HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-09 NAC Planning ReportN C N
PLANNING REPORT
BACKGROUND
NOrCTHWEST ASSOCIATEL) CONSULTANTS
COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
,4),
m 4)14
TO: Tom Melena
FROM: Troy D. Hagen 1 Scott Richards
DATE: 9 October 1998
RE: Oak Park Heights - Carriage Homes - Variance 1 CUP / Subdivision
FILE NO: 798.02 - 98.04
6i T\im
Carriage Homes, Inc. has submitted plans for a 41-unit elderly apartment complex with a
4,304 square foot office area on the fourth floor. It will require subdivision review,
conditional use permits (CUP), and variance approval. The property is bound by Osgood
Avenue (west), Upper 56th Street North (south), Osman Avenue North (east), and 57th
Street North (north).
The parcel is located in the R-B, Residential/Business Transitional. The elderly
apartments are allowed through a conditional use permit within that zoning district. The
abutting property to the north is similarly zoned. The property to the west, south, and east
is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and R-2, Low and Medium Density Residential.
The applicant is requesting three CUPs and a variance. The CUPs are to allow for elderly
housing, office space that will be used to manage the proposed apartment and other
Carriage Homes properties, and for the combining of the two uses in one building.
The variances are to allow for the building to encroach into the thirty (30) foot front and
rear yard setbacks. As proposed on the site plan, the front yard setback would be
eighteen (18) feet, while the rear yard setback would be twenty-five (25) feet.
ENCLOSURE 3
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 612-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595- 9837 E-MAIL NAC@ WINTERNET.COM
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit 0:
Exhibit D:
Exhibit E:
Exhibit F:
Exhibit G:
Exhibit H:
Exhibit 1:
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Site Location
Site Plan
Garage Floor Plan
First Floor Plan
Second & Third Floor Plan
Unit Floor Plan
Elevation Plan
Landscape Plan
Electrical Plan
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development of an elderly living apartment complex
p p
and professional offices use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning. The proposed development will be located in the R -B, Residential /Business
Transitional District. The elderly living apartments and professional offices are conditional
uses within this district. Site Design shall follow the standards established by the zoning
district. Density requirements for elderly housing is 1 ,000 square feet of lot area P er unit.
The estimated lot area is approximately 40,250 square feet. Based upon the number of
units (41), the minimum lot area shall be no less than 41,000 square feet. The applicant
shall increase the lot size from additional property to the north or reduce the number of
units to comply with the established requirements.
Subdivision. The subject parcel is subdivided as Outlot B, Valle y View Estates.
Therefore, Gutlot B must now be subdivided as a Lot/Block. The applicant has not
submitted a preliminary /final plat for this parcel.
Variances m Building Setback. Because of the unique configuration of the lot and the
design of the building, the applicant is requesting a variance from the thirty (30) foot front
and rear yard setbacks. A request for a variance may not be granted unless the following
can be demonstrated:
1. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the existence of special
conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building
involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures of buildings in the
same district.
2
a. Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or water conditions
or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, narrowness,
shallowness, insufficient area of shape of the property.
b Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and circumstances may not
be solely economic in nature, if a reasonable use of the property exists under
the terms of this Title.
c. Special conditions and circumstances causing undue hardship shall not be
a result of lot size or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable
parcel.
The applicant is proposing a typical apartment; double loaded floor plan with a hallway
separating the two sides. Due to the unique configuration of the lot, the building depth
cannot be accommodated for, given the shallowness of the lot (160') at the portion that
encroaches the setback requirements. if the applicant were proposing a floor plan that
exceeded typical building depth, in this case, the variance would not be acceptable.
2. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant
of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms
of this Ordinance or deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to
a reasonable use.
The reason for the variance is because of the pre - existing lot size. Because of the lot size,
the applicant is limited in how the apartment complex can be sited on the property.
3. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
The applicant is proposing a typical double loaded apartment design. Due to the
configuration of the lot, the building encroaches into the front and rear yard setbacks. In
addition, if the proposed building were placed differently on the lot, it still encroach into the
setbacks, but at a greater degree of encroachment. If the building were to take on an
unusual design that made it wider, then perhaps the applicant would be creating the
hardship. Therefore, given the configuration of the lot and design of the building, the
applicant is not creating the hardship.
4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the same
district.
Granting the variance would not grant the applicant any special privileges.
3
5. The request in not a result of non-conforming lands, structures or buildings in
g the
to
same district.
The request is not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings. As the
property exists, the lot area and lot width are met.
6. The request in not a use variance.
The proposed elderly living apartments is considered a conditional use within the R-B,
Residential 1 Business Transitional District. The management offices would also require
a CUP, but they are not a factor regarding the variance issue.
T. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the
rY p
intended purpose of the applicant.
The proposed building could be modified to reduce the encroachment into the front and
rear yard setbacks, but the apartments would be dramatically reduced in size and number.
The Planning Commission would have the ability to require the applicant to reduce the
setback encroachment as a condition of approval of the project.
8. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses.
gp ro p
The proposed construction of the elderly living apartments would not create an
inconvenience to the neighboring properties and uses.
Variance - Parking Lot Setback. The proposed parking lot would be only five
y (5) feet
from the north property line. Due to the configuration of the lot, the arkin lot could not
p g
be designed to allow for the required minimum setback (ten [1 0] feet) and meet the
required minimum number of parking spaces needed. Therefore, a variance would be
needed in order for the applicant to achieve the minimum standards. A request for a
variance may not be granted unless the following can be demonstrated:
1. Undue hardship will result if the variance is denied due to the existence of special
conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building
involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures of buildings in the
same district.
a. Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or water conditions
or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, narrowness,
shallowness, insufficient area of shape of the property.
4
b Undue hardship caused by the special conditions and circumstances ma y not
be solely economic in nature, if a reasonable use of the property exists under
the terms of this Title.
c. Special conditions and circumstances causing undue hardship shall not be
a result of lot size or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable
parcel.
Due to the unique configuration of the lot, the parking lot cannot be sited with the
appropriate number of parking spaces, given the insufficient area of shape of the . pro ert
p y
2. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant
of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms
of this Ordinance or deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to
a reasonable use.
The reason for the variance is because of the pre-existing lot size. Because of the tot size,
the applicant is limited in how the parking lot can be sited on the property.
3. The special conditions and circumstances causing the undue hardship do not result
from the actions of the applicant.
The applicant is proposing a typical double loaded parking lot design. Due to the
configuration of the lot, the parking lot encroaches into the yard setback.
4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the same
district.
Granting the variance would not grant the applicant any special privileges.
5. The request in not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings in the
same district.
The request is not a result of non - conforming lands, structures or buildings. As the
property exists, the lot area and lot width are met.
6. The request in not a use variance.
The proposed elderly living apartments and office space is considered a conditional use
within the R -B, Residential 1 Business Transitional District.
5
7 The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish Y p the
intended purpose of the applicant.
The proposed parking lot could be modified to reduce the encroachment into the a
y rd
setback, but the number of parking spaces would be reduced, which would not meet the
minimum number of spaces required.
8. The request does not create an inconvenience to neighboring properties and uses.
p p es.
The proposed parking lot would not create an inconvenience to the neighboring properties
g gp p s
and uses.
Variance - Parking Spaces. The under ground parking lot satisfies the minimum number
of parking spaces for the elderly housing, which is one (1) space per unit, for a total of
forty -one (41) spaces. The above ground parking lot would be necessary to accommodate
the parking requirements for visitors and the office space on the fourth floor. The required
number of parking spaces for professional offices is three (3) spaces plus at least one (1)
space per 200 square feet of floor area. Floor area is gross floor area minus ten (10)
percent (4,303 - 10% = 3,873.6). The total required number of parking spaces is twenty-
three (23). The applicant is proposing eighteen (18) parking spaces, therefore, a variance
would be required or the applicant could reduce the size of the office space. The Planning
Commission and City Council should provide direction on this matter. The request for a
variance cannot be granted unless the criteria for variances as listed on pages 4 and 5 of
the report are considered.
Conditional Use Permit. Under the R -B District, elderly housing, professional offices, and
gP ,
the combination of the two uses in the same building would require CUPs. The approval
PP roval
of a CUP requires that certain information be submitted for review to determine the impact
the uses would have on the surrounding properties.
Under Section 401.28.E provisions for conditional use have been established for
professional offices, elderly housing, and the combining of residential and non - residential
uses, which are:
For Professional Offices:
1. The site and related parking and service entrances are served by an arterial or
collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be
generated.
2 Adequate off-street parking is provided in compliance with Section 401.15.F of this
Ordinance.
6
3. Adequate off-street loading is provided in compliance with Section 401.15.F of this
Ordinance.
4 Vehicular entrances to parking or service areas shall create a minimum of conflict
with through traffic movement.
5. When abutting an R -1, R -2, or R -3 District, a buffer area with screening and
d
landscaping in compliance with Section 401.15.E of this Ordinance shall be
provided.
6. All signing and information or visual communication devices shall be in compliance
with Section 401.15.G of this Ordinance.
The provisions of Section 401.03.A of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
Overall, the proposal addresses most of the conditions of the CUP but a lack of arkin
p g
stalls and an adequate loading space will need to be addressed.
For Elderly Housing:
1. Not more than ten (10) percent of the occupants may be persons sixt (60) YY ears
of age of under (spouse of a person over sixty (00) years of age or caretakers, etc. .
)
It must be stated that in December of 1997, Congress passed the "Housin g for Older
Persons Act of 1995". The new law removed the requirement that senior housing
years and older), must provide services and facilities to meet the physical and social
needs of older persons. The project can now be marketed as "Senior Only", without being
g
discriminatory, if eighty (80) percent of the units have one person 55 or older. The
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance are superseded by the Federal requirements.
2. Except for caretaker units, occupancy shall be limited to man and wife blood
relatives, or a single and or single woman.
3. To continue to qualify for the elderly housing classification, the owner of agency
9' Y
shall file with the City Clerk and the Building official a certified copy of a monthly
Y
resume of occupants of such a multiple dwelling, listing the number of tenants by
age and clearly identifying and setting forth the relationship of all occupants sixty
Y
(60) years of age or under to qualified tenants, or to the building.
4. There is adequate off-street parking in compliance with Section 401.15.F of this
Ordinance.
7
5. One (7) off - street loading space in compliance with Section 401.03.E of this
Ordinance.
6. Parking areas are screened and landscaped from view of surrounding and abutting
residential districts in compliance with Section 401.15.E of this Ordinance.
7. The site of the principal use and its related parking is served by an arterial or
collector street.
8 All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance
with Section 401.15.G of this ordinance.
9 The principal use structure is in compliance with the Minnesota State Uniform
Building Code.
10. Elevator services is provided to each floor level.
91. Usable open space as defined in Section 401.02.B of this Ordinance at a minimum
equal to twenty (20) percent of the gross lot area.
12. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
The proposed use addresses most of the requirements except for the lack of an adequate
loading space and the site does not allow for 20% usable open space.
For Combining Residential and Non - Residential:
1. Residential and non-residential uses shall not be contained on the same floor.
2. The residential and non-residential uses shall not conflict in any number.
3. The residential building standards as outlined in this section are met.
4. The provisions of Section 401.03.A.8 of this Ordinance are considered and
satisfactorily met.
The proposed project addresses these conditions adequately.
Ingress /Egress. Access to the elderly apartment is proposed to be at two locations. The
first would be from the outside corner of Osman Avenue and 57th Street North. The curb
cut size allowed shall be no more than twenty -four (24) feet. It appears that the proposed
curb cut is approximately thirty -three (33) feet. This exceeds the maximum distance
8
established in the zoning code. The design of the entrance is felt to be desirable.
However, we would recommend rounding the northern edge of the curb cut to allow to
snow plowing and ease of turning. The entrance allows for the drop -off (reducing walking
distance) of elders and adds an attractive appearance to the entrance. This would be
subject to City Engineer approval.
The second access would be located at the eastern end of the building. This would lead
into the under ground parking lot. The estimated width of the curb cut is approximately
twenty -six (26) feet. The curb cut shall be no more than twenty -four (24) feet wide unless
approved by the City Engineer.
Park Dedication. The applicant shall be required to make a cash contribution to the City's
Park Fund as provided by the Subdivision Ordinance. Cash donation for "apartments,
p nts,
townhouses, condominiums and other dwelling units" is $250.00 e er unit plus $85.00
p p per above the first bedroom of each unit. The apartment complex is proposing
p 41
units, with fourteen (14) 2-bedroom units. Based upon approval of 41 units, a cash park
f p
fee of $11,440.00 is to be made by the applicant prior to the Final Plat app roval.
Building Design. Overall, the design of the building is favorable, but the dormers should
be balanced in size on both sides of the roof. The Planning Commission should review
the building design and comment on design issues in light of the Design Guidelines.
Landscape Plan. A Landscape Plan has been submitted and is subject to review of the
1 subject
s Arborist.
Development Contract. It the preliminary /final plat for Carriage Homes is approved, the
g pp
applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City.
v
Submittal Information. In additional to meeting the provisions listed above, the following
plans have not been submitted and need to be considered by the Plannin g Commission:
1. Grading and Drainage. A grading and drainage plan has not been submitted.
Without an elevation plan, we cannot submit comment regarding the sloe of
g g p
specific items, such as the slope of the driveway leading into the under ground
parking lot. The grading and drainage plan shall be subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
2 Signage. A signage plan has not been submitted. It shall comply with the
provisions established in the Zoning Ordinance.
3 Lighting. A lighting plan has been submitted, but the applicant shall p rovide details
of the fixtures to be used.
9
4 Snow Removal. A snow removal plan has not been submitted. The desired P lan
would to have the snow removed off -site to eliminate excessive ilia in the limited
P g
areas available. The plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
5 Utilities. A utility plan illustrating the location of all existing and proposed water and
sanitary sewer lines has been submitted and is subject to the review and q3provd
of the City Engineer.
6. Preliminary /Final Plat. As stated before, the applicant will need to p lat the outlot
proposed for development.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding review, our office recommends that the Plannin g Commission
hold on any recommendation until the issues related to density requirements, lack of
q a
parking for the office use, and lack of usable open space are addressed by the applicant.
y ply
Additionally, the information that is required for submission must be received by the City
y
for Planning Commission consideration. Overall, the project is favorable and would be an
appropriate use for the site, but there may be too many residential units and too much
office space for the lot. The applicant should redesign the project to better comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
pc: John Arkell
Greg Johnson
10
FSIErr
„
m
- n
(D
•
c;)
L
f
;
rill
111
)
1. 1
1
, • •
▪ - - • —
..--
_....,..__.,...„, ...,,,,,,,,,„.. ,..,,„
. ._......1 --•,-
7 ,
. L:_i_Pli r -Iii..1;..1-,
n' -':1::1'C.U; : i - r •.4 1 - . ;1 - •■••■ ''' i —71 - -,-------7--'--- ,-. ,
• .i..L.-1 -.
:-. , .•3±/ , • .--: -
4'= L
,f . .I . .r,ini'7 , r;
,
.. : :.::.:..r. '....L.L
-..
7
....41“
_:2 iril Iiiii
_:_., tlinlIti.:.:i1.1.,_.p.f.,
irri::-..:,,T.irii riliiil."..p1,H,!:=.r• ..j 51 .• . f ,,, , I , 1 [4 L, i
9] ...... , ,1 film
ili ,___.:,____ 1 , E i ;-..,_,.:*-}, ..'... ti;i
. riirTIF:111 ll 11 •TV.1,11,-.. ',.....,]:_ul..--
1''.":.- 2:2t ,,,,.._.,,..„, .,
;,-
.--::' •
• --:_:' cr,THITh , A -,, T.,
,-. i:., ; ,,,.,,, :,.:.
, , l‘k ri \..\ \ , , ,,„.. , l
- 6, -1___I : 7/ ,
_ ,), ), 1 `,1.'•''., ..,c,C,, '---
-,',1- ::...L.,,..
,..;,,,-, ' , , .:21 , ,4:,..:} (t...ii): iuli 1 i ; 's ,, i - \ \\ _,-- ▪ — • - - • - - I T , —1 '
!1 NIL i Li...4 L_,_-
C,1 _ iLl I I ! 1 1 i I ITD r - - ------ 9)
- ;:f..1._I,T -
L i , R\
•
•
Ir 1
:1 I
II ■
(7.
:I=
.',!•
11
,,,, •
=
--
H
k7:7:L•
7,t11:
LE,
;} • - i i P 1' .....- 4, . ; '- ----
..---• . _
r. 72 , ILI Lg i , i
.
17,2 _...;..;
,----1,7: „ - ....;,..,.r_i,L.._:_.r_____,
,,.\\,,,,_.
:„.,,,__ , ...„.„:„._ __.I.....
.....,______..---..,..r
_, :\,-. ,--,,-
_ ...0.0
0 , L.eit
\., .
EXHIBIT A
12:54 PM KEENAN rRCH , L GROUP INC. 32 3 240 6914
Alik\
{
1
1
1
1
p2 !i ° o,- 2I- t$
o, °47•0t_ e
NEW 41 VW SENOR APARTMENT BOL CANE FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, JIIVC
GowTy ROAD 67 1 Sd th STRaT NORTH
OAK PARK - EKG1S, ?4 ESMTA
10 8 0 .
F....
A vz NCB
4 4 4
. r
•
'0
3 �
m'
2
n
cn
J
L
0
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SEPT. 28, 19 '18
r_
5 2 •2: 0
z
A J
OSMAN AVENUE
P 042
EXh.= ; f B
0
NEW 41 LNT SENOP APARflVENT BUILDING FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, INC.
COINTY ROAD 67 & 56 th STREET NORTH
OAK PAW 1 EIGHTS. miNtESOTA
nom
moms
i
�'I
Illllllllllfl1
I
0
ra
ra
0
caf5Vv J `f,
{
f
t
>flll�
`Iillllllllllll
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SEPT. 2S NN
P v 03
!USN ARCHITECTURAL GROUP
Arc 3tects 2
31 Ckaid A,k
FAX �p -2+D- f�Dfe
EXHIBIT C
SP-2-98 12:57 PM KEENAh4 ARCH L GROUP INC. 32@ 240 6914 P.04
CO 9
NEW 41 UNIT SENOR APART1vENT BULDING FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, INC
C kNTY ROAD 67 $ 56 Ih STREET NORTH
OAK PARK 1-EIGHTS. IV*t(SOTA
Coat
vimow �..�..
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
-CONSTRUCTION
SEPT. 28, 19981
• •
KEN ArBIEClR L CUP'
Architects xt0- r ss
tb 14.111 2b++ Amir.tra FAX x-244 -d9
EXHIBIT D
a
NEW 41 NT SENOR APARTMENT KCMG FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, INC
COINTY ROAD 67 & 56 th STREET NORTH
OAK PARK FEtGI ACS, MtiSOTA
leaM vo -a�oa
111.0.4 Cowry,
d �
� F
C
F !1
iA
}
fit
}
11 2
rn r
C �
g
r. aY
z
a
76
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
ONSTRUCTION
SEPT. 28, 1998 1
r
n
L
Architects
St Ozul 56303
J
—
KEENAN ARCIIITECITRE CROUP
Mt 32O--25S -5621
FAX 124-240-6914
z
0
1 0
Pto7Tep 0. 0
j (71
0
INEW 4) LNT SENIOR APARTMENT DULCING FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, INC
COMP( ROAD 67 4 56 Ih STREET NORTH
OAK PARK F14TS, MN
Ninewss
H
1.n 00-20-.6
nz
g:
1
z
z
1- 4
w
m
0
r13
0
0
2
0
0
z
cJ
DOI
1
1ft
:0;
H IL
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
• SEPT 28, I998
44
P - 0 6
Architects "4 .120-7M-$V1
46 NA, W. Aver,. 3X-24o-aos.
Dart NW 54403
PLCA TED O 0,11-
C
NEIN 41 NT SENO? APARTMENT 811CING FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES, INC.
COUNTy ROAD 67 56 ih SWEET NORTH
OAK PARK -EIGHTS. Ivit
r4m,ri'L t'LI-)1 ilIL. „trZ0 It>14
oc.-26-ott
ftwicw
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SEPT 28, 1998
P 7
KELVANARCIIITECTINALCROUPI
ec
Ott 320
Nath ddr 320-24}-69,4
Ckxiii NN 56303
33,1
1
1
1
1
—
flNA
NV1
8661 'S
NO1101181SHO3
NOd ION
ANYNIW1138d
!!
F
4 1 5
t7N .
ClOOLD 90
•
----------------
C7,/ -
VIOSNLIVI I S114911-1 >ierdd
HiefON 13118 ql 9S 19 OVOd AINDOD
3NI SS111011 HDVia
80=1 °wino 1113^118VcIV elOIN3S Ji4fl IP Nal
aro
co
x
uJ
DI 40 CD :
I rc? 1 0. ° •
7 `l i g
rn
X
•
N +,
,-■•••
IOW 41114T SENOR APARTMENT BUILDING FOR
CARRIAGE HOMES INC.
COU4I'Y ROAD 67 & 56 th STREET NORTH
OAK PARK WIGHT% PVWESOTA
coke, kop.
DATE:
ORA.
...
OSMAN AVENUE N
0
PReLIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OCT. S, 1,18
OSMAN A VENUE