HomeMy WebLinkAboutParking Setbacks To: Chair Hawn and Planning Commission Members
City Council SCAN
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator
Date: October 14, 2000
Subject: #2631 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment-
Add "Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD) District" c'ej
s
List of Exhibits '�ay. )C vt y
A - Revised Draft RPUD Ordinance
B - Staff Memo 10-13-2000
Background
Planning Commission briefly reviewed this ordinance at the October meeting during which a public
hearing was held with no public comments forthcoming. The item was tabled to the Commission's
October 18 work session. On October 18 Planning Commission discussed the amendment in general
terms and after a brief review, concluded that each member should review the ordinance draft
individually and forward comments to Staff.
Revised Draft of Ordinance
The revised draft(Exhibit A)incorporates the suggested various standards that were attached to the
October 10 memo,with added minor changes to reflect that this is a Residential PUD ordinance(as
opposed to commercial or industrial) and reflects standards pertaining to single family detached
dwelling developments as well as standards for attached dwelling projects.
Single Family Detached Standards
The revised draft incorporates the suggested development standards for single family detached
dwellinQs in the RPUD district. This section creates minimum lot standards(area,width, setbacks,
etc) for any single family lots that are part of a RPUD district proposal. These minimum standards
are in Subd. 5 (H) and are summarized as follows:
Lot Area: 15,000 s.f. Lot width: 90' Lot Depth: 125'
Front Yard Setback: Interior Street- 25' Exterior or Through Street- 35'
Collector or Arterial Street- 50'
Side Yard Setback: Interior Lot Lines- 10' Exterior Lot Lines- 15'
Side Street Lot Line- Same as front yard setback
Rear Yard Setback: 40' or 20% of lot depth,whichever is less
Building Height: 30' maximum
Building Dimensions: Minimum depth of 20' for 50% of width; and
Minimum width of 20' for 50%of depth
RPUD Ordinance
November 14, 2000
Page 2
Accessory Structures: Must meet principal structure setbacks, except can be 10' setback to side,
rear lot lines when not abutting street; can't be closer to front lot line than
principal structure. Max.height: 12' Max.building footprint: 1000 s.f.and
cannot occupy more than 30%of the side or rear yard in which it's located.
Parking: Must provide parking for a minimum of 2 vehicles on site; must show in
any building plan where a 2-stall (20x24) garage can be placed on site
without variance.
Note that the setback requirements of Subd. 5 (G) are intended to apply only to buildings with
attached dwelling units and their accessory buildings, and not to single-family detached dwellings,
which are covered in Subd. 5 (H).
Landscaping Standards
The landscaping standards now incorporated as Subd. 5 (N) apply to both detached and attached
dwelling unit developments, and include:
- detailed Landscape Plan submittal requirements
— defined minimum landscaping requirements as to types, sizes and mixture of
materials required, locations where landscaping is required, minimum sizes and or
dollar values for landscaping elements, etc.
- standards for landscaping of parking lots
— requirements for maintenance of landscaping once it is in place
- standards for retaining walls
- requirements for performance security
- standards for when and where screening and buffering is required and how it may be
accomplished
Architectural Standards
The architectural standards now incorporated as Subd. 5 (0) apply to both detached and attached
dwelling developments, and include:
— Architectural plans required, must show elevations, type and color of exterior
materials,floor plans,dimensions,locations of trash/recycling containers and HVAC
equipment
- Prohibition on prestressed concrete, concrete block and unfinished metal exterior
materials
— Requires mechanical equipment to be visually compatible with principal structure
- Requires underground utilities
Some additional standards to consider including in the ordinance are listed in Subd. 5 (T)on page
14. One of these is building height, which is addressed below.
1
RPUD Ordinance
November 14, 2000
Page 3
Building Height
Perhaps the most glaring "omission" from the draft ordinance is a numerical limit on height for an
attached-dwelling building such as the proposed senior housing facility. I place"omission"in quotes
because height has been purposely omitted, with the intent that the lack of a defined standard
requires Planning Commission and Council to determine an appropriate height for each proposed
building through the PUD review process. In this process,the Council can approve any height that
it feels is acceptable,but there are as of yet no set guidelines as to how the Council should determine
acceptability.
To date, we have set about creating a "Residential PUD" (RPUD) District, rather than a"Medium
Density Residential District" ("MDRD"). The significant difference is that a PUD District
designation infers that its written standards have already been relaxed from those of an equivalent
non-PUD district(in this case the MDRD),and we inherently must avoid granting variances to these
written RPUD standards. Therefore, if we wish to establish a written building height standard for
the RPUD district,then it must be high enough to accommodate the expected and intended uses of
the district without variance. As an alternative,we should set no height standard,but add language
that establishes a guideline for determining what is an appropriate height for a given proposed
building.
The intent of the RPUD District is to provide "housing to meet lifecycle, and affordable and
moderate cost housing needs". The reality may be that housing meeting these goals has to be of
greater height than our historic norm, in order to be economically viable. The height standard for
all of Orono's residential and commercial zoning districts is "2-1/2 stories or 30 feet"; the only
district in which a greater height has been allowed is the Industrial District,which allows "3 stories
or 40 feet" in height.
A limit of 2-1/2 stories will probably eliminate most multi-unit dwelling types other than
townhomes; likewise, a limit of 30 feet will probably not accommodate a 3-story building. A 3-
story residentialbuilding with a flat roof will likely be at least 30-32' in defined height; if we want
a pitched or hip roof to avoid an institutional or commercial look, then we must write the code to
accommodate the greater height needed for such a roof.
In the case of the example before us,the proposed senior housing building has a peak height,for the
majority of its length, in the range of 42-48' as viewed from the south side, with portions of the
facade appearing to be as much as 50'from finished grade to peak. The visual defined height(high-
side grade to average gable height)averages 38'for most of the building's length;although a perhaps
more strict adherence to the code definition(10'above lowest adjoining grade to average of highest
gable)yields a defined height of[1046'-(991.5+10)] =44.5 feet,when considering the entire length
of the building(but the building is stepped, so this method of defining height is somewhat perverse
in this case).
1
RPUD Ordinance
November 14, 2000
Page 4
The point is, this building and others like it providing 3-level housing options, will not be feasible
without straying from our historic height limits. Why do we have height limits? 1) To limit the
visual impact of structures as viewed from off site; 2)To maintain light,air and open space enjoyed
by the extant site and adjoining properties; 3) To stay within the limitations of local firefighting
capabilities; and 4)any number of perhaps more subtle reasons. If an applicant can demonstrate to
the Council's satisfaction that each of these height limitation factors can be suitably met or
mitigated, then a basis would exist for allowing the requested height.
There are three options:
1. Establish a height limit that will accommodate the type of development the City intends to
occur in this district; OR
2. Have no established height limit, but establish guidelines to be used in determining an
acceptable building height; OR
3. Leave building height entirely to the subjective discretion of the Planning Commission and
Council, with no established guidelines.
RPUD Procedural Requirements
Application review, approval and amendment procedures are generally described in Subd. 6 thru
Subd. 9. These have not been revised since the version you reviewed in October. Substantial detail
in terms of specific plan submittal requirements could be added, using our Highway 12 PUD
(Section 10.53) as a reference. Ultimately, however, the City should consider extracting the PUD
procedural requirements out of this RPUD District ordinance and make all PUD's subject to a
separate generic "PUD Procedures" code section similar to that of 10.53.
For now,the senior housing application immediately confronting the City is subject to the standards
of 10.53 as it is part of the Highway 12 corridor; 10.53 is the `umbrella' PUD section for review of
the Dunbar senior housing/office proposal. But not all properties that might use the RPUD in the
future are within the Highway 12 corridor, so 10.53 cannot act as that generic PUD Procedures
the future.
without some changes in
Staff Recommendation
Subject to any further changes the Planning Commission feels are needed, staff recommends
approval of the proposed ordinance to establish standards and authority for the RPUD District as a
residential zoning option. A final factor to keep in mind: Rezoning from any other zone to RPUD
is a completely legislative action on the Council's part;the Council can say no to it if they so choose,
and approval takes a 4/5ths vote. And with the PUD status,Council can set whatever conditions are
necessary to make a development proposal acceptable.
RPUD Ordinance
November 14,2000
Page 5
Options for Action
1. Recommend that the zoning code be amended by adoption of the attached RPUD ordinance
as Section 10.33,creating the RPUD District as a residential zone,establishing authority and
standards for rezoning to and development within the Residential Planned Unit Development
District.
2. Table for further discussion.
3. Recommend that the RPUD district not be created.
4. Other.
SEC. 10.33 RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)
district is to provide a district which will encourage the following:
A. flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new
techniques of building design, construction and land development;
B. provision of housing to meet lifecycle,and mow affordable and moderate cost
housing needs;
C. energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and
sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses;
D. preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection
of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, poor soils and
trees;
E. high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses,
including both existing and planned;
F. sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land
uses and along significant corridors within the city; and
G. development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the RPUD District, no land or structures shall be used
except for one or more of the following uses:
A. Any `Permitted Use' as regulated in the R-1A District (Ed. Note: this
includes one-family single dwellings; public owned parks and
playgrounds; and municipal buildings).
Subd.3. Conditional Uses.Within the RPUD district,no land or structure shall be used for
the following uses except by conditional use permit:
(Ed Note: Conditional Uses listed in the R-1A District include Schools; Churches;
Clubs,Camps,etc.;Public Service Structures;Greenhouses;Private Recreation Areas;
Guest Houses & Guest Apartments; PRD's; Duplex credit; Farms; Animals; Stables
and Barns; Riding Academy; Plumbing in Accessory Buildings. None of the
conditional uses listed in the R-1A District conceptually fit into the RPUD District,
except perhaps Public Service Structures).
A. Public Service Structures.Public service structures,including but not limited
to electric transmission lines,buildings such as telephone exchange stations,
booster or pressure regulating stations,wells,and plumbing stations,elevated
tanks,lift stations and electrical power substations,provided no building shall
be located within 50' from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District.
1
Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of
service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be
located and thus will promote the general welfare. Public service structures
as defined above that have been approved by the City at required public
hearings for public improvement projects shall not require a conditional use
permit but such structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards
set forth in this section; amendments to approved plans involving design
and/or placement of these structures will require written notice by the City to
all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adoption of the amended
plans by the Council. Personal wireless services and commercial
broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service
structures. Uses allowed by conditional use permit shall be reviewed for
compliance with the RPUD master development plan and with the applicable
conditional use permit standards of this ordinance. Uses allowed by
conditional use permit shall also be subject to site and building plan review
pursuant to this ordinance.
Subd.4. Accessory Uses. Within the RPUD District the following uses shall be a permitted
accessory use:
A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated in the R-1A
District.
B. Privately owned buildings to be used for recreation or social purposes,or for
use as storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish.
Subd. 5. Development Standards. Within the RPUD District all development shall be in
compliance with the following:
A. Minimum Area. Each RPUD shall have a minimum area of five acres,
excluding areas within a designated wetland,floodplain or shoreland district
or right-of-way, unless the Council finds the
existence of one of the following:
1. unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding
neighborhood such that development as a RPUD will conserve a
physical or topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or
community;
2. the property is directly adjacent to or across a right-of-way from
property which has been developed previously as a RPUD or planned
2
residential development and will be perceived as and will function as
-- an extension of that previously approved development;
3. the property is located in a transitional area bctwcrn diffcrcnt land use
categories an area where the proposed development provides a
transition between a commercial or industrial area and an existing
residential area or on an intermediate or principal arterial as defined
in the comprehensive plan;
4. the property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of
significant trees that could be preserved through the clustering of
buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed by the
existing zoning district.
B. Uses. Each RPUD shall only be used for the use or uses for which the site is
designated in the comprehensive plan(Ed.Note:Many of the uses allowed
as conditional uses in residential zoning districts, cannot be placed in
areas of the City which are designated residential in the CMP; for
instance, only properties currently containing schools or churches are
designated in the CMP as Institutional rather than residential. The
result is that any existing site that is designated Residential in the CMP
cannot be converted to an Institutional Use such as a church or school
use, without a CMP amendment...) , except that the city may permit a
RPUD on a site designated for commercial use if the city council finds that
such use is in the best interests of the city and is consistent with the
requirements of this section.
If a commercial site is to be used for a RPUD, the city may forward a copy
of the request to the Metropolitan Council for review.
C. Sewer Availability. A RPUD of proposed density greater than 1 unit per 2
acres must be in the MUSA and must be serviced by municipal sewer.
D. Density. Each RPUD shall have a density within the range specified in the
comprehensive plan for the RPUD site. If the site is not designated in the
comprehensive plan for residential use, the appropriate density shall be
determined by the city based upon the City Council's finding that such density
is consistent with the intent of this ordinance and of the comprehensive plan.
3
E. Incentives. The city may utilize incentives to encourage the construction of
projects which are consistent with the city's housing goals. Incentives may
include modification of density and floor area ratio requirements for
developments providing lifecycle housing and low and moderate cost
housing. Incentives for+Inv affordable and moderate cost housing may be
approved by the city only after the developer and city have entered into an
agreement to ensure that the low and moderate cost units remain available to
persons of low and moderate income for a specific period of time.
F. Site Coverage. Hardsurface coverages and floor area ratios (FAR's) (Ed.
Note: We need to have a definition for this in this section or in the
zoning code general definitions) shall be limited as follows:
Comprehensive Plan Designation Maximum Maximum
Hardsurface Floor Area
Coverage (%) Ratio
Low or medium density residential 50 0.5
(up to and including 6.0 units per acre)
High density residential 70 1.0
(in excess of 6.0 units per acre)
Individual lots within a P.U.D. may exceed these standards as long as the
average meets these standards.
G. Setbacks and Separation of Uses for Attached and Multi-Family
Dwelling Structures.The setback for all attached and multi-family dwelling
buildings and accessory buildings within a RPUD from any bordering or
abutting street line shall be 35 feet for local streets and 50 feet from railroad
lines or collector or arterial streets,as designated in the comprehensive plan,
except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height of the building
. . . • . ' • . :: . The setback for all buildings from exterior
RPUD lot lines not abutting a public street shall be 35 feet except that in no
case shall the setback be less than the height of the building
of 100 fcct. Building setbacks from internal public streets shall be
determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific RPUD.
Parking lots and driving lanes shall be setback at least 20 feet from all
4
exterior lot lines of a RPUD. The setback for parking structures including
decks and ramps shall be 35 feet from local streets and 50 feet from all other
street classifications except that in no case shall the setback be less than the
height of the structure. Parking structure setbacks from external lot lines
shall be 50 feet or the height of the structure, whichever is greater when
adjacent to residential properties; 35 feet when adjacent to non-residential
properties. Parking structure setbacks from internal public or private streets
shall be determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific RPUD.
Where industrial uses abut developed or platted single family lots outside the
RPUD, greater exterior building and parking setbacks may be required in
order to provide effective screening. The city council shall make a
determination regarding the adequacy of screening proposed by the applicant.
Screening may include the use of natural topography or earth berming,
existing and proposed plantings and other features such as roadways and
wetlands which provide separation of uses.
Areas within a RPUD which are designated in the approved master
development plan or final site plan for residential use shall be considered a
residential district for purposes of determining building and parking setback
requirements on adjacent high density residential,commercial and industrial
property outside the RPUD.
H. Development Standards for Single-Family Detached Dwellings in a
RPUD.Each RPUD developed for single family detached dwellings on sites
guided in the Comprehensive Plan for medium density residential
development(i.e. densities ranging from 1 unit per acre to 6 units per acre)
shall be subject to the following standards:
1. Permitted locations: In areas of the City where smaller single family
detached dwelling lots will allow for clustering to preserve significant
natural features, or in areas where a mixture of higher density
attached dwellings and lower density detached single family
dwellings will result in a development that does not exceed the
overall guided density. (Ed. Note - Example 1: A 10-acre area
guided for 1-acre SFR could have 10 individual 1/3 acre lots
clustered at on corner, leaving 2/3 of the site in its natural state
for open space. Example 2: A 10-acre area guided for up to 4
units per acre could have a mix of SFR and townhome lots, for
5
instance-20 SFR units at 15,000 s.f. per lot(6.9 acres total) and
-- 20 townhomes on 2,000 s.f. individual ownership pads with 2.2
acres commons area)
2. Minimum SFR lot size: 15,000 s.f.
3. Minimum lot width at the setback line: 90 feet.
4. Minimum lot depth: 125 feet.
5. Minimum front yard setback: 25 feet on internal streets within the
RPUD. On exterior or through streets a setback of 35 feet must be
provided on local streets and 50 foot setback on collector or arterial
streets as defined in the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet along interior lot lines; 15 feet on
lot lines along the exterior of the RPUD. Side yards abutting streets
must meet the minimum front yard setbacks as noted above.
7. Rear yard setback: minimum of 40 feet or 20 percent of the depth of
the lot, whichever is less.
8. Building height: maximum of 30 feet.
9. All dwelling units, including manufactured homes, shall have a
depthe of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their width. All
dwelling units,including manufactured homes,shall have a width of
at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their depth.
10. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with
the Minnesota State Building Code.
11. Accessory structures shall conform to the setbacks established for
principal structures, except as follows:
A. all accessory structures located more than 10 feet from a
principal structure may be located a minimum of 10 feet from
a rear or side lot line, when that line does not abut a street
6
right-of-way.
B. no accessory structure shall be located closer to the front lot
line than the principal structure, regardless of the principal
structure setback.
12. No accessory structure shall occupy more than 30 percent of the side
or rear yard in which it is located, nor exceed 1,000 square feet in
area, nor exceed 12 feet in height.
13. Off-street parking shall be provided for at least two vehicles for each
single family dwelling. A suitable location for a garage measuring at
least 20 feet by 24 feet without a variance shall be provided and
indicated as such on a survey or site plan to be submitted when
applying for a building permit to construct a new dwelling or alter an
existing garage.
More Than One Building Allowed. More than one building may be placed
on one platted or recorded lot in a RPUD.
J. Single Housing Type Permitted. Any RPUD which involves a single
housing type shall be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with
the objectives of this ordinance and the comprehensive plan.
K. Park Dedication. Each RPUD shall provide a minimum of 8 percent of the
gross project area in private recreational uses for project residents. Such area
shall be for active or passive recreational uses suited to the needs of the
residents of the project,including swimming pools,trails,nature areas,picnic
areas,tot lots and saunas. (Ed. Note: This would be in lieu of park fee...)
L. Ownership. All property to be included within a RPUD shall be under
unified ownership or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants
as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved master
development plan and final site and building plan.
M. Signage. Signs shall be restricted to those which are permitted in a sign plan
approved by the city and shall be regulated by permanent covenants.
7
N. Landscaping.
1. Landscape Plan Requirements. Landscape plans shall be prepared
by a landscape architect or other qualified person acceptable to the
City, drawn to the scale of not less than 1 inch equals 50 feet and
shall show the following:
a) boundary lines of the property with accurate dimensions;
a) locations of existing and proposed buildings, parking lots,
roads and other improvements;
b) proposed grading plan with 2-foot contour intervals;
c) location, approximate size and common name of existing
trees and shrubs;
d) a planting schedule containing symbols, quantities, common
and botanical names, size of plant materials, root condition
and special planting instructions;
e) planting details illustrating proposed locations of all new
plant material;
f) locations and details of other landscape features including
berms, fences and planter boxes;
g) details of restoration of disturbed areas including areas to be
sodded and seeded;
h) location and details of irrigation systems; and
i) details and cross sections of all required screening.
2. Minimum Landscaping Requirements.
a) All open areas of a lot which are not used or improved for
required parking areas, drives or storage shall be landscaped
with a combination of overstory trees, understory trees,
shrubs, flowers and groundcover materials. The plan for
landscaping shall include ground cover, bushes, shrubbery,
trees,sculpture,foundations,decorative walks or other similar
site design features or materials in a quantity having a
minimum value in conformance with the following table:
8
Project Value Minimum Landscape Value
(Including building construction,
site preparation,and site improvements)
Below$1,000,000 2.0%
$1,000,000- $2,000,000 1.7%
$2,000,001 - $3,000,000 1.4%
$3,000,001 - $4,000,000 1.15 %
Over$4,000,000 1.0%
In instances where healthy plant materials of acceptable
species exist on a site prior to its development,the application
of the standards in this section may be adjusted by the City to
allow credit for such material,provided that such adjustment
is consistent with the intent of this ordinance.
b) A reasonable attempt shall be made to preserve as many
existing trees as is practicable and to incorporate them into
the site plan.
c) All new overstory trees shall be balled and burlapped or
moved from the growing site by tree spade. Deciduous trees
shall have a minimum caliper of 2'/2 inches. Coniferous trees
shall be a minimum of six feet in height. Ornamental trees
shall have a minimum caliper of 11/2 inches.
d) All site areas not covered by buildings, sidewalks, parking
lots, driveways,patios, or similar hardsurface materials shall
be covered with sod or an equivalent ground cover approved
by the city. This requirement shall not apply to site areas
retained in a natural state.
e) In order to provide for adequate maintenance of landscaped
areas, an underground sprinkler system shall be provided as
part of each new development, except one and two family
dwellings and additions to existing structures which do not at
least equal the floor area of the existing structure. A sprinkler
system shall be provided for all landscaped areas except areas
to be preserved in a natural state.
9
•
f) Not more than 50 percent of the required number of trees
shall be composed of one species. No required tree shall be
one of the following:
1) a species of the genus Ulmus(elm),except those elms
bred to be immune to Dutch Elm Disease;
2) box elder;
3) a species of the genus Populous (poplar); or
4) female ginko.
3. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping.
a) All parking lots containing over 150 stalls shall be designed
to incorporate unpaved, landscaped islands in number and
dimension as required by the City. All landscape islands shall
contain a minimum of 180 square feet. Islands which are
necessary to promote the safe and efficient flow of traffic
shall not be subject to the "150 stall" standard and shall be
required by the city when warranted.
b) Parking lot landscape areas,including landscape islands,shall
be reasonably distributed throughout the parking lot area so as
to break up expanses of paved areas. Parking lot landscape
areas shall be provided with deciduous shade trees,
ornamental or evergreen trees, plus ground cover, mulch
and/or shrubbery as determined appropriate by the Planning
Commission. Parking lot landscape trees shall be provided at
the rate of one tree for each 15 surface parking spaces
provided, or major fraction thereof Parking lot landscaping
shall be contained in planting beds bordered by a raised
concrete curb or equivalent approved by the Planning
Commission.
4. Maintenance of Landscaping. The owner, tenant and their
respective agents shall be jointly and severally responsible for the
maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy,
neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. Plants
and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape
10
plan, and which have died shall be replaced within three months of
-- notification by the city. However, the time for compliance may be
extended up to nine months by the city in order to allow for seasonal
or weather conditions.
5. Retaining Walls. Retaining walls exceeding four feet in height,and
staged walls which cumulatively exceed 16 feet in height or involve
more than 4 tiers, must be constructed in accordance with plans
prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect.
6. Landscaping Performance Security Required. When screening,
landscaping or other similar improvements to property are required
by this ordinance a letter of credit shall be supplied by the owner in
an amount equal to at least one and one-half times the value of such
screening, landscaping or other improvements. The letter of credit
shall be conditioned upon reimbursement of all expenses incurred by
the city for engineering,legal,contracting or other fees in connection
with making or completing such improvements. The letter of credit
shall be provided prior to the issuance of any building permit and
shall be valid for a period of time equal to one full growing season
after the date of installation of the landscaping. The city may accept
some other form of security in lieu of a letter of credit in an amount
and under such conditions that the city may determine to be
appropriate. In the event that construction of the project is not
completed within the time prescribed by building permits and other
approvals, the city may, at its option, complete the work required at
the expense of the awner and the surety.
The city may allow an extended period of time for completion of all
landscaping if the delay is due to conditions which are reasonably
beyond the control of the developer. Extensions which may not
exceed nine months, may be granted due to seasonal or weather
conditions. When an extension is granted,the city shall require such
additional security as it deems appropriate.
11
7. Screening and Buffering.
a) The following uses shall be screened or buffered in
accordance with the requirements of this subdivision:
1. Principal buildings and structures and any building or
structure accessory thereto used for residential uses at
a density of greater than 4 units per acre shall be
buffered from residential lots located in any "R"
district.
2. Off-street parking facilities containing six or more
spaces shall be buffered from streets located within 50
feet.
3. Loading docks shall be screened from all lot lines and
public roads.
4. Trash storage facilities shall be screened from all lot
lines and public roads.
b) Required screening or buffering may be achieved with fences,
walls,earth berms,hedges,or other landscape materials. All
walls and fences shall be architecturally harmonious with the
principal building. Earth berms shall not exceed a slope of
3:1. The screen shall be designed to employ materials which
provide an effective visual barrier during all seasons.
c) All required screening or buffering shall be located on the lot
occupied by the use, building, facility or structure to be
screened. No screening or buffering shall be located on any
public right-of-way or within eight feet of the traveled portion
of any street or highway.
d) Screening or buffering required by this section shall be of a
height needed to accomplish the goals of this section. Height
of plantings required under this section shall be measured at
the time of installation.
12
0. Architectural Standards.
1. It is not the intent of the City to restrict design freedom unduly when
reviewing project architecture in connection with a site and building
plan. However, it is in the best interest of the City to promote high
standards of architectural design and compatibility with surrounding
structures and neighborhoods. Architectural plans shall be prepared
by an architect or other qualified persons acceptable to the City and
shall show the following for all structures other than single family
detached dwellings:
a) elevations of all sides of the building;
b) type and color of exterior building materials;
c) a typical floor plan;
d) dimensions of all structures;
e) the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating,
ventilation and air conditioning equipment.
2. Unadorned prestressed concrete panels,concrete block and unfinished
metal shall not be permitted as exterior materials for residential
principal and accessory buildings. This restriction shall apply to all
principal structures and to all accessory buildings except those not
visible from any exterior property line. The city may,at its discretion,
allow architecturally enhanced block or concrete panels.
3. Accessory buildings shall be architecturally compatible with principal
structures.
4. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment and exterior
trash and recycling storage areas shall be enclosed with materials
compatible with the principal structure. Low-profile, self contained
mechanical units which blend in with the building architecture are
exempt from the screening requirement.
13
5:r Underground utilities shall be provided for all new and substantially
renovated structures.
P. Flexibility. The uniqueness of each RPUD requires that specifications and
standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and subdivisions may be
subject to modification from the city ordinances ordinarily governing them.
The city council may therefore approve streets,utilities,public facilities and
land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or
ordinance requirements if it finds that strict adherence to such standards or
requirements is not required to meet the intent of this section or to protect the
q
health, safety or welfare of the residents of the RPUD, the surrounding area
or the city as a whole.
Q. Traffic Studies. The City may require a traffic analysis to be prepared by a
registered traffic engineer approved by the City to assess potential traffic
impacts on local streets. If impacts on service levels of roadways and
intersections are anticipated, the project will be approved only contingent
upon a traffic management plan that adequately mitigates those impacts. The
plan may include travel demand management strategies, use of transit
facilities or other appropriate measures to reduce traffic generation, and
necessary improvements to road systems. The developer shall have the
responsibility to install all necessary road system improvements.
R. Building Permits.No building or other permit shall be issued for any work
on property included within a proposed or approved RPUD nor shall any
work occur unless such work is in compliance with the proposed or approved
RPUD.
S. General Regulations Applicability. The requirements contained in this
ordinance pertaining to general regulations for residential districts and
performance standards shall apply to a RPUD as deemed appropriate by the
city.
T. POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL STANDARDS TO CONSIDER:
Height limits for attached dwellings; screening car headlight impacts to adjacent
property; shoreland zone limitations; special outside storage standards
14
Subd. 6. Review of Application; Procedures.
A. Concept Plan Review. In order to receive guidance in the design of a RPUD
prior to submission of a formal application, an applicant may submit a
concept plan for review and comment by the planning commission and city
council. Submission of a concept plan is optional but is highly recommended
for large RPUDs. In order for the review to be of most help to the applicant,
the concept plan should contain such specific information as is suggested by
the city. Generally, this information should include the following:
1) approximate building and road locations;
2) height, bulk and square footage of buildings;
3) type and square footage of specific land uses;
4) number of dwelling units;
5) generalized grading plan showing areas to be cut, filled and
preserved; and
6) staging and timing of the development.
The comments of the planning commission and city council shall address the
consistency of the concept plan with this section. The comments of the
planning commission and city council shall be for guidance only and, if
positive, shall not be considered binding upon the planning commission or
city council regarding approval of the formal RPUD application when
submitted.
B. Master Development Plan and Rezoning. Approval of a rezoning to RPUD
and approval of a master development plan shall be subject to the procedures
outlined in the Zoning Code for a zoning map amendment. The master
development plan shall contain the following:
1) building location, height, bulk and square footage;
2) type and square footage of specific land uses;
3) number of dwelling units;
4) detailed street and utility locations and sizes;
5) parking layout;
6) drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water
storage areas;
7) grading plan and drainage plan including 2-foot contours;
8) generalized landscape plan;
9) generalized plan for uniform signs and lighting;
15
10) plan for timing and phasing of the development;
11) covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of
the development; and
12) renderings or elevations of all sides of
buildings to be constructed in the first phase of the
development.
Approval of the master development plan shall indicate approval of the
previously listed items and shall occur in conjunction with rezoning of the
property to RPUD. After rezoning of the property to RPUD,nothing shall be
constructed on the RPUD site except in conformance with the approved plans
and this section. The procedure for notification of and public hearing on the
master development plan shall be the same as required for a zoning map
amendment by this ordinance.
C. Final Site and Building Plan. Approval of a final site and building plan for
the entire RPUD or for specific parts of the RPUD shall be subject to the
procedures outlined in this ordinance. The final site and building plan shall
contain information as required by the city, including the following:
1) detailed utility, street, grading and drainage plans;
2) detailed building elevations and floor plans; and
3) detailed landscaping, sign and lighting plans.
D. Substantial Compliance. The final site and building plan shall be in
substantial compliance with the approved master development plan.
Substantial compliance shall mean:
1) buildings, parking areas and roads are in substantially the
same location as previously approved;
2) the number of residential living units has not increased or
decreased by more than 5 percent from that approved in the
master development plan;
3) the gross floor area of any individual building has not been
increased by more than 10 percent from that approved in the
master development plan;
4) there has been no increase in the number of stories in any
building;
5) open space has not been decreased or altered to change its
original design or intended use; and
16
6) all special conditions required on the master development
plan by the city have been incorporated into the final site and
building plan.
Approval of a final site and building plan shall signify approval of all plans
necessary prior to application for a building permit, subject to conformance
with any conditions on the approval and subject to other necessary approvals
by the city.
E. Simultaneous Review. Applicants may combine the final site and building
plan review with the master development plan review by submitting all
information required for both stages simultaneously.
F. Basis For Approval; Conditions. In evaluating a site and building plan, the
planning commission and city council shall base their recommendations and
actions regarding approval of a RPUD on a consideration of the following:
1) compatibility of the proposed plan with this section and
consistency with the goals, policies, and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan and Surface Water Management Plan;
2) preservation of the site in its natural state to the greatest
extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and
designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general
character and appearance of neighboring properties;
3) creation of compatible relationships between buildings and
open spaces both on the site and adjacent to it, incorporating
natural site features and with existing and future buildings
having a visual relationship to the development, giving
special attention to:
a) an internal sense of order for the buildings and uses
on the site and provision of a desirable environment
for occupants, visitors and the general community;
b) the amount and location of open space and
landscaping;
c) materials,textures, colors and details of construction
as an expression of the design concept and the
compatibility of the same with the adjacent and
17
neighboring structures and uses; and vehicular and
pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior
drives and parking in terms of location and number
access points to the public streets, width of interior
drives and access points, general interior circulation,
separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and
arrangement and amount of parking.
4) promotion of energy conservation through design, location,
orientation and elevation of structures,the use and location of
glass in structures and the use of landscape materials and site
grading;
5) protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through
reasonable provisions for surface water drainage, sound and
sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those
aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations
which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.;
and
6) such other factors as the planning commission or city council
deem relevant.
The planning commission and city council may attach such conditions to their
actions as they shall determine necessary or convenient to better accomplish
the purposes of this section.
Subd. 7. Term of Approval. If application has not been made for a final site and building
plan approval pursuant to the approved master development plan for all or a part of the property
within a RPUD by December 31 of the year following the date on which the RPUD zoning map
amendment became effective or if within that period no extension of time has been granted,the city
council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at the time of the RPUD
application or to a zoning classification consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the
property. In the absence of a rezoning,the approved master development plan shall remain the legal
control governing development of the property included within the RPUD.
If construction on the property included within an approved final site and building plan has not
started by December 31 of the year following the date on which such final site and building plan was
18
•
approved or if building construction in a phase of a RPUD approved to be built in phases has not
started within this period or if within that period no extension of the time has been granted,the city
council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at the time of the RPUD
application or to a zoning classification consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the
property. In the absence of rezoning, the approved master development plan and final site and
building plan shall remain the legal control governing development of the property included within
the RPUD.
Subd. 8. Amendments.Major amendments to an approved master development plan may
be approved by the city council after review by the planning commission. The notification and
public hearing procedure for such amendment shall be the same as for approval of the original
RPUD. A major amendment is any amendment which:
a) substantially alters the location of buildings, parking areas or roads;
b) increases or decreases the number of residential dwelling units by more than
5 percent;
c) increases the gross floor area of any individual building by more than 10
percent;
d) increases the number of stories of any building;
e) decreases the amount of open space by more than 5 percent or alters it in such
a way as to change its original design or intended use; or
f) creates non-compliance with any special condition attached to the approval
of the master development plan.
Any other amendment may be made through review and approval by a simple majority vote of the
planning commission.
Subd.9. Exceptions.This section shall not apply to any residential PUD or PRD which has
received preliminary or final approval by the city council prior to the effective date of this ordinance
unless such is requested by the property owner and approved by the city council.
Additional Topics for Potential Inclusion:
- Phasing and Guarantee of Performance
— More detailed list of submission requirements(such as in 10.53,Highway 12 PUD section)
19
To: Chair Hawn and Planning Commission Members
City Council
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planning Coordinator /), ,,P-\
Date: October 13, 2000
Subject: #2631 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment- ,')
Add "Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD) District" 4.)
��
List of Exhibits n.{,��.
1.3
A - Draft RPUD Ordinance r. 1
B - Sample Development Standards for Small Lot SFR
C - Sample Architectural, Landscaping Standards
Purpose
The 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan(CMP)as preliminarily approved by the Council on September
11, designates a small number of areas in Orono for medium density residential uses which are
currently not allowed by any of the existing zoning districts. Additionally, the CMP establishes
housing goals and policies placing emphasis on the provision of lifecycle and moderately priced
housing.. The CMP also encourages the use of innovative methods of development that will preserve
Orono's natural environmental features as well as conserve resources.
The proposed RPUD District will be a residential district that has the purpose of allowing flexibility
in terms of design, building techniques, land development methods and density in order to achieve
the residential goals and policies as outlined in the CMP. This amendment is necessary because
none of the existing zoning districts are tailored to achieving this purpose.
Brief Summary of Proposed "RPUD" District Parameters
- The RPUD District is strictly a residential zone, and does not have a mixed land use
component, although it will allow for various types and densities of residential uses
— The RPUD District will contain a list of permitted, conditional and accessory uses that is
similar in scope to that of our single family districts, but will not include certain of the
"institutional"or"quasi-commercial"conditional or accessory uses allowed in those districts.
- Any site to be rezoned to RPUD must be at least 5 acres in area unless the developer
demonstrates the property has certain unique characteristics (see Subd. 5).
• — • Any site to be rezoned to RPUD must be guide-planned for residential use in the CMP.
Proposed RPUD Zoning Amendment
October 13, 2000
Page 2
- Proposed density of a project in RPUD must match the CMP planned density,except that for
a site not planned for residential but which Council wishes to be residential,Council decides
appropriate density.
— Incentives as to density and floor area ratio are possible for RPUD proposals which Council
finds are consistent with Orono's housing goals.
— RPUD Performance Standards are established for hardcover, floor area ratio, setbacks, etc.
(see Subd 5). A laundry list of potential additional standards for consideration, appears as
item P on page 7.
- Application review, approval and amendment procedures are generally described in Subd.
6 thru Subd. 9. Substantial detail in terms of specific plan submittal requirements could be
added, using our Highway 12 PUD (Section 10.53) as a reference.
Discussion
The impetus for creating the RPUD District is the application we expect to soon receive for a 70-unit
senior housing building on a site along Highway 12 that is guide-planned for commercial use.. The
proposed RPUD District ordinance language addresses and accommodates such a use conversion
(from commercial to residential) as well as the density needed to make the project feasible.
However, the RPUD District is also intended to be a suitable option for development of the three
specific areas along Highway 12 the CMP has guided for 2-6 units per acre SFR/MFR use.And,the
RPUD District ultimately may replace our minimal PRD code section for planned residential
developments.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance to establish standards and authority for the
RPUD District as a residential zoning option, subject to any changes that may be proposed by
Planning Commission, Council and staff as the review process moves forward.
Options for Action
1. Recommend that the zoning code be amended by adoption of the attached RPUD ordinance
as Section 10.33,creating the RPUD District as a residential zone,establishing authority and
standards for rezoning to and development within the Residential Planned Unit Development
District.
2. Table for further discussion.
3. Recommend that the RPUD district not be created.
4. Other.
e ,
Completion Date: 10/30/00
Application Deadline: 12/29/00
TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
FROM: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner
DATE: November 16, 2000
SUBJECT: Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640 Preliminary Subdivision/CUP-Rezoning/Comprehensive Plan Amendment
#2641 Site Plan Reviews
Public Hearing
Existing Zoning: B-1, Retail Sales Business District
Lot Area: + 6.7 acres
List of Exhibits
A Plat Map J L1 Office Building Landscaping
B Site Plan/Preliminary Lot Layout K L1-1 Senior Building. Landscaping
C Office Building Views L Section 10.52 Hwy 12 Rezoning
D Senior Housing Building Views M Section 10.53 Hwy 12 PUD Ordinance
E A2.1 Second Level Building Plan N Proposed RPRD Landscaping Req.
F A2.2 Third Level Building Plan 0 Traffic Consult. Review I (11/7/00)
G A2.3 Typical Building Plan P Traffic Consult. Review II (11/14/00)
H A4.1 Unit Floor Plans Q Property Owner Notification List
I A4.2 Unit Floor Plans
Application Summary
Orono Amber,LLC.has submitted an application for a two lot plat of a 6.7 acre property. Proposed
is a rezoning for the two properties from B-1,Retail Sales Business District to B-6/PUD (for office
use of the proposed west parcel) and RPUD/PUD(for multi-family residential use of the proposed
east parcel). The intended use of the properties are a 3 story 70 unit senior housing project and a
23,000 s.f. office building. The proposed residential use of the property would require a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment as the property is not guided for residential use in the 1980 Plan
or the proposed Comprehensive Plan (CMP). The City has a Highway 12 PUD procedure and a
Highway 12 rezoning procedure established that provide the process the review requires.
Section 10.53 is the Code section that defines the standards and review process for a Highway 12
PUD and Section 10.52 defines the special requirements for rezoning along the Highway 12 corridor
and study area. Those Code sections have been attached as exhibits to this report.
mane Amber,LLC.
206®Wayzata Boulevard
#2640/#2641
Page 1
l l
The applicant has provided site plans for both properties. A commercial site plan review for the
office and senior housin&properties and buildings will include a full review of the following items:
1) Landscaping
2) Traffic Flow/Road System
3) Parking Arrangement
4) Building Height/Setbacks
5) Review of Architectural Materials/Building Design
6) Lighting
7) Screening
8) Other
I. Preliminary Subdivision/Rezoning/Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Uses within the PUD may include only those uses designated by the official Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. The 1989 Comprehensive Plan Amendment had guided the property for commercial use.
The Comprehensive Plan (CMP) as preliminarily approved by the City Council in September
designated several Orono properties as areas that would allow medium density. The density
proposed in the CMP does not have an existing zoning district that would allow the types of housing
that would be offered by as proposed in this application. The proposed CMP did not include this
property as a residential site. In fact it has been guided for commercial use as was the case with 1989
CMP amendment. The entire property has been zoned B-1 since at least 1967,perhaps earlier. To
rezone the east property would require changing the land use designation to residential.
The 70 unit building on the 4 acre site would provide 17.5 units/acre of senior housing units at a
variety of unit sizes and rental rates. The proposed RPUD zoning district would be the appropriate
zoning district to provide the units/acre density requested. Section 10.33, Subdivision 5(E) in the
proposed RPUD district would allow the City of Orono to provide incentives to encourage projects
which are consistent with housing goals. "Incentives may include modification of density and floor
area ratio requirements for developments providing lifecycle housing and low and moderate cost
housing." The City has the ability to ensure the housing need, for lifecycle housing, is met. The
RPUD district would rely heavily on the CMP designation for housing density and the ability of the
developer to meet the housing needs of the community.
The office use would not require a CMP amendment as the underlying land use designation is for
commercial use. The property is proposed as a 2.7 acre site. The use of the property as office/clinic
would be permitted under the B-6 district should the Council approve an amendment to the permitted
PP
uses in the B-6 district to permit clinic uses.
Platting. Process
This review is at the preliminary plat stage. A complete review of the preliminary plat will require
review and approval of the proposed site plans. The plat would result in two lots.
Lot 1 (west property) = 116,832 s.f. or+2.7 acres
Lot 2 (east property) = 173,871 s.f. or+ 4.0 acres
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#26404264I
Paste 2
f ,
The preliminary plat review falls under the standard platting, procedures as established in the
Subdivision Ordinance._Additional requirements may be imposed by the City on non-residential
subdivisions to protect adjacent residential areas from potential nuisance from a proposed
commercial/office development including for provisions for a permanently landscaped buffer strip
if necessary. Additional special requirements may be imposed to protect the residential areas
surrounding the development.
The developer has proposed to plat the senior housing project as condominiums. Each unit would
have a separate legal description and tax statement. Under this type of plat the units would be owned
by a non-profit agency and rented to the occupants under the agreements established for the building.
Surrounding Land Use
The subject parcel was platted as Outlot F, Sugarwoods the parcel immediately south of the
Sugarwoods neighborhood. The only buffer between the residential use in Sugarwoods is a 40'wide
platted outlot that is owned by the Sugarwoods homeowners association. Restrictions were placed
on each lot within the Sugarwoods neighborhood that prohibits removal of trees greater than 2" in
diameter within the rear setback for those lots located closest to the proposed development. The
property is located on Highway 12 and the City of Long Lake is located south of Highway 12. Two
lots that are located west of the project are developed as the Orono Shopping Center and Conoco gas
station.
U.S.Highway 12 is proposed to be relocated to the south and the existing Highway 12 will be turned
over to Hennepin County. Part of the proposed Highway 12 relocation includes a change to the
existing 12 and Brown Road intersection. Currently, Brown Road North ends in a T intersection
with 12. The Brown Road south of 12 will be realigned to create an intersection with existing 12
directly across from Brown Road North and a signal light would be installed at that intersection. The
property east of Brown Road is the Long Lake State Bank site, in the City of Long Lake.
IA. Financial Considerations
Briefly,applicant has requested the Council consider various methods of financial assistance to make
this project feasible. Such methods include the creation of a TIF district or similar provisions or
reimbursements. Council has had early discussions regarding_ this and has indicated it is willing to
consider this. The City's financial consultant is also reviewing the request.
II. Site Plan Review (Lot 1 - Office Building)
The proposed office building is two stories with approximately 23,000 s.f. of gross floor space.
Under the building is a 21 stall underground parking area. The actual building size is 172' X 80' or
13,760 s.f. The building is designed to step down from a two story structure to one story
immediately adjacent to the Sugarwoods neighborhood. The building would be constructed to only
expose the 80' width to the neighborhood.
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640/#264I
Page 3
Site Characteristics,B-6 Conformity
(Note: Needed variances are shown in bold type)
Required/Allowed Existing/Proposed
Site area: 2 acres 2.7 acres
Defined lot width: 100' 195'
Parking setbacks:
Required front yard: 15' 15'
Required rear yard: 10' 35'
Required side yard adj. to "R" district: 10' 125'
Required side yard adj. to "B" district: 5' 15'
Building setbacks:
Front lot line: 30' 190'
Rear lot line: 35' 35'
Side lot line adj. to "R" district: 35' 30'
Side lot line adj. to "B" district: 10' 83'
Building Height: 30' (2 1/2 stories) 30' and 32' for the
decorative tower to
the left of the side
entrance
No. of Parking Stalls: Required= 1 per 200 s.f.
Required= 1 per 200 s.f. of"net usable floor area for office/medical use"
(Net=20,880 s.f.+/200 = 105 stalls required)
Total stalls required = 105
Total stalls proposed = 105
Signage Allowance 190 s.f. Not known
Additional Standards required by the current B-6 zoning district (Section 10.45):
A. At least twenty five percent(25%)of the land area shall be landscaped with grass,approved
ground cover, shrubbery and trees. At least three percent (3%) of the land area within a
parking area shall be landscaped.
B. All trash and trash handling equipment shall be stored within the principal structure,within
an attached structure accessible from within the principal structure,or totally screened from
eye-level view from public streets and adjacent residential properties.If accessory structures
are proposed, they shall be constructed of the same building material as the principal
structure and be readily served through swinging doors.
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640/#2641
Page 4
t
C. Garages, accessory structures, screen walls and exposed areas of retaining walls shall be of
similar type, quality and appearance as the principal structure.
D. The ground level view of all mechanical utilities shall be completely screened from
contiguous properties and adjacent streets, or designed to be compatible with the
architectural treatment of the principal structure.
E. External loading and service areas must be completely screened from the ground level view
from contiguous residential or commercial properties and adjacent streets, except at access
points.
F. The light from automobile headlights and other sources shall be screened whenever it may
be directed onto adjacent residential windows.
*Note that the proposed B-6 landscaping/screening and architectural standards(application
#2638)will be much more detailed than the current standsard. The proposed standards have been
forwarded to the developers landscape architect for this project.
III. Site Plan Review (Lot 2 - Senior Housing)
The senior housing building is designed with the same concept of stepping down to decrease the
mass of the ends of the building from 3 stories to 2 stories. The building is designed to have 3 levels
and a level of underground parking for 83 cars. One significant design element of the building is
the clock tower,designed to break up the roof line of the building. The building is designed to have
the east 1/2 of the entire structure located 10' lower than the west 1/2 due to the existing topography.
A MnDot stormwater pond is located at the northwest corner of Highway 12 and Brown Road. The
pond is owned and maintained by MnDot. Developer has indicated this pond has existing designed
capacity to serve both proposed structures as well as other existing/future development in the area.
Site Characteristics, Conformity with the proposed RPUD zoning district standards
(Note: Needed variances are shown in bold type)
Required/Allowed Existing/Proposed
Site area: 5 acres 4 acres
* The RPUD district allows the Council flexibility to this standard when findings are made as listed
in proposed Section 10.33, Subdivision 5 (A).
Parking setbacks:
Required front yard: 20' 45-50'
Required rear yard: 20' NA
Required side yard 20' 60'
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640/#2641
Page 5
Building setbacks:
The setback for all buildings from exterior RPUD lot lines would be 35' except that in no
case shall the setback be less than the height of the building. One concern is the building location
being proposed at 41'to the rear lot line. The developer will provide a new site plan at the Planning
Commission meeting that would indicate a greater setback to the rear property line. The property
is very limited by the MnDot pond for developing the housing further from the property line. One
non-desirable option to allow the building to be located even further from the rear lot line would be
to located the access to north of the building. This may not be the best option as a building would
be a better"neighbor"to the residential properties to the north than a service road providing access
to the buildings and a clinic.
Building. Height:
The intent of the RPUD district is to provide housing to meet lifecycle, and affordable and
moderate cost housing needs. As discussed with the review of the RPUD ordinance, the housing
types may require buildings to exceed the 30'standard that applies to single family residential homes
and office buildings. The only district that could allow a building greater than 30' is the Industrial
district which all 3 stories or 40'.
The proposed building would have a peak height of close to 50'as viewed from the back side
of the structure. Staffs determination of the defined height of the building averages 38'. Strict
interpretation of the ordinance would define the height at 45', lowest grade adjoining building to
highest midpoint of the roof Because the RPUD ordinance has not been adopted,no standard exists
for building height in the district. The developer has stated to allow the project to work the building
would have to be three stories or moderately priced senior rental units would not be feasible.
No. of Parking Stalls: Required=2 per dwelling unit (Section 10.61)
Required = 140 spaces
Total stalls proposed = 83 interior spaces
70 exterior spaces
Section 10.30 establishes required parking for the M-6, Multiple Family Zoning District as
2 spaces per unit plus .25 spaces for each unit as additional parking areas for guests. A minimum
of one space per unit shall be provided on the interior of the building. While this proposal is not
subject to the M-6 standards,these standards provide a guideline for parking for a standard apartment
building.
The standards for a building designed for senior housing use may not require the same
parking standards. The applicants have stated they do not feel all the parking proposed on site will
be necessary for the use. They will be providing additional information as to parking needs for other
similar projects to justify the amount of spaces provided.
IV. Road/Parking/Access
The property would have two access points. One on Brown Road North to serve the entire
development and provide access to a future signal light at the intersection of Highway 12 and Brown
Road. A second access point for the properties would be to Highway 12 for right in/right out turns.
The City of Orono's traffic consultant has reviewed the plan and has determined the development
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640%#264 I
Page 6
would expect to generate approximately 500 vehicles trips per day (250 in 250 out). Both reports
dated 11/7/00 and 11/14/00 have been attached for your review.
A primary concern addressed by our consultant is the proposed interior road would be used for the
clinic traffic as well as the residential use. The individual parking spaces in the lots located in front
of the senior housing building would back out directly into through traffic. They have recommended
a separate primary parking area be designed to not allow two sided parking to have to back out into
the through traffic.
When the original planning for the site was completed in 1988 it was envisioned that a service road
would pass through this property to the Orono Mall property, Otten Bros. and connect to Willow
Drive. The plan was completed many years prior to the final route of the Highway 12 relocation.
A full service road may not be required since Highway 12 will be relocated and the intersection with
Brown Road and 12 will be realigned and lighted in the future. However, the traffic consultant
believes that many motorists would seek this service road route as an alternative to the other direct
access drives to Highway 12 increasing the amount of "cut thru" dramatically.
V. Grading and Drainage
The proposed grading plan shows the parking lot in the northwest corner of the site approximately
10' higher than the adjoining property to the south. The City Engineer is recommending this part
of the site be lowered at least 4'. The retaining wall could then be eliminated.
Additional engineering is required for further review of the proposal. The developer should provide
storm sewer and ponding calculations for review.
VI. Landscaping Plans/Pedestrian Ways
Proposed standards for landscaping are attached as Exhibits J and K. The applicants have provided
landscaping plans for each property under review. The plans have placed an emphasis on heavier
planting between the buildings/parking areas and the residential use to the north. The Code requires
a screen not less than 50% opaque be located between commercial uses and residential uses.
The RPUD ordinance has proposed a landscaping value to be required based on a percentage of the
project value. For a development greater than$4,000,000 the minimum landscaping value that must
be provided would equal 1% of the project value. Wally Case, the City's landscaping consultant,
would complete an estimate of the landscaping value based on the proposed ordinance.
Some of the existing trees would be removed to make room for the project. The plans submitted
have been designed to protect several mature trees that are located between the proposed building
and Highway 12. Protection of those trees requires the building and access road to be shifted to the
north. An adjacent property owner to the north has expressed concerns about the location of the
building being 40'from the rear property line. The Planning Commission should consider the option
of shifting the building forward 20' to allow a 60' setback between the rear property line and the
senior housing building. Shifting the building forward would likely require removal of the trees
Orono Amber,LLC.
2661 Wayzata Boulevard
42641/#2641
Pave 7
located between Highway 12 and the pond. If the trees are removed, it would make the building
more visible to the future 12 and Brown Road intersection. This may be a more desired option as
the building would be moved further from the adjacent residential properties. A suitable landscape
plan would soften the impact of the building as viewed from the Brown/12 intersection,and perhaps
enhance the urban feel of this area.
The developer is preparing an alternative site plan that will show a road without two-sided parking
and relocating the senior housing building 60' from the north property line. They will present that
option to the Planning Commission on Monday night.
Pedestrian paths should be made available between parking areas and all entrances to the buildings.
It would be appropriate to provide for a pedestrian access between the senior building and the clinic,
and the existing sidewalks abutting Hwy 12.
The Planning Commission should review and discuss each of the 6 items as presented in the report
and anv other issues the Planning Commission deems appropriate.
1. Preliminary Subdivision/Rezoning/CMP Amendment
2. Site Plan Review- Office Building Property
3. Site Plan Review- Senior Housing Property
4. Roads/Parking/Access (use of interior street as a future frontage road connecting Brown
Road to Willow Drive)
5. Grading
6. Landscaping
7. Other Issues
Options for Action
Planning Commission is advised that, per the Highway 12 PUD provisions of 10.53, this proposal
is at the General Concept Stage,equivalent to the preliminary plat stage of a subdivision. However,
the Council may hold a second public hearing after the Planning Commission recommendation.
Council approval of the concept plan requires a 4/5 vote. Section 10.53, Subdivision (A) (2) (f)
requires the Council to proceed with the approval process if the Planning Commission does not make
a recommendation within 60 days of receipt of the application. The application was received
complete as of 10/30/00. While the lack of a Planning Commission meeting in December is a
legitimate reason to extend past the 60 day limit, the developer would prefer to have conceptual
approval this year,rather than be tabled until the January meeting. As an option to tabling,Planning
Commission may wish to identify for Council the major concerns with this proposal, and give
Council a sense of the pro and cons of each issue.
A. To recommend approval of the application with direction on each of the 7 issues listed
above.
B. Table, stating additional requirements or information requested.
C. Deny, stating reasons.
D. Other Action
Orono Amber,LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640/42641
Page 8
- eA ..... ...._
. 1 ,
1 i
. , 1
\ 1
_,..„ . •5,7______.7 „..., .7.24.,r77,9-Th5. gli
a.°22
,I, 41'. • to 2 ..!
V..:a (la) i •
• '- • '''' : E . z.,
.- - (., J . ('I F.1 i* I (2)
-...,_. .
II" , I'l 344.14
cr: PM i (4) Zi 4 tr, 1 ;f6-----31-15-7'14,Thavr, I-el
I 08) a
on 2 .72-:t ...
I 917 17 II, ,..2 81i (7)
• I r.. I 1 s .1 on ,,:t , V:
A : I S
' . .
-7 ''-''''''' ''•11' e-,....: „., . _
,.. - ------,..
Is
ans.;
_ 1 -.1 • r• 0.01.07C I
4* 8
ia.5_,23_ ,2,
um n 4 :21 s :I lan
a..L.) ,25,4.C4.• P.• .,
0,1
. I
10 .
.:..
•Ji-
cc ii41-------1
at.A OU11.01, s i i
53 5•1115
-1 • 1--------W44---Yd•*2L' 9-7'.•r t
F..
- 346 E Of
" 7'' 4341ii CZ . •
.. .......
• A6RDP, ::1.....
$S.411 ..... Sun.STS----------.-- --
154/ i---------ffIri .,...,,
51, N. •s-,v
i 1
hart' totr 4, Kicit 3.
4 3'4-,.,-it , TOWNH°ARES
i
....,....... --.1.1 F
, 1 •-- ,:r*,•s-1•51. it
11.Tr7 •,----ro..
P•92EL 24.4 ti
% 17447
‘7) ' = ''' 2'..::1-•`:::::f. ::
k• Z
4 ; ,.. Var8•ZATA 90/1)VI - r 44. 17,.
# / 125 1 N....•1
2iiI!yil i•,,e r1
•:f.',-II_-a-o-._f:1
:--i,-- 1;7P44s-2I,i-,7-;s•1.1(•?4s•5-)--2.--..',. .- .
.,,.:i 1‘-.-•0t,v1..° ._41
sa 9a555 21 ; .i ,, 41.%)i!.,.4 0:,.,„jif 42-
.:.,:
_
(.4
- . i.A'" I91 ,':2 2 ., k5v. 40 /*-
V(
* _ yl •, _ .",
- 0c-- - s1 • 41P 2
..".
..
•,,.''
z• 411,7:::•11 ' • V>
St. i1C4
i 1 , cs)4.
2_1 1 (53) R4.6.?F•9.,2 4 -.4.1 . •\C14.47 .2 on
,-
:
(mu r ", ,•-•\7 ',/.. Mb ‘.CM
7 ,0_4_ t___.1 :S..\ 1 g , fi,S ,.. i S 0 ' •
E.• c.• __i ),. s_..1) -. ,VV,* ,.;\.\,,b;7)\** sss I.
!_e ,.._`0
I
_„.... _. .- "--"2177r"•••-137 44--SS- ''•-j-7-4.07--94-5-- L-----S".-"771 i 45,;•:., • .i._T zawt.S.eet,-7 40,7.,,s, „,,,...b.,vv r .
.a....,,,,-ra,•.,,, 148 9 - v 5,-_..., 7 2 t21•1 ' 4 IX• e...." , X5
2 a ,5 s - vra.
s
,,,,, ---.. -- vi,,_ -/ 1 •-, :zoo, .4• ..--.
MI
05) ' L .......„...•....-/
i .
. • . 1 . . _ .• . . . _ .• . . . N., 7 .
e.....,...................„'
------- ---- -.\s‘
...-..:••7, „.....:=,,,
el's.i..7'::I •.,..:. -.:• .• ... ' -•. .. ..: !
'. :1 .....
:4.:Z.:. ;:4 ..: ".. . . • ....:,. :1
1. •
'' .41 W .--.:-.-- , -•,:::....:- w.C.....1.-za yzi„,-.-;..e
at .5
u ........./
4. 14
..11
..
...
• .L., t .. .f:,.. i2:I" ...,•.:
"n : • .•,
4 ,
.-....:•:, .: ;..., •-,.
IT.-...: r.,) ,..•• ., 7_ • •e• .11_,w.
i •
r :-. ,-i '-ltz.--'
,
bar-trz WriNAPII