HomeMy WebLinkAbout17-3944 PC sr 6-19-17Date Application Received: May 17, 2017
Date Application Considered as Complete: May 17, 2017
60-Day Review Period Expires: July 17, 2017
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director
Date: June 19, 2017
Subject: #17-3944, Westwood Professional Services o/b/o Ugorets 8098, LLC, 2520 Shadywood Road, Rezoning and Master Plan
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting zone change and master concept plan approval to permit construction of a 40 unit condominium building on 3.11 acres to the south of
the Freshwater Business Center. The condominium building as proposed is 4 stories with a defined height of 48’8”*. Site improvements include underground and surface parking. The
project is proposed to be a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD).
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the application be tabled pending resolution of the items outlined in staff comment letter dated May 25th, 2017 (Exhibit E), this staff report,
and additional comments provided by the Planning Commission.
*Defined height may be adjusted based on grading plans
Background
The property is currently zoned B-4 Office Professional, but is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for mixed use with a prescribed density of 6-15 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests mixed use to include senior assisted living, townhomes, condominiums, or apartment buildings. The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The density of 40 units on
2.56 net acres is 15.63 units per acre, just above the upper threshold of the Comprehensive Plan guidance for the area.
The proposal also suggests modifying a portion of the shared property line between the proposed condominium lot and the lot housing the Freshwater Business Center. A boundary line adjustment
is a minor administrative action. The lot boundary though does impact lot size which impacts setbacks, structural coverage, and density calculations.
The applicant proposes rezoning to a RPUD. The purpose of the RPUD zone is to provide a district which will allow for the implementation of certain housing goals established in the
comprehensive plan. It is intended to encourage the following:
(1) Flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new techniques of building design, construction and land development;
(2) Provision of housing to meet lifecycle, and affordable and moderate cost housing needs;
(3) Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses;
(4) Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, poor soils and trees;
(5) High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned;
(6) Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city; and
(7) Development which is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
RPUD has its own specific standards, attached as Exhibit F. Staff reviewed the project based on those standards and comments were provided in a letter dated May 25, 2017, attached as
Exhibit E. To date, no reply has been received. Staff recommends delaying action on the rezoning and preliminary master plan until these comments have been addressed.
Based on initial review, the RPUD standards and necessary waivers are summarized:
RPUD District Minimum SFR Standard
Proposed
Lot Standards
Flexibility Required?
Minimum project size:
5 acres
2.63 acres
Yes
Minimum lot size:
15,000 square feet
2.63 acres
No
Minimum distance from OHW
250’
+1000 feet
No
Minimum front building setback:
50 feet
35 feet
Yes
Density:
Developments with proposed density in excess of the densities contemplated by the comprehensive plan shall be allowed only on properties which are currently zoned and guided for commercial
use.
Proposed on B-4
No
Minimum side yard setback:
35 feet
37 feet
No
Minimum rear yard setback:
Lesser of 40’ or
20% of lot depth (30 feet)
Lesser of 40’ or
20% of lot depth
No
Maximum FAR:
1.0
unknown
TBD
Wetland building setback:
85 feet
75 feet, to be verified
Yes
Private Recreational Area:
10% of gross project area
0% proposed
Yes
Building height:
Maximum of 30 feet
Between 36 and 48’8”, to be verified
Yes
Building Roof
Flat roofs prohibited
Flat roof
Yes
Hardcover
50%
36.1%
No
The following items are important individual issues of note:
Access. Access to the site is proposed off of a new shared drive with the Freshwater Business Center. This driveway will line up with the driveway serving the church across Shadywood
Road. The County supports the offset; the turning movements do not conflict.
Traffic. The applicant has prepared a traffic analysis, attached as Exhibit D. It suggests the development will generate 232 trips per weekday, 18 trips in the morning peak hour, and
21 trips in the evening peak hour. The analysis also suggests a similar number of trips each weekend day (226/ Saturday, 194/ Sunday). These additional trips will increase traffic
about 3%.
City engineering staff have reviewed the traffic analysis and noting that that the assumptions are valid, have no reason to question the findings. Engineering notes bullet point 3 assumes
an AADT of 7950 vehicles/day where the Hennepin County 2016 Traffic Flow Map depicts at AADT of 11900 vehicles/day. It should also be noted that from a use standpoint the proposed
residential use will have a lower impact compared to other possible uses such as retail.
The Commission should note that the development of any vacant lot will increase traffic. For this specific area, much of the traffic is generated by communities west and south of Navarre
(Shorewood, Tonka Bay, Excelsior, Mound, Spring Park) as County Rd 15/19 is one of the few corridors connecting these communities with Metro area jobs and services. The Commission
should be cautious in basing a land use decision solely on traffic caused by outside sources limits the use of the land to passive uses.
Parking. The proposal provides 84 parking spaces, a ratio of 2.1 spaces per unit. 51 of those spaces are under the building, and 33 surface spaces are proposed. The parking requirements
are met.
Building. The building is intended as a 40 condominium building. This is a change from the sketch plan and public meetings, where the applicant heard condominiums were more desirable.
The applicant has stated that condominium buildings require higher ceilings, ultimately increasing the height. The defined height of the building is 48’ 8”, though the southern third
of the building, closest to Shadywood Road, will be 36 feet in height as this portion does not include the penthouse. The height of the building was a point of conversation for the
Planning Commission, City Council, and during the neighborhood meeting. The Council advised 30 feet was an acceptable limit. The applicant has provided information as to other projects
in Orono higher than 3 stories, including Orono Woods (4 stories in the front, 3 visible in the rear) and the Stonebay Condominiums (3 stories visible in front, 3 plus a garage level
in the rear.) The applicant should be asked for additional testimony to support the increase in height.
The building is proposed to be 35 feet back from the Shadywood Road right of way line and about 35 feet from the new side lot line to the north, though this has not been verified with
an updated survey/ site plan. Setbacks are summarized in the table on page 3, 50 feet fro the front yard and 35 from the side yard. The building will need to be 85 feet (75’ MCWD
buffer and 10’ city setback) from the wetland.
Each unit will have a balcony. The building as shown includes brick, steel, and glass with stucco accents. Care will need to be taken to ensure mechanical units are shielded from public
view.
Wetland
The adjacent wetland is a “Preserve” classified wetland, requiring a 75’ wetland buffer, plus a 10
foot city setback. The project does not propose an impact to the wetland buffer area, though clarification of the wetland setback on the site plan will be needed.
Grading. The grading plan has not been reviewed. Stormwater will need to be retained and treated as required by applicable stormwater regulation. Conceptual ponds are pictured, though
sizes and drainage sheds have not been verified.
Utilities. The project will be served by municipal water and sanitary sewer.
Conservation Design. A Conservation Design plan will need to be completed as required by city ordinance. This has not yet been completed.
Hardcover/ structural coverage. By virtue of RPUD zoning, the property is Tier 4; 50% hardcover is permitted. The proposal includes 48,988 sq ft (36.1%) of hard cover. A rough calculation
of the structural converge shows 16,720 sq ft of structural coverage, or 12% of the lot area. Though there is no structural coverage maximum as the property is over 2 acres, 12% of
structural coverage is well below the 20% afforded other residential lots.
Fees. Preliminary review of the fees are summarized:
Park dedication $130,000
Stormwater trunk $ 22,328 (estimated)
Sanitary trunk $204,000
Sanitary SAC $ 99,400
Water connection $169,600
Total fees $625,328
Public Comment
The applicant has hosted a neighborhood meeting earlier this spring. This neighborhood meeting generated a number of comments, provided in Exhibit C - B3. In addition, neighborhood
residents have provided additional comments, Exhibit G. Also, an online petition has been distributed, attached as Exhibit H. Staff has not verified the residency of the petitioners.
Issues for Consideration
What issues should be addressed in a revised application?
Does the Commission find the use of RPUD zoning appropriate for this project?
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A Application
Exhibit B Narrative
Exhibit C Applicant’s Exhibits
Appendix List
A1. PROPOSED SITE PLAN
A2. BUILDING RENDERINGS
A3. BUILDING DIMENSIONS
A4. BUILDING SECTION
B1. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY
B2. NEIGHBOR LETTER
B3. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING COMMENT CARDS
B4. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING INVITATION LIST
C. CONTEXT MAP
D. SHERMAN SECION-ELEVATION
E. LUNDQUIST SECTION-ELEVATION
F. CODUTE SECTION-ELEVATION
G. PERSPECTIVE
H1. ORONO WOODS FRONT ENTRANCE
H2. ORONO WOODS REAR
H3. ORONO WOODS GARAGE ENTRANCE
H4. ORONO WOODS DISTANCES TO HOMES
I1. STONE BAY CONDOS FRONT ENTRNACE
I2. STONE BAY CONDOS GARAGE ENTRANCE 1
I3. STONE BAY CONDOS GARAGE ENTRANCE 2
I4. STONE BAY CONDOS WETLAND VIEW
I5. STONE BAY CONDOS NEARBY RESIDENT
I6. STONE BAY CONDOS DISTANCES TO HOMES
Exhibit D Traffic Analysis
Exhibit E Comment letter dated May 25, 2017
Exhibit F RPUD standards
Exhibit G Resident Comment
Exhibit H Online petition