Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2019/02/04 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, February 4, 2019 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Mueller, Gunn, Hull, Meehlhause, Bergeron PUBLIC COMMENT Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. AGENDA ITEMS DISCUSSED BY CONSENSUS 1. State Representative Elect Kelly Moeller – Legislative Priorities 2. Sketch Plan, Long Lake Woods Second Addition - Sevald 3. Sketch Plan, Crossroad Pointe - Sevald 4. Discuss 2019 Street Project - Woodale Drive, Parking, Sidewalk on South Side - Peterson 5. HR Update - Zikmund NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION: Monday, March 4, 2019 at 6:30 pm NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: Monday, February 11, 2019 at 6:30 pm Item No: 02 Meeting Date: Feb 4, 2019 Type of Business: WS Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Sketch Plan; Long Lake Woods Second Addition Introduction A sketch plan is an informal review, intended to provide the developer feedback prior to them going through the expense of preparing extensive plans. The planned subdivision of “Long Lake Woods, Second Addition” is located on the 8100-8200 block of Long Lake Road (west side). The block includes a number of large lots (e.g. 1+ acres). A majority of the property owners are working with a developer, Marty Harstad, to extend Greenwood Drive as a cul-de- sac, and subdivide the back half of their lots, creating 12 new single-family lots. City Council members are asked to provide feedback to the developer. There is no “formal” approval, denial, or consensus needed. Discussion Much of western Mounds View was platted in the 1940’s as acreage lots. When municipal sewer became available in the 1960’s, blocks were divided, roads built, and lots re-subdivided into to what we see today. This block was not, and remains intact. It is one of the few areas of town with deep lots that are not restricted by wetlands. The area is wooded, and includes a drainage ditch. The developer conducted a wetland delineation in September, 2018. No wetlands were found. As a reference, the block west of this project was similarly re-subdivided in 1987 (Red Oak Park), with 17 lots, and creating Red Oak Court (cul-de-sac). The properties are guided for Single-Family Detached residential in the Comprehensive Plan, and are zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential. The City has partial (30’) right-of-way (ROW) through the block. 60’ ROW width is needed for designated “local streets”. A cul-de-sac (Greenwood Drive) is proposed from the south. The developer chose this route because it has the least impact to existing homes. If to be a thru- street, the two existing homes on the north end would have non-conforming setbacks from the new street. If a cul-de-sac from a different direction, it would require removal of a house. Minimum lot size for non-corner lots is 11,000 sq ft. Proposed lot sizes vary; 14,500 sq ft – 31,000 sq ft (approximate). The sketch plan does not identify lot widths (minimum required is 75’). Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission members reviewed the project on January 16, 2019 and offered the following recommendations: Item 05A Page 2 1. Consider rain gardens in front yards. 2. Consider a buffer adjacent to back yards of; 8150, 8200, 8206 Long Lake Rd. These existing lots have shallower backyards compared to other lots on the block. At this meeting, there were four residents who spoke, with the following concerns (summarized): 1. Stormwater Pond; Water quality, groundwater pollution; proper maintenance of the pond, and liability related to the pond. 2. Greenwood Dr cul-de-sac; Does not serve a public use. Questions related to the process of eminent domain to be used in acquiring right-of-way if property owners are not willing participants in the plat. 3. Property Values; Concern that development of the woods/open space will negatively affect adjacent property values. 4. Damages; Potential damage to trees on adjacent properties due to soil disturbance when new street, etc. is constructed. The Developer has provided additional drawings, illustrating the neighborhood, and clarifying existing public land and easements. Staff Recommendation 1. Consider sidewalk connecting Ardan Ave to Greenwood Dr cul-de-sac. This would provide north-south access between neighborhoods. Summary Harstad Hills (Marty Harstad) has proposed a sketch plan for 12 single-family lots, and the extension of Greenwood Drive from the south as a cul-de-sac. A Sketch Plan is an informal review, and is advisable prior to a developer submitting an application for Preliminary Plat. A Neighborhood meeting was held November 20, 2018, attended by 26 neighbors, representing 20 properties. Notice of that meeting, as well as this Planning Commission meeting and City Council Work Session was provided to property owners and residents of this block. Recommendation The City Council should provide comments on: • Streets & sidewalks • Lot layout • Any features to be preserved • Other items as appropriate Item 05A Page 3 Respectfully, Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS 1. Concept Plan and drawings, Jan 18, 2019 2. “Planning Commission Mounds View”, submitted by Alex Yoder-Fox, 8206 Long Lake Rd Item No: ___03 Meeting Date: Feb 4, 2019 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Sketch Plan, Crossroad Pointe Introduction A sketch plan is an informal review, intended to provide the developer feedback prior to them going through the expense of preparing detailed plans. Crossroad Pointe is located on the southeast corner of Mounds View Boulevard and County Road H2. INH Properties is proposing a 127-unit apartment building. The project includes the closure of Greenfield Avenue through the project. The primary driveway access will be on Edgewood Dr. An optional secondary access may be on Greenfield Ave (Council should advice). City Council members are asked to provide feedback to the developer. There is no “formal” approval, denial, or consensus needed. Discussion The property was formerly occupied by a gas station and Roberts’s Off Ten bar/restaurant. The City’s Economic Development Authority (EDA) purchased the properties in 2006 and 2013, and conducted a redevelopment study of the block in 2006 (County Road H2 to Woodale Drive), with a desire for a mixed-use development of the block (apartments, townhomes, offices, retail). The Council has considered a number of development proposals, and entered into a pre- development agreement in January 2019, with INH Properties, for a 127-unit apartment building. Analysis Comprehensive Plan The properties are guided Mixed-Use (MU-PUD), intended for residential, and commercial/office. …“Sites with this designation should be developed as [PUD’s] to provide flexibility to ensure that integrated efficient and well-planned development occurs.”….1 Zoning The properties are zoned B-3 Highway Business, and are within the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District. A Zoning Map Amendment is needed to rezone the properties from B-3 to PUD. Item 03 1 2008 Mounds View Comprehensive Plan, p 3-20 Page 2 Use The property will be used for multi-family residential (127 units planned). Multi-Family Residential is a permitted use with the PUD district.2 Lot Size As a Residential PUD, the minimum lot size is 3-acres (4.25 acres existing, including Greenfield Ave ROW). Density As a PUD, density is at the discretion of the City Council.3 Unit Floor Area Min Required 4 Min Proposed Studio (one-bedroom) 630 sf 5 570 sf One Bedroom 630 sf 796 sf Two Bedroom 750 sf 1,062 sf Three Bedroom 900 sf 1,336 sf An ordinance amendment is needed to allow the proposed studio apartments. Architecture A minimum of 50% of all exterior wall finishes must be brick, stone, glass, stucco, or similar materials. The Sketch Plan does not detail building materials. The developer has stated that the architecture will be similar to the adjacent Bel Rae Senior Living building. The building will be three stories above a parking garage. The garage will be partially below grade, depending on the water table. As a PUD, building height is up to the discretion of the City Council. Each unit will have a balcony. A common patio/deck is shown on the north side of the building. Planning Commission Comments: Consider using more than one exterior color (e.g. not all white). Item 03 Page 3 2 City Code, Section 1119.02 (Permitted Uses) 3 City Code, Section 1120.02, Subd 6 (Density). NOTE: this conflicts with Section 1120.03, Subd 1(e), which allows a 10% density bonus, e.g. 3.8 acre site (excludes ROW) is allowed 66-units + 10% (72-units max). One unit per 2,500 sq ft lot area is the base density for multi-family residential. As the City Code is updated (amended), this conflict will be addressed. 4 City Code, Section 1104.02, Subd 4(c) Minimum Floor Area Per Dwelling Unit (Multiple Dwelling Units) 5 2015 MN Building Code: Efficiency Units shall have a minimum area of 120 sf (one occupant); 220 sf (two occupants); and 320 sq ft (three occupants). Efficiency units have additional standards for cooking areas and bathroom areas. Staff Comments: North: Common patio/deck should be an architectural “feature” (front door) viewed from eastbound Mounds View Blvd., OR located on the NW corner of the building where there is more space. East: - - South: More pronounced building entrance/feature, e.g. large suspended balcony over entrance. West: Q: Are walk-up units an option on the first floor (units with exterior access), e.g. yard is graded up, with individual stairs/patios (brownstone)? The intent is to integrate the building more with the single-family neighborhood. Building Location Minimum Setbacks: North: 30’ East: 5’ (maximum) South: 20’ setback from drive lane. Rear setback equal to the building height from south property line.6 West: 30’ Staff Comments: The east 5’ setback may not be practical because of buffer needed between the trail and landscaping, to be used for snow storage. This will be addressed during the grading plan review (Preliminary Plat stage). Planning Commission Comments: Consider shifting building such that it covers entire length of Mounds View Blvd side of lot, and relocate tot lot and dog run to Edgewood Dr. side. Access Primary entrance will be from Edgewood Drive. Optional secondary access from Greenfield Ave. NOTE: City Council should provide a direction on which of the following options to pursue: 1. Cul-de-sac Greenfield Ave, no driveway access. 2. Cul-de-sac Greenfield Ave, allow driveway access. 3. Connect Greenfield Ave to Edgewood Dr. Planning Commission Comments: Keep Greenfield Ave open. Consider access through Bel Rae property. Item 03 Page 4 6 City Code, Section 1120.03, Subd 1(d) (Yards) Staff Comments: Edgewood Drive can handle the additional traffic from the apartments. Staff does not recommend that a traffic study be required, because no access is proposed onto Mounds View Blvd, nor Co Rd H2 (options are limited). Ramsey County Access Management Policy7 recommends a minimum 660’ (1/8th mile) distance between Co Rd H2 and a driveway or side street. If a driveway were at the south property line, this would be about 450’ from Co Rd H2. 660’ distance is equal to Bel Rae’s main building entrance. It is not practical for Crossroad Pointe to share an access with Bel Rae. If applying the county’s policy to Co Rd H2 (city street), a driveway onto Co Rd H2 is not supported. The Edgewood Dr intersection is about 475’ from Mounds View Blvd (e.g. less than 660’ spacing). Sidewalk to be added along Co Rd H2, with buffer between it and the street. The hammerhead dead-end on Greenfield Ave needs to accommodate backup movement of fire truck/vactor truck. Dimensions need to be confirmed, but generally allow for 50’ X 20’ area + snow storage. Planning Commission Comments: Address pedestrian visibility along sidewalks on Edgewood Dr, and Co Rd H2. Provide an enhanced experience for pedestrians (e.g. landscaping). Landscaping A minimum of 15% (0.5 acres est.) of the property must be landscaped open space.8 The amount proposed is not known. Plantings (est. minimum): 84 Overstory deciduous shade trees 84 Coniferous trees 152 Understory shrubs 9 23 Ornamental trees10 Item 03 Page 5 7 Ramsey County Access Management Policy, Figure 3.2 (Category 5B). Policies: “A parcel has the legal right to one access from a public street. If access can be obtained from an adjacent street, rather than from a County Road or County State Aid Highway, access should be directed to the minor street.” 8 City Code, Section 1129.05, Subd 5(b) (Landscaping) 9 One (1) understory shrub for every three hundred (300) square feet of building (i.e. 45,520 sf building area / 300 sf = 152 shrubs) or one (1) shrub for every thirty feet (30’) of site perimeter, whichever is greater (i.e. 1,973’ perimeter / 30’ = 66 shrubs). 10 One (1) ornamental tree for every two thousand (2,000) square feet of building (i.e. 45,520 sf building area / 2,000 sf = 23 trees) or one (1) ornamental tree for every two hundred feet (200’) of site perimeter, whichever is greater (i.e. 1,973’ perimeter / 200’ = 10 trees). Staff Comments: It is not likely that this amount of plant material will fit on the site. Planning Commission Comments: Consider moving tot lot away from Mounds View Blvd. Parking Parking guidelines 11 are 1 garage stall, and 1.5 surface stalls per unit. Proposed: 1 garage stall and 1 surface stall per unit. Staff Comments: This is consistent with The Boulevard apartments on Groveland Rd (2018). Outside Storage A refuse area is identified within the parking garage. If to be located outside, it must be screened. Summary INH Properties has submitted a Sketch Plan for Crossroad Pointe, a 127 unit apartment building to be located at the southeast corner of Mounds View Boulevard and County Road H2. A Sketch Plan is an informal review of plans, intended to provide the developer with feedback prior to preparing engineering and building plans. This project will require: 1. Zoning Map amendment, from B-3 to PUD 2. Conditional Use Permit for a Residential PUD 3. General Concept Plan (aka Development Review) 4. Ordinance Amendment to allow studio apartments, less than 630 sf in size 5. Vacation of portion of Greenfield Avenue 6. Preliminary/Final Plat It is anticipated that these items will be applied for and reviewed concurrently. Planning Commission Recommendations The Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan on January 16, 2019. Commission members’ recommendations are incorporated into this report. Staff Recommendation City Council members are asked to provide feedback to the developer. There is no “formal” approval, denial, or consensus needed. Item 03 Page 6 11 City Code, Section 1129.05, Subd 4 (Off-Street Parking) Notice has been provided to property owners and residents in the area, using addresses used for a neighborhood meeting, held June 27, 2018. During the January 16, 2019 Planning Commission meeting, four residents spoke with the following concerns (summarized): • Too much density • Opposes apartment access onto Greenfield Ave (yes; cul-de-sac) • Opposes cul-de-sac of Greenfield Ave, if directs more traffic onto Edgewood Dr. (no; cul- de-sac) • Apartments will decrease property values • Apartments will increase traffic on Edgewood Dr. • Pedestrian traffic and safety (crossing Co Rd H2, Mounds View Blvd). • Increased crime at the apartments (e.g. automobile break-ins) Respectfully submitted, Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director Attachments 1. Comments, Mark Gavett, January 16, 2019 2. Sketch Plan M EMORANDUM to: Mounds View City Council from: Nyle Zikmund, City Administrator re: February 4, 2019 Workshop date: January 31, 2019 Some background for the workshop Monday night. Representative Moller: Representative Moller is specifically seeking feedback from the council on what issues are important/critical to you. We have spoken a number of times and I have shared the importance of LGA, Local Control, and Unfunded mandates. I am also meeting with her next Monday to discuss the definition of prosecuting agency with respect to Chapter 307 of the statutes based on the media inquiry we received. That chapter deals with fines levied and used to combat sexual exploitation of youth. As of this writing Thursday morning she is the Chief Author of 3 bills; House Files 10, 327 and 418 (the latter two just introduced on the 28th). All deal with criminal sexual assault/harassment/conduct. From my 25+ years’ experience down at the capitol, this shows remarkable discipline as most freshman introduced a larger number of bills. Furthermore, this is in her professional field of expertise and clearly a passion. She is co-author on 27 other bills which provides some insight into other areas she supports. Topics range from free public transit on election day, to insulin assistance program, to firefighting issues, to mental health, hands free cell phone when driving, gender equality and more. Sketch Plans: Both the Long Lake Woods (Harstad proposal) and INH/Crossroad Pointe projects will be before. Staff needs direction on both in order to proceed. Both have gone before the Planning Commission and both have had neighborhood meetings. Long Lake Woods – In short, we are to the point of go or no go. A go decision is likely to result in the City having to use eminent domain to obtain the final right of way/road dedication on the platted road that exists. This action will be limited to the Doll property as the developer has either the City has acquired or the developer has agreements to acquire. Attorney Riggs will be present. Crossroad Pointe – Developer is looking for consensus on design/layout issues specific to Greenfield Avenue access, site amenities such as the tot lot, dog run, and outside patio. Based on feedback from the P & Z they moved the tot lot and dog run to the West side proving more barrier and green space to the single family homes on Edgewood. The plan, as you can see, also shows an actual road to Greenfield with an option to still limit southbound traffic directly out of the complexes parking lot. Street Redevelopment for 2020: Don will be on hand to share some thoughts and concerns about our current plan and a suggestion for you to consider that we believe will eventually result in a lower cost. HR Issues: Since I was first hired you had established a goal which is now part of the Strategic Plan, to focus on HR issues with one of the priorities being retention. To that end, Council had ordered a market rate study for non- bargained employees to make sure wages were competitive and Council has, since receiving that document, endeavored to implement the recommendations which are all done or nearly done. Council is also aware of the labor shortage and specifically as it related to public employment with evidence in several positions such as law enforcement which generated over 100 applications per position and now we are fortunate to receive 20. Over the past year Rayla and I have been working with the HR committee on benefits resulting in a number of Council approved policy changes last summer. We have also made greater investments in training as well as constructing very robust hiring processes that include intense probation requirements and subsequent feedback. This is all designed to ensure our employees have maximum ability to succeed. Staff continues to work with the HR Committee (as we did on all these issues) and have been working with them on a couple of specific issues related to department heads/senior employees. For example, we have reviewed, updated and repointed the Assistant to Public Works Director. We are in process on updating the Cable Coordinator Job Description and have done an update on market rate. And, for over a year, I have been researching and evaluating department head compensation and benefits. As you know changes have been made to the Public Works Director (promotion and increase), hiring of HR position, creation/promotion of Assistance City Administrator. While we have achieved a level of success in consistency and stability on the position and fiscal compensation side of the equation, those same situations do not exist on the benefit side. We have been working with the HR Committee on remedying that and I will share Monday night what they have provided feedback and support on.