Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PC 11.13.19 agenda packet 2
k F�El FPLANNING COMMISSION LA MO DATE: A ITT 19 AGENDA ITEM: 4B ITEM: Minor Subdivision—Inwood Addition (Inwood 7t'Addition) SUBMITTED BY: Ken Roberts,Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a minor subdivision request from RPS Legacy to divide Outlot B of the Inwood 6th Addition into two separate parcels. The proposed minor subdivision would create a 4.4 acre lot for which they have requested City approval of a two-phase multiple-family housing development and the other parcel would be 1.29 acres reserved for future use. The site is located on the southwest corner of 5th Street North and Island Trail. Staff is recommending approval of the minor subdivision as presented, subject to conditions of approval. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: RPS Legacy Desoto, 2935 Country Drive, Little Canada MN 55117 Property Owners: RPS Legacy Desoto, Little Canada MN 55117 Location: Outlot B, Inwood 6th Addition. Part of PID Number 33.029.21.13.0017 Request: Application for a Minor Subdivision to split said property into two separate parcels Existing Land Use and Zoning: Open field; future development site within the Inwood PUD. Current Zoning: C—Commercial and HDR PUD Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North—Existing homes across 5th Street; East—Future High density residential site across Island Trail; West—Future commercial use and site of approved Kwik Trip facility; South— Outlot C, Inwood(ponding area) Comprehensive Plan: MU-C (mixed use commercial) History: The City Council approved the general concept plan for the Inwood PUD on September 16, 2014, the preliminary plat on December 2, 2014 and the Final Plat on May 19, 2015 for Phase 1. Since then, the City has approved several additions for the Inwood PUD, all for property north of 5th Street North. On October 15,2019, the City Council approved the minor subdivision for the Inwood 6th Addition and a conditional use permit for the future Kwik Trip facility. Deadline fbrAction: Application Complete— 10-11-2019 60 Day Deadline— 12-09-2019 Extension Letter Mailed—No 120 Day Deadline—N/A Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 —Subdivision Regulations 2 REQUEST DETAILS The City of Lake Elmo has received a request from RPS Legacy Desoto (the property owners), for a minor subdivision to divide the 5.69-acre Outlot B of the Inwood 61h Addition into two lots. The purpose of the proposed minor subdivision is to create a 4.4-acre parcel for a planned multiple-family residential development and a 1.29-acre parcel (Outlot A) for future use. The property owner intends to develop the future Outlot A for additional residential land uses. The City's Subdivision regulations allow for certain subdivisions of land to be exempt from the City's requirements for platting when no more than four lots are being created, when no new public infrastructure or rights-of-way or streets are necessary and when the proposed lots meet the minimum road frontage and area requirements of the underlying zoning. The proposed minor subdivision does not require any new public infrastructure or any new public streets as those improvements are in place. Each of the lots the minor subdivision would create exceed the commercial zoning requirements concerning lot size (20,000 square feet)and lot frontage (100 feet). As such,the proposed plat meets all the City requirements for a minor subdivision. CITY ENGINEER REVIEW. I have attached the City Engineer's review comments (dated November 4, 2019) for your consideration. Items of note are as follows and I have included these as recommended conditions of approval. • The Preliminary plat and project plans should be revised to show the proposed lot lines and easements consistent on each set of plans. • Drainage and utility easements must be provided for any public utilities constructed as part of this project, including City-owned watermain and hydrants,with easements shown on the plat and on the project plans. Any watermain lines serving hydrants placed internal to the site require minimum 30-foot-wide easements centered over the hydrants and pipe. These easements must be dedicated to the City and be provided in the City's standard form of easement agreement. • There were a number of other amendments required to the plan for approval,which can be reviewed in the memo. It is a recommended condition of approval that all of these comments be addressed on the plans before the applicant/developer submits a final plat for approval. PARKLAND DEDICATION The proposed development does not propose a public park and staff would not recommend a park land dedication with this proposal. When the City approve the original Inwood Development, the developer dedicated 10.73 acres of parkland to the City. This dedication was 1.16 acres more than was required for parkland dedication for the residential subdivisions north of 5th Street North. The City agreed to apply the 1.16 acres of excess park dedication from those earlier phases of the Inwood development to the multi-family residential area lying south of 51h Street. For this site, the City will apply the 1.16 acre credit toward the park dedication requirement. That means for this 4.4 acre site, the City will collect a park dedication fee for 3.24 acres. The current City Code standard for park dedication for developments in the HDR zoning district is a fee of $4,500 per acre. At $4,500 an acre, the park dedication fee for the 3.24 acres will be $14,500. The City will require the developer to pay this fee before issuing a grading or building permit for the site. 3 DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Minor Subdivision: • That the Minor Subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. • That the Minor Subdivision complies with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the City's C—Commercial Zoning District. • That the Minor Subdivision complies with the City's subdivision ordinance and specifically the requirements concerning exceptions to platting. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval for Inwood 7th addition: 1. All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in the review letter dated November 4, 2019 shall be incorporated into the plat and project plans. The City shall approve all plans before releasing the final plat for recording. 2. The developer shall pay a cash contribution of$14,580 in lieu of land for park dedication. 3. The project landscape plan shall be approved by the City's Landscape Architect before recording of the final plat. 4. The final plat shall show a 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easement along all property lines. 5. All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be documented on the Final Plat before the execution of the final plat by City Officials. 6. Before recording the Final Plat,the Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement or Site Work Agreement with the City. This agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public improvements and other site management and operation considerations including erosion control and construction staging. 7. Final Plat shall be contingent upon the City receiving separate drainage and utility easements in the City's standard form of easement agreement for all off-site development improvements (beyond the plat limits).All off-site easements must be clearly shown on the street,grading and utility plans,with all dimensions labeled. The easements must be obtained before the start of grading or construction. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the minor subdivision request from RPS Legacy Desoto (Inwood 7th Addition)to divide Outlot B of Inwood 6th Addition into two separate parcels. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision request(Inwood 7'Addition) to split Outlot B of Inwood 6"Addition into two lots, subject to the conditions of approval as listed in the City staff report." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Minor Subdivision Survey/Preliminary Plat 2. City Engineer Review comments dated November 4, 2019 U-60-M:xR4 ODGL-69T-E9L uauO4d NW'au1016'OOTR 3N'�O a6Plb luesea4d 068E e]arauulW'owl3 a4el ii «♦'¢I � , '-Ulel '001#il3N' N3 I'd IU a-U NOI LIOCIV HIZ UOOMNI .� 1 am NW'epeuea amn �ia-dd U1 �WWWWWW OOT ailnS'anUtl Aiiunon 5CCZ = 1 € ltlldA2tlNIWIIdd IlADVJH- Shcf UOS l s ri C , zICJ Ilk A u v v A J \ o i MMOW P w o�a a i,.da...°��nrnnsj ;a allIf 04 CJ / .rN ,� / 0• �� i ^ � ���i krl -J rar. C) 3AY,64OO4 I d CN ST s 1'�—'--oN_.__y •�Cr� 'gib 1�� �' [) M,91,04iQS B� ----------------� i I (-)6 r kI I VN } U I I I cD Vl- I I I I c> I 4 I I L-—— -------1----------- ———- s a `' F L17 VIV iV IO AVAA -4V .�HI'll"S /\VIVIR11,1i7 %y1 Wr1V•I IYVyIJI YIr'7J V/V, d p g q C9■ �� I' ga g FOCUSENGINEERING, inc. MEMORANDUM Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin,P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Date: November 4, 2019 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4285 To: Ken Roberts, Planning Director Re: Inwood 7th Addition -Apartments Cc: Chad Isakson,Assistant City Engineer Preliminary Plan Review From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer An engineering review has been completed for the Inwood 7th Addition —Apartments. A Preliminary Plan submittal was received on October 18, 2019. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Carlson McCain: • Inwood 7th Addition Preliminary Plat dated September 26, 2019. • Inwood 7th Addition Preliminary Site Plans dated September 26, 2019. • Storm Water Management Plan dated September 26, 2019. • Preliminary PUD Plan Application Materials. STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments based on the plans submitted. Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be prepared in accordance with the latest version of the City Engineering Design Standards Manual dated APRIL 2019, using City details, plan notes and specifications and meeting City Engineering Design Guidelines.A detailed construction plan review will be completed prior to the start of construction of the site improvements. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND EASEMENTS 1. The proposed plat creates a new Lot for the Apartment complex along with Outlot A. Outlot A is shown to remain developer owned for future development. 2. Minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easements are shown along the 5th Street North and Island Trail right- of-way as required,and over existing storm sewer and drainage ways.The site improvements must be designed to reserve the full easement utility corridors without encroachment. 3. A 30-foot wide drainage and utility easement is shown as required for the public watermain and hydrants extended internal to the site.The preliminary/final plat easements must be revised and updated as necessary to accommodate any watermain/hydrant layout changes. 4. Consideration should be given to adjusting the south lot line of Lot 1, Block 1 further north to facilitate a shared commercial driveway access between Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A. See comment#2 below for Site Plans,Traffic and Access Management. SITE PLANS,TRAFFIC AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT 1. A secondary access for Lot 1, Block 1 is required to meet the Fire Code.The secondary access should connect to the shared driveway for Outlot A of the Inwood PUD 6th Addition. No additional access along 5th Street North will be allowed from either the Phase 1 or Phase 2 development on Lot 1, Block 1. 2. The proposed site access from Island Trail must be designed as a shared driveway access for both Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Inwood PUD 7th Addition, in order to allow for two potential accesses, as may be required by the Fire Code, for the future development of Outlot A; or an alternative access plan for both properties must be submitted for review and approval by the City. PAGE 1 of 3 3. No additional right-of-way dedication is required along 5th Street North or Island Trail. 4. Minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easements are shown along the 5th Street North and Island Trail right- of-way as required. The site improvements must be designed to reserve the full easement utility corridors without encroachment. 5. The site plans must be revised to address Fire Code requirements for emergency access roads. Access roads must be identified with signage and markings. Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be a minimum of 26- feet wide. 6. Construction parking and staging (preservation of 5th Street North or Island Trail). As part of any development or site improvement agreement the developer will be required to manage all construction parking,construction staging and material deliveries internal to the site. No parking and construction staging, including loading and unloading materials and equipment will be allowed along 5th Street North or Island Trail at any time during the construction of the site improvements and buildings. All street and boulevard damage caused by the construction activities must be repaired or replaced at no cost to the City and meeting City standards and specifications. 7. Landscaping. The landscape plans must be revised to maintain all tree plantings outside of the front, side and rear drainage and utility easements. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1. A State and South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) permit will be required. The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, SWWD and City rules and regulations. 2. No additional storm water BMPs are proposed or needed. The proposed site was designed as part of the Inwood development to accommodate 75%impervious surfaces for both storm water rate and volume control. The proposed 68-unit Phase 1 Apartment together with the future Phase 2 Apartment building to be located on Lot 1, Block 1 will contain 53%impervious surfaces.Stormwater management will be handled by the existing storm water pond and infiltration basin located to the south of the proposed site. 3. The applicant is proposing a private storm sewer system internal to the proposed Lot 1, Block 1 apartment site to collect and convey storm water runoff.The storm water will be discharged to the existing City owned storm water pond and infiltration basin located to the south of the proposed site that was constructed as part of the Inwood PUD development and will be turned over to the City upon acceptance of the Inwood PUD 1st Addition development improvements. 4. The internal storm sewer system must be sized and designed to accommodate the Phase 2 Apartment building and impervious surfaces, and the future development for Outlot A. No additional direct discharge to the City storm water pond will be permitted. 5. A storm sewer stub must be constructed from CBMH-101 to Outlot A to accommodate a connection for storm water runoff from Outlto A future development.The 18-inch RCP pipe should be upsized accordingly,if needed. 6. The storm sewer system constructed for this development will remain privately owned and maintained. The applicant will be required to execute and record a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City's standard form of agreement. The agreement should provide a maintenance plan defining the maintenance responsibilities for the private owner, the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals, including minimum cleaning frequencies for the sump manhole. MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY 1. The proposed property is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA and high-pressure zone water system. 2. Water availability charges and connection charges will apply to the service connections. A Met Council SAC determination will be required to determine the WAC/Connection charges for the development. 3. Connection to the municipal water supply is readily available to serve this property. The applicant will be required to connect, at its sole cost, to the existing 8-inch DIP stub that was installed to serve this property located along Island Trail, as shown on the proposed utility plans. 4. The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants and gate valves throughout the property at the direction of the Fire Department and Public Works Department. All fire hydrants and connecting watermains shall be owned and maintained by the City. 5. Any watermain lines and hydrants placed internal to the site will require minimum 30-foot easements centered over the hydrant or pipe. Easements must be dedicated to the City and be provided in the City's standard form PAGE 2 of 3 of easement agreement. Easements have been shown on the proposed plat accordingly, however, easement revisions may be required as changes are made to the watermain and hydrant layout. 6. The watermain plans must be updated to show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 watermain/hydrant layout for Lot 1, Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 watermain plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development.The applicant may be required to construct a looped watermain with a second connection point, depending upon site layout. 7. The project proposes to extend a 6-inch DIP watermain internal to the site with a hydrant placed near the rear of the proposed building. This watermain may need to be upgraded to an 8-inch DIP pipe based on fire suppression requirements. The applicant must submit fire suppression requirements for the building to determine the size of watermain up to each hydrant. MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER • The proposed property is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA current Regional Sewer Staging Plan and would discharge to the MCES WONE Interceptor. • Sewer availability charges and connection charges will apply to the service connections. A Met Council SAC determination will be required to determine the SAC/Connection charges for each building. • Connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system is readily available to serve this property.The applicant will be required to connect,at its sole cost,to the existing 8-inch PVC stub that was installed to serve this property located along Island Trail, as shown on the proposed utility plans. No public sanitary sewer mains are proposed to be extended internal to the site. • The sanitary sewer plans must be updated to show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 sanitary sewer connections for Lot 1, Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 sanitary sewer plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development. PAGE 3 of 3 THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO STAFF REPORT DATE: 11/13/19 REGULAR ITEM#: TO: Planning Commission FROM: Ken Roberts, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM: Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development(PUD) Request-Lake Elmo Inwood Apartments (5t" Street North) REVIEWED BY: Ben Prchal, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City has received a request from RPS Legacy LLC for the approval of the preliminary Planned Unit Development(PUD)Plan for a 3-story, 68 unit rental housing development to be known has Lake Elmo Inwood Apartments. This development is proposed for a 4.4 acre parcel on the south side of 5'Street North,just west of Island Trail. ISSUE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission is being asked to review the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plans, hold a public hearing provide feedback and then make a recommendation to the City Council about the proposal. PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Applicant: RPS Legacy Desoto,2935 Country Drive, Little Canada MN 55117 Property Owners: RPS Legacy Desoto,Little Canada MN 55117 Location: Outlot B,Inwood 6t1i Addition. Part of PID Number 33.029.21.13.0017 Request: Application for Preliminary Planned Unit Development(PUD) approval. Existing Land Use and Zoning: Open field; future development site within the Inwood PUD. Current: HDR PUD(Urban High Density-PUD) Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North—Existing homes across 5t1i Street;East—Future High density residential site across Island Trail;West—Future commercial use and site of approved Kwik Trip facility; South— Outlot C,Inwood(ponding area) Comprehensive Plan: MU-C(mixed use commercial) History: The City Council approved the general concept plan for the Inwood PUD on September 16,2014,the preliminary plat on December 2, 2014 and the Final Plat on May 19, 2015 for Phase 1. Since then,the City has approved several additions for the Inwood PUD, primarily for property north of 5'Street North. On October 15,2019,the City Council approved the minor subdivision for the Inwood 6t' Addition and a conditional use permit for a future Kwik Trip facility to be located on the corner of Inwood Avenue and 5t1i Street North. 1 DeadlineforAction: Application Complete— 10-11-2019 60 Day Deadline— 12-09-2019 Extension Letter Mailed—No 120 y Deadline—N/A Applicable Regulations: Chapter 153 —Subdivision Regulations Article VII—Specific Development Standards Article XI—HDR(High Density Residential)District City of Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Ownership and Management: It is staff s understanding that the applicant will own and manage the proposed apartment building. Inwood PUD History. As noted above,the City approved the concept plan and the preliminary plat for the Inwood PUD in 2014. The approved concept plan showed a variety of land uses for the area south of 5`h Street including commercial buildings near Inwood Avenue, an apartment building on the corner of 5' Street and Island Trail and 4 and 8-unit residential buildings for the area east of Island Trail. Site Plan.The proposed site plan includes a 3-story, 68-unit apartment building with a clubhouse area and with underground and surface parking. As shown,the apartment building would be located on the southwest corner of 51}i Street North and Island Trail with the vehicle entrance on Island Trail. The site plan also shows a future apartment building to the west of the proposed apartment building. This future building is not part of this development review and approval but having it on the plans shows the developer's long-term vision for the site. The apartment building would include amenities for the residents including a fitness room,management office,community room and an outdoor patio and grilling area. This building also would have indoor parking for 70 motor vehicles and 65 outdoor parking stalls. Minor Subdivision/Preliminary Plat The applicant also has requested City-approval of a minor subdivision to divide Outlot B of the Inwood 6t'Addition into 2 lots. The proposed minor subdivision would create a 4.4 acre lot for which they have requested City approval of a two-phase multiple-family housing development and the other parcel would be 1.29 acres reserved for future use. (I review the proposed minor subdivision in greater detail in a separate report). Land Use/Comprehensive Plan Land Use. The land use map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update shows this site designated as MU- C(mixed use commercial). The proposed 2040 Plan notes"this designation is a new land use and identifies where a mix of commercial and residential uses may be integrated to benefit from proximity and adjacencies to each other. Commercial uses in this category include service and retail uses such as, but not limited to,restaurants, shops, convenience stores, salons, studios and dry cleaners. Land with this designation is assumed to develop with a minimum of 50 percent residential use with a density ranging from 10-15 dwelling units per acre." 2 In this case,the applicant is proposing a development with 68 dwelling units(in Phase One) on 4.4 net acres. This calculates to 15.45 dwelling units per net acre thus exceeding the density limits set for this area in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. At 15 dwelling units per net acre,this site could accommodate 66 units. (Please see the Density Analysis below for more information about this.) Density Review and Calculations. The 2040 City land use plan map shows the area south of 51h Street in the Inwood PUD planned for MU-C (mixed use commercial,HDR(high density residential)and PSP (public facilities)land uses. The 2040 land use plan allows residential development in the MU-C and HDR designated areas of up to 15 units per acre. For the area south of 51}i Street in the Inwood PUD, there are 29.67 acres of land(including the ponding area)that can be used for residential density calculations. At 15 units per acre,the 29.67 acres could accommodate up to 445 total residential units. (Please see the attached PUD Density Exhibit that shows the parcels and the density calculations for this area). In this case,the proposed development includes 68 dwelling units in the first phase and another 63 units in the second phase on a 4.4 acre parcel. (That would be 29. 8 units per acre for this part of the Inwood PUD). The developer is asking the City to allow the higher density on this corner and then only allow lower residential densities throughout the remainder of the Inwood PUD. The developer wants flexibility from the City as to where they place the units south of 51}i Street while not exceeding the total allowed number of units in the PUD. That is,they are not proposing to exceed the overall maximum density of 445 residential units for the land south of 5t'Street. Staff does not have a big concern with this request for the use of density since it is part of an approved PUD. The City will need to ensure there is documentation in place in the City files and in the resolutions that clearly states how the density is calculated and that the overall PUD density for the area south of 5t1i Street in Inwood cannot exceed 445 residential units. Site Character. The site is vacant,has been rough-graded and is relatively flat. The site generally slopes to the south and southwest from 5'Street North toward the existing ponding area. Vehicular Access. The project plans show one driveway into the site from Island Trail that is about 300 feet south of 5'Street North. The driveway then splits to provide access to the underground parking and to the surface parking area and the primary entrance into the apartment building. This driveway also will serve as the vehicle access for the future apartment building to the west of the proposed apartment building. The City Engineer's review memo(attached)provides more details about streets and access for this site. His comments included the need to share the driveway on Island Trail with the future development site to the south and the need for a second access to the site. The most logical location for the second access would be to extent the driveway on the south side of the apartment buildings to the west to the future driveway on the site of the commercial development. Trails and Pedestrian Access. There is an existing sidewalk along 5t'Street North and along the west side of Island Trail. The proposed project plans show several sidewalks connecting the proposed building with the existing sidewalks adjacent to this site.These sidewalks would provide pedestrian access to the first level units in the new building and to the main entrance of the building adjacent to the parking lot. Setbacks.The proposed site plan shows the building meeting or exceeding a 30-foot setback from 5t' Street North and from Island Trail. All the building setbacks meet or exceed the minimum 20-foot setback required by code as proposed. Impervious Surfaces. According to the applicant,the proposed site plan has 53 percent of the site as impervious surface(buildings,pavement and hardscape)and 47 percent of the site with pervious surfaces (green space and landscape areas). The City Code for development in the HDR Zoning district requires 3 that at least 25 percent of the site have pervious surfaces(a maximum of 75 percent impervious) so,as proposed,the site plan for this PUD meets this requirement. Proposed Unit Breakdown.The number of units in the proposed building(Phase 1)is 68. The following provides a breakdown of the proposed unit types and the number of units of each: Unit Type Number of Units Total Number of Units Apartment Building Studios 7 7 1-Bedroom 40 40 2-Bedroom 21 21 Total 68 68 Proposed Design. According the project architect,the exterior of the building will have three primary materials—blonde brick anchoring the corners and fiber cement lap siding(Hardi-plank) in a dark grey will cover much of the exterior. They also are proposing to have cement panels in a sage green color to provide pop of color and visual interest. About 30 percent of each of the elevations would have glazing (glass). The elevations are broken up with various insets and protruding 2-story bays to break up the facades so they are not long and flat. As proposed,the building would have a flat roof. The design of the building will need to meet the intent and purpose of the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards by following the listed design goals and standards for style,themes,materials and colors. I discuss these in more detail below. Adherence to Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards. The proposed exterior design of the building is not typical of the design of buildings in Lake Elmo— especially residential buildings. With its variety of exterior materials and colors and a flat roof, I would describe the design of the proposed apartment building as having a modern industrial look. This design is not necessarily bad,but it is different for Lake Elmo—especially the flat roof. After studying the proposed apartment building design,I researched the topic of modern apartment building design to gain more insights into current design trends. While doing this research I found an article written by Patrick Sisson dated December 4,2018 titled"Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?"that explains why many of the design elements are now in use for apartment buildings in the United States. This article touches on many of the design elements the developer is proposing for this apartment building and the reasons why developers around the United States currently use them in apartment buildings. The Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standard Manual includes standards for site design including building placement, streetscape,landscaping and parking. There also are goals and standards for building design,building materials, scale and mass,roof design, entries and lighting in the Design Guidelines Manual. The Manual states that for residential development, "the intent of the design standards is to provide housing of a high aesthetic quality with open or recreation spaces integrated directly into the site."For this proposal,the exterior building design is worthy of a more detailed review than those the City has recently approved. As I noted above,the proposed building exterior would have a variety of materials and colors and flat roof that gives the building a modern industrial look. 4 For form and fagade,the Manual has a goal stating"Standards are intended to ensure high quality design, encourage creativity and promotes visually appealing development,thereby cultivating a sense of place and identity." Relevant standards listed in this part of the Manual include: • Blank facades without windows and doors are discouraged. All sides of structures shall have architectural treatments. • Flat panel exterior and garage doors are discouraged. • Ground level of multi-family structures should be distinguished architecturally from upper levels to provide human scale elements for pedestrians. For Building Materials,the Goal in the Manual states"to offer variety of attractive and quality buildings materials that will shape the identity and visual interest of residential development in Lake Elmo." The relevant standards listed in this section include: • All structure facades should use multiple building materials. • Siding materials should emphasize horizontal lines to reduce the appearance of height and mass. • Multiple fagade colors are encouraged as long as they are balanced and consistent. • Primary building materials for residential structures should include brick, finished wood, stone, quality metals, glass, cast-stone or pre-cast concrete panels with aggregate,banding,texturing or other decorative finish. • Exposed exterior building materials such as brick, stone,wood or stucco should be authentic. Simulated materials also may be used if demonstrated to be of high quality and approved by the City. • Roofing materials should consist of composition shingles,wood shakes or clay or stone tiles. Metal used as a roofing material must incorporate ribs or standing seams to be acceptable. Scale and Mass. For this section of the Manual,the goal states"To establish parameters for building horizontally and vertically with a human scale in mind." For this proposal,the relevant standards include: • Building volume should be broken up with recesses and projections such as balconies,bay windows, dormers,porches and other features that provide variation and identity. • Mass should be reduced through fagade articulation,breaking up the wall area into smaller sections. • Structures of two-stories or higher should have articulated facades to minimize the appearance of mass, as well as multiple roof lines with corresponding gables. • Scale should be reduced by used"step-down"methods towards the public street. Porches, entries,window-bays or bump-outs are effective in this regard. Roof Design. Goal: "To break up monotonous roof lines, add architectural detail and screen rooftop equipment." This section as the following relevant standards: • All rooftop equipment and must be screened using materials consistent with the overall architecture,particularly on roofs that are visible from adjacent buildings. • Multiple peaks and ridgelines are encouraged to promote greater visual interest. Note: There is no requirement in the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual that residential properties have a peaked roof 5 Entries. Goal: "To encourage entryways of high architectural quality that emphasize access, safety and a human scale." For this goal,the relevant standards include: • Building entries should incorporate design elements or architectural treatments, such as awnings, columns or cornices to emphasize the primary entryway. • Ground floor residences that adjoin a public street or open space shall have direct access to the public street or open space. All of the building exterior design and materials will need to conform to the design standards in the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards Manual including those regarding building facades,rooflines, colors entries, lighting and exterior building materials. At first review, it appears the building style and materials will meet or exceed the City's design standards for multiple-family structures. It appears that the project meets the Lake Elmo Design Guidelines and Standards in that: • The proposed structure is located and oriented in a manner that allows for pedestrian accessibility and provides visual interest from the public right-of-way. • The building is located as close to the public street as possible, easily accessible from the street; setbacks are varied slightly;recreational and common spaces are located at the interior or rear of the site. • The parking area does not account for more than 50%of street frontage. • The proposed building would have multiple fagade colors. • As proposed,the building would use exterior building materials consistent with standards for residential buildings in Lake Elmo including brick, glass, cement siding and cement panels. • The proposed building will articulated facades to minimize the appearance of mass. • Examples of past developments adhere to building design requirements. It is a recommended condition of final PUD approval that the applicant include a detailed architectural plan proposal (with a listing of colors,materials, etc.) for the building in the development for City approval. City staff will need to verify the proposed exterior design and materials will meet the City's design standards before the City issues a building permit for the apartment building. Parking.The City's Zoning Code requires one parking space per studio and 1 bedroom unit,two parking spaces per 2 and 3 bedroom units and at least one visitor space per four units. With the proposed mix of 68 units,the City Zoning Code requires the developer to provide at least 106 parking spaces on site. In this case,the developer is proposing a total of 131 parking spaces—including 68 garage spaces and 63 surface parking spaces. This computes to a unit parking ratio of 1.93 spaces per unit—above the 1.75 parking spaces per unit required by the City Code. The proposed width and length of parking stalls is compliant with code,and the proposed width (estimated to be 24') is adequate for a 2-way drive aisle width according to the Zoning Code. Of these parking spaces, a total of 2 spaces are proposed to be Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA)-accessible. Engineering Comments.The City Engineer has provided a detailed review memo (dated November 4, 2019)regarding the proposed preliminary PUD Plans. This memo is attached for reference. Staff would like to highlight the following comments in summary: • Preliminary Plat and Easements o The site improvements must be designed and installed to preserve the full width of all easement utility corridors without encroachment. 6 o The preliminary plans must be revised to maintain all tree planting outside of the front, side and rear drainage and utility easements. o Consideration should be given to adjusting the south lot line of Lot 1,Block 1 further north to facilitate a shared commercial driveway access between Lot 1,Block 1 and Outlot A. (See note below about access from Island Trail). • Site Plans, Traffic and Access Management o No parking and construction staging,including the loading and unloading of materials and equipment will be allowed at any time on 5`'Street North or on Island Trail during the construction of the site improvements and buildings. All street, curb and boulevard damage caused by the construction activities must be repaired or replaced at no cost to the City and meeting City standards and specifications. o The site plans must be revised to address Fire code requirements for emergency access roads. All access roads must be identified with signage and markings. Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be a minimum of 26-feet wide. o A secondary access for Lot 1,Block 1 is required to meet the Fire Code. The secondary access should connect to the shared driveway for Outlot A of the Inwood PUD 6' Addition(to the west). No additional access along 51}i Street North will be allowed from either Phase 1 or Phase 2 development on Lot 1,Block 1. o The proposed site access from Island trail must be designed as a shared driveway access for both Lot 1,Block 1 and Outlot A,Inwood 71}i Addition(to the south), in order to allow for two potential access, as may be required by the fire code,for future development of Outlot A; or an alternative access plan for both properties must be submitted for review and approval by the City. • Municipal Sanitary Sewer o Sanitary sewer is readily available to the site. The applicant or developer will be responsible for connecting to the City sanitary sewer system located along Island Trail as shown on the proposed utility plans. o The sanitary sewer plans must be updated to show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 sanitary sewer connections for Lot 1,Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 sanitary sewer plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development. • Municipal Water Supply o The existing City water system is readily available to this site. The applicant will be required to connect,at its sole cost,to the existing 8-inch DIP stub that was installed to serve this property located along Island Trail,as shown on the utility plans. o A minimum 8-inch diameter watermain within the site may be required based on fire suppression requirements. o The applicant will be responsible to place fire hydrants and gate valves throughout the property at the direction of the Fire Department and the Public Works Department. All fire hydrants and connecting watermains shall be owned and maintained by the City. o Any watermain lines and fire hydrants placed within the development will require 30- foot-wide utility easements centered over the hydrant or pipe. These easements must be dedicated to the City and provided in the City's standard form of easement agreement. Easements have been shown on the proposed plat accordingly,however,the City may require revisions to the easements as changes are made to the watermain and hydrant layout. o The watermain plans must be updated to show both Phase 1 and Phase 2 watermain and hydrant layout for Lot 1,Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 watermain plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development. The applicant may be required to construct a looped watermain with a second connection point, depending on the site layout. 7 • Stormwater Management o The proposed development is subject to the construction of a storm water management plan and system that meets State, South Washington Watershed District(SWWD)and City rules. All Stormwater facilities need to be designed and installed in accordance with City and South Washington Watershed District(SWWD)rules and requirements. o No additional storm water BMP's are proposed or needed. The proposed site was designed as part of the Inwood development. Stormwater management will be handled by the existing storm water pond and infiltration basin located to the south of the proposed site. o All stormwater facilities constructed for this development are to remain privately owned and maintained. The City will require the applicant or developer to execute and record of a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement with the City in its standard form. This agreement should provide a maintenance plan defining the maintenance responsibilities for the private owner,the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals,including the minimum cleaning frequencies for the sump manhole. o Even as privately owned and maintained facilities,the City requires the developer to provide maintenance access roads or drives that meet City engineering design standards for all storm water facilities. South Washington Watershed District Comments: I have not received comments from Matt Moore from the South Washington Watershed District about this proposal. However, City staff is aware that the project will require a South Washington Watershed District(SWWD)permit. Once the applicant submits a complete SWWD permit application,they will review it for conformance to the SWWD rules and regulations. Stormwater Management and Storm Sewer System Improvements.The proposed development site is in the South Washington Watershed District(SWWD). The design of the storm water management systems must be compliant with the requirements of the State, SWWD,the City of Lake Elmo Storm Water Management Ordinance, and the City of Lake Elmo design standards manual. The applicant is advised to fully read and comprehend the City's storm water and erosion control ordinance since these standards are different, and in some cases more stringent,than the watershed district. The City Engineer's review memo further addresses the stormwater management considerations and requirements for this development. Tree Removal and Preservation. The applicant submitted an existing conditions plan and a site landscape plan for this development. These plans do not show any existing trees on the site except the boulevard trees along 5t'Street North. Landscaping. The applicant provided the City with a detailed landscaping plan for the development that shows the installation of a mix of trees, ornamental trees and shrubs and flowering plants throughout the site. The City's Landscape Architect has reviewed the proposed landscape plans for this development and found the plans are not in compliance with all City Code requirements. (Please see the comments from Lucius dated October 30,2019). He noted that the proposed plans show the planting of not enough trees(30 proposed, 33 required) and that the proposed mix of trees does not meet code requirements. As proposed,there would be too many ornamental trees planted as a percentage(43 percent proposed, 15 percent maximum) of the total number of trees. The City should require the applicant to revise the landscape plans to meet or exceed the City's requirements before submitting plans for final PUD approval for this phase of the development. All tree planting and landscape plans will subject to review and approval by the City's Landscape Architect before the City releases or approves a grading or building permit for this development. 8 Building Official and Fire Chief Review. The Building Official and Fire Chief have reviewed the proposed Phase 1 development plan and have provided several comments. Specifically,the Fire Chief noted: • FDC (Fire Department Connection)location to be approved by Fire Chief • Locations and spacing of fire hydrants to meet requirements of 300' spacing by road. Will need to add hydrant at entrance to underground garage. Also show hydrant locations along 5'Street and Island Trail as they are needed for this proposal and more may need to be added. • Ensure roads(driveways) are built to current standards with proper turning radius. • Lockbox location approved by Fire Chief • Location of Annunciator Panel approved by Fire Chief • All applicable codes from the 2015 MN State Fire Code. o APPENDIX D,FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS has been adopted and is applicable. With special attention to the following: ■ SECTION D104, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS requires two means of apparatus access. ■ SECTION D105,AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS,based on building height,requires a 26'road width. • Identify NO PARKING/FIRE LANE locations and ensure proper signage and markings. The City Building Official(Kevin Murphy) also provided me with comments about the concept plan. He noted the following: • Plans shall be prepared an Architect, Structural Engineer and Mechanical Engineer. • The plumbing plans shall be submitted to the State for review. • The elevator requires a permit issued by DOLI(Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry). • All fire suppression plans shall be submitted to the State Fire Marshall's Division for review. Consistency with Urban High Density Zoning District. The City has zoned the property Urban High Density Residential(HDR)as part of the Inwood PUD.As such, staff reviewed the proposed PUD Plans against the standards including setbacks, impervious coverage, etc. of the Urban High Density Residential zoning district, as shown below. Standard Required Pro osed Impervious Surface (Maximum) 75 percent 53 percent Minimum Lot Width 60 feet 522 feet on 51h Street North Front Yard Setback 5t'Street N. 20 feet 30 feet Interior Side Yard 10 feet 55 feet Corner Side Yard 15 feet 30 feet(to Island Trail) Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 100 feet Accessory Building Setbacks 10 feet N.A. (none proposed) Maximum Building Height 50 feet 35 feet Detached Structures 1,000 square feet maximum None proposed Parking Not to be located in the front Parking is located in rear and yard or between the front interior to the site,not in the fagade and street. front or side yards Open space 200 square feet of common 20,000 square feet(approx.). _ open space provided per unit. 0.46 acres(294 square feet per unit) 9 In this case, at least 13,600 square feet. Consistency with Planned Unit Development Regulations.The applicant has requested City approval of the preliminary PUD plans for this development. Staff has reviewed the proposed plan for its consistency with requirements of Article XVII: Planned Unit Development(PUD)Regulations and has found the following: • Intent.The intent of a PUD is to provide for flexibility in the use of land and the placement and size of buildings in order to better utilize site features and obtain a higher quality of development. The City approved a PUD for the overall Inwood Development in 2014 and this proposal is another phase of that PUD. • Identified Objectives.When reviewing requests for PUDs,the City is to consider whether one or more objectives as outlined in Section 154.751: Identified Objectives of the Zoning Code will be served or is achieved. Staff has found that the proposed development would meet the following objectives: A. Innovation inland development techniques that maybe more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches. • The proposed development is the latest phase of the Inwood development and is generally consistent with the city-approved Inwood PUD plans. B. Promotion of integrated land use, allowing a mixture of residential, commercial and public facilities. • The proposed development is another housing type in the existing and expected mixture of housing types in an area. The City is expecting and approved a variety of land uses within the Inwood PUD including commercial development to the west, single-family homes to the north(across 51}i Street North) and the vacant properties to the east and across Island Trail that are planned for medium and high density housing. C. Provision of a more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques. • The proposed development is part of the city-approved Inwood PUD that included recreational amenities for residents in the area including a future park and trails. D. Accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing. • The proposed development will provide additional multi-family housing opportunities within the City, as there are currently very few multi-family residential buildings in Lake Elmo. J. Higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. • The City may impose design guidelines and standards on high density residential development such as this proposal. Staff has provided an extensive review of the building design in greater detail on pages four-six of this report. 10 a. Minimum Requirements.PUDs must meet the following minimum requirements: A. Lot Area.A PUD must include a minimum of 5 acres for undeveloped land or 2 acres for developed land within the approved development. • The proposed development is a phase of the City approved Inwood PUD. B. Open Space: For all PUDs, at least 20%of the project area not within street rights-of-way to be preserved as protected open space. Other public or site amenities may be approved as an alternative to this requirement. Any required open space must be available to the residents, tenants, or customers of the PUD for recreational purposes or similar benefit. Land reserved for storm water detention facilities and other required site improvements may be applied to this requirement. Open space shall be designed to meet the needs of residents of the PUD and the surrounding neighborhoods, to the extent practicable,for parks, playgrounds,playing fields and other recreational facilities. • The proposed development is a Phase of the Inwood PUD the City initially approved in 2014.The overall PUD as approved by the City showed areas for open space,parks and trails north of 5t'Street. The applicant is not proposing any additional open space with this phase of the development. C. Street Layout... In newly developing areas, streets shall be designed to maximize connectivity in each cardinal direction, except where environmental or physical constraints make this infeasible.All streets shall terminate at other streets, at public land, or at a park or other community facility, except that local streets may terminate in stub streets when those will be connected to other streets in future phases of the development or adjacent developments. • The proposed development site has about 522 feet of frontage on 51}i Street North. The applicant is not proposing any new public streets but rather one private driveway from Island Trail to serve the development that will need to meet City spacing and access management standards. It is a recommended condition of approval that the developer address all the comments outlined in the Engineering memo dated November 4, 2019,before submitting plans for a final plat and final PUD approval for this site. Parkland Dedication. The proposed development does not propose a public park and City staff would not recommend a park land dedication with this proposal. When the City approve the original Inwood Development,the developer dedicated 10.73 acres of parkland to the City. This dedication was 1.16 acres more than was required for parkland dedication for the residential subdivisions north of 5t'Street North. The City agreed to apply the 1.16 acres of excess park dedication from those earlier phases of the Inwood development to the multi-family residential area lying south of 51}i Street. For this site,the City will apply the 1.16 acre credit toward the park dedication requirement. That means for this 4.4 acre site,the City will collect a park dedication fee for 3.24 acres. The current City Code standard for park dedication for developments in the HDR zoning district is a fee of$4,500 per acre. At $4,500 an acre,the park dedication fee for the 3.24 acres will be $14,580. The City will require the developer to pay this fee before issuing a grading or building permit for the site. Easements. The City will require the applicant to dedicate 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along all property lines and drainage and utility easements for watermains and fire hydrants as they will become public infrastructure. The City also may require other easements as the applicant refines their project plans—especially around the elements of the stormwater management system. Watering Ban. Due to a shortage of water,the City may need to implement severe watering restrictions in the City in the future. This could include limiting or prohibiting the use water outside including for 11 vehicle washing and for watering grass and landscaping. This could affect future home builders,buyers and renters as there may be a limited supply of water available for outdoor uses. It may be wise for the City to put a condition on this plat to require the owner/developer to inform the renters of the units about the possible outdoor watering restrictions. Recommended Findings. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Plan for the proposed Lake Elmo Apartment Project in the Inwood 7'Addition as proposed by RPS DeSoto Legacy based on the following findings: 1. That the Preliminary PUD Plan meets the general intent of the Mixed Use Commercial(MU-C) Land Use designation in the Comprehensive Plan and the Urban High Density Residential(HDR) zoning district with PUD modifications. 2. That the Preliminary PUD Plan generally complies with the City's Subdivision regulations. 3. That the Preliminary PUD is generally consistent with the City-approved Inwood PUD plans. 4. That the Preliminary PUD Plan is generally consistent with the City's engineering standards with exceptions as noted in the City Engineer's memorandum dated November 4,2019. 5. The Preliminary PUD Plan meets the minimum requirement for a PUD including minimum lot area,open space and street layout. 6. The Preliminary PUD Plan meets more than one of the required PUD objectives identified in Section 154.751 including providing: innovation in land development techniques that may be more suitable for a given parcel than conventional approaches; provision of a more adequate, usable, and suitably located open space, recreational amenities and other public facilities than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development techniques; accommodation of housing of all types with convenient access to employment opportunities and/or commercial facilities; and especially to create additional opportunities for senior and affordable housing; coordination of architectural styles and building forms to achieve greater compatibility within the development and surrounding land uses; and higher standards of site and building design than would otherwise be provided under conventional land development technique. Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Preliminary PUD Plans for the Lake Elmo Apartment Project Development(Inwood 7t1i Addition) as proposed by RPS Legacy(to be located on the south side of 5' Street North,west of Island Trail)with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant prepare any future final plat and final PUD plans showing all of the site perimeter property lines -including any revisions for any additional easements that may be needed on or around the perimeter of the property. 2. That the future final plat and final PUD Plans submittal identify all requests for flexibility from the Zoning Code. 3. That the applicant address all comments in the City Engineer's Memorandum dated November 4, 2019 with the future final plat and final PUD Plans submittal. These changes include: • Having two access driveways for the site to meet the Fire Code. This second access should connect to the shared driveway for Outlot A of the Inwood 6'Addition. • Redesigning the site access to Island Trail to allow it to be a shared access with Outlot A to the south of the development site. • Revising the site and driveway plans to meet Fire code requirements for emergency access roads. Aerial access roads must be a minimum of 26-feet wide. • Providing the City with overall sanitary sewer and watermain plans(showing both Phase 1 and Phase 2)for the area. 12 4. That the final Plat and final PUD Plans submittal include an updated tree inventory and tree preservation/replanting and landscape and screening plans that address all comments in the City's Landscape Architect's memo dated October 30,2019. All revised and final landscape plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect.All tree planting must outside of the front, side and rear drainage and utility easements. 5. That the final Plat and final PUD Plans submittal include accurate open space and impervious surface calculations. 6. That the developer provide the City fees in lieu of park land dedication as required by the City Code. 7. That the final plat and final PUD Plans submittal include detailed architectural plans for all the proposed buildings. 8. The applicant receive a permit from the South Washington Watershed District for the construction of the proposed development. 9. All storm water facilities internal to the site shall be privately owned and maintained. A storm water maintenance and easement agreement in a form acceptable to the City shall be executed and recorded with the final plat. 10. The Preliminary Plat/Preliminary PUD approval is conditioned upon the applicant meeting all City standards and design requirements unless specifically addressed otherwise in these conditions. 11. That the PUD overlay zoning allow for the following: a. Setbacks: Lake Elmo Inwood Apartments-Minimum Building Setbacks Front(5t'Street). 20 ft. Front(Island Trail) 20 ft. Interior Side 20 ft. Rear(south property line) 50 ft. 12. The Final Plat/Final PUD shall include all necessary public right-of-way and easements for 5th Street North and for Island Trail. 13. The Final Plat/Final PUD submittal must include a complete storm water management plan and construction plans that provide all design details including details about building roof drainage connections. 14. That the applicant shall obtain all necessary permits including but not limited to all applicable City permits(building, grading, sign, etc.),NPDES/SWPPP permits and South Washington Watershed District approval before starting any grading or construction activities. 15. That the Final Plat/Final PUD include South Washington Watershed District preliminary review comments and that the applicant provide the City evidence that all conditions attached to a South Washington Watershed District permit will be met before the starting any grading activity on the site. 16. If necessary,the applicant shall provide the City with a copy of written permission for any off-site grading work and storm sewer discharges to adjacent properties before starting any site work, grading and as part of any final plat or final PUD application. 13 17. That the applicant or developer address all the comments of the Fire Chief and the Building Official with the final PUD, site and building plans including the placement of buildings and fire hydrants, street and driveway design,parking and emergency vehicle access within and to the site. 18. That the applicant revise the project plans to show watermain easements and effective maintenance areas with a minimum width of 30 feet with a minimum of 15 feet of clearance from the pipe centerline and easement agreements are included with the final plat and PUD application and plans. 19. That there shall be no encroachments into drainage and utility easements and corridors other than those reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and upon execution of an easement encroachment agreement. Prohibited encroachments include, but are not limited to trees, landscaping, fences,retaining walls and buildings. 20. That the developer prepare exhibits for City staff approval that clearly identifies the property lines, easements,proposed locations of retaining walls and fences and the required and proposed setbacks for each building site within the development. 21. The Applicant(s)or developer shall submit a photometric plan for the development for staff review and approval. All lighting must meet the requirements of Sections 150.035-150.038 of the City Code. 22. Before to the installation or construction of any subdivision identification signs or neighborhood markers within the development, the developer shall submit sign plans to the City for review and obtain a sign permit from the City. 23. That the applicant provide the City a detailed construction and staging plan with the construction plans and final plat for the development. These plans are to clearly indicate the phasing of the site grading,the phasing of the construction of each public infrastructure component(watermain,trails and sidewalks)and shall address access to that phase of the development for construction purposes and for residents. The City may require temporary cul-de-sacs at the end the private driveways. 24. Before the execution and recording of a final plat for the development,the developer or applicant shall enter into a Developer's Agreement or a Site Work Agreement with the City. Such an Agreement must be approved by the City Attorney and by the City Council. The Agreement shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction and payment for the required improvements with financial guarantees therefore. 25. The applicant or developer shall enter into a separate grading agreement with the City before starting any grading activity in advance of final plat of PUD approval. The City Engineer shall review any grading plan that is submitted in advance of a final plat or final PUD, and said plan shall document extent of any proposed grading on the site. 26. That the applicant/owner notify all renters that the City may impose restrictions or limits on outdoor water use including no vehicle washing and no watering of grass, sod or landscaping. 27. That the applicant shall submit revised preliminM plat and project plans meeting all conditions of approval for City review and approval. The revised applicant/developer project plans shall meet all of the above conditions before the City will accept a final plat or Final PUD application the development and before the start of any clearing or gradingativity on the site. 28. That the City's preliminary plat/preliminary PUD approval is good for one year from the date of City Council action,unless the applicant requests and the City Council approves a time extension. FISCAL IMPACT: There would be no fiscal impact to the City at this time. The Concept Plan approval did not afford the applicant development rights for this Phase of the PUD. When the property develops, it will access the existing urban services and will pay sewer and water connection charges,building permit fees and the like that the developer and/or contractors will pay. 14 RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the proposed preliminary PUD Plan for the Lake Elmo Inwood Apartments development(Phase 1) as proposed by RPS Legacy Desoto to be located on 5'Street North with the following motion and recommended conditions of approval. "Motion to recommended approval of the preliminary PUD Plan as requested by David Schwebel of RPS Legacy Desoto for Outlot B of the Inwood 6rh Addition for the project to be known as Lake Elmo Inwood Apartments (Inwood 7rh Addition) to be located on the south side of Yh Street North, west of Island Trail,subject to recommended conditions of approval." ATTACHMENTS: • Location Map • Address Map • Applicant's project statement dated October 11,2019 • Project Architect statement dated October 22,2019 • Inwood Concept Plan(3 pages) • Inwood PUD Density Exhibit • Project Plans (5 pages) • December 4,2018 article"Why do all apartment buildings look the same?" • City Engineer review memo dated November 4,2019(3 pages) • Landscape Architect's review memo dated October 30,2019(5 pages) • Neighbor comments dated November 4,2019 • Neighbor comments dated November 6,2019 • Neighbor comments dated November 6, 2019 15 10/11/2019 Washington County Property Viewer Washington Sign in County Prop-oriy Viewer 0 i ' t( [� Q 1 13 i 2 W i� J � - 5 Q� ,tip Z t 47ti-5 f N o HUDSON�tVD r- Z n�. 1 maps.co.washington.mn.us/propertyviewer/ 1/1 10/11/2019 Washington County Property Viewer Was hin ton Signin 5 CluUunty Property Viewer + Cc , - a0 pp MCb hCI Cb h O Qmi ~ h0 ti r7 V C N m coco -a1 .w tU fD Z 00 III LOWER BTiH pL N 0' c 1 A IJtoca m ncw M % w Go � A a A� 86B �b ~� O b b � n� Lj lb STii ST N �, � 1%b �a nZ924 _y 113 L FR 7Thl pL ly co co co 8827 W 0 a O � I EAGLE POINT BLVD 8519 8568 ', •, , � III 8515 maps.co.washington.mn.us/propertyviewer/ 1/1 .:��i:� T nq '-�1I ME RP S Legacy Multi-Family•Commercial• Development October 11, 2019 City of Lake Elmo Planning Department 3880 Laverne Ave N. Lake Elmo, MN 55042 RE: Inwood Multifamily Development Dear City of Lake Elmo: We are excited to introduce the First Phase of our planned 445 units of multifamily housing in the Inwood High Density Residential Neighborhood. The proposed Collage Architects designed three-story building consists of 68 units of market rate apartments with both below grade and on-site parking. A detailed project description is attached. The land use and density of the project are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan which provides for a graduation of land use intensity over the master planned development site. No changes to the plan or variances are necessary as a result of the application. The Hans Hagen Single Family Neighborhood was designed to lessen impacts on single family homeowners with the use of cul-de-sac lots, landscaped berms, landscaped medians, storm water ponding and a linear park. A detailed Market Study was completed by Maxfield Research and Consulting. The study assessed demographic, economic, and market characteristics for multifamily housing and concludes that there is considerable demand for both market rate general occupancy and active adult senior housing on our site. If everything goes as planned, construction will commence in the Spring of 2020 with additional phases constructed over an approximately 7-year period. We look forward to working with the City of Lake Elmo on this exciting project and we are available to answer any questions or provide additional information. Sincerely, RPS Legacy LLC David Schwebel CPM, CEO I 2935 COUNTRY DRIVE SUITE 100 LITTLE CANADA,MN 55117 (651)484-0070 RPSLEGACY.COM Collage h itn ctw October 22, 2019 RE: LAKE ELMO APARTMENT PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:The project is located with frontage along Island Trail and 51h Street N in Lake Elmo, MN and is currently a vacant lot.The proposed structure is a three-story, 68-unit market-rate apartment building, with both below grade and on-site parking stalls at nearly a 2:1 ratio. The site offers great proximity to a variety of local restaurants, shopping, grocery stores, and parks. The proposed building fagade has three major materials. Blonde brick anchors three corners of the building;this brick is accented with complimenting darker brick between, and at,the community building. Fiber cement lap siding in a dark grey provides a neutral color.Throughout the project, cement panels in a sage green provide a pop of color and visual interest.The building is broken up with various insets and protruding 2-story bays. The building offers many amenities to the residents including on site leasing office, fitness room,yoga studio, community room, and an outdoor patio and grilling area.The site has both paved areas for parking along the SW portion of the site and green space and trees along 5th Street N and Island Trail. Surrounding the building is a mix of medium to low shrubs, as well as larger trees for shade. Public sidewalks along the street are connected to the Vt level walk-up patios.The landscaping provides visual interest from the public streets, brings the fagade down to a human scale, and meets the design standards for the City of Lake Elmo. BUILDING AREAS: Garage 24,960 SF Common space 3,529 SF Building office 662 SF Residential 64,717 SF UNIT MIX: (68 units) • 7 studios (Average 544 SF) • 40 one-bedrooms (Average 698 SF) • 21 two-bedrooms (Average 1,070 SF) HEIGHT: Proposed Height: 35' This is calculated from the average grade around the building to the top of parapet. PARKING: (135 total stalls) • 70 stalls below grade • 65 stalls on site COLLAGE I a r c h i t e c t s 708 151h Ave NE Minneapolis, MN 55413 651.472.0050 C2 Collage h i...— ZONING: HDR-PUD DENSITY:445 total units The building is Phase 1 of a 4-phase development. Phase 2 will mirror the Phase 1 building and be a 68- unit structure. Phase 3 is planned to be a 50-units, and phase 4 is yet to be determined. mu z LOT 1 OUTLOT A `r W o Q (INWOOD eTN) pNWOOD 6TN) _T Z 3a � 4 _ z 0�t 0 0 W1L0T B — a z (INWOOD 6TN) STH STREET N S WTLOT C a u y (INW000) „N o W TLOi A J�J (INWOOD) t V_I J WTLOT M WTLOT N OUTLOT P (INWOOD) (INWOOD) (INWOOD) _c DENSITY CALCULATIONS PARCEL PLAT AREA lacrel r�. WTWI C INIgOD �O •••• OY1tCTM INWOOO rM I*# WMTN INYYDOY Q�0 R OUMiP INY000 0�1 WMtB NNI000 iTH rorr mu 1uowwaowsnT Islr.`a. riorLrilulrt� us.ula 1 a 1 Pete Keely, President COLLAGE Iarchitects COLLAGE I architects 708 15T"Ave NE Minneapolis, MN 55413 651.472.0050 I I � III s .a Ao■■ww _- -. - Swr�4H■II. IMMEM w • °•! ♦_ _{ .� Si n..�ri nriri.u■.3. ,�I ■ iW 3_iiiiii'i�inLrr n.l,.,` `ku y� � ♦ aY4�y ■ . Ao .� ■f■f 6fA�lI�-�aai-- _ � � ate. : •�N �'gg��`L�l WIN' 7A-MR... �,�►�e �-1 I , iR 7 I �r i Yl t i4i� b nd Ill f , �11111RII f "` �t � 1n�E1. l Y _ �� 1ti �����i'�i7�I�I_~al ..a,iiii.iriif�Fr����� �p���'�I�Cr"�d�i���♦ 5^ Jill';�rr�'■,i!�J�9i�Sa �iL�,e��`:ry:: �♦y'�.,� �� �� _ g; f,1P �rjw Fj� °I�I II ■I�al ■ + 7�1�a�i�bta.ri!!i ge�lh0 ISW nil Nu ANA \U lJIM -Mf - •• ! 11f - II �� � �� �� a I � r— r; r^��►.=fie a�rx v 1. 'i ' tzc•�raa�va■ I Nn o® 6IiP Ltl�Itr' i-T-Ir (1 u all- � n-1Tp7=1 � I��lil�il I�1t� F,� - � IN ;l.li1livill �� BillyiTSZ iLn-li;f ���I_,�;. 1' fir' o �°. ,�"• .; ° Owal F�Ir$I (RL j ■i■, r �fn�-1'iiip T \� Ong 117E . IIMF N = =lI=O II LL�II=1�- ylf II�ILe. =II=11=f1=LL3i1-: e �,IJo I�ji�' a;.. yy►► Ij� , ;lr _ 1bieI77°[oiLo17°Tn:T77Tol'oT°YoToT ° o• '� ,l.___•_�_-��^ °3�aPdirriiL J � ,.: 00 �/ °. ° ■oaT��ol _ er, L }�}fl!!fl✓�� ' • co e° °°�° it i ow°�1° �� �r•.���rf�~� �i � �,h?�y��+,/� ,,• e o+ I i o�>o �r` ^ " �✓�i7 mill fop I Jim lit ° li ,aJ° `�"�` �.�■�..r y�� ��` , ma's=,/ ° a li ;DO OOp e p �• �71 ■����"�r��# a i1 o V■ODpj p p 0 a ° !rlt�ll,1 y >•� � ��fJJJ(((JJ ���t OK o ' '11=11=1. .ar f `��t �►t�� V ','. � ,r .....1^II=1f=L y \, a �►./. D O° °Sop0 epilk o -'�If;'�I��IA '�V �1• (� unO° e o p e _rrlt_)T.:II-II=�'•II'. � � /i��� ° [[CCea.. �t`o ii� o w ° 0 0o a o `rll;tll-'1=ij�T1ll=•,. �'N1 ta°• I o° a •t °� '„ , op !'I�II-Zf=n^1=11'.lr IWa �� n ■ e 9 e cif;t1=if—II=i f,u' -[I=(1=1'=1s. •' I[o o p � oe p =tl;;tt=11=1I—t1�1!"�Il=il�11��,�-11—II—'l�:I 0 +%° 9' i i a °e I o oe o oo a� m Cam.. C I z E N � c rc m v p• FUT�R y a "x FS� T i�z zLL ,�jCV z m FF V^L a m �a z m o m i a M_ Q Z Ld � ~ O m N Q LOT 1 OUTLOT A S�S O Ixu O z po (INWODD 6TH) (INWOOD 6TH) E 0 3 v rn %a r E Z p IZ C v 3 O OUTLOT B e i (INWOOD 6TH) 5TH STREET N OUTLOT C a J d (INWOOD) J y OUTLOT A y a z a (INWOOD) U.> Co U IL U 01 O+J OUTLOT M OUTLOT N OUTLOT P (INWOOD) (INWOOD) (INWOOD) �ns�orvs � 5 DENSITY CALCULATIONS PARCEL PLAT AREA(acre) OUTLOTA INWOOD 1268 a OUTLOTC INWOOD &47 OUTLOTM INWOOD 1.84 OUTLOTN INWOOD 0.45 res OUTLOTP INWOOD 0.43 OUTLOT B INWOOD BTH &68 TOTAL 2B.67 ALLOWABLE DENSITY 16 unitslaere g ALLOWABLE UNITSI 445 unite 1 a of 1 � eSt-600 -£91:74 0061-68b-£9L uauoyd e�osauulW'nw[a eHa� k �p��§iy , NW'aulel9'ODT83N'u0 a6PJM lueseaW 068E I}ejt Puelsl@'N IDWIS 44S s 7NIA�Abne•ONI1b3NI�IJd•ltllNaWNONiAN3 NOIIIQUV H14 QOOMNI LFi55 NW'ePeueoalNl7 as€I d OOT MInS'anlaa MunD]SEGZ s s UIgj.7w n3V931 saa 1?s- I Z6i E tSg - ' z— z �el� .=N•ii.i od��6d d��� \ C � `y� /Y4J[ ' ;:� -...........------------------------------------ -0-0 .- � o J � I A W II j� � 0 w f� fill ` I if 'll I --------------- I I I I •� 1 I f j Q I I I I I ll I i I � :II I -------J L-------------�--- ..._...--------._._--- -----------------------.,f ___-------------------------------------------------------- (£1 HMSO) 'N 3ntmv OOOMNI -------- - - --- -------------------------------- —-----------------�I 656G-606-£9G:xei 006G-60-£9G:auoyd e4osauujW'oml3 w1el w .� •4t-'..e�.....,� _ NW'001eIB'OOTM 3N'Aa a6PIH.[neseaUd 068E NOIlIOOV HlC UOOMNI DNIAi U-1 nN—N1�•IVIN NNnLI GI E-F [SS'NW'Irpaua�a�0p 001 oft ' p0 Aquno�GE6Z Ul oN •W ae all'AOVSal Saa uOSp SNOIlIONOD 9NI.LSIX3 yaR�1 fig a ygjg� Fy No "�V RJA�itJlA� ��89b b u f t Y S F ,3i q q E a x qg /2. /' << I ta n / c CA 1— Lj / 11 y I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I T�. � I z. la 1 ] I 1111 p I I Igo Ill Iiillll� . . 0 > 01 cfo< GAF.1 656L-b86-E9L I>�d 006L-606-E9L tauoyd alosauulN'owl3 a�el M• E � ,��"�M NW'OLMON'OOTO 3N'JO A M IUMs qd ONE Ilp1l PURI-1 V'N WAS 41S �I P oNvsnyne.aNim�+i�.c�•�m.r=wq�+rro,� NOIlIOdtl H11 OOOMNI aTSS N41'ePeuc7 aNlll +a3 9 Ul ,ywy. OOT a:InS•anNO A j—D SE6Z I I-f A uoslap��� NV Id N'JIS 12 31IS I li t � ry ags N N J d d n d F > N N 16 d K @ ' • \ . J 1 `\ `// , "r� f '"�`°''� � `k'+r y r ./_•ate` / /I •�Y . AJAW LEI Y gill .• _ I �� i•� ro N a 8 I I� 6S6L•686-£9L MA 006E-6BP£9L A0gd LnmuulW'Ow13 wim NW'aulel8'OOTS M Ua OUM IX,,e.:d 068£ Ile/l puels[�'N Taan5475 a k�s' 3i "I M eNuanNns•euie]3xCVG•wlwroatlArn NOIlIOOtl"IL OOOMNI LT[55 NW'epeug7 ap[17 i:a ; U �� 00[a71n5'anf O Munao Sf6Z " 'fI all AJV�3l Sdtl t`� Ea d" o Ntlld 3dtlJSONtlI atIS �. ��� 8 " "R� g @� "$ ! $'e $ r ° mm"rows F N o r ,. k� "� S :11 Ohl PI 2 I Vie PIP 9 S O 6 8 » S€ k �I •+•[) N.k= w d k i w - N ws w rr: r r? � ? ^ . d � d9 � `.�\'.• 8 � z 8 8 � � �' fit'- _ . -.4.•:•'•" ��11 '��[l t•: -: `._. ,� r: �. sue,:•:. ��^ '� `.,` ,�,`\ ar• ^ Nee Q0.0- Ao � ,: r,. gip^ Y�:k Jyi.' _% !'/ / ' P•, •y '`Z J,/ / / a ,�_ ,�`� "lam_....,-�''� ,%/ f'f•��'f' ' f '� IIIIMII 1 DO Mom MR t . MEN gloom yl�`rr irk wr 4�0.0U.q 7w7:- al 9 IMMUNE Mill �rr aan01 lee o �e+; ' ••y am! IN Q i IN SINM, am via !I■p a1 '' © L� I ��J>•I Nag ��. No ON ; oil - s pie e� ee -■ ��- � EI - an "I dwig 1om1! pp rlir T Q iF"af ,�� F'7 ■eye { t ���E p h C `■1 ram! A! ii � l° ' M! a! I<I( r•i, an f1 1 ,a_iJ B O1 ®! 11111! mom Soft an Ba 1 �I wi Raw:r�1 p no 1111 arlx_ rrlp.,� a� f MR pp 91 �1 1111 I1 fix I Pi 'O I♦s's� �i .�� j No no ON we ma © moll. moll ii 9 UM1 Im1 ie Q� �„m !rr �mot1 as fg �",�i E ?E-�� © Or W! �1 y 0 LLiLLecccycG r, rEr•r: aa' p r�i>=.i]" f � sss.. © '� e�';'I` Al f3 . Weld, . FFF _ 1 ■1 �1 '' �rlr=s�wr ■1 �JI�lire i1i1 p 'a ��• ������_ �lk.�� 0e �1''"�I��ri>•r p �r �e�i !fit :�. 4 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed ��RBEO PROPERTY LINES 40 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same? The bland, boxy apartment boom is a design issue, and a housing policy problem By Patrick Sisson Dec 4, 2018, 12:34pm EST t t 4 s; EMO �k,� t Shutterstock PROPERTY LINES Property Lines is a column by Curbed senior reporter Patrick Sisson that spotlights real estate trends and hot housing markets across the country. Comments,tips,and suggestions on where Property Lines should head next are welcome of potrick@curbed.com. A wave of sameness has washed over new residential architecture. U.S. cities are filled with apartment buildings sporting boxy designs and somewhat bland facades, often made with colored panels and flat windows. Due to an Ainazon-fueled apartment construction boom over the last decade, Seattle has been an epicenter of this new school of structural simulacra. But Seattle is not alone. https://www.curbed.com/2018/12/4/18125536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 1/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed Nearly every city, from Charlotte to Minneapolis, has seen a proliferation of homogenous apartments as construction has increased again in the wake of the financial recession. A Twitter query seeking to name this ubiquitous style was a goldmine. Some suggestions seemed inspired by the uniformity of design in computer programs and games: Simcityism, SketchUp contemporary, Minecraftsman, or Revittecture. Some took potshots at the way these buildings looked value-engineered to maximize profit: Developer modern, McUrbanism, or fast-casual architecture. Then there are the aesthetic judgement calls: contemporary contempt, blandmarks, LoMo (low modern), and Spongebuild Squareparts. "Part of what people are responding to isn't the building themselves, it's that there are so many of them going up so quickly, all in the same places in the city," says Richard Mohler, an associate professor of architecture at the University of Washington. 1 I Shutterstock Many of the replies to the Twitter call simply pointed out that these buildings are housing, and much-needed housing at that. Though they can be defined or classified by aesthetics, this wave of new apartments is perhaps best described as a symbol of today's https://www.curbed.com/20 1 8/1 2/4/1 81 25536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 2/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed housing problems: a lack of developable land; rising land, material, and labor costs; and an acute need to find more affordable places for people to live. "At the end of the day, if you line up multifamily apartments from Boston, San Francisco, and Miami that have been built in the last decade, you're going to see a very strong pattern," says Scott Black, senior vice president of Bristol Development, a Nashville- based firm that develops apartments across the Southeast. Good architecture should always respond to the local context. In the case of these buildings, the local economic context just happens to be the same in just about every major U.S. city. "Critics don't understand what we're working with, the parameters and the financial constraints," says Black. "It's like any other business: If you're selling autos or selling widgets, there are certain costs, and a certain profit you need to make to do business in the future." rp V Shutterstock It boils down to code, costs, and craft https://www.curbed.com/2018/12/4/18125536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 3/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed Perhaps the biggest constraint in the urban U.S. apartment market, a $61 billion annual industry, is the amount of available space. Many cities zone with an overwhelming preference for detached, single-family homes, with small corridors in downtowns or dense areas set aside for large, multistory towers. In Seattle, for instance, roughly three- quarters of residential land is zoned for single-family homes. That means new apartments are forced to cluster in small areas of the city, amplifying the impact of a rash of new, similar buildings. The buildings themselves are an effort to fit within the small niches made available by local building and zoning codes. According to Mohler, due to height limits and safety/fire requirements, most of these structures are what's known as "5 over i" or "one-plus-five": wood-framed construction, which contain apartments and is known as Type 5 in the International Building Code, over a concrete base, which usually contains retail or commercial space, or parking structures, known as Type 1. Some codes also mandate a modulated facade, or varying exteriors across adjacent buildings to avoid repetition. Cities' design review boards can add to the pressures caused by zoning. Ideally, these groups work with architects and developers to improve upcoming buildings and make them more compatible with the neighborhood. Mohler says that's not always the case; in some cities, there's a tendency to rubber-stamp structures that have already proven themselves, leading to a formulaic feel. Code constraints, which allow construction on restricted areas, help create the second major restraint: cost. The reason our cities are filled with so much of the same kind of building is because it's the cheapest way to build an apartment. In this case, that's light- frame wood construction, which often uses flat windows that are easy to install; a process called rainscreen cladding to create the skin of the building; as well as Hardie panels, a facade covering made from fiber cement. The need to cut costs limits facade options, says Black. Hardie Panels run roughly $16 a square foot, roughly the same cost as brick. The next upgrade, metal siding, costs from $25 to $5o a square foot, potentially more than triple the cost. "Since we're facing a housing affordability crisis, it makes a certain amount of sense to build a building as affordably as we can," says Mohler. https://www.curbed.com/2018/12/4/18125536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 4/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed According to Black, variation is costly. Many units get made to a standard size, say 12- foot-wide bedrooms. Repeat that a few times per floor, maximized to create rentable space, and you start a domino effect toward generic architecture, because the floor plates end up very similar. Once the interior is laid out, there are ways to make the exterior look more interesting using setbacks, materials, and massing. But giving up space for units and creating more complicated construction plans cuts into profitability. "The bigger issue is construction costs have escalated pretty significantly over the last two years," says Black. "We need to deliver a product within a price point. People don't always understand the margins we work with. We really do want to build something that'll sparkle and shine and look great from the outside. At the end of the day, we feel like we're able to do that." Some critics dismiss the cost issue as a small piece of a larger problem. Michael Paglia, a writer for Westword in Denver, penned a popular piece about his city's rash of bad design, "Denver is Drowning in Awful Architecture." He feels architects aren't just cost- constrained, but are being left out of the equation. Computer-aided design has led to a degradation of the role of architect, Paglia argued, replacing a noble craft with a series of equations that wring every last bit of value out of a site, aesthetics be damned. Formulaic floorplans are cost effective, while good design is considered an unaffordable luxury, concentrated, like so much else, among the 1 percent. "I don't think you can call the designers of these buildings designers or architects," he told Curbed. "I think accountants are designing these buildings." The art of design has become a science, he says, and that's created another important, but less tangible, constraint on new construction—the loss of construction craft. Paglia feels that construction standards, and the expectations renters have of new buildings, have diminished. "Many of the renters living in those buildings don't even know they're terrible," he says. "And as far as cost constraints go, talk to someone in Florence, Italy, where there are numerous constraints on development. Nothing is an excuse for bad design." Mohler agrees that there are tangible difference between the apartments of today and yesteryear. Older apartment buildings have something that the Hardie-clad structures https://www.curbed.com/2018/12/4/18125536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 5/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed lack, a certain texture and materiality. "Today's flat window may be a great product, easy to install and cost-effective," he says. "But the depth of facade on older buildings offers a whole new level of detail and scale." f Shutterstock History judges architecture on a curve Since the constraints creating the conditions for this generic apartment architecture show little sign of abating, cities may be stuck with buildings like these for the foreseeable future. New construction slowed this year after peaking in 2017, but that still means 283,000 new apartments are expected to be finished by the end of the year, many in this generic style. What happens to them further down the road, decades and generations from now? "I don't think these buildings will be around in 40 years. They'll collapse and be maintenance problems," says Paglia. "We'll remember the small sliver of good architecture being built today." Mohler, though, thinks time will play a trick on detractors of today's bland, boxy buildings. He points to neighborhoods of identical bungalows, celebrated and often https://www.curbed.com/201 8/1 2/4/1 81 25536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 6/8 11/4/2019 Why do all new apartment buildings look the same?-Curbed enshrined as historic districts. At the time they were built, in the early half of the loth century, they weren't the product of forward-thinking architects seeking to create character-filled dwellings for today's homeowners to drool over. They were factoring in cost, code, and craft, and creating their own equations to maximize profit and product. Placing them above today's building, often meant to meet contemporary needs for affordable housing, can be, as McMansion Hell's Kate Wagner wrote, a form of"aesthetic moralism." "Many of these houses were the same, and many were completely identical to each other because they were being built by a single developer," Mohler says of past urban developments. "At the time, it was criticized for wasting land and all looking the same. Looking identical today means neighborhood character. If it's old and looks the same, it's good, but if it's new and all looks the same, it's bad." Even Mohler doesn't say these boxy builds will be celebrated in coming decades. But, arising from an era with an acute housing shortage, perhaps they'll have kitsch appeal, or be appreciated for what they represent: a part of the solution to today's housing crisis. "I'm optimistic that people's opinions of these buildings will change over time," he says. "Will they be celebrated? Not likely. But will they be more accepted? Probably." https://www.curbed.com/2018/12/4/18125536/real-estate-modern-apartment-architecture 7/8 FOCUSENGINEERING, inc. MEMORANDUM Cara Geheren, P.E. 651.300.4261 Jack Griffin,P.E. 651.300.4264 Ryan Stempski, P.E. 651.300.4267 Date: November 4, 2019 Chad Isakson, P.E. 651.300.4285 To: Ken Roberts, Planning Director Re: Inwood 7th Addition -Apartments Cc: Chad Isakson,Assistant City Engineer Preliminary Plan Review From: Jack Griffin, P.E., City Engineer An engineering review has been completed for the Inwood 7th Addition —Apartments. A Preliminary Plan submittal was received on October 18, 2019. The submittal consisted of the following documentation prepared by Carlson McCain: • Inwood 7th Addition Preliminary Plat dated September 26, 2019. • Inwood 7th Addition Preliminary Site Plans dated September 26, 2019. • Storm Water Management Plan dated September 26, 2019. • Preliminary PUD Plan Application Materials. STATUS/FINDINGS: Engineering has prepared the following review comments based on the plans submitted. Final Construction Plans and Specifications must be prepared in accordance with the latest version of the City Engineering Design Standards Manual dated APRIL 2019, using City details, plan notes and specifications and meeting City Engineering Design Guidelines.A detailed construction plan review will be completed prior to the start of construction of the site improvements. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND EASEMENTS 1. The proposed plat creates a new Lot for the Apartment complex along with Outlot A. Outlot A is shown to remain developer owned for future development. 2. Minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easements are shown along the 5th Street North and Island Trail right- of-way as required,and over existing storm sewer and drainage ways.The site improvements must be designed to reserve the full easement utility corridors without encroachment. 3. A 30-foot wide drainage and utility easement is shown as required for the public watermain and hydrants extended internal to the site.The preliminary/final plat easements must be revised and updated as necessary to accommodate any watermain/hydrant layout changes. 4. Consideration should be given to adjusting the south lot line of Lot 1, Block 1 further north to facilitate a shared commercial driveway access between Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A. See comment#2 below for Site Plans,Traffic and Access Management. SITE PLANS,TRAFFIC AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT 1. A secondary access for Lot 1, Block 1 is required to meet the Fire Code.The secondary access should connect to the shared driveway for Outlot A of the Inwood PUD 6th Addition. No additional access along 5th Street North will be allowed from either the Phase 1 or Phase 2 development on Lot 1, Block 1. 2. The proposed site access from Island Trail must be designed as a shared driveway access for both Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, Inwood PUD 7th Addition, in order to allow for two potential accesses, as may be required by the Fire Code, for the future development of Outlot A; or an alternative access plan for both properties must be submitted for review and approval by the City. PAGE 1 of 3 3. No additional right-of-way dedication is required along 5th Street North or Island Trail. 4. Minimum 10-foot drainage and utility easements are shown along the 5th Street North and Island Trail right- of-way as required. The site improvements must be designed to reserve the full easement utility corridors without encroachment. 5. The site plans must be revised to address Fire Code requirements for emergency access roads. Access roads must be identified with signage and markings. Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be a minimum of 26- feet wide. 6. Construction parking and staging (preservation of 5th Street North or Island Trail). As part of any development or site improvement agreement the developer will be required to manage all construction parking,construction staging and material deliveries internal to the site. No parking and construction staging, including loading and unloading materials and equipment will be allowed along 5th Street North or Island Trail at any time during the construction of the site improvements and buildings. All street and boulevard damage caused by the construction activities must be repaired or replaced at no cost to the City and meeting City standards and specifications. 7. Landscaping. The landscape plans must be revised to maintain all tree plantings outside of the front, side and rear drainage and utility easements. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1. A State and South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) permit will be required. The site plan is subject to a storm water management plan meeting State, SWWD and City rules and regulations. 2. No additional storm water BMPs are proposed or needed. The proposed site was designed as part of the Inwood development to accommodate 75%impervious surfaces for both storm water rate and volume control. The proposed 68-unit Phase 1 Apartment together with the future Phase 2 Apartment building to be located on Lot 1, Block 1 will contain 53%impervious surfaces.Stormwater management will be handled by the existing storm water pond and infiltration basin located to the south of the proposed site. 3. The applicant is proposing a private storm sewer system internal to the proposed Lot 1, Block 1 apartment site to collect and convey storm water runoff.The storm water will be discharged to the existing City owned storm water pond and infiltration basin located to the south of the proposed site that was constructed as part of the Inwood PUD development and will be turned over to the City upon acceptance of the Inwood PUD 1st Addition development improvements. 4. The internal storm sewer system must be sized and designed to accommodate the Phase 2 Apartment building and impervious surfaces, and the future development for Outlot A. No additional direct discharge to the City storm water pond will be permitted. 5. A storm sewer stub must be constructed from CBMH-101 to Outlot A to accommodate a connection for storm water runoff from Outlto A future development.The 18-inch RCP pipe should be upsized accordingly,if needed. 6. The storm sewer system constructed for this development will remain privately owned and maintained. The applicant will be required to execute and record a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement in the City's standard form of agreement. The agreement should provide a maintenance plan defining the maintenance responsibilities for the private owner, the type of maintenance and the maintenance intervals, including minimum cleaning frequencies for the sump manhole. MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY 1. The proposed property is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA and high-pressure zone water system. 2. Water availability charges and connection charges will apply to the service connections. A Met Council SAC determination will be required to determine the WAC/Connection charges for the development. 3. Connection to the municipal water supply is readily available to serve this property. The applicant will be required to connect, at its sole cost, to the existing 8-inch DIP stub that was installed to serve this property located along Island Trail, as shown on the proposed utility plans. 4. The applicant will be responsible to place hydrants and gate valves throughout the property at the direction of the Fire Department and Public Works Department. All fire hydrants and connecting watermains shall be owned and maintained by the City. 5. Any watermain lines and hydrants placed internal to the site will require minimum 30-foot easements centered over the hydrant or pipe. Easements must be dedicated to the City and be provided in the City's standard form PAGE 2 of 3 of easement agreement. Easements have been shown on the proposed plat accordingly, however, easement revisions may be required as changes are made to the watermain and hydrant layout. 6. The watermain plans must be updated to show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 watermain/hydrant layout for Lot 1, Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 watermain plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development.The applicant may be required to construct a looped watermain with a second connection point, depending upon site layout. 7. The project proposes to extend a 6-inch DIP watermain internal to the site with a hydrant placed near the rear of the proposed building. This watermain may need to be upgraded to an 8-inch DIP pipe based on fire suppression requirements. The applicant must submit fire suppression requirements for the building to determine the size of watermain up to each hydrant. MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER • The proposed property is located in the Southwest Planning MUSA current Regional Sewer Staging Plan and would discharge to the MCES WONE Interceptor. • Sewer availability charges and connection charges will apply to the service connections. A Met Council SAC determination will be required to determine the SAC/Connection charges for each building. • Connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system is readily available to serve this property.The applicant will be required to connect,at its sole cost,to the existing 8-inch PVC stub that was installed to serve this property located along Island Trail, as shown on the proposed utility plans. No public sanitary sewer mains are proposed to be extended internal to the site. • The sanitary sewer plans must be updated to show both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 sanitary sewer connections for Lot 1, Block 1 to ensure the Phase 1 sanitary sewer plans are installed efficiently for both the proposed and future development. PAGE 3 of 3 ^V WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. To: Ken Roberts, City of Lake Elmo Planning Director From: Lucius Jonett, Wenck Landscape Architect Date: October 30, 2019 Subject: City of Lake Elmo Landscape Plan Review Inwood 7t" Addition, Review #1 Submittals ■ Full Construction Documents, dated September 26, 2019, received October 18, 2019. Location: Southwest quadrant of Island Trail and 5t" Street N, Lake Elmo, MN Land Use Category: Urban High Density, PUD Surrounding Land Use Concerns: None Special landscape provisions in addition to the zoning code: None Tree Preservation: A. The existing parcel for this development is vacant and absent of any trees. No tree preservation plan is required. Wenck I Colorado I Georgia I Minnesota I North Dakota I Wyoming Toll Free 800-472-2232 Web wenck.com Ken Roberts Planning Director WENCK City of Lake Elmo October 30, 2019 Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Landscape Requirements: The master plan landscape plans do not meet the code required number of trees. Master Plan Master Plan (Code Required) Proposed Street frontage 586 Lineal Feet Lake Shore 0 Lineal Feet Stream Frontage 0 Lineal Feet Total Linear Feet 586 Lineal Feet /50 Feet = Required Frontage Trees 12 Trees Development or Disturbed Area - SF Development or Disturbed Area 2.8 Acres *5 = Required Development Trees 14 Trees Interior Parking Lot Spaces* 63 Spaces /10 = Required Parking Lot Trees 7 Trees Perimeter Parking Lot Frontage Length 0 Lineal Feet /50 = Required Frontage Strip Trees 0 Trees Required Mitigation Trees 0 Required Number of Trees ** 33 Total Trees to Date 30 * Interior parking lot landscaping trees are required based on stall count: None if 0 - 30 Parking Spaces 1 tree per 10 spaces if 31 - 100 Parking Spaces 1 tree per 15 spaces If >101 Parking Spaces ** Residential development - mitigation replacement trees are in addition to landscape required tree counts. 1. A minimum one (1) tree is proposed for every fifty (50) feet of street frontage. 2. A minimum of five (5) trees are proposed to be planted for every one (1) acre of land that is developed or disturbed by development activity. The landscape plans do not meet the minimum compositions of required trees: • Up to 15% of the required number of trees may be ornamental tree Master Plan Qty Composition Deciduous Shade Trees 9 30% >25% required Coniferous Trees 8 27% >25% required Ornamental Trees 13 43% <15% required Tree Count 30 A. A landscape plan has been submitted that does meet all requirements 2 T:\6443 Lake Elmo\13 Inwood\08 7th Addition\01 Plan Review\2019-10-30 Inwood Landscape Plan Review.docx Ken Roberts Planning Director WENCK City of Lake Elmo October 30, 2019 Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. B. The landscape plan does not include the landscape layout requirements: TreeSpacing ................................................................................. Not Specified • No driveway conflicts; Prefer that the trunk of trees shall be 8-10 feet minimum from the nearest driveway edge. C. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping - The development does include interior parking lots. 1. At least 5% of the interior area of parking lots with more than 30 parking spaces is devoted to landscape planting areas. The parking lot is measured at approximatively 22,808 square feet and a planting bed measuring approximately 6,600 square feet separates the parking lot from the main entrance. The planting area is approximately 34% of the interior of the parking lot area. 2. The planting area includes 7 shade trees satisfying the minimum required tree planting requirements for interior parking lots. D. Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping - The development does not include perimeter parking lots. E. Screening - Screening is not required by City code. Special Landscape Considerations: A. 51h Street - The development is along 5th Street which has been completed with previous phases of the Inwood development. a. The applicant has marked the existing 5th street boulevard trees to remain which meets the required 5th Street landscaping elements. Findings: 1. Not all code required trees have been provided. 2. Landscape plans do not meet the minimum composition requirements. a. Too many ornamental species have been proposed. Some of the ornamental species should be exchanged for deciduous or evergreen species as they fit site conditions and to meet the minimum composition requirements. 3. Landscape plans do not meet the landscape layout requirements. a. The Boulevard Linden proposed by the entrance drive is located too close to the driveway edge. See attached figure. b. Only two (2) trees are proposed along Island Trail (measured at approximately 270 lineal feet of frontage) and does not fulfill street frontage requirements of one tree every 50 feet. Provide additional trees along Island Trail street frontage to make the streetscape cohesive with the rest of the Inwood development along Island Trail. 3 T:\6443 Lake Elmo\13 Inwood\08 7th Addition\01 Plan Review\2019-10-30 Inwood Landscape Plan Review.docx Ken Roberts Planning Director WENCK City of Lake Elmo October 30, 2019 Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Recommendation: It is recommended that conditions of approval include: 1. Submit a revised landscape plan addressing the above findings. Sincerely, (�LLL Lucius Jonett, LA (MN) Wenck Associates, Inc. City of Lake Elmo Municipal Landscape Architect 4 T:\6443 Lake Elmo\13 Inwood\08 7th Addition\01 Plan Review\2019-10-30 Inwood Landscape Plan Review.docx -LAKE ELMO LANDSCAPE CODE z o 1. A MINIMUM OF(1)TREE PER 50 LF OF STREET FRONTAGE. TOTAL STREET FRONTAGE= 586 LF.(EXCLUDES 227 LF FRONTAGE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT) C I� / / �� �� A�� �/ �'�� A •• 586/50= 12 TREES REQUIRED / / \ `o 0��� \ •• 227/50= 5 TREES REQUIRED(FUTURE) } m 00 2. ADDITIONALLY,(6)TREES SHALL BE PLANTED PER(1)ACRE OF DEVELOPED LAND OR DISTURBED BY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY. 00 M vl OVERALL SITE ACREAGE= 2.8 ac(EXCLUDES 1.4 ac AREA FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT) �� ��� � •• 2.8x6= 17 TREES REQUIRED / I,. �� .� V •• 1.4 x 6= 9 TREES REQUIRED(FUTURE) z LU X / =U w Z li / a, �`�� �� 3. AT LEAST 25%OF TREE COUNT SHALL BE DECIDUOUS OR CONIFEROUS z /✓ / \ �\�\�" �\ �� \\\\ �. \ / - 4. CONGREGATE HOUSING REQUIRES SOsf OF OPEN SPACE PER RESIDENCE C3 U w O ��/ \ / •• 68 UNITS X 50sf 3400sf OPEN SPACE REQUIRED O� UM �\ ^�- ��\ o�` \ •• PATIO&RAISED GARDENS +/-3400sf OF OPEN SPACE - OT BH /� 5. IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL SOD/SEED AND LANDSCAPE AREAS PER LAKE ELMO DETAILS/SPECIFICATIONS C V F � PLANTING NOTES I > v i r IT ♦ ��, w .. / �l / F� r/Jf/J�/Jrr ♦ �` "� \ 1. EXISTING TREES AND SHRUBS TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED TO THE DRIP LINE FROM ALL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC, O O {y�gAq �R / 11///r rrr ♦ EXISTING BOULEVAR \/\.\\ STORAGE OF MATERIALS ETC.WITH 4'HT.ORANGE PLASTIC SAFETY FENCING ADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY STEEL FENCE 01 L / �/ R F /J JJ//✓/ rr.-., ♦ TREES TO REMAIN PO STS 6'O.C.MAXIMUM SPACING. 00 0_ l l NQF�RFN 3.S / /JJ/l/r;'L' ® ♦ \`�� 2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL QUANTITIES,SHAPES OF BEDS AND LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE t`'1 RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETE COVERAGE OF ALL PLANTING BEDS AT SPACING SHOWN AND ADJUSTED TO CONFORM TO THE / l / OG e�T�/QJ. /J/r lr ♦♦ ���� EXACT CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL APPROVE THE STAKING LOCATION OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. , \� 3. ALL PLANTING AREAS MUST BE COMPLETELY MULCHED AS SPECIFIED. l ` ♦ EDGING GAPE 4.LA MULCH: SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH,CLEAN AND FREE OF NOXIOUS WEEDS OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIAL,IN ALL �� / l / /Iy //////rl yyy'''������ '° ♦♦ EDGING (TYP.) c\ � ��� \� MASS PLANTING BEDS AND FOR TREES,UNLESS INDICATED AS ROCK MULCH ON DRAWINGS. SUBMIT SAMPLE TO \ l / / C' �//Jr/rr / �2 ♦ v ( \ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO DELIVERY ON-SITE FOR APPROVAL. DELIVER MULCH ON DAY OF INSTALLATION. USE 4" / \ / J/// r/ / J♦ ♦♦ �'y �\ % FOR SHRUB BEDS,AND 3"FOR PERENNIAL/GROUND COVER BEDS,UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED. 5. PLACE LANDSCAPE FILTER FABRIC UNDER ALL ROCK MULCHED AREAS. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE 100%INTERWOVEN 5.1- l j l /r//rrr/, ` ♦♦ \\� \\ __ /L NEEDLE PUNCHED POLYPROPYLENE FABRIC MANUFACTURED BY DEWITT. USE PRO 5"WEED BARRIER"OR APPROVED TL / 1/ / ,//rr///, \ m ♦ 2 F `\ate �� / EQUAL. Z / l / r - ♦ T / 6. PLACE EDGING BETWEEN ALL PLANTING ROCK BEDS AND TURF. EDGING SHALL BE POLY. Z l \ rrr/Jf/J//'A�',' ` ♦ �/ �\ \\/� LL 7, THE PLAN TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE LANDSCAPE LEGEND IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST.THE SPECIFICATIONS TAKE Q O / / /r///JJ/J// /r ♦♦ °� ��\ PRECEDENCE OVER THE PLANTING NOTES AND GENERAL NOTES. J I - . 8. THE WILL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL MULCHES AND PLANTING SOIL QUANTITIES TO COMPLETE THE WORK (o i ""t ROCK y SHOWN ON THE PLAN. VERIFY ALL QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE LEGEND. a MULCH F'y ~ , 9. LONG-TERM STORAGE OF MATERIALS OR SUPPLIES ON-SITE L NOT BE ALLOWED. O 0 / 10.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP PAVEMENTS,PLANTERS AND BUILDINGS CLEAN AND UNSTAINED. ALL PEDESTRIAN AND LU N / / / \ ////J/Jl//r rr** *;;...`_ ♦♦ VEHICLE ACCESS TO BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.ALL WASTES SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED a G 2 C FROM THE SITE. ANY PLANT STOCK NOT PLANTED ON DAY OF DELIVERY SHALL BE HEELED IN AND WATERED UNTIL H/ , A / /r ♦ MONUMENT SIGN Q Q S l / / �J / rry*�.° ®o♦♦ BY THER$ INSTALLATION. PLANTS NOT MAINTAINED IN THIS MANNER WILL BE REJECTED. ANY DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES l / \ Jr Jr ♦\ L) SHALL BE REPAIRED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. V x ` ♦ S 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES,REGULATIONS,AND PERMITS (n r SHEET L1 I-- /r ♦ / GOVERNING THE WORK. QO J/J/ �..�♦ / / 12.PLANTING SOIL FOR TREES,SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS: FERTILE FRIABLE LOAM CONTAINING A LIBERAL AMOUNT OF rr/// /l/ ♦ �c� / HUMUS AND CAPABLE OF SUSTAINING VIGOROUS PLANT GROWTH. IT SHALL COMPLY WITH MN/DOT SPECIFICATION 3877 Z v LU TYPE B SELECT TOPSOIL.MIXTURE SHALL BE FREE FROM HARDPACK SUBSOIL,STONES,CHEMICALS,NOXIOUS WEEDS,ETC. 0 YL �✓ X �Jl/r rr r// /l rr+` 4� SOIL MIXTURE SHALL HAVE A PH BETWEEN 6.1 AND 7.5 AND 10-0-10 FERTILIZER AT THE RATE OF 3 POUNDS PER CUBIC Q YARD. IN PLANTING BEDS INCORPORATE THIS MIXTURE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE BED BY ROTOTILLING IT INTO THE TOP J C N @ / 12"OF SOIL. 1!J O J lI \ \i 55 - 13 THEINS CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF BEGINNING PLANT / I .4/r/ / r .* 7 �\ j 14.MAINTENANCE SHALL BEGIN IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH PORTION OF THE WORK IS IN PLACE. PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE I"I \ ate\ err/////JJJ JJ/l///r/r//:• ,/ PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED UNTIL THE INSTALLATION OF THE PLANTS IS COMPLETE,INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE,AND (n Z r / J, , - - �/ PLANTINGS ARE ACCEPTED EXCLUSIVE OF THE GUARANTEE. MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE WATERING,CULTIVATING, F•I MULCHING,REMOVAL OF DEAD MATERIALS,RE-SETTING PLANTS TO PROPER GRADE AND KEEPING PLANTS IN A PLUMB ACCEPTANCE,THE OWNER SHALL ASSUME MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES. HOWEVER,THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTINUE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING THE TREES PLUMB THROUGHOUT THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. o ,oR, Y / / 15.ANY PLANT MATERIAL WHICH DIES,TURNS BROWN,OR DEFOLIATES(PRIOR TO TOTAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK)SHALL BE PROMPTLY REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND REPLACED WITH MATERIAL OF THE SAME SPECIES,QUANTITY,AND SIZE AND MEETING ALL LANDSCAPE LEGEND SPECIFICATIONS. / WATERING: MAINTAIN A WATERING SCHEDULE WHICH WILL THOROUGHLY WATER ALL PLANTS ONCE A WEEK.IN EXTREMELY HOT,DRY WEATHER,WATER MORE OFTEN AS REQUIRED BY INDICATIONS OF HEAT STRESS SUCH AS WILTING LEAVES. JJ / ,JJJ JJJ�'J rr / JJ JJ JJ.* / /`f ,�% V/ CHECK MOISTURE UNDER MULCH PRIOR TO WATERING TO DETERMINE NEED. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE NECESSARYi� ARRANGEMENTS FOR WATER. l \ �/l/l/r// //l/l / / *y♦.*' * j« ,r/ 1T CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST IN WRITING,A FINAL ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION. �?j / 18.ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BE TURF SEEDED,ARE TO RECEIVE 6"TOP SOIL,SEED,MULCH,AND WATER UNTIL A HEALTHY ULCH M j* „/ /� STAND OF GRASS IS OBTAINED. O U - SEED MIX LEGEND(FOR AusHEErs) a; TL J ] u) SYM TYPE SEED MIX J U) Ln Z COMMERCIAL TURF-SOD TURFGRASS SOD V > fo \ !/J /J// // //JJ f� �A„*_♦ ,/«,. // / SALTTOLERANTSOD MnDOT 3878C W to \\ \ 4//JJ/J///✓�///J/J.' / 3 / / y C / LOW MAINT.TURF-SEED MN SEED MIX 25-131(OLD MNDOT 260)& =1 to BL ` // // 7 U SHEET T ! rr rr ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY (USE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (/) O r//JJ J//lr//r. * e7HL/L/T L r/r rrr CONSTRUCTION NOT SODDED FOR SLOPES OVER 3:1) a U 0) rr /J JJ//rr r/.. HB / r r L y ROCK rn \\ 6 1.5"TRAP ROCK TRAP ROCK,COORDINATE WITH OWNER N J �� u4cH Ai LANDSCAPE LEGEND-TREES LA D$bAPE KEY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT QTY. IN Ta V A \ ♦ /rJ/J JJ rr//J l/Y%+ �y DECIDUOUS TREES ED�INO' TYPti r � HEIGHT HEIGHT \ \ \ \ \ \-Q J_JJ��lJr rrr C;as s / rr rr / /%+.. I 100 ':i�+ 1 I I / BL REVISIONS P Tilia americana 'Boulevard' BOULEVARD LINDEN 2.5" BB 3 15' 60' 1. x \ L - \� h � HD (�-_���Lel.�\jam/ Celtis occidentalis HACKBERRY 2.5" BB 3 15' 50' �o 0 \ \ \\ \ ♦ r / / r/r r r / / / \ 2 o DRAWN 8Y: RJR a RM A CEY Yu brum NOth WOOdS SDGNED BY: MR // RM A NORTHHWOODS MAPLE 2.5" BB 3 14' 50' rr / • « jl it SESUE DATE: 09/26/19 a \ \�_ �/ // /rl / / /r rrr/// 1C g( 1`.7"�•-' I I�u 'n v ORNAMENTAL TREES I hereby cer[fy,p.M's plan,spec d.r ay /JJ JJ//// / Amelonchier x grondifloro AUTUMN BRILLIANCE I or report was preparetl by me or antler my 2 ROWS OF SOD BEHIND .,I SB 'Autumn Brilliance 1.5" BB 3 8' 20' w F direct supervision and that I a a duly - \ CONSTRUCTION LIMITS j ��k� SERVICEBERRY o ucensed Landscape arcmrect under the BACK OF CURB ��� `� w laws of th eso e State of Minnta 's SS MoluS x'Spring Snow' SPRING SNOW CRABAPPL 1.5" BE 3 8' 25' F - �1, //Jr/r Name: Ryan J.Ruttger,RLA PE ii TL Syringe Reticulate JAPANESE TREE LILAC 1.5" BE 7 8' 20' z Signature:�j ( , Date:09/26/19 License#: 56346 EVERGREEN TREES O w LANDSCAPE T� r T� PLAN Q 1 OVERALL LAINDSCAr E r LA1V 0 30 60 90 3H { Picea glauca var. BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 6' BB 8 6' 40' 2hrr>� Den sofa �o Ll SCALE 1" = 30' N QUANTITIES SHOWN IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S CONVENIENCE. o CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLAN. Of 3 x From: Kristi Melrose To: Ken Roberts Subject: Preliminary Plat and Development Stage Planning Unit Development(PUD)Plans Date: Monday,November 4,2019 6:58:55 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. To whom it may concern, This email is in response to a public hearing notice we received by mail on Friday,November 1, notifying us of the plans to develop Outlot B of the Inwood 6th Addition into an apartment complex. We strongly oppose the placement of this apartment complex. While we know and agree that housing of all kinds are important, our opposition to the proposed location is based on three factors: 1. When we began the building process in the summer of 2015, one of our primary concerns was the planned development of the vacant areas surrounding the new subdivision we were building in,particularly as our home would face one of those vacant areas straight on. We were assured again and again that any new housing would 1)be stand-alone townhomes and 2) would only be constructed in the open areas along Inwood Avenue North and 10th Street. The vacant areas bordering 5th Street North and Island Trail, we were told, would be developed with businesses aimed at building a true community in this area i.e. a gas station, a coffee place, a gym, etc. When the development of Kwik Trip was announced, we were excited because it was clear that Lake Elmo was doing exactly as promised. We eagerly anticipated the announcement of which new business would be built next. Instead, we received a proposal for the construction of a 445 unit apartment complex which will largely bring 7 more years of construction to our neighborhood, significant traffic increases onto a single-lane residential road, increased noise levels, an increase in illumination 24 hours a day (in a city requiring dark sky lighting fixtures), and a rotation of residents moving in and out every month. 2. Apartment complexes, by nature, are aesthetically unpleasant. There are valid reasons that cities like Woodbury and Eagan develop apartment complexes in non-residential areas. No single home resident would buy or build knowing they will have to look out their windows onto a 35' structure filled with people staring back at them and/or staring into the windows of their single level or two story home. In the plans submitted, this appears to also include single family home owners driving by or living across from apartment balconies used to hold bikes, furniture, grills, etc. The use of cut-de-sacs, landscaped berms, landscaped medians will do very, very little to lessen the impact of a 35' building built across from our homes,particularly given the number of trees that were lost on those landscaped berms due to the past two extreme winters. 3. In doing a quick Google search, it is clear that apartment complexes typically result in a decrease in property values for surrounding homes and neighborhoods because of the perceived increase in crime, transient activity, noise, traffic, and an increase of on-street parking along single-family home streets by visitors and/or residents of the apartment complex. These perceptions may be unfair, but they are certainly long-held and will no doubt result in difficulty maintaining the quiet neighborhood reputation we currently enjoy. There is no doubt that these perceptions will also certainly impact our ability, and our neighbors ability, to sell our homes with ease in the future. We implore the city of Lake Elmo to not approve this preliminary plan. Please continue to help stabilize and positively enhance our newly formed single-family neighborhood. Thank you, Don and Kristi Melrose From: Nicolette Bates To: Ken Roberts Subject: Proposed Apartment Complex for Inwood Date: Tuesday,November 5,2019 5:42:01 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization;please use caution. Hello Ken, I received some information for the proposed apartment complex for Inwood and wanted to voice my concerns as I'm not sure if I will be able to find child care for the evening of the Planning Commission meeting on 11/13. First question is, is this a senior living complex? It isn't 100% clear in the proposal. My concern is the look of the building looks to be sterile and more "institutional" like. Perhaps "modern" is another word that can be used. In looking at the area and the existing architecture (aside from the school), it isn't fitting, nor warm or welcoming. It isn't what my neighborhood or Lake Elmo is all about. Instead, Inwood and Lake Elmo have a sense of "home" and "tradition". This is why I chose to live here, raising my young family. If this is a senior living complex, having parents nearing this stage in life, the proposed design would not be appealing to them whatsoever. They would not want to call a "box" home or be proud to show off their new home. They might as well move into a nursing home to get the same institutional feeling. I hope my opinion will be heard and taken into consideration. Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing feedback. Kindest Regards, Nicolette Bates 8742 Lower 8th Place Lake Elmo, MN 55042 612-483-3642 From: Scott Mumhv To: Ken Roberts Subject: Inwood Multifamily Development Date: Wednesday,November 6,2019 2:12:27 PM Caution: This email originated outside our organization;please use caution. Ken, This is relative to the proposal from RPS Legacy for the 68 unit apartment building. I live in the Inwood development at 8669 Lower 8th Place N, Lake Elmo, MN 55042. 1 also have served on the Board of Directors for the Inwood HOA since the homeowners took this over from M&I Homes in May of 2018. While I understand the need for multifamily developments in the area, my preference is for townhomes or condos that are owned by the occupants. Owners of townhomes and condos have a vested interest in preserving and enhancing their property values, while apartment dwellers do not. Apartments attract a more transient type of population whose interest is in finding lower rent and therefore, lower property values. Case-in-point is a friend of mine who lives in Maplewood near some apartment buildings where a shooting took place a few months ago and he and his family are in the process of moving to our development to get away from this. He found that his property value has decreased dramatically since the shooting took place at that apartment building near his home. I understand that people live in apartments for a variety of reasons, however, there is always a difference of attitude when people rent vs. own a home, a car, a power tool or anything. Please re-consider this proposal for an apartment building and, instead, solicit proposals for townhomes or condos that can be owned by individual families who can enjoy and who will enhance the value of this beautiful area. Thank you, Scott Murphy Phone 612.875.1102 3 DRAFT FINDINGS Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the following findings with regards to the proposed Minor Subdivision: • That the Minor Subdivision is consistent with the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map for this area. • That the Minor Subdivision complies with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the City's C—Commercial Zoning District. • That the Minor Subdivision complies with the City's subdivision ordinance and specifically the requirements concerning exceptions to platting. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Recommended Conditions of Approval. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval for Inwood 7th addition: 1. All required modifications to the plans as requested by the City Engineer in the review letter dated November 4, 2019 shall be incorporated into the plat and project plans. The City shall approve all plans before releasing the final plat for recording. 2. The developer shall pay a cash contribution of$14,580 in lieu of land for park dedication. 3. The project landscape plan shall be approved by the City's Landscape Architect before recording of the final plat. 4. The final plat shall show a 10-foot-wide drainage and utility easement along all property lines. 5. All easements as requested by the City Engineer and Public Works Department shall be documented on the Final Plat before the execution of the final plat by City Officials. 6. Before recording the Final Plat,the Developer shall enter into a Developers Agreement or Site Work Agreement with the City. This agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and shall delineate who is responsible for the design, construction, and payment of public improvements and other site management and operation considerations including erosion control and construction staging. 7. Final Plat shall be contingent upon the City receiving separate drainage and utility easements in the City's standard form of easement agreement for all off-site development improvements (beyond the plat limits).All off-site easements must be clearly shown on the street,grading and utility plans,with all dimensions labeled. The easements must be obtained before the start of grading or construction. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the minor subdivision request from RPS Legacy Desoto (Inwood 7th Addition)to divide Outlot B of Inwood 6th Addition into two separate parcels. Suggested motion: "Move to recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision request(Inwood 7'Addition) to split Outlot B of Inwood 6"Addition into two lots, subject to the conditions of approval as listed in the City staff report." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Minor Subdivision Survey/Preliminary Plat 2. City Engineer Review comments dated November 4, 2019