Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-26 Fully Executed PUD DocumentApplicant: Brooks and Whitcomb LLC 275 3rd Street South Suite 302 Stillwater, MN 55082 Owner: Brooks and Whitcomb LLC 275 3 Street South Suite 302 Stillwater, MN 55082 Site Address: 5595 Memorial Ave Oak Park Heights 55082 CITY OF OAK PA's: ,: HEIGHTS PLANNED i1NI'I' DEVELOPMENT PE I'I' FOR BROOKS AND WHITCOIVIB, LLC File No.: 798002 -06.05 Council Approved: June 26,2006 Legal Description: (Washington County Geo. Code 06.029,20.24.0005) LOT 3, BLOCK 1, KERN CENTER SECOND ADDITION Present Zoning District: I3 :aljghway Business and arehous n DLstrict Permitted uses set forth in Ordinance 401 Section 401.300.B L PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PE General Description and Permit: 1. The application submitted by Brooks and Whitcomb for a planned unit development, concept and general plan and a site plan review for the construction of two condominium office/warehouse buildings off of Memorial Avenue North and affecting the real property as follows: (Washington County Geo. Code 06.029.20.24.0005) LOT 3, BLOCK 1, KERN CENTER SECOND ADDITION Be and the same as hereby approved by the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights subject to the following conditions: 1. The grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 2. The proposed signage for the site shall be consistent with Section 401.15.G of the Zoning Ordinance and the sign designs and dimensions submitted by the applicant. A sign permit shall be obtained prior to the erection of any signs on the subject site 3 The applicant shall resubmit landscape plans that shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. 4 Mounted pole height for the proposed parking area lights shall not exceed 25 feet. All freestanding and building lighting shall comply with the lighting regulations found in Section 401.15.B3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Reference Attachment: The recommendations of the City Planner date May 31, 2006 as adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council are annexed hereto by reference and are incorporated herein. Date: Date: Date: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands and seals. CITY 0 0 HEIG Beaudet Eric ti son Ci dministrator Its: BROOKS AND WH rNe, ATTACHMENT PLANNERS : ORT MAY 30, 2006 MEMORANDUM FILE: 798.02 — 06.05 BACKGROUND Attached for reference: tpt (?). Rif WWI P. Tr To: Oak Park Heights Planning Commission FROM: Laurie Shives 1 Scott Richards DATE: May 31, 2006 Exhibit 1 — Existing Conditions /Removal Plan Exhibit 2 -- Site Plan Exhibit 3 -- Grading & Erosion Control Plan Exhibit 4 — Utility Plan Exhibit 5 — Lighting Plan Exhibit 6 — Floor Plan Exhibit 7 — Building Elevations Exhibit 8 — Colored Renderings Exhibit 0 — Landscape Plan Exhibit 10 — City Engineer's Comments Exhibit 11 — City Arborist's Comments "'el (•:;.__Qi 1,1, TA. Tr .4.,„ OSA ,, 4800 Olson Memorial. Highway Suite 202, Golden Valley, Ill N 55422 Telephone: 763.231 .2566 Facsimile: 763.231 .2661 planners@nacplanning.com nacplanning.con ENCLOSURE 2 RE: Oak Park Heights — Memorial Office Condominiums; PUD Concept/ General Plan Brooks and Whitcomb, LLC have submitted site and building plans for the construction of two 14,720 square foot office condominium buildings located off of Memorial Avenue North. The request is for a PUD: Concept /General Plan. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing building and parking area to construct the proposed buildings and parking areas. The subject site is currently zoned B-3, Highway Business and Warehousing District and guided for highway business and warehouse development by the Oak Park Heights Comprehensive Plan. ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for highway oriented business and warehouse uses and, as such, the proposed office condominium deve[Qpment is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Zonin g subject The subject site is currently zoned B -3, Highway Business and Warehousing District. The applicant is proposing to have general office and/or warehousing uses occu py the available spaces in the proposed two buildings. The applicant is requesting approval of a PUD in order to allow more than one principal building on the subject site. pp The purpose of a PUD is to allow for greater flexibility in the design of neighborhood s or p p other sites and is intended to encourage, among other things, a more desirable environment than would be possible through the strict application of the City's zoning and subdivision regulations. Lot and Setback Provisions. As shown in the table below, the proposed building and site design meet the required lot area and setback standards for the B -3 District. Required Proposed Lots Area 15,000 sq. ft. 109,419 sq. ft. Width 100 feet 250 feet As stated in Section 401.15. F.4. h.17, the parking area setback is 10 feet for all uses except single and two - family uses. The site plan indicates a parking area setback of at g least 10 feet from all property lines. Buildin g Design. n. The submitted plans indicate that the proposed office buildings will be one stor y with a total of 14,720 square feet of floor area each. The primary facade material is proposed to be precast concrete panels with accents of exposed aggregate precast panels anels and brick. The applicant has also submitted colored building elevations indicatin g that the primary building color will be beige with dark brown brick accents. Each suite will have a glass door entrance with a metal overhang. The proposed buildin g will have architectural interest in the form of varied roofiines for different sections surrounding each suite entrance. The proposed office condominium buildings are consistent with the requirements of the B -3 District and the City's Design Guidelines. The proposed buildings roposed to be 20 feet in height at the highest point, compliant with the 35 -foot height limit in the B -3 District. Phasing Plan. The applicant is proposing to construct the two office /warehouse condo phases. s in two hases. The building to the south of the site is proposed to be constructed first, followed by the building to the north. Access. The subject site accesses off of Mernorial Avenue North. The applicant is proposing ingress/egress driveway, which is the existing site access. The site plan p g one g 2 Front 40 feet 88 feet Setbacks Side Rear 10 feet 20 feet 42 feet 70 feet illustrates 24 -foot drive aisles along the building sides containing the proposed loading areas and 22 -foot drive aisles in the remainder of the parking areas, aside from the northwest corner of the parking area which appears to narrow to 19 feet wide. Section 401.15.F.h of the Zoning Ordinance requires at least 22 foot wide drive aisles for the proposed use. The applicant shall revise the proposed parking lot design to demonstrate at least 22 foot wide drive aisles in all areas. Off-Street Parking. Based on the proposed 80 percent office uses and 20 percent warehouse use, the required number of parking spaces is as follows: Office: 3 spaces +[((14,720 sq. ft. x 0.80) x 2) x 0.90] / 200 sq. ft. = 109 spaces Warehouse: [((14,720 x 0.20) X 2) x 0.90] / 1,500 sq. ft. = 4 spaces The applicant is proposing a total of 110 parking spaces including four handicap accessible spaces, which is three parking spaces short of the parking requirements outlined in Section 401.15.F.9.w of the Zoning Ordinance. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall be required to provide three additional parking spaces including one additional handicap accessible parking space pursuant to Section 401.15.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Some of the submitted plans indicate that the parking stalls will be 17.5 feet in length. All parking stalls shall be revised to be 9 feet by 20 feet or 9 feet by 18 feet provided there is ample room for a two foot overhang, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Signage. The applicant has submitted some additional information on the proposed signage plan. They are proposing to have three wall signs per building, one on each of the southwest, southeast and northeast building elevations. These proposed wall signs are to be approximately 32 square feet in total area per tenant, for a total of 192 square feet. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to have a 96 square foot monument sign located within the rear yard setback and positioned to be visible from Highway 5. The proposed signage is consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Lighting. The applicant has submitted a lighting plan including the proposed photometric plan for the site. The lighting plan indicates that the exterior lights' illumination will extend beyond the property line, however, this illumination will be Tess than 0.4 foot candles and as such, is consistent with Section 401.15.B.7.d of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to install ten shoebox style parking area lights mounted on a 30-foot pole and four building mounted fixtures located within the courtyard area. Section 401.15.B.7.f.2.d of the Zoning Ordinance limits the permitted mounted light fixture height to 25 feet. As such, the proposed parking lot light fixtures are not consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirements and the lighting plan shall be revised prior to approval by the City Council. 3 Landscaping. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan showing the addition of perimeter plantings around the proposed buildings as well as within the proposed courtyard area. The plan also indicates the addition of several trees around the site perimeter to provide screening of the parking areas. The Landscape plan indicates fewer plantings than a previously submitted plan, particularly along the northeast and southwest boundaries of the site, than the previous plan. In consideration of the requested PUD for the subject site, the landscaping plan shall be revised to reflect the purpose of the City's. PUD overlay districts. As stated in Section 401.06.B.12 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council shall consider the natural features of the particular site, the architectural characteristics of the proposed structure and the overall scheme of the PUD plan when evaluating the proposed landscape plan. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. Trash Enclosures. The applicant is proposing to have a 90 square foot trash room in each building for shared use by all occupants. The proposed trash enclosures appear to be consistent with the requirements of the B-3 District provided that they are in an accessible location for pickup hauling vehicles. Grading, Drainage & Utilities. Preliminary construction plans have been submitted. Ali grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION The applicant has submitted the necessary materials for the proposed application. The proposed use and site design are consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the direction of the Comprehensive Plan. Based on the information contained in this report, our office recommends approval of the requested PUD Concept General Plan for the Memorial Office Condominiums project, subject to the following conditions: 1. The grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. The proposed signage for the site shall be consistent with Section 401.15.G of the Zoning Ordinance and the sign designs and dimensions submitted by the applicant. A sign permit shall be obtained prior to the erection of any signs on the subject site. 3 Landscaping plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. 4. Mounted pole height for the proposed parking area lights shall not exceed 25 feet. 4 5 The applicant shall provide three additional parking spaces including one handicap accessible space. The site plan shall be adjusted prior to City Council approval. The applicant shall revise the proposed parking lot design to demonstrate at least 22 foot wide drive aisles in all areas. The site plan shall be adjusted prior to City Council approval. 7. All parking stalls shall be 9 feet by 20 feet or 9 feet by 18 feet provided there is ample room for a two foot overhang, subject to approval of the City Engineer. The site plan shall be adjusted prior to City Council approval. 5 ® \ • / NN 0 9 / e c% N 4 „ .. • /5 o . ---IF , . ,/ „..,-.....„ ., 0 ,,, .„,..,.,., ,..,, „..\,/,,. q „,-,.., ,--... ,,,A,./.. ..,„ .-.-t :--/:-..-...., - --,-,..,._—,,,- --v-6'----, ' 4 , h - -•., ..., • ----,*:-- - i N, / . v, ,/,,------N, -? kV• ' °F!'N, N elosauumi 1 s14SPH 1- le0 SICININOCINOD DWG 1VM001101 luowdoion@ci pasodoid ),,,, &/ / . , - - , i, .., r / ',,,,,( ■ 0 ( 1 b., i. ;/' ■ / ._..,,..),e,_,,__ ( ■ \., „.• C.) - , ‘91 ,c co, a / 4? ca w 0 , z N N \\ I 5 .! n 301,0 1V1,01,1,\SOC,IOD ;1, LANDSCAPE PLAN Project No. 060428-2 SHALLOW MULCH WEAR TR Sheet Number CITY SUBMIrrAL s>lepTeIN 1 EVG H. ,9 e/G 8/0 e/ E 1 10, Ic r ---• U) ' 4- ,- ' LPJ I 9g _ANTING SCHEDULE BOTANICAL NAME SN2.nd ,301,d snGoais sr:N. sacioNvivid ,130v 1NVIGY, Sr1,11, Sh?Jr). . snN800 1983.711141 S58..6 NoA00] 1,,Pet AVM8DN Alddveveo iredsOv2i 1 ,71 038 TV1721 JdXW OD 0 0 Li mil 1 111 ® \ • / NN 0 9 / e c% N 4 „ .. • /5 o . ---IF , . ,/ „..,-.....„ ., 0 ,,, .„,..,.,., ,..,, „..\,/,,. q „,-,.., ,--... ,,,A,./.. ..,„ .-.-t :--/:-..-...., - --,-,..,._—,,,- --v-6'----, ' 4 , h - -•., ..., • ----,*:-- - i N, / . v, ,/,,------N, -? kV• ' °F!'N, N elosauumi 1 s14SPH 1- le0 SICININOCINOD DWG 1VM001101 luowdoion@ci pasodoid ),,,, &/ / . , - - , i, .., r / ',,,,,( ■ 0 ( 1 b., i. ;/' ■ / ._..,,..),e,_,,__ ( ■ \., „.• C.) - , ‘91 ,c co, a / 4? ca w 0 , z N N \\ I 5 .! n 301,0 1V1,01,1,\SOC,IOD ;1, LANDSCAPE PLAN Project No. 060428-2 SHALLOW MULCH WEAR TR Sheet Number CITY SUBMIrrAL 0 LU 0 0 LT..1 0 0 0 Er3 0 z 0 ulosauunni i s11-19PH NPd NEO SIVININOCINOD 3DIJA0 1VINOMIN luowdoian@G posodold ,V-SCON00 3300 1,20.6,50.0D 3DWO ivom. o Eios@uu islt-ADH >pud leo SIAMININOGNOD ]Dlid0 1VIMAITAI iu@wdoi@A@G psodom -MIENS r:t 4) 4, 13,Nd .3,15 w ZV 10,130 iv.rv3il\SCONO3 A31.0 N ..■ g 7 ; ..-..' ,‘-, — ' / ... .--, .2 ;...: .•-.. ,.., ).': ,.. ,`,'. / /,2 :,7 '. . ;.= := ; ', ; 7. . .2 / ..• , .7 ,2. ,:, .,:, . ..- . , : .:-:: ., : .2 ..!, ;; ., ,;.:, ( .;., 'I , to ;'• :.-: . ,' .2 ,',,: := ' 7 /2 - , i .., /( ' .: -,-,---- ..: ;' i: / /2 ::: :- ..-_, .,- .g g ., . ..,./: ,,,,,;:, ..," /,. b (.../ iy ,, /,, ,' ...' .`• - 9 ':;/ : / - ,N • 2 '..-:, ..,,, ' ;', ,,,. , ..., - . • . ---, ..„:, , ,,, ,, N N „ :77/; - ,:: N , . ,,,.. 2 ; .2 , ( . J.,-■7: .:! .'..: 7 '. N ,:'; " ,2 ,,, .' •.; ::-: , 7 ' Z ; ,-`.:1 'N' • ' - ' / / N „ .`:g :3 ..„... ...... ,,T: ,2 '7 ,9. _2 .2. lif6,11 (10 UES'Et, ,1551 'EENAITWS 11./.1:0,1 RfNIAY IVIEUiti. 0,95 •ruos opiq „ / NN / N < i DTI `MAIODIIHAA SNO(Ail YIOS3NNIIN ' 4311/M1111S ODE# ' S 1S (nit • Sa .3 .01:131P.M3 , N '11-1DINA NNVd NVO JO AL1D 11" INOCINOD 33IAJ0 lYPIOMIN ca N'ortt 17559 NV1d DINILLHD11 w NC11,,,S30 NOG,. HMO .3,9 ulvAvrius maiv MEONDI 02, 0..yla awe .,9AgArins u uos)ppa VIOS3NNIW `/13.1YM1111.S ZO{# 5 J.S - SLZ 37kictirMa5 DT1 WIODIIHM SNOO 13301:LOWN5 N MiVd 1VO 40 Ain . 31 3D1JJ0 1VISCOA1 VY MiFFETCLI NVId rainn • 2 c2J gpl /+.i" 'MMUS luEoN 0295 " • • f ' \\\ Y1053NNJW ( S31VM1111S 70E# S 1LS CAE - 35i5171,,W, Dll `1WODIIHM DOOM LHOQH NTVG) 4VO JO kLiD ,WOONOD 3D1420 1V1IQW31 1 10E03 NOISON MN DRY6 w I 1 L.L.1 z / I ,ir5H •:c 0 ;T: iii x (7, N )--/ s s, 4/ elosauumi 's14EPH >1-lud leo SIAMINIWOGNOD Did() 1VIMA1101 luawdolonaa psodom , , [----- ■ •-----, ....... ' ,....11! c:1- fll 'i , ■ 61 N -? , ,9 ..„ 2..„ . ,:-.. , - • .9, , . ,,,,,,,; -, ,...,, , , / 4/ ;' • ' -), N ,„, , N / ---" ---' q ■ , N L ,_ N '7 4 • 6 NN H 4 . - p, /1'' / / G : - . L....J o L., ''" • E,'! ,' L,:i ,°,,,:-_-: .,,, 'N'ELAEB N itl—SOC!:00 .1,0 IVIEcyr.i\socr,00 33L,10 2 8 6 8 N rcevo (1 ss, .5 'aINNITILS 1-MON onS • • N N -• N I • '0 - -•"3.i / _._ ______,--- ----- - - - - • , \ •-,.. - ,._. -- - --,--_:__ 12 -./ \ \ ,- , ---2-'.... ..._., VIQS3N1 '21311/M1111S ZOC# 'S IS MIE • SZZ VS. Dll 8010DIIHM S>I00)ig HODIA MNId )WO K, A.113 )ONOD D1110 1VINOWNA/ T. NV - IVAOIA/Di YWFITIV1 / / / / / / / ,-. ,- _,- -- •-,, --. ......,-. ...... ':',... ..,_ --......, .. ..,,, \ `-, , ....:•• - \\ \\ \-'-. ..., •--.. ...:-. ..... -::_„... .,:.. __ „,:,.......:.., ".„ . \ \ : \ ...,, ■ ,,,,.. ,:, ...., -,. ....., , ■ , ,,., '1, 1 O ■ ‘N. \,,, , _ __,.., ■ 0S.,5,:\,,...ji.,,, , N's, ,, ,,.,._:=-\ -,- c ' 1 17, / • ; Z. Scott Richards rrom: "Postler, Dennis Mf' <dpostler©bonestroo.com> To: "Eric A Johnson" <eajohnson a©cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Scott Richards" <srichards a©nacplanning.com> Cc: "Erickson, Karen S" <kerickson@a bonestroo.com >; "Judy Hoist" <jholst a@cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Julie Hultman" <jhultman a@7cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Tom Ozzello" <tozzello cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Mark Vierling" <mvierling eckberglammers.com >; "Kathy Widin" <kdwidin c@attbi.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 7:40 AM Subject: Memorial Office Condods Here are some general comments /thoughts, for today's 10:30 a.m. staff review meeting, on the latest plans l picked up last night: 1. They're back to one driveway entrance? This is preferred over the two entrances previously proposed. 2. The parking stalls appear substandard (9' wide by 17.5' long). What is the City minimum standard? 3. The overall parking layout width appears inadequate (17.5' stalls with a 22' drive aisle). 4. The drive aisle in the northwest corner, where it narrows due to the 10' setback, appears to be less than 19' wide. 5. Are the new garage accesses for trash enclosures (don't see them anywhere else on site now)? If so, they'll probably be o. k. -- have to roll out bins. If not, trucks do not have room to back up /into these areas. 6. Several Drainage and Grading comments: • Recommend no roof drains be allowed tributary to the DDD LLC pond. • The internal courtyard grass drainage swale appears less than 1%. Recommend minimum of 2 %. They also are proposed to drain across the sidewalks? • There are 4 proposed drainage curb cuts with rip rap. The one to the north /northeast will concentrate flows down the pond slope past the existing outlet structure - -- potential erosion issues. Recommend draining parking lot to northeast corner, then collecting with a catch basin and pipe to CB #2. • The proposed storm sewer outlet to the Kern Center Pond is in MnDOT right --of --way (City drainage easement). a. Probably need MnDOT approval. b. Verify the proposed FES elevation (should equal Kern Center Pond NWL). c. Specify how much rip rap at FES. d. Recommend moving the outlet pipe to CB #1 (redesign storm sewer to go from CB #2 to CB #1) to move this inlet to pond farther from existing outlet to pond ---- better water quality. • Need BCWD approval /permit. 7. The final plans needs a permanent Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. Dennis EXHIBIT 10 5/31/2006 Scott Richards rrom: <kdwidin a@oomcast.net> To: "Tom ozzello" <tozzello a©cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Julie Hultman" <jhultman a[7cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Dennis Pastier" <dpostler a@bonestroo.com >; "Eric Johnson" <eajohnson a©cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Jim Butler" <jbutler c@cityofoakparkheights.com >; "Scott Richards" <srichards nacplanning.com >; "Mark Vierling" <mvierling a©eckberglammers.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9 :58 AM Subject: Memorial Office Condos - Landscape Plan (rev. 5/10/06) OPH Staff - I have reviewed the revised landscape plan for Memorial Office Condos (submitted 5/10/06) and have the following comments: 1. The lan has changed substantially from the prior plan. It is not as attractive or interesting and utilizes tree species p g Y which will be much higher maintenance than the previous plan. Tree numbers are about the same, but there are a lot fewer shrubs and perennials than on the previous plan. 2. The tree species have been changed from the previous plan. They are less attractive and more prone to various pest and disease p roblems than those species specified on the previous plan. Colorado spruce have several problems with p p fungal al diseases as they age and some of these should be replaced with a mix of 'Black Hills' white spruce, red or white g Y g ne or pine '.Fraser' lanted. in this area tend to suffer from fungal cankers and winter injury and are of l fir. Norway map le planted longevity p moderate lon eve in the landscape. The Norway maple should be replaced with several varieties of red maple such as the 'Freeman -type' a p ' les. "Radiant" crab is very susceptible to apple scab, a fungal disease that has been 1 prevalent in the past several years when we've had a lot of rainfall. in the spring and early summer. This disease p p L __..uses susceptible trees, such as "Radiant" to lose their leaves before August, and trees would need to be sprayed every Y protect against to rotect them_ a ainst this disease. The "Radiant" crabs should be replaced with several different crabapple cultivars that have g ood disease resistance, such as "Prairie Fire ", "Indian Summer ", "Professor Sprenger" or and is also e prone to stem "Thu.nderchild" . Amur cherry, though a beautiful tree, is very short - -lived in the landscape p g girdling tipping. and ti i . This should be replaced with a hardier ornamental such as Japanese tree lilac. 3. The shrub choices could be more varied. "Cardinal" dogwood becomes a very large shrub (8 -10' by 8 -10') and I'm not sure it will work well in the p atio area between the buildings. Smaller, more varied shrub choices, some flowering, evergreen, and p some ever g perennials would be more appropriate and much more attractive in that middle patio /walkway area. 4. The 'Plantin g Detail' for shrubs is o.k. except for the disturbed (rather than undisturbed) soil illustrated on the bottom of the g lantin hole. Shrubs should be set on firm, undisturbed soil or plant will shift after planting. The tree p 'Planting Detail' should also include: removal of twine and top of burlap and top 1/3 of wire basket (if B&B material is in a wire basket ) after tree is in the planting hole. Tree root balls should also be set on firm, compacted soil at the bottom of the planting hole, not turned soil as indicated on the details. Trees inspected planting, will be ins ected after lantin g , and, if twine, burlap and top wire are still in place, the City will require the removal of these items. Please supply landscape contractor with the correct planting detail. If you have any questions, regarding this report, please contact me. Kathy Widin F '- ori _cy of Oak Park I--Ieights EXHIBIT 11 5/31/2006