Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEDA Packet 10.18.22If you need accommodations for the EDA meeting please contact Rachel Juba at (651) 762-6304 or rjuba@ci.hugo.mn.us, thank you. Agenda ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) Tuesday, October 18, 2022 Hugo City Hall 5:30 PM 5:30 pm 1. Call to Order 5:31 pm 2. Roll Call (Arcand, Chrun, Denaway, Gallivan, Klein, Puleo, Roberts, Weidt) 5:32 pm 3. Approval of Minutes EDA Meeting of September 20, 2022 5:35 pm 4. Oneka Commons Sketch Plan • Peter Stalland, Knute Development, LLC 6:00 pm 5. Rosemary Place Sketch Plan • Mark Lambert, Summit Management, LCC 6:15 pm 6. Update on Downtown Redevelopment 6:30 pm 7. Adjournment If you need accommodations for the EDA meeting please contact Rachel Juba at (651) 762-6304 or rjuba@ci.hugo.mn.us, thank you. Background memo for the EDA Meeting of Tuesday, September 20, 2022 3. Approval of Minutes Staff recommends approval of the minutes from the June 21, 2022 EDA Meeting as presented. 4. Oneka Commons Sketch Plan The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for development of the properties with residential and commercial uses which includes rezoning and a comprehensive plan amendment for change in the land use. The applicant has stated the first phase of the development would be the two 70 unit apartments. The properties are generally located in the area south of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 and west of TH 61. The property owner, Marvin LaValle, as signed a contact with the applicant, Peter Stalland (Oneka Commons, LLC), to develop the properties. The proposed sketch plan includes 8 parcels totaling approximately 92 acres. The parcels are currently vacant and vary in elevation with several constraints including wetlands, floodplain/floodway, ditches, and the Met Council sewer interceptor. Staff recommends the EDA discuss and provide feedback to the applicant on the proposed zoning and land use changes, construction of streets, and proposed uses for the property. 5. Rosemary Place Sketch Plan The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for development of the property with an apartment use, where current zoning and land use is commercial.The applicant, Summit Management LLC, is proposing to construct a 90-unit apartment complex on the west side of a 12.96-acre property, of which 7.75 acres are buildable. The property is located to the south of Rosemary Way N and north of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8, west of Festival Foods. The property is bisected diagonally by a 50-foot wide utility transmission line easement. Staff recommends the EDA discuss and provide feedback to the applicant on the proposed zoning and land use changes. 6. Update on Downtown Redevelopment Staff will update the EDA on downtown redevelopment. MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2022 Chair Weidt called the meeting to order at 5:30pm. PRESENT: Arcand, Denaway, Klein, Puleo, Roberts, Weidt ABSENT: Chrun, Gallivan STAFF: Bryan Bear, City Administrator Rachel Juba, Community Development Director Max Gort, Associate Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE EDA MEETING OF JUNE 21, 2022 Commissioner Klein made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Puleo, to approve the May 17, 2022 EDA meeting minutes. Ayes: All. Nay: None. Motion carried. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION ON DOWNTOWN HUGO PROJECT Juba presented giving background on the Downtown Hugo project. The plan includes 5 building for a total square footage of 63,000 square feet. The plan show a traditional downtown atmosphere with a promenade with a boardwalk along Egg Lake. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the plan on September 8th. Staff wanted to check in the EDA on the plan. Mr. Trooien spoke to the EDA and stated that he is excited to be at the EDA meeting. He stated at a later date he would like to talk to the EDA about cost share items for the project. He stated that the first phase would likely be the restaurant along Egg Lake and the other buildings along the lake would be phase 2. Mr. Trooien wanted introduce the topics the EDA. He would like to talk about cost sharing for the relocation of sewer and water utility and hazardous waste cleanup. He did not have costs at this time. EDA generally agreed that the plans is consistent to what they were expecting and liked the plan. The discussed the cost sharing. They stated they needed additional information to make a decision. Staff stated that they would bring information back at a future meeting. All items would be outlined in a development agreement. DISCUSSION ON BANNERS ALONG FRENCHMAN ROAD / CSAH 8 Juba presented three new banner designs for re placement of the old ones. The EDA aged that a rendition of option 3 was the best and directed staff to order the replacements. SPONSORSHIP REQUEST FROM HUGO AREA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION FOR KIDZ N’ BIZ FEST Juba provides background on the Kidz n’ Biz event and how the EDA typically receives sponsorship request from HBA. Weidt made a motion, seconded by Klein to approve the sponsorship. All ayes. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Klein made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Roberts, to adjourn at 6:42 PM. All ayes. Motion Carried. Respectfully submitted. Max Gort, Associate Planner 1 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 CITY OF HUGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning and Zoning Application Staff Report TO: Hugo Economic Development Authority (EDA) FROM: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Peter Stalland - Oneka Commons Sketch Plan DATE: October 13, 2022, for the EDA Meeting of October 18, 2022 REVIEW DEADLINE (120-days): November 23, 2022 1. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The properties are generally located in the area south of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 and west of TH 61. The property owner, Marvin LaValle, as signed a contact with the applicant, Peter Stalland (Oneka Commons, LLC), to develop the properties. The proposed sketch plan includes 8 parcels totaling approximately 92 acres. The parcels are currently vacant and vary in elevation with several constraints including wetlands, floodplain/floodway, ditches, and the Met Council sewer interceptor. The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for development of the properties with residential and commercial uses. 2. CONCEPT PLAN: Current Zoning The properties are located in three zoning districts, Low Density Single Family Residential (R- 3), General Business (C-2), and Central Business (C-1). Current Land Use The properties are guided in three land use categories: Low Density Residential (LD) The Low Density Residential designation identifies residential land uses developed between 2 and 4 units per net acre. 2 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 Commercial (COM) The Commercial designation provides areas for service retail, highway, and neighborhood- oriented retail establishments to develop. This designation includes commercial, office, and retail uses and is generally concentrated along key transportation corridors. This designation does not include residential development. Mixed-Use (MIX) The Mixed-Use designation provides opportunities for multiple compatible uses on a single site. These uses can include residential, commercial, office, retail, and public/quasi-public uses. The MIX land use designation allows residential development at a minimum density of 10 units per net acre and maximum density of 60 units per net acre. General Layout The applicant is showing development of 8 parcels of land into separate residential and commercial lots, to be developed separately. The uses proposed are single family homes, multi- family townhomes, apartments, senior housing and various commercial business. In discussions with the applicant the proposed apartments, would be the first phase. The sketch plan is proposing different zoning districts and land use than what is guided and required for the properties. The total number of proposed units and total buildable acreage of the development is not clear and is not consistent between the proposed sketch plans provided. The plan shows access to the sites from the extension of Victor Path, crossing Oneka Parkway, and connecting to the proposed extension of Fenway Boulevard from the south to the north connecting to Frenchman Road/CSAH 8. The frontage road is intended to relieve traffic and reduce the number of access points along Frenchman Road/CSAH 8. The properties are guided Low Density Residential (LD), Commercial (COM), and Mixed-Use (MIX). The developer has stated that they would like to increase the amount of residential and decrease the amount of commercial. The developer has stated that the existing market for residential is greater than the commercial market. Staff understands the residential market has been on the raise. The City’s zoning districts and comprehensive plan includes several acres of property to accommodate residential development throughout the City. The applicant has not clarified if they will be applying for a Planned Unit Development (PUD), but it is likely. PUDs offer flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of PUD zoning can allow for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. PUD approval may be granted if the applicant can demonstrate compliance with the following criteria: 1. The establishment of PUD zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations, to create or maintain a development pattern that complies with the City's comprehensive plan. 3 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 2. The mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not otherwise be accomplished. 3. Variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in this chapter in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements (e.g., construction materials, landscaping, lighting, open space, etc.) that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. 4. A more creative and efficient approach to land use within the city, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. 5. Preservation and enhancement of natural features and open spaces, including but not limited to the width expansion of greenway corridors, conservation of wooded areas, development of buffer areas, reduction of impervious surface, and utilization of joint facilities and utilities. 6. Maintenance or improvement for the efficiency of public streets and utilities. 7. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. It’s unclear from the sketch plans, but it seems application is proposing the mixed-use land use designation to be extended to the west, generally where the apartment complex is shown in the sketch plan. Compliance with City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Downtown Design Guidelines The way that the properties are zoned and guided for land use in the Comprehensive Plan is intentional. Through the Comprehensive Plan process it was determined that the areas along CSAH 8 are designated for commercial and mixed-use development. The areas further to the south (south of the proposed frontage road) are designated for residential uses. The areas that are guided mixed-use are within the boundaries of the downtown plan and are subject to the downtown design guidelines. The areas that are guided mixed-use are in highly visible areas of the City and, consequently, development in these areas will be expected to provide a higher level of site design and architectural design than other areas of the City. Typically, mixed-use development includes a combination of retail, office, cultural, or entertainment uses with the ability to integrate higher density residential uses as part of an overall master planned development. Any change of the land use designations as proposed by the developer would require approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Any change in zoning for the property would require approval of a zoning amendment. The applicants plan does not comply with the existing land use designated for the properties, in the following ways: • The mixed-use area is proposed to be extended to the west, where the apartments are shown on the plan. • Unclear how the development would meet the Mixed- Use development policy and Downtown Design Guidelines. Staff recommends that the existing land use designations be followed when developing these properties. However, staff may be able to support allowing higher density residential, which could accommodate an apartment use, in the areas that are guided as Low Density Residential 4 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 (LD). Allowing higher density residential in that area would provide an appropriate transition from single family residential uses to commercial development. Alternatively, staff could see the potential of a multi-family residential or apartment complex that is integrated in to a mixed- use development. The proposed sketch plan shows each parcel being developed separately. It is in staff’s opinion that the applicant is not showing a vision for a mixed-use development that blends the uses together. Based in the information provided and discussions with the applicant these plans have been put together to find a location for a seven acre lot for the three-story apartment development. The apartment is shown in an area that is zoned partially in General Business (C-2) and Central Business (C-1) and partially in the Commercial (COM) and Mixed-Use (MIX) land use designation. There is some conflicting regulation on multi-family residential development, apartments included, for what uses and densities would be for zoning districts and land use. Apartments are allowed, with a conditional use permit (CUP), in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts. The base density as outlined in the Multi-Family Residential Development performance standards (City Code Section 90-251) is 10 units per net acre. The performance standards anticipates allowing higher densities with a CUP, but no maximum density is outlined in the ordinance. The COM land use designation does not allow residential development and the MIX land use designation allows residential development at a minimum density of 10 units per net acre and maximum density of 60 units per net acre. The apartment development proposed on the seven acres would be at a density of 20 units per net acre. Any development of residential in the COM land use area, would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, therefore, the applicant would need to propose the MIX land use designation to accommodate the apartment development. However, it is in staff’s opinion that the apartment is not part of a mixed-use development, since the uses are not blended or integrated on one site, but rather as standalone sites to be developed separately. The east side of the properties are a part of the downtown and therefore the Downtown Design Guidelines should be met by the development. The intent of the guidelines is to provide a baseline for quality in order to revitalize and expand the downtown business district. Some of the guidelines for downtown Hugo include: • Enhancement of the public realm to maintain a pedestrian-oriented downtown. • Creating a sense of arrival in downtown by placement of gateway elements. • Blending of commercial and residential development as a master planned mixed-use development. • High quality architecture, with specific emphases on French architectural elements, traditional downtown design and/or relating to existing buildings in the downtown. The downtown plan shows a mixed-use development blending commercial/office and multi- family housing uses in a master plan development. It does not show this area being planned as separate individual lots, but a plan that integrates/blends both uses together with an intentional site design. Although the uses shown on the proposed sketch plan are generally reasonable, the applicant is showing this area as developing as individual lots and planned separately. This property is ideal for planning a mixed use development blending commercial/office and multi- 5 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 family housing uses in a master plan development since the there are several acres with one property owner. The applicant has not provided information on how the development would meet or exceed the Downtown Plan and Design Guidelines. Architecture The applicant has indicated that the design of the buildings in this area would be consistent with the building styles in the Victor Gardens development. They have stated the architectural theme would be required for all commercial and mixed-use areas of the proposed sketch plan. This does not include proposed residential areas. The applicant did not provide a narrative on how the buildings would related to the Victor Gardens development, meet the design guidelines, or what materials would be use on the buildings. Although it seems the buildings will be designed to be cohesive, the developer shall provide a design palette, including elevations, colors, and materials for the buildings, to ensure they are compatible and meet the guidelines. Commercial Buildings All commercial buildings are required to meet the Commercial and Industrial Design Guidelines and if the downtown area, the Downtown Design Guidelines. The applicant has not shown any building rendering example for the commercial uses. All of the buildings within the project shall have four sided architecture, with equal treatment and visual qualities, and shall meet the requirements of the guidelines. It is hard to know whether the proposed buildings would meet the guidelines as one side was shown in the rendering. However, if it exudes the quality of the Victor Gardens development, it will likely meet the guidelines. Multi-Family Residential/Apartments The applicant has provided building renderings for the three-story apartment buildings. All of the buildings within the project shall have four sided architecture, with equal treatment and visual qualities, and shall meet the requirements of the Multifamily Design Guidelines. The building rendering shows the building design with horizontal and vertical projections. Although the applicant did not provide information on the building material, it looks like there would be varying materials and colors. The guidelines encourage using a mix of materials and the ordinance states that the exterior of three-story structures shall have a high percent of brick, stone, or comparable material. The apartment includes underground parking. Parks/Trails Because of the residential density proposed and proximity to future businesses special attention should be paid to the trails and sidewalks for both recreation and transportation purposes. Additionally, the development is adjacent to the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail, which connects many of Hugo’s trails and parks. According to the Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan trails and sidewalks are to be built with new developments that connect the community and ensure safe access to parks, downtown, and other important areas in the City. 6 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 The developer shows the trails that were built in 2017 with Clearwater Cove on Oneka Parkway North and along the ditch. The developer is proposing a trail connecting these existing trails east to the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail along the ditch. This would provide a scenic and desirable recreational amenity. There is a trail on the west side of Fenway Avenue North in the Oneka Estates neighborhood. According to the Existing and Proposed Trails Map, this trail is planned to be extended to Frenchman Avenue with the extension of the roadway. This needs to be included in the development plans. Additionally, the planned trail on the south side of Frenchman Avenue needs to be included in the development plans. Per the city code, sidewalks are required along all county roads, state highways, city collector streets, and along all city residential streets where abutting lots have a width of less than 80 feet. The developer has not shown where sidewalks would be constructed. Sidewalks have been constructed along both sides of Victor Path, which should continue. Additionally, sidewalks would be required along residential streets. Park Dedication The developer is required to dedicate land, pay a fee, or a combination of land and fee. The developer has indicated that there may be a 4.2 acre park dedicated however it is shown to primarily be stormwater ponding and a ditch, which is not acceptable. The remaining dedication would be paid in fee. These are the assumptions used in order to provide an example of what the park dedication calculations could be, based on the information provided by the developer: Units Developable Acres Density Low Density Residential: 85 units 43.7 acres 1.9 units/acre Apartments: 140 units 7 acres 20 units/acre Mixes-use: 130 units 16.8 acres 7.7 units/acre Total: 355 total units 67.5 acres 5.3 units/acre Park land dedication is preferred and 10-17% of the buildable land shall be dedicated based on the density of the development. With the assumptions above, the overall density of the proposed development would be 5.3 units per acre and would therefore require 11% of the buildable land to be dedicated. Currently, the fee is $3,400 per unit. This fee is set annually, and the current rate at the time of building permits would be paid. Park Dedication Calculations Required *Land OR Fee Proposed Land 11 % of the developable acres 7.4 acres 4.2 acres (56%) Fee $3,400 per unit $1,207,000 $531,080 (44%) 7 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 The above assumption is only if the entire property is master planned and uses park dedication overall. If each parcel is developed separately, the park dedication would be calculated separately. Only buildable land is accepted for park dedication. The City may accept wetlands, ponds, or other undevelopable land areas that could be incorporated in the park system but dedication credit will not be given for these areas. Trail construction is required, but park land dedication credit is not given for trail corridors. Only contiguous buildable park land is granted credit for park dedication. Based on the wetland survey for the property, not all of the proposed 4.2 acres of parkland is buildable. In 2020, Parks Commission reviewed the sketch plan from the applicant with showing generally the same proposed park and trail plan, and provided comments to the applicant. The Parks Commission provided the following feedback: • The Commission stated that the trails shown were generally in a good location as long as they were in a buildable area, not within a wetland or stormwater pond. Some off road trails were desired. • Continue the paved trail along west side of Fenway Avenue to Frenchman Road/CSAH 8. • Construction of a paved trail on the south side of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8. • Construction of sidewalks where required. • Incorporation of the greenway corridor per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • Incorporation of the Downtown Design Guidelines. • The Commission would consider a park in the area closer to the higher density residential development. They would also consider a combination of land and fee for park dedication satisfaction. o Any land used to satisfy the park dedication requirement shall be buildable. o Could be located within the greenway corridor. o Medium sized park with active amenities. Streets and Access Generally the proposed access locations and street locations meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is showing a right-in/right-out access to Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 that is not on Washington County’s corridor plan and would need to be approved by the County. Washington County plans show future traffic signals at the prosed access points along Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 at Fenway Boulevard and Oneka Parkway. Developer contributions to the cost of the traffic signals will be considered with the development of these properties. The development of this property result in in the construction of Victor Path (frontage road) and Fenway Boulevard. This would require connecting to Fenway Boulevard to the south to the Bald Eagle Industrial Park and easements acquisitions will be required. The applicant has not shown the connection on the proposed sketch plan. The sketch plan shall be revised to include the street connection. 8 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 Although a phasing plans has not been provided, the developer has indicted that the apartments would be the first phase of the development. The applicant has indicated that the access to Frenchman Road/CSAH 8 would be constructed and a small section of Victor Path to the apartment entrance would be constructed. It’s in clear in the plan how and when the other streets would be constructed. Floodplain/Floodway The property has several acres that include the floodplain and floodway. Rice Creek Watershed (RCWD) rules and City Ordinance prohibit fill within the floodway and state that no structure will be allowed in the floodway, and that any floodplain fill will require replacement somewhere else in the property. Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or comparable will be required to be submitted to MnDNR/FEMA for approval of any modifications to the floodway/floodplain. Typically, no habitable structures are allowed to develop in the floodway. The developer has not shown the floodplain on the plans, which limits the development of the site. Shoreland A portion of the property is within the Shoreland Overlay District for Clearwater Creek. Any property within 300 feet of the creek/ditch is subject to the shoreland ordinance regulations under City Code Section 90-137 Shoreland District. The MnDNR also has regulations for PUDs in the shoreland district. The shoreland ordinance regulates items such as setbacks, lot size, impervious surface, etc., above the standard zoning regulations. To meet the shoreland district regulations the development along Clearwater Creek will likely be limited and revised. Stormwater Management/Water Reuse The plan is not showing how stormwater management would be handled. The applicant has indicated that regional stormwater management for the site, instead of individual stormwater management for each site as it develops. This will allow for efficient use of property and is encouraged for the properties. Staff has not evaluated if the stormwater management, but is supportive of regional stormwater management. Conditions for stormwater reuse for the site is ideal and should be incorporated into the development. Stormwater reuse can aid in meeting the stormwater management requirements for the development. The applicant has not indicated if stormwater reuse would be incorporated into the development. Environmental Review Any development of these sites would most likely trigger an environmental process, for example an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) or an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). City staff have been talking to the applicant and the property owner’s representative on conducting an AUAR, which will take care of not only EAW requirements, but also cover land use planning, traffic analysis, stormwater management, and environmental issues. This process will help with the development of these pieces of land in the future. The environmental review process at a minimum can take nine months or more to complete. 9 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 Utilities Municipal sewer and water is available to the site. Once development phasing is proposed, staff can better determine the best means for servicing the site. The Metropolitan Council sewer interceptor runs through the property. There is an easement along this sewer line. Development of the property will need to be outside of the easement area, however, it is likely streets can cross the sewer line easement. 3. CONCLUSION/ RECOMMENDATIONS: Because of the constraints of the property including wetlands, floodplain/floodway, and creeks/ditches, it is likely the buildable area of the property is less that what has been shown on the plans and the proposed sketch plan will likely change significantly when these items are evaluated. Staff recommends the applicant evaluate the wetlands, floodplain/floodway, and shoreland district regulations to determine the buildable area of the property, then prepare development plans for the property. It is unclear if this was taken into consideration with the proposed overall sketch plan. The proposed sketch plan shows each parcel being developed separately. It is in staff’s opinion that the applicant is not showing a vision for a mixed-use development that blends the uses together. Staff recommends discussion on the following: • Develop the property using the existing land use plan/designations for the property, but it may be reasonable to consider: o The residential area south of Victor Path (frontage road) may be able to accommodate higher density residential that would provide appropriate transitions from single family residential to commercial uses. o The apartment complex could be integrated into a mixed-use development blending the various uses with the buildings relating to each other or could be located in areas with residential land use. o The EDA should comment specifically on the location of the apartments in the area designated commercial in the 2040 Land Use Plan. • Incorporate the Downtown Design Guidelines into the development. • Incorporate the Parks Commission comments into the development. • Incorporate stormwater reuse into the development. • Incorporate regional stormwater management into the development. • Phasing of road construction for the property. The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for the properties showing residential and commercial uses on the property. 10 Oneka Commons Sketch Plan 2022 The applicant would like comments on the following: • The proposed land use designations and proposed uses • Proposed park dedication • Building architecture • Street locations and access points ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Existing Zoning Map 3. Existing 2040 Land Use Map 4. FEMA Floodplain Map 5. Downtown Plan 6. Applicants Narrative Dated July 8, 2022 7. Applicants Sketch Plan 8. Applicants Sketch Plan over Existing 2040 Land Use Map 9. Applicants Sketch Plan for the Apartment Complex with Proposed Architecture Forest Boulevard NorthFrenchman RoadEverton Avenue North140th Street North Fenway Boulevard NorthOneka Parkway North145th Street North Flay A ve nu e N orthFinale Avenue North147th Street North 141st Street North 146th Street North Fenway Avenue NorthVictor Path Fitzgerald Avenue NorthFerrara Avenue North142nd Street North 143rd Court North 138th Street North 137th Street NorthEvergreen Avenue North142nd Circle NorthDahlia Way North141st Circle NorthFinale Avenue NorthFrenchman Road 142nd Street North Flay Avenue North147th Street North Flay Avenue NorthOneka Com mons Location Map Hugo, MN ¯0 700Feet1 in = 700 feet Document Path: S:\Mapping\Emily\LocationSite Maps\2020\Oneka Commons.mxdSite Met C ouncil Interceptor Parcel Boundary selection Roads Hugo Border Parcel Boundary Clearwater Creek Frenchman RoadOneka Parkway NorthForest Boulevard North145th Street North Finale Avenue North147th Street North 146th Street North Fenway Avenue NorthEverton Avenue NorthFitzgerald Avenue NorthFerrara Avenue NorthFlay Avenue North143rd Court North 141st Street North Upper 146Th Street North 142nd Street NorthEvergreen Avenue North142nd Circle North 141st Circle NorthFrenchman Road 142nd Street NorthFinale Avenue North141st Street N orth Finale Avenue NorthOneka Co mmons Existing Zoning Hugo, MN Subject Parcels Right of Way RoadsParcel B oundaryZoning Distric ts (LA) Long Term Agricultural (AG) Agricultural (RR) Rural Residential (R-1) Large Lot Single Family Residential (R-3) Single Family Detached Residential (CR-3) Central Residential (R-4) Low Density M ultipl e Family Residential (R-5) Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (NS) Neighborhood Service (RC-1) Restricted Commercial (C-1) Central Business (C-2) General Business (FCB) Future Central Business (BP) Busi ness Park (RI-1) Restricted Industrial (I-3) General Industrial (FUS) Future Urban Service (PUD) Planned Unit Development Water ¯ 0 500Feet 1 in = 500 feet Frenchman RoadOneka Parkway NorthForest Boulevard North145th Street North Finale Avenue North147th Street North 146th Street North Fenway Avenue NorthEverton Avenue NorthFitzgerald Avenue NorthFerrara Avenue NorthFlay Avenue North143rd Court North 141st Street North Upper 146Th Street North 142nd Street NorthEvergreen Avenue North142nd Circle North 141st Circle NorthFrenchman Road 142nd Street NorthFinale Avenue North141st Street N orth Finale Avenue NorthOneka Co mmons Land Use Hugo, MN Subject Parcels Right of Way Roads Parcel BoundaryLandUse Agricultural (AG) Large Lot R esidential (LL) Very Low Density (VLD) Low D ensity R esidential - (L D) Medium Density Residential (M D) High Density Residential (HD ) Business Park (BP) Comm ercial (COM ) Industrial (IN D) Mixed Use (MIX Public/Q uasi-Public (PQ ) ¯ 0 500Feet 1 in = 500 feet Frenchman RoadOneka Parkway NorthForest Boulevard North145th Street North Finale Avenue North147th Street North 146th Street North Fenway Avenue NorthEverton Avenue NorthFitzgerald Avenue NorthFerrara Avenue NorthFlay Avenue North143rd Court North 141st Street North Upper 146Th Street North 142nd Street NorthEvergreen Avenue North142nd Circle North 141st Circle NorthFrenchman Road 142nd Street NorthFinale Avenue North141st Street N orth Finale Avenue NorthOneka Co mmons Floodplain Map Hugo, MN Subj ect Parcels Right of Way Roads Parcel Boundary Floodw ayFlood Zone A AE ¯ 0 500Feet 1 in = 500 feet Hugo Downtown Framework Plan Final Plan & Design Guidelines Page 6 of 23 The Downtown Plan City park with trails, gazebo, dock, pedestrian bridge Shared public parking Carpenters on the Lake Additional downtown senior housing Walkable community spaces along trail ROW Proposed trail connections New mixed-use development blending office and multi-family housing uses New mixed-use development with housing, offices and complementary retail/commercial uses Traditional residential blocks Improved park with future community center ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING 14070 Highway 52 Southeast, Chatfield, Minnesota 55923 Phone 507-867-1666  Fax 507-867-1665  www.ggg.to July 8, 2022 City of Hugo Attn: Rachel Juba, City Planner 14669 Fitzgerald Ave. North Hugo, MN 55038 RE: Knut Development LLC - Sketch Plan Dear Ms. Juba, Please accept the application and packet for review and discussion of the Sketch Plan for the LaValle property specific to a proposal for two conceptual 70 unit apartment buildings (140 total units) which would be three stories in height plus understory parking garages. We are looking for Hugo’s support of this concept and to determine a path forward for construction of the necessary facilities to allow construction of the apartments. At this time it is not economically feasible to invest in the infrastructure for future commercial/mixed uses which are speculative at this time. We see getting an apartment project kick starter for the single family residential development. Once there is positive growth in the residential area, the commercial/mixed use developments will come. The sketch plan is quite similar to a plan submitted and reviewed in early 2020. The main difference being a single 150 unit apartment is now there are two - 70 units apartment buildings. The apartments would be upscale, market rate buildings similar to what developer Peter Stalland has built in many locations in the greater metro area. Mr. Stalland has a purchase agreement in place for the apartment location and the mixed use area to the east (approximately 28 acres). Three existing building examples are provided to show the quality in architecture and interior finish that is proposed. Please accept this application and let us know if there is additional information needed to start the discussion to move the development of this project forward. Thank you, Mark R. Welch, PE Acres 7 43.7 16.8 67.5 Apartment: (1) Apartment parcel is currently 5.2 acres commercial and 1.8 acres mixed use Mixed Use: (2) Two mixed use resideintial structures are depicted totaling 130 apartment units 7/20/2022 Current Zoning Apartment Parcel Low-Density Res. Mixed Use Total Notes: 355 5.3 Net Density 20 1.9 130 Units 7.7 Proposed 140 85 Lots SE 1/4 SW of NESE o f N ENW of SESW of SE NE o f S E 20SW 1 / 4 19ONEKA ESTATESNW1 / 4NE1/4 S E o f S E SW o f NW S E o f NW1231514131211109876512345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345687123456123456FENWAY PLACE FENWAY AVE. N.BEACONDRIV E 142ND ST. N.FERRARA AVE. N.141ST COURT NORTHFINALE AVE. N.146TH STREET NORTHFINALE AVENUE NORTH FINLEY AVENUE NORTHUPPER 146TH STREET NORTH4TH AVENUE145TH STREET NORTH147TH STREET NORTHVICTOR GARDENS SE 1/4 SW of NESE o f N ENW of SESW of SE NE o f S E 20SW 1 / 4 19ONEKA ESTATESNW1 / 4NE1/4 S E o f S E SW o f NW1231514131211109876512345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345612111098712345687123456123456FENWAY PLACE FENWAY AVE. N.BEACONDRIV E 142ND ST. N.FERRARA AVE. N.141ST COURT NORTHFINALE AVE. N.146TH STREET NORTHFINALE AVENUE NORTH FINLEY AVENUE NORTHUPPER 146TH STREET NORTH4TH AVENUE145TH STREET NORTH147TH STREET NORTHVICTOR GARDENS GRAPHIC SCALE( IN FEET )1 IN = 50 FT HUGO HOUSING HUGO, MN RENDER 1 7-8-2022 C Copyright 2022 - CRW architecture + design group HUGO HOUSING HUGO, MN RENDER 2 7-8-2022 C Copyright 2022 - CRW architecture + design group HUGO HOUSING HUGO, MN RENDER 3 7-8-2022 C Copyright 2022 - CRW architecture + design group Aster Meadow Apartments- Vadnais Heights, Minnesota Cedar Green Apartments - Blaine, Minnesota Conifer Ridge Apartments - Maplewood, Minnesota 1 Rosemary Place Sketch Plan CITY OF HUGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning and Zoning Application Staff Report TO: Hugo Economic Development Authority (EDA) FROM: Max Gort, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Summit Management LLC. – Rosemary Place Sketch Plan DATE: October 14, 2022, for the EDA Meeting of October 18, 2022 REVIEW DEADLINE (60-days): November 14, 2022 1. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant, Summit Management LLC, is proposing to construct a 90-unit apartment complex on the west side of a 12.96-acre property, of which 7.75 acres are buildable. The property is located to the south of Rosemary Way N and north of Frenchman Road/CSAH 8, west of Festival Foods. The property is bisected diagonally by a 50-foot wide utility transmission line easement. The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for development of the property with an apartment use, where current zoning and land use is commercial. 2. CONCEPT PLAN: Current Zoning The property is currently zoned General Business district (C-2). The C-2 zoning district is designed to provide commercial services which are oriented toward motorists and require visibility from major roads and high volumes of traffic. Current Land Use The property is guided for Commercial (COM) use in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Commercial land use designation provides for commercial, office and retail uses generally concentrated along key transportation corridors. 2 Rosemary Place Sketch Plan General Layout The applicant is showing a proposed 90-unit, 3-story apartment building to be developed in the northwest corner of the parcel. The development would be roughly across from the existing Rosemary Apartments located at 4628 Rosemary Way N. Access to the development would be from Rosemary Way at the northwest and northeast corners of the proposed parking lot. Parking for residents would be provided through a combination of 70 detached garage stalls and 170 surface parking spaces. The proposed apartment building is set on roughly a third of the entire property. The utility easement splits this western third of the property from the remaining eastern two thirds, which have a substantial amount of wetland coverage. Staff did not comprehensively review the site plan as it relates to the City Code or the orientation of the buildings and parking lots, as the applicant wanted to have a high level discussion with the EDA on the zoning and land use. Compliance with City Code and Comprehensive Plan Although the property is guided for Commercial (COM) use in the 2040 Land Use plan, the developer intends to create a multi-family residential use. The applicant has stated that the current plan for the remaining portion of the property is to be extra land for resident walking trails and pet walking areas. However, the applicant has stated that the easterly portion of the property could be used as a commercial lot should the EDA seek additional commercial development. With the development of a residential use on this property, a zoning amendment and comprehensive plan amendment would be required. The property would need to be rezoned to the Medium-density multiple family residential district (R-5), and the land use plan would need to be amended to guide the property for high density residential (HD). The R-5 zoning district allows for a maximum density of 10 units per buildable acre, and 12 units per buildable acre with a PUD. With the current buildable acreage of 7.75 acres, the applicant could feasibly develop an apartment building with 77 units. H owever, the applicant is proposing to create more buildable acreage by filling wetlands on the western portion of the property, and including a pond which sits on formerly buildable land to create a new total of just under 9 buildable acres, allowing for the proposed 90 units. It is unlikely that the amount of wetland fill and impact would be approved by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). If the plan incorporated commercial uses on the remaining portion of the property, the applicant would need to apply for a PUD and for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Mixed-Use (MIX) land use designation. PUDs offer flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of PUD zoning can allow for a greater variety of uses. In exchange for this flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. PUD approval may be granted if the applicant can demonstrate compliance with the following criteria: 3 Rosemary Place Sketch Plan 1. The establishment of PUD zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations, to create or maintain a development pattern that complies with the City's comprehensive plan. 2. The mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not otherwise be accomplished. 3. Variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in this chapter in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporating design elements (e.g., construction materials, landscaping, lighting, open space, etc.) that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. 4. A more creative and efficient approach to land use within the city, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. 5. Preservation and enhancement of natural features and open spaces, including but not limited to the width expansion of greenway corridors, conservation of wooded areas, development of buffer areas, reduction of impervious surface, and utilization of joint facilities and utilities. 6. Maintenance or improvement for the efficiency of public streets and utilities. 7. Establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. It is unclear how the proposed plan would meet the PUD criteria, and the proposed plan would likely change significantly with a PUD application. The applicant has stated that previous attempts of commercial development on the property have not been successful, and that the portion of more buildable property where the apartment is proposed to be located, facing Rosemary Way, is more viable for residential development than commercial. Neighboring properties to the south that are similarly zoned and guided for commercial use are currently occupied by commercial uses, generally following the spirit and intent of the land use designation to provide commercial uses along CSAH 8. If the proposed residential building were constructed on the northerly edge of the property facing Rosemary Way, the commercial uses along CSAH 8 would remain. Staff recommends that the EDA discuss the potential for changing the zoning and land use designation of the property to allow for high density residential use, and whether the applicant should implement a PUD with commercial uses alongside the proposed residential use. Architecture The applicant has indicated that the design of the building would be similar to one of their existing developments in Forest Lake. The exterior of the building is proposed to be a mixture of brick and steel siding with earth tone colors. The individual apartments would feature decks and window shutters. The building would need to meet the city’s Multifamily Design Guidelines. The applicant has provided photos of their comparison property in Forest Lake for a visual representation of the architecture of the building. 4 Rosemary Place Sketch Plan Parks/Trails Park Dedication The developer is required to dedicate land, pay a fee, or a combination of land and fee. At the maximum allowed density of 10 units per acre, the developer is required to 17 percent of buildable acreage. The park dedication fee is $3,400 per unit. The applicant has not made their intentions for meeting park dedication requirements clear at this time. The sketch plan shows a playground and courtyard attached to the building, but it is unclear whether these would be public or used as private amenities for residents. The applicant is currently planning to incorporate walking trails within the remainder of the property to the east of the utility easement. If this area would be incorporated into the city park system, then 1.3 acres of buildable land would need to be used in order to meet the required 17 percent of buildable acreage for park dedication. However, the applicant’s narrative seems to suggest that the trail area would be kept private as a resident amenity. Changes in zoning and land use for this property would need to be evaluated by the Parks Commission for an assessment of the park system in the area and recommendations for park dedication for this property. Streets and Access The applicant’s sketch plan currently shows two access points onto the property on the northwest and northeast corner of the parking lot onto Rosemary Way. A traffic engineer may need to review the proposed access points to understand if Rosemary Way can handle the proposed traffic. Rosemary Way is a collector road and presumably can handle the additional traffic, since high traffic is anticipated for collector roads. If the applicant were to develop a PUD with commercial uses in the remaining portion of the property, additional points of access will need to be provided. Stormwater Management The applicant has not provided plans for stormwater management or water reuse. The applicant will need to develop a stormwater management plan that meets drainage requirements. This will impact the areas that can be used for buildings and development. Utilities The property is served by city sewer and water. The sewer and water system can handle the proposed land use changes. 3. CONCLUSION/ RECOMMENDATIONS: Due to constraints on the property such as existing wetlands that are proposed to be filled, it is not certain what the total buildable area will be in the plan review process. It is unclear in the 5 Rosemary Place Sketch Plan sketch plan whether the applicant would be willing to move forward building fewer units than what is proposed in order to satisfy density requirements. Staff understands that previous attempts to market for commercial uses on this specific property have been unsuccessful. Further, the adjacent properties immediately to the south are fulfilling the vision of a strong commercial corridor along CSAH 8. A case could be made that rezoning and the changes to land use for the property for residential use would not disrupt the general business district along CSAH 8. A case could also be made for a PUD with residential and commercial uses. Staff recommends discussion on the following: • Rezoning and re-designating the use of the property to allow for high density residential, moving away from the original plan for commercial use on the property. • Creating a true mixed-use PUD with residential and commercial uses The applicant is requesting review and comments on a sketch plan for the properties showing the 90 unit apartment building. The applicant would like comments on the following: • Whether residential use would be possible considering current zoning and land use designation. • The use of the east end of the property for commercial PUD versus the planned recreation and walking space. • Whether the plan should incorporate commercial development ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Existing Zoning Map 3. Existing 2040 Land Use Map 4. Applicants Narrative Dated October 12, 2022 5. Applicants Sketch Plan Frenchman Road Everton Avenue NorthV i c t o r P a t h N o r t h Rosemary Way North Private Road 149th Street North Provence Way Nort h M ercantile Drive NorthLeopold LaneFrenchman Road Rosemary Place Location Map Hugo, MN Parcel Boundary selection Roads Hugo Border Parcel Boundary ¯0 100Feet1 in = 333 feet Document Path: S:\Mapping\Emily\LocationSite Maps\2022\Rosemary Place.mxdSite Frenchman Road Everton Avenue NorthV i c t o r P a t h N o r t h Oneka Parkway North149th Street NorthRosemary W a y N o r t h Private Road Victor Hugo Boulevard NorthValjean Boulevard North F a r n h a m Av e n u e No rt h 150th Street North Victor PathEmpress Avenue NorthProvence Way North C o s e tte L a n e N o rth Leopold LaneFrenchman Road Rosemary Place Existing Zoning Hugo, MN Subject Parcel Right of Way Roads Parcel B oundaryZoning Distric ts (LA) Long Term Agricultural (AG) Agricultural (RR) Rural Residential (R-1) Large Lot Single Family Residential (R-3) Single Family Detached Residential (CR-3) Central Residential (R-4) Low Density M ultipl e Family Residential (R-5) Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (NS) Neighborhood Service (RC-1) Restricted Commercial (C-1) Central Business (C-2) General Business (FCB) Future Central Business (BP) Busi ness Park (RI-1) Restricted Industrial (I-3) General Industrial (FUS) Future Urban Service (PUD) Planned Unit Development Water ¯ 0 500Feet 1 in = 500 feet Site Frenchman Road Everton Avenue NorthV i c t o r P a t h N o r t h Oneka Parkway North149th Street NorthRosemary W a y N o r t h Private Road Victor Hugo Boulevard NorthValjean Boulevard North 150th Street North Victor PathEmpress Avenue NorthProvence Way North C o s e tte L a n e N o rth Leopold LaneFrenchman Road Rosemary Place 2040 Land Use Map Hugo, MN Subj ect Parcel Right of Way Roads Parcel BoundaryLandUse Agri cultural (AG) Large Lot Residential (LL) Very Low Density (VLD ) Low Density Residential - (LD) Medium Density Residential (MD ) High Densi ty Residential (HD) Business Park (BP) Commercial (COM) Industri al (IND ) Mixed Use (MIX Publ ic/Quasi-Publi c (PQ) ¯ 0 500Feet 1 in = 500 feet Site Page 1 of 6 Rosemary Place Project Narrative Summit Management, the Applicant, is a renowned property management and development firm that owns and operates several properties throughout the state of Minnesota. With over 30 years of experience developing multi-family properties, Summit Management has a proven track record in building and professionally managing high quality housing. Summit serves thousands of residents annually, and prides itself on providing exceptional management services and outstanding properties and amenities. Summit Management is proud to be a current, active member of the City of Hugo through its Hugo Estates Community and looks forward to participating in the growth of the City through the new Rosemary Place development. The proposed Rosemary Place project will bring in a vibrant multi-family presence, consisting of a state of the art 90-unit, three story apartment building. The proposed location is currently a vacant, commercially zoned lot. Summit Management plans to build 90 multi-family units at a density of 10 units per buildable acre (see Site Plan, attached as Exhibit A for notes and calculations). The Applicant would like to note that it does have a possible commercial PUD lot remaining on the East side of the property, which could be used if the EDA is seeking additional commercial development. Otherwise, the current planned use for that lot is extra land for a resident pet walk and/or walking trail. The building will be designed similarly to Summit Management’s Arbor Ridge Luxury Apartments in Forest Lake (see Exhibit B). The exterior materials of the apartment building will be a mixture of brick, steel siding, trim and window shutters, with decks and screening incorporated around the entire building. The colors will consist of earth tones that complement the palette of the surrounding neighborhood. Some of the proposed uses and amenities of the 90-unit apartment building include the following: • Spacious, bright apartments • Full kitchens with all appliances in every unit • Washer and dryer in every unit • Maintenance of apartments, common spaces and all appliances • High speed internet • Utilities including gas, electric, water, waste and recycling • Individual climate control in every apartment • Community Room • Exercise Room • Outdoor patio with grills and lounge space • Outdoor fitness area Summit Management looks forward to bringing this project to the City of Hugo and fulfilling its continued commitment to providing outstanding properties and amenities for its residents. Page 2 of 6 Exhibit A Rosemary Place Plan Page 3 of 6 Exhibit B REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS * Note: All photos contained in this EXHIBIT B are of Arbor Ridge Luxury Apartments, 1700 8th St SE, Forest Lake, MN 55025. Page 4 of 6 Page 5 of 6 Page 6 of 6 WETLAND-6 = 5,479 SF WETLAND-7 = 10,366 SF WETLAND-5 = 3,139 SF WETLAND-3 = 5,314 SF EXISTING POND = 28,050 SF TOTAL PROPOSED FILLED WETLAND = 24,298 SF NEW BUILDABLE AREA = 390,084 SF (8.95 ACRES) WETLAND CALCULATIONS TARGET BUILDABLE AREA = 392,040 SF (9 ACRES) TARGET PROPOSED FILLED WETLAND = 54,304 SF WETLAND-3 = 2,037 SF ADDITIONAL WETLANDCALCULATIONS TOTAL PROPOSED FILLED WETLAND & EXISTING POND = 54,385 SF NEW BUILDABLE AREA = 392,121 SF (9 ACRES) POND CALCULATIONS TOTAL EXISTING POND = 28,050 SF EXISTING BUILDABLE AREA = 337,736 SF (7.75 ACRES)13'-0 "