Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2011 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ': �. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, November 10, 2011— Oak Park Heights City Hall Call to Order: Chair Bye called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Dougherty, LeRoux, and Squyres; City Planner Richards, City Administrator Johnson and Commission Liaison Abrahamson. Absent: Commissioner Powell. II. Approval of Agenda: Commissioner Squyres, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux, moved to approve the Agenda as presented. Carried 4 - 0. III. Approval of October 13, 2011 Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Squyres, moved to approve the minutes as presented. Carried 4 - 0. IV. Department/Commission Liaison / Other Reports: None. V. Visitors/Public Comment: None. VI. Public Hearings: A. Oak Park Sr. Living -Phase I: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living -Phase I (Formerly Known As Oakgreen Village) Allowing a Reduction in Approved Number of Townhome Units, Construction of Brownstone Sr. Living Buildings, An Increase To Allowable Building Heights & Increase to Overall Density. City Planner Richards reviewed the November 3, 2011 planning report, noting that as part of the request for density change a comprehensive plan amendment for the area from medium to high density would be required if approved. Chair Bye opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Tim Nolde of Oakgreen Villa LLC /Anchobaypro introduced himself as the owner & developer of the project and noted that market challenges are driving the changes requested to the site in order to make it viable. Mr. Nolde stated that their market research shows that rental senior housing versus ownership purchase of senior housing is what the market is demanding. He discussed the site briefly, adding that proposed development should tie in nicely to the area and its trail system. Mike Diem of Archnet U.S.A., architect to the project, provided the Commission with a materials board for their review and discussed the mixed palate and materials composition proposed for the development structures. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 2 of 7 Todd Erickson of Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., engineer to the project, responded to Commissioner Squyres inquiry as to the long -term validity of senior rental housing, noting that the demand for such housing is in place. Discussion ensued among the Commission, the applicant and his representatives as to their being community rooms being planned within each brownstone building proposed, potential small retail shop to the development, tie -in of proposed exterior design of structures to those currently in place within the development area, property lines and setbacks, trails, building elevations and locations of residences in relation to the trails and pedestrian traffic areas. Chair Bye noted visitors to the audience and invited them to speak. Starr Frost — 5555 Novak Ave. N. addressed the Commission and expressed concerns with changing the density from medium to high with respect to infrastructure and water supply demand increase, adding additional traffic to existing roadways she feels are already heavily congested, how it could be guaranteed that the development would not be changed from senior use, how rental versus ownership units would affect the community overall, and the lack of mature trees and decreased green space in the area. Mrs. Frost questioned whether residents to the development would find living by the streets and trails desirable and discussed her experience with residences located at Boutwells Landing. Bill Hodges — 13210 56 St. N. expressed his concern to an increased density and additional congestion to the existing roadways as a result of the development and during its period of construction. Discussion ensued, wherein Mr. Nolde noted that the previously approved plan for the site would have actually resulted in greater traffic volume than the currently proposed project. City Planner Richards stated that a senior rental guarantee would be achieved through an agreement with the City as part of any approval to the project. Additional discussion among the Commission was had as to issues related to safety vehicle access, water supply, tree requirements, senior density calculation criteria, and other senior developments situated within the City. Mrs. Frost stated that she felt the traffic on 58th St. N. was high with the Boutwells Landing Sr. neighborhood and the Stillwater Area High School accessing it. She also stated that she found the front road connection and intersections to be bad and questioned how it would be at such time the roadway was widened to three or four lanes of traffic. Discussion ensued as to the matter of traffic in the area and potential future roadway changes, the proposed plan, tree plan and species selection. City Planner Richards reviewed the proposed conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report. Discussion was had as to those conditions, density, rental versus ownership, and how to ensure that the site does not become a blight upon the community in the future. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 3 of 7 Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner Squyres moved to recommend City Council approval subject to the amended conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report, specifically: 1. The Planning Commission recommends the property should be re- designated from medium density to high density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The preliminary and final plat, as well as the dedication and vacation of any easements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. 3. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed density of the project. 4. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that Oak Park Senior Living Phase I will remain as senior rental and shall not be converted to non - restricted rental housing. 5. The Planning Commission was favorable to the added parking and changes to the private access roadway and cul -de -sac adjacent to Nova Scotia Ave. N. 6. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed private and public trail system. 7. The Planning Commission was favorable to the zero lot line setback for Building one (1) but recommended that the right -of -way area be enhanced with additional landscaping, subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. The applicant shall provide revised landscape plans for City Council approval. 8. All tree removal and landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 9. The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer and applicable watershed authority review and approval. 10. All utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 11. The Planning Commission was favorable to the use of the non - shielded, residential style light fixtures. 12. The applicant shall submit any plans for new signage subject to City approval. 13. The projected traffic counts are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. If the intersection of 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue requires signalization or other traffic control measures, the applicant shall agree to a share of the costs as outlined in the Development Agreement. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 4 of 7 14. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief should review the plans and determine the accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development. 15. The trails and sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's review and approvals. 16. The snow storage areas and plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 17. Any mechanical equipment that is ground mounted or visible from adjacent streets shall be screened as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 18. The den rooms in the dwelling units shall not be converted to bedrooms with the addition of a closet. 19. The Planning Commission was favorable to the final building appearance, colors, materials and variety between buildings. The applicant shall provide a materials board for all of the buildings to be subject to review and approval of the City Council. 20. The Development Agreement shall include a requirement that all of the buildings be maintained in proper condition and in compliance with City Codes. 21. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and the City Council. 22. The proposed multi -level townhome four -plex is to be constructed of the same building materials and appearance as the building at 5812 -5818 Nutmeg Court, N. and all of the existing and proposed one -level townhomes are to be constructed with the same building materials and appearance as the building at 13848 -13872 Upper 58` Street, N. subject to review and approval of the City Building Official. 23. The applicant shall provide additional details for the private park area including elevations of the gazebo, materials to be used in the structures and walkways, and landscaping details for review and approval of the City Council. Carried 4 — 0. B. Oak Park Sr. Living -Phase II: Planned Unit Development Amendment Related to the Construction of Oak Park Heights Senior Living- Phase II (Formerly Known As Carriage Hose Co -op) To Increase Building Height & Density. City Planner Richards reviewed the November 3, 2011 planning report, noting that the request seeks an increase to the number of units, an addition of one - story, and a change from senior co -op ownership to senior rental. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 5 of 7 Chair Bye opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Tim Nolde of Oakgreen Villa LLC /Anchobaypro addressed the matter of setbacks, noting that the sidewalks at the site have already been installed and that there is considerable green space between the sidewalk and the Oakgreen Commons building. He noted that one of the reasons they opted to relocate building 4 closer to the sidewalk is to permit closer access to the sidewalk from the building. He expressed his thought that the building placement should look fine in relation to the overall site. Discussion ensued as to sidewalk access directly from ground unit patios facing the sidewalk, trails and elevations within the site. Starr Frost — 5555 Novak Ave. N. stated that she felt the building to be very large and tall for the proposed location, questioned how the building was going to fit in with future proposed roadway changes in the area, expressed concern about density to the area and how the proposed building will affect the property values of her neighborhood, which is just down the road from the development site, and noted that she felt that the trees along Oakgreen Ave. were in need of maintenance. Commission discussion ensued as to roadways, building height mix in the development overall, setbacks, location of building 4, and grass /seeding in the right -of -way area. City Planner reviewed and discussed the conditions proposed within the November 3, 2011 report. Commissioner Dougherty, seconded by Commissioner LeRoux moved to recommend City Council approval subject to the amended conditions within the November 3, 2011 planning report, specifically: 1. The Planning Commission recommends the property should be re- designated from medium density to high density residential in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed density of the project. 3. The Development Agreement shall include a provision that Oak Park Senior Living Phase II will remain as senior rental and shall not be converted to non - restricted rental housing. 4. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed private and public trail system. 5. The setback for Building 4 should be moved at least 30 feet from the right -of -way line of Oakgreen Ave. Revised plans shall be provided to the City Council for review and approval. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page6of7 6. All tree removal and landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Arborist. 7. The grading and drainage plans shall be subject to City Engineer and applicable watershed authority review and approval. 8. All utility plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 9. The Planning Commission was favorable to the non - shielded, residential style light fixtures. to res. 10. The applicant shall submit any plans for new signage subject to City approval. 11. The projected traffic counts are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. If the intersection at 58 Street and Oakgreen Avenue requires signalization or other traffic control measures, the applicant shall agree to a share of the costs as outlined in the Development Agreements. 12. The Fire Marshal and Police Chief should review the plans and determine the accessibility of emergency vehicles throughout the development. 13. The trails and sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with the City Engineer's review and approvals. 14. The snow storage areas and plan shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 15. Any mechanical equipment that is ground mounted or visible from adjacent streets shall be screened as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 16. The Planning Commission was favorable to the 38 -foot height of Building 4 as part of the PUD approvals. 17. The den rooms in the dwelling units shall not be converted to bedrooms with the addition of a closet. 18. The Planning Commission was favorable to the final building appearance, colors, materials and the variety between buildings. The applicant shall provide a materials board for the building to be discussed at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. 19. The Development Agreement shall include a requirement that all of the buildings be maintained in proper condition and in compliance with City Codes. 20. The applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and City Council. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 2011 Page 7 of 7 21. The applicant shall provide additional details for the private park area including elevations of the gazebo, materials to be used in the structures and walkways, and landscaping details for review and approval of the City Council. 22. The applicant shall provide a sidewalk connection plan for the first floor units of Building 4 subject to City Council review and approval. Carried 4 — O. VII. New Business: None. VIII. Old Business: None. IX. Informational: A. Upcoming Meetings: • Tuesday, November 29, 2011 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall • Thursday, December 15, 2011 Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. /City Hall • Tuesday, December 27, 2011 City Council 7:00 p.m. /City Hall B. Council Representative: • Tuesday, November 29, 2011 — Commissioner Dougherty • Tuesday, December 27, 2011 — Commissioner LeRoux X. Adjourn: Commissioner LeRoux, seconded by Commissioner Squyres, moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 p.m. Carried 4 — 0. Res ectfully submitted, Juli( ultman Playing & Code Enforcement Officer Approved by the Planning Commission: 01 -12 -2012