Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-11-23 City Council Meeting Packet Enclosure Oak Park Heights Request for Council Action Meeting Date Nove;tnlier "0r 2010 Time Required: ._.___._... .._.__... __ Agenda Item Title: _ ...---- _C)akgreen Commons Planned Unit Development :-_.'atio Arca.. Agenda Placement New Bush es ' ' Originating Department /Rcgt e.s . ' LA : c�lxz sort, City Administrator Requester's Signature _._.... ____...__ _..... Action Requested. ce B sirv. /7 Background/justification (Please indicate i-fany previous action has been taken or if other public bodies have advised): City Planning Consultant, Scott Richards, has provided the following: 1.. Planning Report Dated Nov 11 ?:flub -- (NH exhibits will be found iae the Nov. Planning Packet); 2 Planning Commission Recommending Resolution (unsigned); Proposed City Council Resolution. Page 57 of 80 TPC 3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100 Anoka, MN 55303 Phone: 763.231.5840 Facsimile: 763.427.0620 TPC@PlanningCo.com PLANNING REPORT TO: Eric Johnson FROM: Scott Richards DATE: November 11, 2010 RE: Oak Park Heights — Oakgreen Commons — Planned Unit Development Amendment — Patio Area TPC FILE: 236.03 ._ 10.05 BACKGROUND Tim Nolde, representing Oakgreen Commons, has made application for a Planned Unit Development amendment to allow for the change of use as it relates to a patio area at the northeast corner of the Oakgreen Commons building. The amendment will allow for the patio area to be constructed with a lower level hair salon and office space. As approved by the City Council, the area below the patio was not to be excavated. The patio area is at the same elevation and same square footage as originally approved. The general plan approval for the Oakgreen Commons project was recommended by the Planning Commission on May 14, 2009 and approved by the City Council on June 9, 2009. The plans for the approved project and the new plans are found in the Exhibits as follows. The review is based upon the following submittals: Exhibit 1: Grading and Erosion Control Plan — Approved June 9, 2009 Exhibit 2: Landscape Plan — Approved June 9, 2009 Exhibit 3: Garage Level Floor Plan — Approved June 9, 2010 Exhibit 4: Building Elevations — Approved June 9, 2010 Exhibit 5: Grading and Erosion Control Plan - Submitted with building permit Exhibit 6: Landscape Plan — Proposed Exhibit 7: Garage Level Floor Plan — Proposed Exhibit 8: First Floor Plan — Proposed Exhibit 9: Wall Sections at Patio — Proposed Exhibit 10: Updated Grading Plan — Proposed Exhibit 11: Updated Layout Plan — Proposed Exhibit 12: Letter from Todd Erickson, October 22, 2010 Page 58 of 80 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Oakgreen Commons project was approved with plans that showed a patio area at the northeast corner of building. The lower level of the patio was to be unexcavated. The plans clearly showed that the patio was to be constructed off of the first floor and not at ground level. During construction, the Building Official noticed that the lower level of the patio area was excavated and the foundation included windows. A stop work order was placed on that portion of the building so that City Staff could address the change of plans. It has been determined that an amended PUD would be required to address the issue. When considering the general plan of approval for the project, the City Council discussed the setbacks for the project and wanted at least a 40 foot setback from the main building to the east property line. The patio setback of 20 feet was also agreed to in that was at the first floor level and did not include habitable space below. In that this was a significant change in the use of the lower level of the patio, it was deemed necessary to have the Planning Commission review and the City Council consider the change. ISSUES ANALYSIS Setbacks. The patio, as now constructed is the same size, at the same elevation and at the same setbacks as originally approved. The only difference is that it will now include a hair salon and office space below. There are windows on the north and east elevations. Exhibit 11 shows a detail of the patio with the setbacks. The main building is setback 40 feet and the patio 20 feet from the east property line as originally proposed. Steps and a sidewalk will allow access from the lower level to the trail that is to be constructed along Oakgreen Avenue. Landscape Plan. A revised landscape plan had been provided for the area around the patio area. The revised plan shall be subject to City Arborist review and approval. Grading Plan. The grading plan has remained unchanged from the original approvals. The final grading and drainage for the site is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. CONCLUSION 1 RECOMMENDATION The proposed changes to the plans related to the patio area are quite minor. City Staff wanted to bring this forward as an amendment in that the setbacks to Oakgreen Avenue was an issue that was important to the Planning Commission and City Council. Overall, the visual difference with the new plan will be negligible. The patio is constructed in the 2 Page 59 of 80 same place and at the same elevation as originally proposed. The only visual difference is the addition of the windows. City Staff recommends the amendment to the PUD with the following conditions: 1. The revised landscape plan will be subject to City Arborist review and approval. 2. The final grading and drainage for the site is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. Any other conditions of the City Council and Planning Commission. Page 60 of 80 2335 Highway 36 W SI. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 fax 651- 636 -1311 wiwi.bonestroo.com November 5, 2010 BoneStroo Eric Johnson City Administrator Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Boulevard North Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007 Re: Wellhead Protection Plan Update City of Oak Park Heights Project No. 55- 10170 -0 Dear Mr. Johnson, The purpose of this letter is to provide you with a proposed scope of services for the completion of the required updates to your Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan. Additionally, a list of tasks and estimated scope of services is also provided for the updates to the Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan, based on initial estimates of what the Part 2 Plan update will entail. On October 27, 2010, the City of Oak Park Heights met with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) to officially scope the update to the Wellhead Protection Plan, since the City's current version of the Wellhead Protection Plan will come to the end of its 10 -year lifespan in 2012. The purpose of this meeting was to outline the MDH's expectations for the requirements to update the City's existing Wellhead Protection Plan for the next 10 years. Following the meeting, additional communications with the MDH helped define the specific requirements and scope. The Part 1 update in summary includes gathering new data, delineating the Wellhead Protection Area using new MDH requirements, and completing a vulnerability assessment based on the new delineation. The Part 2 update in summary includes gathering data and identifying potential contamination sources for the new Wellhead Protection Area based on Part 1 results, and producing a management plan. Wellhead Protection Plan Update — Proposed Costs: 9 Part 1 - $12,500 (not to exceed) • Part 2 - $12,500 - $19,000 (depending on results from Part 1) An outline of the proposed tasks and details to complete the updates are provided on the following pages. Page 61 of 80 City of Oak Park Heights Page 2 Wellhead Protection Plan Update November 5, 2010 Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan Update 1. Data Assembly While much of the geologic data for the area has not changed in the past 10 years, any new data pertaining to water use, water quality, and well performance will need to be incorporated into the updated plan. Also, any new borings and wells that help to further refine the understanding of the local geology should be reviewed. 2. Delineation of the Wellhead Protection Area A computer- generated groundwater model was utilized to create the delineation for the existing Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan. This model will need to be updated to reflect the updated data elements. The model will also require modification to estimate the leakage between the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers, in order to calculate the fracture flow component to the delineation. The current model simulates the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers as one unit, which was the standard practice at the time the model was built (2001). Bonestroo will consider two options for updating the delineation. These options are: 1. Re -build the existing model to show the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers as two separate layers in the model, so recharge between both layers can be simulated. 2. Use an existing regional groundwater model for the metro area constructed by the Metropolitan Council, which already simulates both aquifers separately. This model will require some refinement and re- calibration for the Oak Park Heights area. Bonestroo will examine both models at the time the project is undertaken and will choose the method that appears to be most cost - efficient, but will still yield results accurate enough to meet MDH requirements for the delineation analysis. A minimum 10 -year time -of- travel capture zone is required by the MDH for delineation of the wellhead protection area. Other time frames can be provided, if the City desires, to provide a better understanding of where the water is corning from and how fast it takes to travel to the municipal wells. The delineation task also takes into account possible additional steps, including fracture flow delineation and a surface water delineation to be added onto the model- produced delineation. 3. Vulnerability Assessment Using the delineation created in the second task, an assessment of the vulnerability of the aquifer within this area needs to be conducted. The analysis takes into account the presence of confining geologic areas between the land surface and the aquifer. Based on the presence and the thickness of these confining units, the vulnerability of the underlying aquifer is determined. 4. Reporting The data elements, wellhead protection delineation, and vulnerability assessment will be summarized in a report designed to meet MDH criteria for documenting the wellhead protection planning process. Results of the planning effort will be mapped both on printouts and as GIS- compatible shape files. Page 62 of 80 Cif y of Oak Part; Heights Page 3 Wellhead Protection Plan Update November 5, 2010 The draft report will first be presented to the City for review. Following City approval of the draft, the final report will be submitted to the MDH for review and approval. The MDH approval process generally takes 60 days. Deliverables will include 3 hard copies of the draft report to City staff, 2 electronic copies of the final report to MDH for approval, and 10 hard copies of the approved final report for the City. The final report will also be presented to the City in electronic format (on CD -ROM) to aid in archiving the plan. The CD -ROM will also include any relevant groundwater model files and GIS shape - files. 5. Meetings It is anticipated that three meetings will be necessary before the completion of the Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan: Pre-Delineation Meeting: The MDH asks that a pre- delineation meeting be held to review the modeling approach, before the draft wellhead protection area is delineated. The purpose of this meeting is to ensure that the modeling approach meets MDH standards and that the approval of the plan isn't held up by any technical shortcomings in the model. This meeting is typically held at the MDH offices and only requires the attendance of Bonestroo and MDH staff, although City staff may attend if they so desire. Draft Review Meeting: This meeting will be held to solicit comments from City staff following the delivery of the draft report. For the purposes of this proposal, Bonestroo will assume the meeting will be held at City offices. However, if the City does not have many comments or questions about the draft report at this time, the meeting may also be held via telephone. Public Information Meeting: Following the MDH approval of the updated Part 1 plan, the City is required to hold a public information meeting to present the results of the plan to the general public. This can be done either at a City Council meeting or as a stand -alone meeting. Bonestroo staff will attend this meeting and give a short presentation on the results of the Part 1 plan and will be available to answer any questions. The conclusion of the public information meeting is typically the last step of the Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan, Part 1 Budget and Schedule The proposed budget and schedule is attached in Tables 1 and 2. Completion of the plan is expected to take place by March 2011, including the 60 -day review period from the MDH. The budget includes direct project expenses such as mileage and printing costs. Page 63 of 80 City of Cook Park !•teighfs Page 4 wellhead Protection Plan Update November 5, 2010 Table 1 – Ci of Oak Park Heights Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan, Proposed Costs Pro'ectTask Proposed Cost —_ Task 1– Data Assembly $1600 Task 2 – Delineation of the Wellhead Protection Area J6500 Task 3– Vulnerability Assessment 11000 Task 4 – Reporting _ $1800 Task 5 – Meetings $1100 Expenses $500 Total _ $12,500 - Table 2 – City of Oak Park Heights, Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan Proposed Schedule Project Milestone _ Proposed Completion City Approves Bonestroo Work Plan November 2010 Draft Wellhead Protection Area Delineation Complete February 2011 Draft Report Delivered to City _ -- March 2011 Report Submitted to MDH for App- oval _.-.._........_ ......_..........._._........ .._......_April 20 11.._._.. MDFi Approval July 2011. Public Information Meeting August 2011_...._..- ._._.._._.. Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan Update Following the completion of the public information meeting held in Part 1, another scoping meeting will be set up with the MDH and City staff to review the requirements and expectations for the completion of the updates to the City's Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan. Since the scope of this plan is highly dependant on the results of the Part 1 plan, an accurate scope of services cannot be determined at this time. For the sake of budgeting purposes, however, an estimate of costs is provided in Table 3. The following is a list of tasks that comprise the Part 2 planning process. 1. Data Collection and Assembly Data collection and assembly often represents one of the largest portions of the Part 2 planning effort. Data pertaining to land use, the physical environment, public utilities, and water quantity/quality must be incorporated into the plan. The largest amount of time and effort is spent creating the Potential Contaminant Source Inventory (PCSI) for the delineated wellhead protection areas. The PCSI lists all possible sources of contamination with the wellhead protection area that are thought to pose a potential hazard to drinking water quality. While this data has already been collected and assembled for the existing Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan, data collection will need to incorporate new areas of the delineation that were not previously considered. Also, any potential contamination sources that were previously identified will need to be re- visited, to determine the current status of the contamination source. 2. Development of Management Plan The City has already developed a management plan for their existing Part 2 Wellhead Protection Plan. As such, large portions of the existing plan can be utilized for this plan update. However, this update also gives the City an opportunity to modify their plan to better suit their needs. Action items that may not have been as successful as the City has desired can be altered or Page 64 of 80 City of Oak Pork Heights Page 5 Wellhead Protection Plan Update November 5, 2010 replaced with new action items that better fit with the City's current approach for management of the identified potential contamination sources. 3. Reporting The report is the document that summarizes the data elements and outlines the management plan. Like the Part 1 report, the Part 2 results will be mapped both on printouts and as GIS- compatible shape files. Upon completion of the draft report, it will be presented to City staff for their review and comments. Following meetings with City staff to refine and revise the report, the final report must then be submitted to all affected local units of government for a required 60 -day review period. Following the 60 -day review period, a public hearing must also be held to present the report to the general public. Once the public hearing has been held and any relevant comments are incorporated into the plan, the report is then submitted to the MDH for review and approval. The approval process generally takes 90 days. Following MDH approval, the final approved plan is then delivered to City staff. Report deliverables include five hard copies of the draft report for City staff, electronic copies of the draft report for local government review, six electronic copies for MDH approval, and, finally, 10 hard copies of the approved plan report for City staff. Additionally, electronic copies (on CD- ROM) of the approved report will be presented to City staff for archival purposes. 4. Meetings The Part 2 planning process generally requires five meetings total: Scopinq Meeting: Following the completion of the Part 1 plan, the MDH holds this scoping meeting to outline their requirements and expectations for the completion of the Part 2 plan. PCSI Review Meeting: When the draft of the PCSI is nearly completed, a meeting should be held with City staff to review the identified potential contamination sources. Experienced City staff with knowledge of the area (and local historic land uses) are encouraged to attend and provide feedback. Often, this is the best way to catch potential contamination sources that may not be listed in official databases. Management Plan Review Meeting: This rneeting is held to review the current management plan and to discuss how the updated plan should be shaped to better reflect the City's current approach to management of land uses. Getting direct input from City staff is vital to ensure that the finished plan best meets the City's goals for wellhead protection planning. Draft Review Meeting: Following completion of the draft report, a meeting is held with City staff to conduct a final review and revision to the plan to ensure that the draft sent to local units of government and the MDH meets the City's needs and expectations. Page 65 of 80 I City of Oak Park Heights Page 6 Wellhead Protection Ptan Update November 5, 20W Public Hearing: Following the local government review period, the City is required to conduct a public hearing at one of the City Council meetings. Bonestroo staff will attend this hearing and give a brief presentation, outlining the contents of the Part 2 plan for the Council and the general public. Bonestroo staff will then remain to answer any questions posed by the Council or the general public. Part 2 Budget and Schedule Since the scope of the Part 2 activities depend greatly on the results of the Part 1 plan, an accurate cost proposal and schedule for Part 2 services cannot be provided at this time. In order to help the City with internal budgeting for this project, however, estimates of budget and schedule are provided in Tables 3 and 4. Budgets for tasks are presented as a range, in order to give an idea of the variation that may occur depending on the results of the Part 1 plan. The schedule is expected to be less variable, since the City has a deadline of November 13, 2012 for the submittal of the final plan to the MDH. Table 3 - - of Oak Park Heights, Part 2 Wellhead Protection PIan„_Estimated Costs Project "task Estimated Cost Rance Task 1- Data Collection and Assembly __._...._..__._. $5,000 - 5,000 Task 2 -- Management Plan Develdpment12 000-3,000 Task 3 — Reporting $3,000 -4,000 Task 4 _ Meetings __..._.---------------------------- - - -..— - -- _$2,000 -3,000 _____ Expenses $500 -1000 Total $12,500-19,900 Table 4 — City of Oak Park Heights, Part 2 Wellhead Protection_ Plan, Estimated Schedule Project Milestone _..____...— _. _..._pro psed Completion Part 2 Scoping Meeting_ ............. ...._._..---- ..__-- .- . - - - -- - - - - - -- September 2011 City Approves Bonestroo Work Plan - -- -------------- _ ---- __.--------- _.._._— October 2.011 Draft PCSI Completed December 2011 Draft Management Plan Completed __.__...._------------- ._._ -- ............._._. _._.._.__. January 2012 _City Review of Draft _ —_ -- February 2012 Local Government Review March -April 2012 _.__--___—.._.—. .__— ...._.--------- .._.._ ...... ... ............_____....___ -- ......._.__.........._ .. - - -- Public Hearing Ma ._— _ .1. 2012 Submittal of Plan to MDH for Approval* _....._.__.._._._._ June 2012* MDH A .royal of Plan _. _.. September 2012 Plan Implementation Begins October 2012 *due date for submittal is November 2012 For the sake of budgeting, it is suggested that you budget approximately $15,000 - $18,000 for the year 2011. This will include the costs to complete the Part 1 plan and begin the Part 2 plan. You should then budget approximately $15,000 for the year 2012, which will get you through the completion of the Part 2 plan. Any portion of that budget which is not used towards completing the Part 2 plan can be used toward the implementation of the plan. Page 66 of 80 Cify of Oak Park Heights Page 7 Wellhead Protection Pion Update November 5, 2010 Next Steps We hope the proposed scope of services outlined in this work plan meets your needs. Please contact me at (651) 604 -4831 with any comments or questions you may have regarding wellhead protection planning. We look forward to working with you towards the successful completion of your Wellhead Protection Plan. Sincerely, BONESTROO Mark Janovec, 'G Senior Scientist copy: Chris Long, Bonestroo Page 67 of 80 A RECOMMENDING RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION :ESTABLISHING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AM.ENDMENT AS IT RELATES TO A PATIO AREA AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE OAKGREEN COMMONS BUILDING LOCATED AT 13936 LOWER 59 STREET NORTH SHOULD BE APPROVED WITI1. CONDITIONS WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has received a request for a planned unit development amendment as it relates to a patio area at the northeast corner of the Oakgreen Commons building located at 13936 l..ower 59 Street: North; after having conducted a public hearing relative thereto, the Planning Commission of Oak Park Heights makes the following findings of fact: 1. The real property affected by said application is legally described as follows, to wit: SEE A'TTAC1"IMENI' A and 2. The applicant has submitted an application and supporting documentation to the Community Development Department consisting of the following items: SEL..: ATTACHMENT 1:3 and 3. The property was approved by the City Council for a Planned Unit Development, general plan by the City Council on June 9, 2009; and 4. 'The Oakgreen Commons project was approved with plans that showed a patio area at the northeast corner of the building. The lower level of the patio was to be unexcavated; and 5. The Oakgreen Commons project was approved with a 40 foot setback from the main building to the east property line and a 20 foot setback for the patio in that it did not include habitable space below; and Page 68 of 80 6. The patio was constructed with the approved setback but included a lower area that was excavated and a foundation that included windows, allowing for habitable space; and 7. City Staff has determined that an amended Planned Unit Development is required to allow for the change in plans; and 8. City staff prepared a planning report dated November 11, 2010 reviewing the request; and 9. Said report recommended approval of the amended Planned Unit Development subject to the fulfillment of conditions; and 10. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their November 18, 2010 meeting, took comments from the applicants, closed the public hearing, and made the following recommendation: IOW, THEREFORE, I3I?, IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE (11 Y OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS THAT 'IIIF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE F()I.A.,OWING: A. The application submitted for Oakgreen Commons for a Planned Unit Development amendment as it relates to a patio area at the northeast corner of the Oakgreen Commons building located at 13936 Lower 59 Street: North and affecting the real property as follows: SEE ATl'A.CIIMEN'F A The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council of the City of Oak Park 1- leights approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. The revised landscape plans is subject to City Arborist review and approval. 2. The final grading and drainage for the site shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer, 3. Any other conditions of the City Council and Planning Commission. Recommended by the Planning Commission of the City of Oak Park Heights this 18 day of November, 2010. 2 Page 69 of 80 Jennifer Bye, Cpl lair__...._._. ___..__.__.------ _------- ____ -- ATTEST: Erie A. Johnson, City Administrator J Page 70 of 80 RESOLUTION NO. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF OAK PARK II.EIGI -ITS WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL THAT TIE REQUEST FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AS IT RELATES TO A PATIO AREA AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE OAKGREEN COMMONS BUILDING LOCATED AT 13936 LOWER 59 STREET NORTH BE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS WHEREAS, the City of Oak Park Heights has received a request for a planned unit development amendment as it relates to a patio area at the northeast corner of the Oakgreen Commons building located at 13936 Lower 59 Street North; after having conducted a public hearing relative thereto, the Planning Commission of Oak Park. Heights recommended that the request be approved with condltiorls. The City Council of the City of Oak Park 1 eights makes the following findings of fact and resolution: 1. The real property affected by said application is legally described as follows, to wit: SFr'. ATTACHMENT A and 2. The applicant has submitted an application and supporting documentation to the Community Development Department consisting of the following items: SI;E ATTACHMENT I3 and 3. The property was approved by the City Council for a Planned Unit Development. general plan by the City Council on .tune 9, 2009; and 4. The Oakgreen Commons project was approved with plans that showed a patio area at the northeast corner of the building. The lower level of the patio was to be unexcavated; and • 5. The Oakgreen Commons project was approved with a 40 foot setback from the main building to the east property line and a 20 foot setback for the patio in that it did not include habitable space below; and Page 71 of 80 6. The patio was constructed with the approved setback but included a lower area that was excavated and a foundation that included windows, allowing for habitable space; and 7. City Staff has determined that an amended Planned Unit Development is required to allow for the change in plans; and 8. City staff prepared a planning report dated November 1 1 , 2010 reviewing the request; and 9. Said report recommended approval of the amended Planned Unit Development subject to the fulfillment of conditions; and 10. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their November 18, 2010 meeting, took comments from the applicants, closed the public hearing and recommended that the application be approved with conditions. NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR TH..E CITY OF OAK PARK IIEIG1-i'1'S THAT THE (:;11'Y COUNCIL APPROVES TINE FO1..LO'WING: A. The application submitted for Oakgreen Commons for a Planned Unit Development amendment as it relates to a patio area at the northeast corner of the Oakgreen Commons building located at 13936 Lower 59` Street North and affecting the real property as follows: S1::E A'J'TAC11M1E:N"1' A 1:3e and the same as hereby approved by the City Council of the City of Oak Park Heights subject to the following conditions: 1. The revised landscape plans is subject: to City Arborist review and approval. 2. The final grading and drainage for the site shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. Any other conditions of the City Council and Planning Commission. Approved by the City Council of the City of Oak Park 1 Heights this 23 day of November, 2010. 2 Page 72 of 80 David J3eaudet, Mayor ATTEST: Eric A.. Johnson, City Administrator n Page 73 of 80