1 , „ 1 1 1 . , „ W 1 w ... ... .... .� 4 �O —Ol • -\ • cf) W • r - a PA • Pr M • •.• 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1190••► • • • • • r • 1 • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••• • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••• ►11.11••• • • • • • • • • • • • ,• • • • • • • i t • • • ! • • 44.• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • t • • • • • • • a • • 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • • • • • • • • • • I • it • to • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • .• • • • • • 1 n/ • ; • • • • • 1 • t • • • • • • • • • be • • • t 1 r - ....._.: _ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • t ................ • • •••■•• • • • . • • •Dmi,K• .: • • i • • • .. : .. • • ..... . ....... • .11•••••• .. : ...... ••••i••••••••• • • • • •• • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••• ••• ►•••••••••••• ••M•f•••••• • • • •• •••••••••••••••••••••• ►••• )r•,j) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t•.ww rr. • • • • • • • • • r. • • • •• • • •~ 1 • • • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • + 11 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ; • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ; • • • • • • ▪ •• :• • •••••••1 ••••••41 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •11 • • • • • • • • • • • BUILDING SIZE: Basement First Floor.._.. 3 pi Second Floor , Third Floor, • NOS SKETCH ADDENDUM f■a. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • ` • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • w • • • • • • • • • • • 1111 • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t 1 • • • • • • • ► • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••••••••••:•••;• 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • ion • • • • • • t • • • 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • State • • • • • • • • : • 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • ► • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • ♦ f • • • • • • 1111 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 0 1 • • • • • • ► • • • I • • • • • • • t • •.•... • b. • t • • 1111 ► • • • • • • r• • • 1 • • • • • t • Gj • 60: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • j r • 0••••• ••••••••••••••••••• •••••1>f �y6�l •••••_•••••••••••• •••••••••••• ••••••• ••••••••••••••••••• •••••111141•0•••••••••1 f ■ ` • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • /� • ffMM ► • • • ► • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • ∎ • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • • • • • • • 11.11 • • • • • • • • • ► • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • ' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ► • • • • J • • • • • • • • ► • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ; •► • • • • • • • • ► • • ► f • • • / • • • : • _,• • • • V r 1 • • 7+• " • 9 • i • • • • : • • • • • • • • • ' • t • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • t ;iT7 • • • • • � • • • • • • : ♦ • • • t • • • • f ► • • • • • ► • • • i • • • • 111041 ice• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 6•►•••,•••• ••••••••• ►••••••••••••••••••••• •t•.••••••►••r••••)••••• • 1• ••••••••••••••••••••• • ••••11.••••••• ••.•••• ••••••••••• •0:04. • •••••• ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • • •11•••• ••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • f • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • ! • • • • • • • • .... 71 .... 64 :::1:1 ' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• 1111 ••••••1 • FAA% • 0. • • • f • • • • 1 • • • • • • • • 11.11• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11 • • ••• • • • • • • • • • f • • • ••• *AA • • • • • • f • • •;• • • ! • f ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • ► •• • • ' " • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1111•' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 9 f • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • R • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ................ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f • • • 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • 6 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • : • • • • • • • • • Settle: 1 i� 'Ws Us PORCHES & MISC. BLDGS.: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PUkTiJ 3"?6 I,EV61 — t LtaXsia . Lela- tic-- �7�( - I1I'TBffl? 'QR 'KIC}ll ' EXHIBIT 4 • �� ^••�� '�� ••�� ''^ :Of ^``'`^^:^^`^'^^^^o^'^'^``^^:^^^^^^^^^:^^,...~..■:....,••,, �� • i��`^^'^`:^^~^^^°^^ '' `^^^- ` ^' ^^ ^^^^ • ^`^�^^^^`^^'^�^^^^`^^^^ ��|��Y��•�� ^^~:.,......�l��• `^':^`'•• ... ,�..~^~.� .�� .. `' • BOtt*WIMCIiom Property Aumass Lender • • } , ,, , ,, ,, ......... ,. .,. .. .. ..=�. ^ 1•••:••••••••• ...i..,...... ..^ ....,. , ,, � �� .....*~. ^^`^^`^' WILDING SIZE: SIN» 506.664itt-k 14'. • county ••••••••••• ••••••x ^^^ ,,..,.. . ..,,.... • Buonuumot. First Floor Second Floor Third Floor ��.^. ~_ ~:~~ . .,_ ,.•~•~ ..� ��.�� ..,�� ,...,.,.:.,,.,,.~. �� ~ �� ,,,�r� .�,,^,^i~.,,,,,,. �•••• ... ^.,...... ,..**�� .�� ^^` ``^'^^.^. ,,..,,. i••• ••• ,,,,,,,, ' • �� .~.`^. .�" .� i � ^ -� ` ^^^``' • PR./ •.... ** 0 s ** : .4 o s 1 1 104••••• • ** i■ ***** .0 ** 1: .. . .... • • • ^ ' is••••••••:es I. .~. ................... i ...,..... • ..;�,.,. • 4�� _,��.�� :;, • • • ~ � , . . ^ . . . . • . . . . . . . . . : . . . . ' ' ' ' ' .� ' . •• ' ' • ..••••• ''' .—''''''' 10 . 11 11• 1 . 1 04 1 ••••••••••••••••• .. .,. ~=~• •••:••••••••• .........x....~~~. . ••• �� •C•�� ^^^�^^^~��m��^ `~, '.' ......,^ ~°=_,.��°��. ,.. c' � »��••••••• � ..,~^~^^.^^''`^~^`u^^^^^ ^^^ �� ' ��U�� •••o•••••••• ^ ^w��0^^^^:^^^^^^^^^:^^`^'^ • •• ^ ^^`; ^�r ^^^0^ ,., .. .-~ �~ .~ .' ~~ ' '''— Li. . '— '- - --- . .�°. ^~.. . ^ ..~' ......., .~"...~.. ... .^.,.....^.~....,. ..... '... ~`^ ^~ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^'^^^^ ^ . ....... � .. ..... , ... .. �� "^^^^^ } ••• ••••••••• •••••••••: .•••• ..~ ......... ....45 . •• . so ••••••• ••••••�•�• I ..��•••• •••:• ••• '~^ ••••••••• ^^^ :.. : ,.. ..... .,.~ ••••••• `. •• .^..^,...:,^, • SKET61-1 ADDENDUM ••• ••• `^`` • .... .... ..^.. ... •••1111 ... ,^',~..^ • ••• •• . , ...~^.�~... ••• ^~`` •••••• ^^` . . "/• `^^ ^ ^ '^~^^�^^^''``^ ��.... : ... • ,��"� �� b f ....`''^ ~,.,,,~.,:^... ~��C�~ . .~. � �� ; ... � �� ^^^'^^~^^^^^^^^^^`x^^ • �� ' ��.�: . |� •••••••••• .~� ••• » .. •^^:•,`^•`^^^|••••• • ^^^ ��•e D�� ^ . • • .. ... ~^^ .. State ~~~ ..'.,^,.^»,.'...^. ......... ~~^~~~~~~~` ••••••••• ,.••••••• '^ ^^~ ~ ^^' ,, ,,, , ,,, `^^^^^^^' ......... ......... ......... ...~..~.. ••••••••• .^......, ^'^ ,,,, 15aii.1 •i:••~. ~~~~ at 0114 li .••• ... .....;~.~..^... ^^ ^^^^^^`^`^`'` •• .,.••:•••••••• ,.,...,.. ......~.. ��••••• ^``~'``'^t'~^^^`^^^ .~.,,...^ ...~,..,. '`'`'`^'^ '^^^^^`'^ ,..~...., ^,.....,. .��.�� .~,...... ..... .... BETTENDORFIROIIIIERIBOCREIWAlli', .. • ,,,....,. .....,,.~ . .. ..... .. :�11•11 • .... .... `^^^'^`^^ ••••^^^•^ ......... ......... �� • .~.. ^^'^~`^^^ `^' ...•• .... •.. ••••••••• ... ~~.^~^..... ~~^..~~..~~~~'^~^. ....,...~I... ........ �.. 0 ;if.. .. �� • M66 MP �� ........ .."~..... •• •••••• ..~"° `^' ,,,,,, .~,.,. 10•••• ...... ^'`^ '^I^~^^'^`i~^^^^` ~^^ ` ^^^^^l^^'^^`^^^ ^ ..� ' ...... ,..... ,� ^^'." .^. :^. ....... ' ' , • .... : ...... ........ . ......~.. ^..~.^.,,:.,^,^..~.i..... • ,,,,, .... ,,,, ^`^~ ...,.. ,"..,... .... • ^ �� ... ^�� ~~`.~~~~~~ ...,... ~.^.~..,~ ,."...~~• �� `^^^^' ••••• . �. ..,~ ,^. .. Zip Code •~~•••••1 '^`~`'^^` ' ...`..',. . . . .. . . . . `^ ``^`~^` ,.....,,. ^^^^^'^`' ^^~^^''`~ ,, .,....., ^^^^'^'`` ^^`^^` ~~~~~~~.,... ^^^`~'``' ^^^^`^^'' ......... . ....... '. ~~~~^~~^~~` ..... ••••••••• . ........ ^^^^^`^^' ^`~~`^'^^ `^^^^^'^' ^^~^`'`~' ^`^^'^'`` ......... ',..^,... .. ......^.. ^``^'^``^ ..~^,,'., ^ ^^'`^^^^ . ..^....^ ......... ~~^~~~~^~~~ ,,,, ......,.. '........ . ..,.^., . .,....,.. ^^^^`^^'` ^~ ^^^^`'' , ..... .,. ... ..... ......,'. Scale: . PORCHU & MISC. BLDGS.: . .. .......... . " ...^,.... . '````^`` • ^^`^^^`'` ' ~.....'., • ~ '~ . ••••••~ .• .".^.. • ^^^^~^`^` ..~....~, . ••••••••• • ••••••••• • `~^^`^^^^ • ��:��• . ^^^^^|^^^`` ^^ EXHIBIT 5 Memo 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N • Box 2007 • Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 • Phone (651) 439 -4439 Fax (661) 439 -0574 To: Planning Commission From: Jim Butler, Building Official Date: May 11, 2005 Re: 5480 Stagecoach Trail (Gulickson) CUP & Variance Request With respect to the above- referenced request, please note: 1. That while the the dwelling has been operating as a triplex it is not a legal, non- conforming triplex as indicated. The dwelling was granted permission and issued a construction permit to convert the single family dwelling into a duplex on September 24, 1985: No other requests or permits for conversion beyond the duplex have been granted. 2. On February 12, 1996, 1 issued a permit was issued to the homeowner, Brian Smith, for remodeling, windows, steps, sheetrock, and soffit repair. The homeowner was advised at this time that the dwelling was not to be used as a triplex and should he desire to so he would have to apply for a variance. 3. On May 11, 2005, 1 conducted a site visit of the dwelling and it appears that there has been ongoing repair and/or alterations to the residence for which no permit has been requested. The last permit issued to the residence was for a gas line replacement on March 9, 1999. 4. The unit has two gas meters and two mailboxes. 5. In January of 1999 an appraisal was made of the property and in it contents it states that per the City and the owner, Mr. Smith, the property is a duplex. It also notes that a variance would have to be granted by the City of Oak Park Heights Council to permit a triplex. It would be my recommendation that the Council deny the proposed addition, remove the third tenant space, and request that additional garage spaces be constructed. Respectfully, Jim Butler, Building Official City of Oak Park Heights TREE CITY U.S.A. 2811 BETTENDORF ROHRER KNOCHE WALL,1NC. APPRAISAL OF ADDRESS SMITH — 5480 Stagecoach Trail N. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 FOR Oak Pk. Hgts. c/o Eckberg, Lammers, Briggs, Wolff & Vierling 1835 Northwestern Ave. . Stillwater, MN 55082 AS OF January 28, 1999 BY Paul J. Gleason and Roger M. Rohrer COMPLETE APPRAISAL — SUMMARY REPORT APPRAISED VALUE: $158,000 FormFille PC-Flue" (800) 262-4805 SMALL RESIDE' Generardescription Units /bldgs. 2/ 1 Stories 1 + basement Type (det. /att.) Detached Design (style) Split — ev dup Existing /proposed EX i sting Under construction No Year Built 1978 1985 Effective age(yrs) 15 +/-- Units 1 Improvements contain: Fireplace(s) Level(s) Foyer 1 X Surfaces (Materials /condition) Floors Cpt ,Vin /Av --Gd Walls Drywa l 1 /Av -Gd Trim /finish Wd./pt.,stain Bath floor C . Ti 1 e , vinyl Bath wainscot C . T i 1 e, Drwl. Doors Flush HC wood doors /Avg -Good # 0 Living 1 BETTENDORF ROHRER KNOCIIE WALL , I NC . AL INCOME PROPERTY APPF Exterior description (Materials /condition) Foundation Concrete Block Exterior wails Rough cedar,hdbd Roof surfoce Asphalt Shingle Gutters & dwnspts. Aluminum Window type D. Hung /Casement Storm sash /Screens Yes/Yes Manufactured housing* El Yes fl No *(Complies with the HUD Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards.) Rooms; 5 Bedroom(s); 2 Bath(s); 2,137 Square feet of GROSS BUILDING AREA GROSS BUILDING AREA (GBA) IS DEFINED AS THE TOTAL FINISHED AREA (INCLUDING COMMON AREAS) OF THE IMPROVEMENTS BASED UPON EXTERIOR MEASUREMENTS. 1 0 Dining Heating Type Forced Air Fuel Natural Gas Condition Avg Cooling Central Other Condition Sq. Ft. 0 $ = $ Sq. Ft. @$ =$ Sq. Ft. 0$ =$ Sq. Ft. 0$ — Garage: 376 SF @ $11 = $• Basement Fin. 1,352 SF @ $15 =$ =$ =$ =$ Special Energy Efficient Items I nc . above =$ s Porches, Patios, etc. 3 decks , shed =$ Total Estimated Cost New = $ Physical Functional External Less Depreciation 35,0001 2,500 4 , 000 Depreciated Value of Improvements "As is" Value of Site Improvements INDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH Freddie Mac Fomi 72 10-94 2811 1 None None N/A ESTIMATED SITE VALUE = $ ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COST - -NEW OF IMPROVEMENTS: 2,137 Sq.Ft. @$ 62 =$ _ $ _$ Kitchen Den Family rm. Condition of the improvements, repairs needed, quality of construction, additional feature, modernization, a ct slit - -entr st le duplex. The area below the main level is el er Basemen space or - -ca erty was originally a single family home built i of what now is Unit 1, with a main floor area of 957 SF, garage. In 1985, the main floor was expanded to the west by 1,180 SF, adding a 200 SF family room to Unit 1 and a new 980. SF Unit 2. A full walkout basement accompanied the addition. Topography /design features are such that the basement is either significantly or fully above grade, with good window exposure and utility as livable area. As such, in addition to the completely above-grade areas and rooms stated above, finished basement is as follows: bedroom and rec room in Unit 1, 490 SF; bedroom, rec room, bath and 2nd kitchen in Unit 2, 862 SF. Each unit has separate furnace, water heater, and gas /electric metering (continued below). Depreciation (physical, functional, and external inadequacies, etc.): (contd. from above) Extra kitchen and separate walkout entry in Unit 2 lower level offer potential for triplex use. However accordin to cit official and owner, this would re uire conditional use permit and possi•ly a variance. Curren y e su. J ec s a us is as a legal duplex, and this I s judged also to be its hi hes and best use. Therefore, the •roperty is appraised as a duplex. ECIA ui •lnLage ranges rom o years. on •i ion ranges from good /recently remodeled to somewhat below average, depending on area or component; overall condition is considered average. See comments "on Cost Approach below regarding functional and external dep, Adverse environmental conditions (such as, but not limited to, hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) present in the improvements, on the site, or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property: There are no known or apparent adverse environmental conditions noted on the site or in the immediate area that would negatively impact property value. For . this analysis it is assumed that none exist VALUATION ANALYSIS 33,000 132,494 4,136 20,280 9,500 166,410 =$ 41,500 =$ 124,910 1 3,500 161,410 PAGE 2 of 4 Foundation Slab Crawl space None Sump Pump None seen Dampness None Noted Settlement None Noted Infestation None Noted None Basement 82 % of lst floor area Basement finish 1,352 SF ;built -• in garage in lower lev. Bedrooms # Baths 2 1.00 1 Kitchen equip. (# / unit- cond.) Refrigerator Personal Pr Ronge /oven Personal Pr Disposal Dishwasher Fan /hood 1 /Un i t Compactor Washer /dryer Personal P r Microwave Intercom "AL REPORT 3723 Laundry Attic n None El Stairs 1_] Drop stair Scuttle ri Floor ❑ Heated i:i:ii Finished LJ Unfinished Other Insulation n R oof ❑ Ceiling LI Walls n F loor El None Adequacy Assmd Energy efficient items: Typical for Age/ Assumed Adequate Sq. ft. /unit 1,157 980 Car Storage No. Cars Garage Carport Attached Detached Adequate Inadequate Offstreet None Blt --in n 1978, consisting a partial basement and the tuckunder Comments on Cost Approach (such as, source of cost estimate, site value, square foot calculation and, for HUD and VA, the estimated remaining economic life of the property): Building cost estimates are based on Marshall Valuation Service, a nationally recognized cost data service, with adjustments for building features and Twin Cities Metropolitan Area location, plus local builders and cost data sources. Remaining economic life estimated at 55 years. Functional depreciation taken to reflect the fact that, though 2nd kitchen contributes cost to construct. (R -value it knownl Unknown Unknown Avg Total f� 1,157 980 1+ E n value, it does not contribute to full extent o Moderate external depreciation taken for mixed use location factors i.e. proximity to state prison) . Fannie Mae Form 102510 --94 PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: May 5, 2005 RE: FILE NO: 798.02 — 05.01 BACKGROUND Attached for reference: Exhibit 1: Cover Sheet/Perspective Drawing Exhibit 2: Existing Conditions Exhibit 3: Concept and General Plan (Updated) Exhibit 4: Preliminary Plat ENC tT Oak Park Heights — Pine Grove Gardens: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Planned Unit Development The City Council, at their April 12, 2005 meeting, voted to reconsider their vote of March 29, 2005 to deny approval of the Pine Grove Gardens rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment. The Council redirected the application to the Planning Commission to allow the applicant to redesign the site plan so that it would be more compliant with the R -3 District standards. The applicant has requested a Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, preliminary and final p lat, and planned unit development (PUD) for the 26 unit townhome project to p be known as Pine Grove Gardens. The site is 4.4 acres in area and is located northwest of Cit y Oakgreen east of Oak reen Avenue, north of 58 Street, and south of Highway 36. The applicant has applied for a simultaneous concept and general plan planned unit development for this project and has provided the information to complete that review. A p ortion of the exhibits will need to be updated to reflect the slight changes in the overall site plan, but the information as attached is adequately complete to review a concept and general plan PUD. tDF 4 � .t NORTHWE$T ASSOCIATED COI+tSULTANTS INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden valley, MN 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231..2581 planners @nacpl nning:oom Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Exhibit 10: Exhibit 11: Exhibit 12: Exhibit 13: ISSUES ANALYSIS Grading and Drainage Utilities Layout with MnDOT 1995 Highway Overlay Landscape Plan Landscape Details Perspective Drawings Floor Plans Building Elevations (Updated) Project Narrative Comprehensive Plan, The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as R -B, Residential business Transitional District. The purpose of this district is to allow for a smooth transition from high intensity commercial to the low density residential use. This is to be accomplished by allowing a mixture of medium density residential uses p Y with low intensity commercial uses. The applicant is requesting the Comprehensive Plan to be changed to designate the property as medium density residential consistent with the proposed development. In support of the request from the applicant, the following points could be made: • Medium density development would complement the surrounding uses, especially the single family development. If the property to the west is developed as the Oak Green Village, the medium density developments would complement g 9 each other. • Medium density residential development may have Tess of a negative effect on the significant tree cover and wetlands than a commercial development would. The property may also be appropriate for commercial development, especially if the MnDOT roadway alignment is constructed as currently planned. The applicant has submitted plans (Exhibit 3) showing the lot layout with the MnDOT 1995 proposed Highway 36 alignment. The development has been planned so as to accommodate the g Y g MnDOT design. Before any consideration of the details of this project, the Planning Commission should look at the overall land use issues of this site. The consideration should be based upon the referred long term land use of the property, the proposed plans of MnDOT, and the p g current/proposed uses that surround the subject site. As Y ou are aware, the Planning Commission, at their March 10, 2005 meeting, voted to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendment to medium density residential and a zoning change to R -3, Multiple Family Residential District. 2 • • • Zoning. The subject site is currently zoned Open Space Conservation.. The purpose of this district is to allow suitable areas within the City to be retained and utilized for P open space ace purposes and also as a "holding" zone for annexed lands. p The applicant is requesting that the site be rezoned to R -3, Multiple Family Residential District. The rezoning could be consistent with the transitional nature of this property and with the potential Oakgreen Village to the west. Approval of the proposed zoning would be subject to the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to a residential use. Project Description. The request is to construct a total of 26 units in five townhome buildings. The project has been designed with private driveway access from Oakgreen Avenue. The project incorporates one story townhome units with a lower look -out level. The plans indicate exterior landscaping and a trail connection to the City's trail system. The project layout is nearly identical to what was originally reviewed by the Planning Commission. The setbacks have been adjusted so that there are 30 foot front and rear principal al building setbacks, consistent with the R -3 District standards. The side yard setback requirements of 10 feet are also compliant within the new plan. The private roadway and driveway lengths have also been increased. Planned Unit Development (PUD). A PUD is required to allow for a townhome development on private access drives. The property would be rezoned to R -3 and a PUD overlay would be applied with the appropriate development agreement. • • Subdivision. A preliminary/final plat has been submitted for review. The property is being divided into five blocks and a total of 26 lots. There are two outlots proposed -- one for the common landscape and street areas and the other in the northwest comer. The City Attorney has reviewed the plat and has determined that the City would prefer that the two outlots be merged into a single taxing parcel. The homeowners association that is established should be responsible for the long term maintenance of this area and for the taxes. The plat incorporates a 50.02 foot right -of -way to the centerline for Oakgreen Avenue. This is consistent with the recommendations of the City Engineer for Oakgreen Avenue right -of -way requirements. The plat, as presented, would comply with all of the basic subdivision requirements. The final plat shall be subject to any comments or requirements of the City Engineer and City Attorney. Park Dedication. Section 402.08 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires a park land and /or cash dedication for the proposed development. The purpose of the dedication is to require new subdivisions to contribute to the City's park and open space system in a rough proportion to the relative burden they will place upon the system. The ordinance requires either land or a cash contribution in lieu of land or a combination of both be dedicated to the City. As the site is so small and not planned for a future park area, staff recommends the City require a cash contribution in lieu of land The formula for cash contributions is described in Section 402.08.D of the Subdivision Ordinance. Per the ordinance, the applicant will need to provide the City with a property appraisal. Lot Standards. The following table illustrates the lot requirements for the proposed R -3 District and level of project compliance: R -3 DISTRICT STANDARDS The project has been reconfigured so that all of the principal building setbacks are complied with. The new plans reflect proposed decks on the easterly townhomes, and decks and /or porches for the other units. The Zoning Ordinance allows for decks, not more than nine inches above ground level, to be constructed into the setback area. The proposed decks and porches would exceed the allowance of the Zoning Ordinance and would need to comply with the 30 feet/10 feet requirements. The Planning Commission can consider, as p art of the PUD, an exception from this setback requirement. Staff does not see an issue with that exception in that a minimum of 10 foot setbacks are provided in those areas where these porches and decks are proposed. Additionally, the potential for adjacent development is not significant in the areas that surround this proposed development. Access /Circulation. The site is accessed via a cul -de -sac off of Oakgreen Avenue North. The private drive would be 26 feet in width. All maintenance would be the responsibility of the homeowners association. Snow storage would be in those areas at p ty the ends of the private driveways. There may be some concern with the dead -end design of the street network. The Police Chief and Fire Chief should comment on the accessibility of the project for emergency vehicles. One visitor parking area with nine spaces is provided on the site plan. Additionally, each of the driveways in front of the two stall garages are 22 feet in length and will accommodate additional guest/resident vehicles. A trail access is planned to be constructed by the developer on the City property to the east of the townhome development. The trail would access the private drive and continue north to the trail within the .Xcel trail easement and to the south to the access drive for City Hall. The City Public Works Director has recommended the following related to the proposed trail: 4 Standard Proposed Project Lot Area 15,000 square feet 4.4 acres Lot Area Per Unit 4,000 square feet 5,385 square feet per unit provided Front Setback 30 feet 30 feet Side Setback 10 feet 10 feet ++ Rear Setback 30 feet 20 feet principal / 18 feet deck Wetland Buffer 36 feet 41 feet Building Height 35 feet 18 feet As the site is so small and not planned for a future park area, staff recommends the City require a cash contribution in lieu of land The formula for cash contributions is described in Section 402.08.D of the Subdivision Ordinance. Per the ordinance, the applicant will need to provide the City with a property appraisal. Lot Standards. The following table illustrates the lot requirements for the proposed R -3 District and level of project compliance: R -3 DISTRICT STANDARDS The project has been reconfigured so that all of the principal building setbacks are complied with. The new plans reflect proposed decks on the easterly townhomes, and decks and /or porches for the other units. The Zoning Ordinance allows for decks, not more than nine inches above ground level, to be constructed into the setback area. The proposed decks and porches would exceed the allowance of the Zoning Ordinance and would need to comply with the 30 feet/10 feet requirements. The Planning Commission can consider, as p art of the PUD, an exception from this setback requirement. Staff does not see an issue with that exception in that a minimum of 10 foot setbacks are provided in those areas where these porches and decks are proposed. Additionally, the potential for adjacent development is not significant in the areas that surround this proposed development. Access /Circulation. The site is accessed via a cul -de -sac off of Oakgreen Avenue North. The private drive would be 26 feet in width. All maintenance would be the responsibility of the homeowners association. Snow storage would be in those areas at p ty the ends of the private driveways. There may be some concern with the dead -end design of the street network. The Police Chief and Fire Chief should comment on the accessibility of the project for emergency vehicles. One visitor parking area with nine spaces is provided on the site plan. Additionally, each of the driveways in front of the two stall garages are 22 feet in length and will accommodate additional guest/resident vehicles. A trail access is planned to be constructed by the developer on the City property to the east of the townhome development. The trail would access the private drive and continue north to the trail within the .Xcel trail easement and to the south to the access drive for City Hall. The City Public Works Director has recommended the following related to the proposed trail: 4 1. There should be no T trail intersections. The connections to the Xcel easement trail should be split with a V design and possible placement of a bench in the middle area. The revised site plan has been changed to accommodate a V design. 2. The south trail to the City Hall access roadway should be provided with a crosswalk and pedestrian accessible ramps. This will be added as a condition of approval. 3. . The existing trail connection near City Hall could be abandoned with this improvement. This will be a condition of approval. Snow Removal. The applicant will be required to submit a snow removal plan that will be subject to review and approval of City staff. Grading, Drainage and Utilities. The applicant has submitted grading, drainage and utility plans for City review as part of the original submittal. The project architect will be required to update the plans to reflect the revised site plan. The final grading, drainage and utilities plans are subject to review and approval of the City Public Works Director and the City Engineer. The project should also be reviewed by the Middle St. Croix Watershed District. Landscaping and Tree Preservation. The applicant will attempt to preserve as many significant trees as possible. The project architect will be required to update the landscape and tree preservation plans to reflect the revised site plan. The final landscape plan and tree preservation plans are subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. A tabulated list of trees to be removed and preserved will be required by the City Arborist to determine compliance with the Tree Protection Ordinance. Signage /Lighting. The applicants are not including a development sign or monument for this project. A lighting plan has been submitted that includes decorative lights for the private drive. The private drive lights are shown on Exhibit 3. The applicants have also included the building light fixtures on Exhibit 3. The fixtures are of a residential style that is allowed. The applicant will be required to present a photometric plan subject to City staff review and approval. Building Design. The project would not be subject to the Design Guidelines of the City. Other multiple family dwelling projects, as part of a PUD, have been required to make adjustments in design and building materials as part of the approval process. The applicant is proposing all garage forward design for the one story townhomes. All of the buildings will have the same architecture. The Planning Commission should comment on the garage forward design and general architecture. The proposed building materials include architectural asphalt shingles, cultured stone and vinyl siding/ shakes. The City has required steel siding or concrete masonry board for other similar projects. City staff would suggest the same requirement for this project. The applicant 5 will also be required to provide a materials board for review by the Planning Commission and City Council. Trash Handling. All trash removal should be through individual areas in the owners unit. There are no centralized trash or recycling storage areas. Development Agreement. A development agreement shall be required for this project subject to review and approval of the City Council and the City Attorney. The City Attorney requests copies of the homeowners documents and declarations for his review. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION The applicant has requested the following approvals to construct a 26 unit townhome project on Oakgreen Avenue: • Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Medium Density Residential • Zoning Amendment to R -3, Multiple Family Residential District • PUD Concept and General Plan Approval • Preliminary and Final Plat The Planning Commission and City Council shall review the overall Comprehensive Plan and zoning issues for this project before acting upon any PUD review. If mid density land use is preferred, consideration of the zoning amendment, PUD, and subdivision is appropriate. City staff recommends approval of the project with the following conditions: 1. The final plat shall be subject to any comments or requirements of the City Engineer and City Attorney. The City Attorney shall provide comment and provide a recommendation on the proposed separate developable parcel designated as an outlot. 2. The applicant shall be required to pay a cash park dedication fee based upon the requirements of Section 402.08 of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant shall provide the City with a property appraisal acceptable to the City Attorney. 3. The Planning Commission shall comment on allowing encroachments of decks and three season porches into the required set backs as provided for on the concept/general plan. 4. The Police Chief and Fire Chief shall comment on the accessibility of the project for emergency vehicles. 5. The proposed trail locations and applicant's responsibility in construction costs shall be subject to review and approval by the City Council. b • 40 • • 6. The applicant shall submit a snow removal plan that shall be subject to the review and approval of City staff. • 12. The homeowners documents and declarations shall be provided to the City Attorney for his review and approval. • 7. The applicant shall provide updated grading, drainage and utility plans to the City reflecting the revised concept/general plan. All final grading, drainage and utility plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Public Works Director and City Engineer and review of the Middle St. Croix Watershed District. 8. The applicant shall provide updated landscape and tree preservation plans to reflect the revised site plan. The final landscape plan and tree preservation plans are subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 9. The applicant shatl provide a photometric plan for the project subject to City staff review and approval. 10. The Planning Commission should comment on the garage forward design, general architecture, and building materials of the project. The siding materials should be steel, concrete masonry board, or an equivalent material approved by City staff. 11. A development agreement shall be required subject to review and approval of the City Council and City Attorney. O 2 S 0 2004 --Pak fiveurn. Noble. hw — A!i Rig* Rsurrod m Z ra 114 F 0 w c OD rn 3 ON N c) tTintri y � r)z orritTi { -,.no w 0 , V R. 0 c ; *Z cd W 0 1 r 1 Cf) o r " Q LT4 (4,:;) Ct PLI [4 c) P'4 '"4 1 1 1 1 1 n Y C3 } re 6 cc • N oo , t to co z 0 .�z cD 1 1 - -I- 1 I 'I 1 11 r it 0 n W 2 o o W L g w H- w u) < o� � W a Z a — 2 z zz DD z00 m = W za C9u�..� m —I p �QZ � Z p ' UJ Z w n UJ O 03 2 o I s ore =' : z— 6z g >- D < cr 1- z— z o oo Ul w ~ Q � ° z C7 Ocn x ;o =0 Z z O z ?p W Y m 0 Da CI CO Iii z U Q (7 5 0 0 O gE' J }} ce Ozw iis-- z2 W = W o..a� i.-.= p ill a tn �m 6-9 za c~no ▪ N l.) 1 1 s � 1 u) 0 cL Um w -111 0 z 8 0 D >. 0 c p. .0.fry— 0 • '?14 eooio i ( ) % fl -, z ,�, ' c _ _a A CTl 4, lq .... s: -- -\ 9 - 3 ' A C_�.� — z. 'G u - tA ry 21_. o I \ 3 4,. rr I \1 - it (_- o J _ v m W a C �. S 015214" E 1324.90 J ,7 C `;1 1/(''‘ f \ � f` rn S' Q �4 ri i` ', `f ` v X . J --- — zz `.� Mm ti IA Y o 5 01'52'14" E 728.12 -� rT S 8 ao $ 8 8 Ol j ri 50021'44 "E 7L00 7100 8 N $ 7140 7100 v 7100 N0021'44`W S0021'44`E 7200 i N0021 '44'W r I \ z WA ig pti Ng I' , s: I p O t a t it o a 8 N p) 0 7100 IS ea 8 fa L-1 1; 00 1\ n A V r 1 I A r ii t I 1f" n to --) - rr r vn1'r ,L. -r v r► v L=r vvr— t vvh 1 r7 484.16 N 01'52'14 1r OAKFREEN AVENUE NORTH w r*1 S 01'51 04 E 3200 8 7100 10 —(3 8 7100 8 8 72.w ttl 8 O 7800 10 8 8 �. 8 7100 8 C.,3 U, 7LQv 8 kt 8 7200 N0022'41 `W s 0151'04" E 484.16 -- ti �, a y a a I z c r A v '! A f U 1 8 BLaCR 5 a N 015104W p 11 9.52 . � S O1 ",51'04` E 96.00 V v $ $ 8 BBDCK 4 az 5 0151'04" E 96.00 / / / / / 204,00 N 01''51'04` W 2100 1.0 28.0 2 &00 2 204.00 s 110 3100 8v8 co 3 Oo 414.131' / / / fl 1' 0 0 M L / / / / / / / / / / 1 1 / / / / / t0 / / / / / r / / / z / / / / l / / / / / / / / � � z 1.3 Q ti offri Pori 0 • • 0 5 • • 1111111011111111111, z t 0 2004 — Volt. hosnon. Erickson. bor.— Ail Mak Ileoovrti m 5 2 4) • *le • r ly P M P win u I I lux$14 ISOM I ,.0u "ICJ 1e wa u TO IS 1* U r� u I a xxxil SIR 1 s�a►1 +1111v Pin . mom , /maim wont ,aa, tt i a s ft . IP•sol N 6 . �� .Y i1 1 1 1 1 A 1 • vg w„g g )10 d i Wag g e S X t NI or, uj • E 2 PLANTING DETAIL FOR MASS PLANTING BEDS • wI ter ` ': . p., ' - .} " ,. ,J.......r.�..�.,- y„K,s- t.:,�^. -,- - . \ • • 1jA.1"G +... c.q; ....,yy+l,►DIrMt.a- WII""'� �` - lc.+el+ • 'Mylrivr -.• • " a rt .- �'�•f+•r..yr:��r,�`�� 4.s.- a• d�`.ea r-- l.a.rMA�t.ti, w•►.....s • r It � - . � _ ! � � 4 4 � - 1 ....>/i i . d ,, t '•,,i `' /{ •r. a, I ••• , •� y � 1s'•• Y., '"• may � �� .. - . • jMy�. � � {�� ti'l 4 � - • f� � � �` 3 } �.. • / p/' '�e �J'a� }f � / ...w cif' �'.y,y,L• I: t• '• u . ; ,,,t,..,4 '7 .. i, 4'if , ... , : - Z ... 4 .. 1 1„...1s... • 4.0 . ` 1 r • d • gy m • � .. a' , M " v .nt.�Ti'i� .w�AS ..+.r ',� -.. �w•OiIMr+ s .41111 ;_ ---- - -` . „ _ !gyp R . —, ., "`�, gw , . .�..,+.�J1r.rl 7": —1— '7...,„,,..„ ..!ti.,J► - ; e-- .,- �.rs E�,,.ry ^ ---- :• i' 'Y �` t n.avelaafti`? �` ..-, , ... - _ ' �v0�3r >.. '' .I.�I„Y , „,.„ `., ,,, ,,„.„„;^,. lf.„,_._. .4. —� }.�?iY#� .r,,,•.. . rr, ,,,�W ►t»"=y�,, i i--° y .J- i-- - - ��.�� ... ' •,N4 si- .:t.1r. -' -. -'• �y�_ � „ ' .r�� - r.N�O► } ' r', "-' s^Ah *...1 :,f., :: wa. -a .. .: .. ► . rrr , + o / .,,;y�,. - „she .... . + .r�<.t - fir Myr'•�''r.' .,yt,�•riY. ' '�!s .-+/w p.At+... •.�....: `,. , .-,_ s•oryt. t h w� ...:. ~ ed ss, 2.' r� +' ..yyr'+ - "'A�t�r ' r J,.....440.,...„ , • ..�..r ^ "' r +7�:.*y� -` _f: .r , '�'ri r .•�� wM,w: �"�'M"'p;�„ -. - �-:t - i6= ^�rl�Fu .:ar. .,,rM�il ..:. 7 .. iA `iY e ' ° . i ,A.:44,,..,,,,, `' 4*ott'.t � .. +14 - . � �: .� „ .-1 ?Rtr'tt'�uai!•.S.jo .. za�..+, r .. �Sx•S"'aSC-: •, :� T ((ta.• • • a� • • • wasih DINING LIVING ROOM i .`, " .' : 1 L • — - d � �/� � • fi , ter. CONC. PORCH OPT. 4 SEA ON PORCH MASTER BEDROOM SSr�SViXA1T�1 fir OFFICE /k3DRM GARAGE .4" CONC. FLOOR MASTER BEDROOM A A r� VATNITMCM OPT. 4 SEA ON PORCH DINETTE 4 OFFICEMDRM CONC. PORCH 12x12 DECK 111 q1.17, VOMIT ahU 1 t4Vitte.n'FP=Z.IT.J'rfRAGTfrW1 7M:1W t=r7lie GARAGE 12x12 DECK Ara Wal 1 C 1 Na.9v14 HO11># Wool VNIAI1 9NINICI weIcGIr30I3Ao HONod NOVY 9 'ldo 4,:itrz.rentiTuve- 444"4:43 mem tr. 1 HZ Od ' vNima woo NIAI1 HONod "NO >Q3CI LIxLI 2004 — Fotz, Freesnn, E J kioa, fne. -- All Right Ruerved a o ' v 0 o O 0 rn C a x 0 -o ° 2) 0 • 53 n n Z S a 0 1:111 .74 N 1 1 1 ■ ! i•= ME ■ MR ■■ Mi air fag Im am • Mu NUN 11141.1 limigus 0 D 0 tt ' 1 P) t .14 1 ILO L• r � z0 0 4 r Folz, Freeman, Erickson, . Inc. al LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING. • ENGINEERING PINE GROVE GARDENS Narrative February 9, 2005 The current Ackerman property, approximately 4.4 acres, is located east of Oakgreen Avenue and north of 58 Street, and abuts City Hall. The existing parcel is currently zoned Open Space. The request for this project is for R3 Multiple Family Residential District zoning, with a total of 26 units in five townhome buildings. We intend to process the request as a PUD to allow for flexibility in the strict provisions of the ordinance. The guidelines for setbacks and lot size of R3 Zoning are met with the exception of the front yard setback. We are requesting a reduction of the 30 foot required front yard setback to a 20 foot setback from the street. This setback reduction will allow the project to pull the buildings away from the existing trees in the rear that we are trying to preserve. The code allows for 4000 square feet per unit for determining overall density. This should net 34 units for the project. This proposal only requests 26 units. The reason for the reduced density is accommodate for the area needed to allow the 1995 layout of the Hwy. 36 design to be preserved. The proposed units will be serviced with city sewer and water, with connections being made to existing facilities north and west of the proposed project. The private street as proposed is 24 -feet in width, which will not allow for parking. The units will have attached garages with driveways that provide for off street parking. Several small visitor parking lots are provided. The open areas between the driveways have been designed to incorporate extensive landscaping gardens and for the use of snow storage. The project provides for extensive landscaping and re- vegetation to help mitigate the loss of existing trees. A 8 -foot wide trail is proposed which would connect the east end of the proposed project to the existing 'trail to the north. The project is located in the Middle St. Croix Watershed and will require their review. The proposed drainage and ponding as shown on the plan provides the storage to reduce the runoff from the site to below that of the existing conditions. The site drainage incorporates the existing wetland found in the northeast comer of the site, � g helping to keep this a viable wetland, also reducing the impacts to the surrounding area. A tree count has been completed as shown on the Existing Conditions Map, Figure A. EXHIBIT 13 5620 Memorial Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082 • Phone: (651) 439 -8833 • Fax: (651) 430 -9331 • Website: www.ffe- inc.com Bruce A. Folz LS Timothy J. Freeman, ES • Todd A. Erickson, PE 1939 - 2G 01 President Vice President or II • • City of Oak Park Heights To: Planning Commission From: Julie A. Hultman Date: May 6, 2005 Re: Annual Meeting: Election of Chair and Vice Chair & Commission Vacancies ENCLOSURE 5 John Dwyer and Mike Liljegren's appointed terms culminate May 31, 2005. John was first appointed to the Commission in June of 1999 and will be completing his second full -term appointment. Mike Liljegren was first appointed in January of 2002 and will be completing his first full term. At the April Commission meeting, Commissioner Liljegren expressed his desire to seek reappointment to a second term. This request was sent to the City Council for consideration at their May 10, 2005 meeting. Additionally, Commissioner Oswald announced his intent to resign and stated that he would continue until such time a new Commissioner was appointed. 1. Commissioner Terms the Bylaws state that (1) appointments shall initiate and be established by city council resolution; (2) unless extended by special order of the City Council for a period of one year, no member shall serve more than two consecutive terms on the Planning Commission. With Commissioner Liljegren's acknowledgment of reappointment sought and Commissioner Oswalds notice of intent to resign, staff asks that Commissioners Dwyer declare his intent to resign or seek extended appointment from City Council. Ultimately a written resignation is requested from resigning Commissioners and that advertisement of vacancies will occur. 2. 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. Current Chair - John Dwyer is currently the Chair. The Planning Commission elected John as Vice Chair, in March of 2001, for a 2 -year term running from March 2001 to March 2003. He was elected Chair in March of 2003 for a 2 -year term running from March of 2003 to March 2005. Current Vice Chair - Mike Runk is currently the Vice Chair. The Planning Commission elected Mike as Vice Chair March of 2003 for a 2 -year term running from March 2003 to 2005 and is currently in his first term in this position. 3. Commission Vacancies: At this time applicants will be sought to fill Commissioner Oswalds term, which expires May 31, 2006. The City has not yet formally advertised Commission vacancy; however has received one application for consideration. Conclusion: Staff asks for: 1. John Dwyer to declare his intent to seek reappointment or resign. 2. Chuck Oswald to restate his intent to resign. 3. Nominations and election of Chair and Vice Chair; 4. Direction to advertise vacancies; and 5. A date and time to be determined for interviewing of applicants to Commission vacancies. 4. •