Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION 01212020If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612-782-3313 or email city@savmn.com. People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Work Session Agenda Tuesday, January 21, 2020 5:30 p.m. Joint Meeting with Planning Commission 1. Development 65 Concept Review (2501 Kenzie). Steve Grittman, City Planner presenting 2. Adjournment City of St. Anthony CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Minutes January 8, 2020 Present: Mayor & Council Randy Stille, Mayor; Bernard Walker, Councilmember; Thomas Randle, Councilmember and Jan Jenson, Councilmember. Absent: None Staff: Mark Casey, City Manager Call to Order: Mayor Stille called the Work Session to order at 5:30 p.m. City Council Vacancy Interviews: The mayor and council individually interviewed the following applicants: Dan Payne, Dave Colling, Wendy Webster and Nancy Robinett. Each applicant was asked the same eleven questions. Mayor Stille stated that no decisions or deliberations will be done at the Work Session, that will be done at the January 14, 2020 City Council meeting. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Mark Casey, City Manager. 1. Development 65 Concept Review 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony, Minnesota 55418-1699 Office: (612) 782-3301 • Fax: (612) 782-3302 • www.savmn.com MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Stille and St. Anthony City Council St. Anthony Planning Commission Mark Casey, City Manager FROM: Stephen Grittman, City Planner DATE: January 14, 2020 RE: Development 65 – Joint Work session – January 21, 2020 Senior Housing PUD Concept Plan NAC FILE: 323.01 – 20.01 This summary is intended to provide an overview of the project proposal and some of the primary elements for Work session discussion. The applicants will have a presentation available for review at the meeting. Potential Issues/Elements for Work session Discussion • Project Description. The applicants are seeking a PUD proposal that would be developed on a parcel of approximately 4 acres along Stinson Parkway. The parcel in question would be subdivided from the Urban Grove (formerly “Lowry Grove”) manufactured home park property. Development 65 proposes a 125-unit mixed senior facility that would have access from Stinson, and share parking and service access with the Urban Grove development. • Current Land Use and Designations. The current land use for this portion of the Urban Grove property is largely vacant. The manufactured home park development is occurring largely on the southeast portion of the 15.4 acre parcel. The entire parcel is currently guided for high density residential use, but is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. Compatibility between land use guidance and zoning district would be one of the implementation actions following final ratification of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • PUD Flexibility – Density. The proposed senior apartment building is 125 units, on 4 acres – a density of approximately 30 units per acre. The City’s Comprehensive Plan allows for projects of up to 40 units per acre, while the R-4 Zoning District would accommodate just 25 units per acre without PUD flexibility. The R-4 District is used as a comparison district for purposes of establishing the baseline zoning requirements as it would be the zoning district applied if PUD were not being pursued. • PUD Flexibility – Joint Access. One of the aspects of PUD flexibility being sought in this design is the shared access and travel route from Kenzie Terrace on the south boundary of the Urban Grove property. This private drive is shown to provide access to the parking and service portions of the Senior Residential building, as well as to the Urban Grove private streets and proposed garage buildings. The plans do not, at this stage, illustrate the subdivision and property line between the two development sites. As a part of the project, a subdivision plat will be necessary, and the two projects will need to incorporate shared access and maintenance agreements covering the use and upkeep of that private access drive. Staff has noted to the developers that a project which accomplishes several other goals – such as affordable housing, various design and/or architectural elements could be factors in consideration of the PUD approach being sought for this project. It is staff’s understanding, based on early discussions with the applicants, that TIF assistance will be requested as a part of the project. The details and scope of that request is not a subject of the planning review, but will be important to understand early on in the project discussions. Public financing consideration should parallel the zoning review. • Site Plan – Apartment Development. o Setbacks. The plan shows setbacks for the proposed building of approximately 80 feet from Stinson, approximately 70 feet from the south common property line with Bremer Bank, and more than 150 feet from the north line, which is an alley serving single family homes along 27th Avenue NE. o Impervious Surface. The concept plan does not provide an impervious surface coverage estimate. The R-4 standard would be 50%. Given stormwater issues in this area of the community, the applicants should plan to stay well under the 50% impervious threshold. o Parking. The site plan shows surface parking on the west (Stinson) side of the building of approximately 50 spaces, and an addition 22 spaces on the east side of the building, presumably for staff. Underground parking is also planned, however, total quantities are not indicated. The Zoning Ordinance requires 1 space per 3 units for “retirement homes”, which would mandate at least 42 spaces. Given the mixed nature of the units (independent living, assisted living, and memory care, a ratio of approximately one space per unit should be preserved. o Access. The proposed plan utilized the existing access point to Stinson, and the referenced shared access to Kenzie Terrace. The Stinson Parkway access would be used for access to the main parking area and entrance, as well as to the parking garage on the south end of the building. Given the Minneapolis Park Board’s concerns over use and traffic on the Parkway, consideration should be given to providing garage access from the internal private street shared with Urban Grove, rather than the front parking area from Stinson. • Other Considerations o The applicants have designed the surface parking in the front of the building to accommodate a band of landscaping along the Stinson Parkway trail, as well as additional front yard green planting area. The setback of the building from Stinson accommodates this space. Staff’s recommendations include avoidance on long “dead-end” drive/parking areas where visitors would have difficulty turning around when the parking is full. o The access and “dead-end” traffic pattern would typically also apply to emergency vehicle access in these areas as well. An apparent emergency vehicle egress lane is shown to the north of the front drive. The City’s public safety staff will comment on these issues further as the project goes forward. o Architecturally, the building is proposed to be a 4-story structure with a flat roof. The concept plans show a series of articulated roof line parapet extensions. The building wall is a combination of recessed and forward extended sections, with balconies either recessed or extending outward, depending on the building wall section. Materials are not specified at this stage. For processing and next-step purposes, the applicants would seek a “Preliminary Plan” PUD request, with more fully detailed plans and support materials. To advance to that stage, the Planning Commission and City Council can use this Concept discussion to identify preferences in project density, location, site planning, and architecture, along with any other relevant issues, such as affordability and sustainability, that would be important for the applicants to incorporate into their next-stage plans. As noted previously, clarity as to financial considerations should also be included as a part of the discussion. It will be important that planning and zoning aspects of the City’s review do not advance too far beyond the expectations for financial assistance. ST CHARLES CHURCHBIKE RACKBIKE RACKkaas wilson architectsSt Anthony Village - SeniorSite Plan1/64" = 1'-0"1Site PlanURBAN GROUP COMMUNITY BUILDINGSIDEWALKS AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS PER PARK BOARD STANDARDS AT DEVELOPERS EXPENSE BUILDING EMPLOYEE BIKE PARKING IN GARAGE BELOW. SHOWER FACILITIES PROVIDED Project Number:1301 American Blvd. E. Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000 fax: (612) 879-6666Issue Date:Revision Number:Revision Date:kaas wilson architectsC:\Revit Local\19061 - Hoyt - St Anthony Village - Senior_V22_detached_iwimaladharma.rvt1/2/2020 2:02:07 PMSt Anthony Village - SeniorSD_130Exterior Rendering Project Number:1301 American Blvd. E. Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000 fax: (612) 879-6666Issue Date:Revision Number:Revision Date:kaas wilson architectsC:\Revit Local\19061 - Hoyt - St Anthony Village - Senior_V22_detached_iwimaladharma.rvt1/2/2020 2:02:07 PMSt Anthony Village - SeniorSD_131Exterior Rendering Project Number:1301 American Blvd. E. Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000 fax: (612) 879-6666Issue Date:Revision Number:Revision Date:kaas wilson architectsC:\Revit Local\19061 - Hoyt - St Anthony Village - Senior_V22_detached_iwimaladharma.rvt1/2/2020 2:02:07 PMSt Anthony Village - SeniorSD_132Exterior Rendering Project Number:1301 American Blvd. E. Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000 fax: (612) 879-6666Issue Date:Revision Number:Revision Date:kaas wilson architectsC:\Revit Local\19061 - Hoyt - St Anthony Village - Senior_V22_detached_iwimaladharma.rvt1/2/2020 2:02:07 PMSt Anthony Village - SeniorSD_133Exterior Rendering