HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-03-07 NAC MemorandumMEMORANDUM
TO: Judy Hoist
FROM: Scott Richards
DATE: March 7, 2003
RE: Oak Park Heights — VSSA Oakgreen Village: CUP/PUD
Concept Plan
FILE NO: 798.02 — 02.33
REVISED PLANS
Attached for reference:
Exhibit 1: Revised Concept Plan
ANALYSIS
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.596.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 plannersPriacplanning.com
ENCLOSURE 2
Valley Senior Services Alliance (VSSA) has provided revised plans for a PUD Concept
Plan approval for that area west of Oakgreen Avenue and north of 58 Street. The
Planning Commission, at their February 13, 2003 meeting, continued the public hearing
to the March Planning Commission meeting pending the submittal of additional
information. The February 6, 2003 planning report outlined the unresolved issues and
information required to complete a concept plan review.
The project architect has provided a revised plan indicating changes to that area east of
Novak Avenue North. The plan addresses some of the issues, but not all that were
identified in the February 6, 2003 report.
Plan Details. The revised plan indicates a change in the number of units in the
apartments (labeled as 17 on the site plan) from 50 units in each to 45. As a result, the
two apartment buildings east of Novak Avenue will have a total of 90 units, instead of
100 units.
The configuration of townhomes has also changed. The townhomes of Phase 1 now
total 87 units in 12 buildings. Phase 2, near Oakgreen Avenue, has a total of 23 units in
four buildings. The total number of townhome units is now planned at 110 units, instead
of 100 units.
The townhome units have also been reconfigured to provide 65 feet from building to
building and a 23 foot drive aisle. Adequate space is now provided to allow parking in
front of the townhome garages.
Staff comments on the revised plans include:
• The access roadway between Novak Avenue and 58 Street is proposed to be a
public street. The plans indicate the driveways of townhomes 9 and 10
accessing directly on the street, which is regarded as a traffic issue and not
allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
• The City Engineer has indicated that too many access points for the townhomes
and apartments are provided to the public street. The plan should be revised to
address the access issue.
• The townhomes on Oakgreen Avenue as part of Phase 2 have been pulled
further west to allow for additional separation to the roadway. The plat will need
to be revised so at least 40 feet of right -of -way can be retained from the
centerline of Oakgreen Avenue North.
• Townhome 6 in Phase 1 is set back 25 feet from the boundary line of Phase 1
and 2. At least a 30 foot separation should be provided if the project is
constructed in phases.
• Staff has previously recommended that the Oakgreen Avenue townhomes be
constructed in the same phase as the other townhome development. The
Planning Commission and City Council should comment on this issue.
• Staff recommends that VSSA obtain written approval from Xcel Energy on the
construction of a roadway and the ponds within the power line easement.
• The City Engineer has indicated that stormwater will be redirected into a different
watershed district from where it currently drains. Written approval from the
affected watershed districts should be obtained by the applicant.
issues /Recommendations from February 6, 2003 Memo. Following is a list of
issues and recommendations from the February 6, 2003 memo with a response to
each:
1. The preliminary plat needs to be revised to include lot and block numbers and
keep stormwater ponds on the same tots as adjacent buildings.
2
Response: A revised preliminary plat has not been submitted.
2. Forty feet of right -of -way should be dedicated from the centerline of Oakgreen
Avenue North to allow space for future improvements.
Response: The preliminary plat will need to be revised to address this issue.
3. The extension of Novak Avenue North must be redesigned to be completely on
the subject property, or the applicant must reach an agreement with the adjacent
property owner for the street to be partly on the adjacent property consistent with
the submitted plans.
Response: A preliminary plat has not been submitted to address this issue.
VSSA representatives have indicated that they will address this issue.
4. The phasing plan must be revised to include ail areas of the development
including ponds and streets.
Response: A revised phasing plan has not been submitted.
5 The phasing plan must put the areas along Oakgreen Avenue labeled C1 and E
in the same phase.
Response: The revised plan indicates the townhome project will stilt be
completed in two phases. The Planning Commission and City Council should
comment on this issue.
The applicant must address concerns regarding the close spacing of buildings
and potential difficulty in maneuvering fire equipment.
Response: The revised plan addresses this issue but the plan should be subject
to review and approval of the Fire Marshal.
The Parks Commission should make preliminary comments regarding open
space, park land needs, and sidewalk/trail locations.
Response: Minutes of the February Parks Commission meeting will be provided
to the Planning Commission and City Council.
8. The trail and landscaping south of 59 Street should extend all the way to
Oakgreen Avenue North.
Response: The revised plans indicate a trail to Oakgreen.
3
9 Information related to land market value should be provided to calculate park
dedication requirements.
Response: Representatives of VSSA have indicated that they would prefer to
submit the information as part of General Plan review. The Parks Commission
would like an indication at this time of the potential cash park dedication for this
development.
1 0. The applicant should respond to any comments from the City Engineer regarding
drainage and utility plans.
Response: The City engineer has made preliminary comments and will issue a
separate report.
1 '1. Any other comments from City staff, Planning Commission, Parks Commission,
and City Council.
Approval Timing. The initial application for this development was submitted in
December 20, 2002. The City sent the applicant a letter indicating that the timeline for
review would be 120 days. The project will need to be acted upon by the City Council at
their April 8, 2003 meeting, thus not allowing for another review by the Planning
Commission in April.
An additional 30 day extension has been requested from the applicant to address the
timeline issue.
RECOMMENDATION 1 CONCLUSION
Numerous issues that were raised by the City staff and Planning Commission have not
been adequately addressed by the applicant. In addition, the new site plan raises
additional issues, primarily with the direct access from garages to a public street and the
overall number of driveways along this roadway. The current Concept Plans and
supplemental information is not adequate to recommend favorably for Concept Plan
approval. With the approval timing issues, staff has requested the applicant provide at
least a 30 day extension to allow staff and the applicant to address the remaining
concerns before the April 1 0, 2003 meeting.
If an extension is not granted, it is recommended that the Planning Commission deny
the application based upon a findings of fact that will be prepared before the meeting or
send the application to the City Council without a recommendation.
4
r- er eH [.u: J U: 14a S e n i o r - Housing Partners
s
■0A ■.a a.MOOS•■NR0.•AO000O.■■Isr 1 ■saasasAMR
;1 F 7
SIMal.a. LL .... • •ala aa•la ariaala WeaMaaala OWN aft. MU. Caa*,0lea
Rein ARCHITECTS
•
•
•
•
VSSA
OAXGREIEN VILLAGE
OM PARK MGM'S. Lei
651-631-8301 p.2
a
•
o
•
•
•
� Z�
EXHIBIT 1
1