11-07-05 PCITEM 3.1
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway. Suite 202. Golden Valley, Ml\J 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 703,231.2581 plar�ners�ir�ac;F�lanniny.corr�
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Laurie Shives / Daniel Licht, AICP
RE: Otsego — Waterfront East; Building E Development Stage Plan
REPORT DATE: 2 November 2005 ACTION DATE: 10 December 2005
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 05.34 CITY FILE: 2005 — 57
BACKGROUND
Landcor Construction, Inc. has submitted a PUD Development Stage Plan for Outlot I of
Waterfront East to construct a 14,600 square foot retail building, known at this stage as
Building E. Parking will also be constructed on Outlot J. The subject site is located at
the northwest corner of future 90th Street and Quantrelle Avenue, east of TH 101. A
PUD District was established on 10 November 2003 with the subdivision of Waterfront
East to specify allowed uses and performance standards for the development, including
the subject site.
Exhibits:
A.
Site Location
B.
Site Plan
C.
Grading Plan
D.
Utility Plan
E.
Building Elevations
F.
Building Floor Plans
ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for
commercial land uses as part of the City's primary commercial area at the intersection
of TH 101 and CSAH 39. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates development of a full
range of retail, service and office type commercial use in this area of the City to serve
both local and regional market needs. The proposed multiple tenant building is
consistent with this goal.
Zoning. The subject site is zoned PUD District with allowed uses the same as set forth
by the B-3, General Business District. No specific uses for the proposed building are
specified on the submitted application, which identifies the building only as retail office
consistent with the Waterfront East PUD District. The applicant has submitted floor
plans specifying general retail uses.
Building Design. The plans indicate that the proposed building will have a total area of
14,634 square feet. The plans indicate that the building will have the appearance of two
stories, but has only one floor of useable space. The building will be "L-shaped" and
connected by an enclosed link area. Individual suites will have separate exterior access
points. The submitted plans show that the primary exterior facade material will be brick.
The proposed building will have architectural interest in the form of varied rooflines for
different sections of the building and the southern entrance of the building will
incorporate an approximately 60 -foot high column with a metal Bermuda -style tower
roof. The proposed building design is consistent with the approved design standards for
the Waterfront East development.
Landscape Plan. A landscape plan has not been submitted. As a condition of
approval, the applicant must submit a landscape plan, which is to be subject to review
and approval of City staff.
Access. Vehicle access to the subject site will be provided by reconstruction of 90th
Street and Quantrelle Avenue, which is being done as a City project. The City has
coordinated plans with MNDoT regarding the pending TH 101 project which will upgrade
the intersection of TH 101 and CSAH 39 to a freeway interchange. Full access to the
subject site will be maintained during the City construction project and the TH 101
project.
The submitted site plan shows that access to the site will be located to the north of
Building E via Street A off of Quantrelle Avenue. There are proposed to be several
access points off of Street A into the subject site's parking area. Access onto Street A
is lined up directly across from a future building site and parking area within Outlot H, as
would be required.
The site plan shows pedestrian access to the site via perimeter sidewalks on all sides of
the building as well as interior lot connections with future development of Building D to
the south. Concrete sidewalks are also shown along both sides of Quantrelle Avenue
and along the east side of Street A.
Off-street Parking. Absent identification of the specific tenants that are to occupy the
proposed building, we cannot accurately determine off-street parking requirements.
Assuming occupancy of the proposed building by retail and/or office uses at one stall
per 200 square feet, 73 off-street parking stalls would be required. Additional parking
M
would be necessary if a restaurant were to occupy some of the building space. Outlot I
shows a total of 70 parking stalls including four handicap accessible stalls.
The applicant is requesting a shared parking agreement between Outlot I (subject site)
and Outlot K to the south to account for the three stall deficit. Parking on Outlot K is
also to be used to off -set a parking deficit on Outlot L. The breakdown of approved and
proposed parking is shown below:
Site
Required
Stalls
Stalls
Provided
Net
Outlot L under construction
108
76
-32
Outlot I and J subject site
73
70
-3
Outlot K (proposed)
17
57
+40
TOTAL
198
203
+5
Occupancy of the building under construction on Outlot L is contingent upon provision of
required parking by construction of the stalls to be provided on Outlot K. Through this
already established condition, sufficient parking stalls will be in place to serve the
proposed building on the subject site.
Off-street loading. The proposed building does not have traditional loading areas,
which is typical of this type of commercial building. The expectation is that the
proposed uses within the building will receive delivers through their individual front
doors. The site plan indicates a truck loading area along the eastern edge of the shared
parking area. Based on a MNDOT minimum turning path template, the submitted plans
show that the turning radii into, out of and within the parking area will not accommodate
a semi tractor -trailer, which is most likely the type of vehicle that would be delivery
supplies to the subject site and utilizing the loading area. The applicant must revise the
submitted plans or submit other documentation that provides proof that semi tractor -
trailers will be able to navigate the proposed turning radii within the subject site.
Lighting Plan. A lighting plan has not been submitted for the exterior building lights or
parking lot lighting. All lighting must have a 90 degree horizontal cut-off directing the
light downward. Proposed lighting must match or be comparable to the lighting shown
in the Otsego Waterfront East Development Standards including a pole height limit of 25
feet or less. The applicant must submit a lighting plan, subject to City staff review and
approval.
Trash Storage. The site plan shows an enclosed trash storage area located in the
southeastern corner of the parking area. The trash enclosure's exterior walls must be
similar or complementary to the principal building and must comply with all other
provisions as outlined in Section 20-16-15.B of the Zoning Ordinance.
Signage. No plans for signage on the subject site have been submitted at this time. All
proposed signs must conform to Chapter 37 of the Zoning Ordinance and the PUD
District Guidelines. A sign permit approved by City staff is required prior to
construction/erection of any signs on the subject site.
3
Grading, Drainage & Utilities. Preliminary construction plans have been submitted.
All grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer.
Final Plat. The City Council has approved final plats for Outlots I and J on 14 June
2005. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must record the approved
final plat documents with Wright County, if they have not already done so.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed project is consistent with the Waterfront East PUD Concept Plan
previously approved and the submitted materials for the development of Outlot L are
compliant with applicable ordinances and design standards. The applicant must submit
additional plans including a lighting plan, landscape plan prior to consideration of a final
plat. We recommend approval of the PUD Development Stage Plan for Building E,
Outlot I of Otsego Waterfront East, subject to the comments in this report and the
conditions outlined below.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
A. Motion to approve the PUD Development Stage Plan for Building E/Outlot I of
Otsego Waterfront East, subject to the following conditions:
Off -Street parking for Outlot I is to be satisfied though joint use of parking
to be constructed on Outlot J. Occupancy of Building E shall be
contingent upon the availability of the number of parking stalls as required
by the Zoning Ordinance.
2. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan illustrating turning radii for
anticipated delivery vehicles, subject to City staff review and approval.
3. Plans for proposed signage shall be submitted and must comply with
Chapter 37 of the Zoning Ordinance and all applicable regulations of the
PUD District.
4. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan, subject to City staff review
and approval.
5. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan, subject to City staff review and
approval.
6. All street construction plans, grading plans and utility plans and related
issues are to be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the application is not
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Waterfront East concept plan.
C. Motion to table.
C. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Bob Fields, Landcor
John Brickley, Landcor
1 inch equals 1 mile
D
OAD
EXHIBIT B
(o
NORTH
GRAPHIC SCALE
m
0
Z
1
9
Ln
IL
Z
0
SITE DATA
ano4sslrPMPAIwmmo: n,swsF
a xas4IUAWAJCUTWT :44m W
4u4nwA3 E PASr Im FWW MGI 4mr SF
QUAD" R wwT ISTFLOOg� 4m,
PAR M STAUSOLfto 1: m
PARNMSTAIUSOM0 J: p
TOTALPAT11 STALLS.' SLr
C
yIl
Iuw alrr AsnuLr
I!
.: 4 um
(����
►J
EXHIBIT B
(o
NORTH
GRAPHIC SCALE
m
0
LEGEND
o.
e
::==a�
IGW DDIY AlNNT
DDNNp MEA WK S,mm
rE�a "��°ra\EmrcMiuwEM
GRADING. DRAINAGE k EROSION CONTROL NOTES
k� kcxla� N ke.ws x bw�ywia.
•w. w w.b..11 eNa. N w a.•n. i mow..
.: :.tee:
.wMw m w q N4
rq�ry e.ba w p�.mue N n...ik mb ..yrn.nv
MI yxr�ww"r .N nx w •Nw b wwa A.ks na.w
w.bs h � pus w wsuxln Ntw
rM1w. N"I pkb .1x1 4mb� M �Ixq'ay."hw� p �jr.�'� W x•
rix
n.b.w .,s w N wNw
Nnrs °1'•DE10 \\
'
UTILITY PLAN GENERAL NOTES
EXHIBIT ^
' C
!!�� ��1
\ \\ \ //�
mrvxrN .aN " •..
IM1� rwM1Nn.nl. x Y.. CFIN Sp..IIIwYm.
�\
Da.e. ar N ot.s. Dy"bn.l .v Ephwby sN
NORTH
w•. ."e nM1w•...b`•rk�.°i..°"..'r�.ax :imn w web rwn °.�r"..r.:""M1`°a..rFi
ra
(
GRAPHIC SCALE
aAlk u.ltkw
= w,bmix m ..ury caPrcn sr.rt OLE c,kl x ur-u.-000x x bM
b M1w. Mx m wk.mny am .uew�m > ur.aN.N .at
,'
//
s
vo;
i.•e: I�iotl a u. pre ovxw m."�'iM1ee� k�x a x�...�b�.k�'�N
ri093 u roO3UO ar w, mm - -
(3 OONIOIIl19)1SV3 - NOHU3IVM
NVId AlIILI fl loopuel �I
'NolarnALWOJ ddld .L$ZLlfO
90d id9 A0799 ads
g
I
Qll �
G
I
Qll �
G
m
k
z
ao
rl
LL
D WEST &SOUTH ELEVATIONS ISSUED FOR
Gi 800w0: MCCOY ARCHITECTS
BUILDING E Z B -2005 p
p 1944 CEDAR LAKE PARKWAY a wwe.et e,w. m. �u„e°i".em smt.'Z�e°.d0
OTSEGO MAIN STREET n 0rssueD: MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 _
9-19-2005 =
v (612) 927-8546
OTSEGO, MINNESOTA w ixwm,Rrxeat1]70
v aa. •-te-mm
AA AT(' I -I 1 I N F
umiu r
1 rrcr 2 a 3 a 140'-0` 4 `t 4.9 — 7 r�
26'-0' 22'-0• 1 22 -0` RO'-6• 25'-4• 2 0`
dd dd
m m
� I i
A dd
1 1 •� b
dd
o w y o
0
ro
n
dd
W W
O
I
1 rKt 26'-0• 2 a 22'-0• <22
'-0'4 4 20'-B`
•r MEw. ��
dd I �1s=ab� t•1aa=b3 1 ��—�_Li i
da
.T
dd dd
u '
Fa' pg
�l r
�a.
26'-0• 22'-0' 22'-0• 22'-0• 24'-D• N'-0•
140'-0`
6
MATCH LINE LINK:
GRID F 676 SF
(676.4222)
GROSS INTERIOR AREA
WEST BUILDING E
a€g
8,923 SF
Y0
(8923.1318)
cc
a.
EAST BLDG. F:
m
5035 SF_
�m
�m
(5035.3992)
awaN
GROSS INTERIOR AREAo't6
O Z
O zZ
0� ,
C) 0
I �3
2
TOTAL PROJECT AREA:
:10311HOHV
ej98
�w
14,634 SQ. FT.
EXHIBIT F
o�v cn
GROSS INTERIOR AREA
CC 5 F— F—
AREAS TAKEN AT FACE OF FOUNDATION
44010J1J11a33
AREAS INCLUDE PIER PROJECTIONS
FLOOR PLAN BASE
MATCH LINE LINK:
GRID F 676 SF
(676.4222)
GROSS INTERIOR AREA
WEST BUILDING E
a
8,923 SF
Y0
(8923.1318)
cc
a.
EAST BLDG. F:
m
5035 SF_
�m
�m
(5035.3992)
awaN
GROSS INTERIOR AREAo't6
O Z
O zZ
0� ,
C) 0
2
:10311HOHV
ej98
�w
EXHIBIT F
o�v cn
MATCH LINE LINK:
GRID F 676 SF
(676.4222)
GROSS INTERIOR AREA
WEST BUILDING E
8,923 SF
Z F-
(8923.1318)
Q Q
GROSS INTERIOR AREA
LLd
(10I.—
CC 0 W
O Z
O zZ
0
Z Z O O
EXHIBIT F
o�v cn
CC 5 F— F—
omoo
BUILDING E
FLOOR PLAN BASE
A2.1 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" NORTH
W 4�901005iA1-130tld-1-1300N 3SVtl tlld 06nOtl01-ZY-.-.
MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
cc: Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, Clerk
Dan Licht, NAC
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Bob Fields, LandCor
John Brickley, LandCor
Truc D. Ho, P.E., Metro Land Surveying & Engineering
From: Ronald J. Wagner, PE
Date: October 4, 2005
Re: Otsego Waterfront East Outlots I & J — Building E
We have reviewed the Construction plans, revised 9/12/05, for the above -referenced
project and would offer the following comments:
Cover Sheet — Sheet 1
1. No comments.
Site Plan — Sheet 2
The B618 concrete curb shall wrap around the entire trash enclosure.
2. A legend shall be provided to describe any symbols (i.e. the hash marks on the
pavement, concrete areas, etc.)
3. The two parking stalls located in the southwest corner of the parking lot (north of
West Building E) do not have sufficient depth. It appears that if two cars were to
reside in said parking stalls at the same time they would collide. Please eliminate
the last parking space along the west side of the parking lot (see redlined plans.)
4. We recommend widening the sidewalk along the west side of West Building E
(adjacent to Quantrelle Avenue) to 7' for pedestrian travel.
\\Ha01\shared docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2500\ot2500bldgervwl.doc
Page 2 of 3
Grading Plan — Sheet 3
The second entrance into the parking lot from the west depicts drainage from the
parking lot into the street. Please revise the gutterline elevations of the curb along
the east side of the entrance.
2. Spot elevations shall be provided for the area between Building E and Building C.
Utility Plan — Sheet 4
1. Additional fire hydrant(s) must be added around the building to provide sufficient
fire coverage.
2. All easements shall be shown on the plans.
3. Easement shall be provided for the trunk storm sewer crossing through Outlots I
and J.
4. The existing sanitary manhole information south of Building E shall be shown on
the plan. The invert information for SMH-1 does not agree with the invert
elevations of the existing manhole (i.e. the existing manhole has invert elevations
of 854.64 and 854.69.) Also, the length of pipe shown on the plan between the
existing manhole and SMH-1 does not agree with the scaled value.
5. Since Outlot J does not have direct access to a public street, ingress/egress
easement is required through the adjacent outlots. (Note: ingress/egress easement
will be required for all outlots north of Outlot I)
6. The 12" watermain along Quantrelle Avenue NE is mis-labeled as 8" watermain.
Also, all fittings and hydrant information shall be shown on the plans.
7. Insulation is required between the 12" watermain and 30" RCP storm sewer.
Also, the watermain shall be lowered so the top of pipe elevation at this location
is 851.00.
8. The legend shall include existing and proposed watermain symbols.
9. The Storm Sewer Casting and Structure Schedule call out a Neenah R-1728
casting for CBMH-43 and CBMH-44. The dimensions of this casting do not
agree with the dimensions of the grate called out on the detail sheet. Please
revise.
10. FES -40 shall be installed at a 900 angle to the detention pond slope (see redlined
plans.)
11. The temporary sedimentation basin shall be designed to have a storage volume of
at least 1800 FT3/acre of contributing drainage area (see redlined plans.)
Ma01\shared docs\MunicipalUotsego22xx\2500\ot2500bldgervwl.doc
Page 3 of 3
Standard Details — Sheet 5
1. City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 201, Water service Detail (2" and larger), shall
be included in the detail sheets.
2. City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 202, Watermain Thrust Blocking, shall be
included in the detail sheets.
City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 204, Hydrant Detail, shall be included in the
detail sheets.
4. City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 300, Standard Sanitary Sewer Manhole, shall
be included in the detail sheets.
5. City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 302, Sanitary Sewer Service Detail, shall be
included in the detail sheets.
6. City of Otsego Standard Plate No. 304, Insulation Detail, shall be included in the
detail sheets.
7. The base course of bituminous in the typical sections for Heavy Duty Pavement
and Parking Lot Pavement shall be Type LV 3. Please revise.
Other considerations
A parking agreement between the owners/operators of Building E and the future
Building between Building E and Building C shall be developed.
We recommend approval contingent on the above comments being addressed.
Resubmittal is required for approval.
\\Ha01\shared docs\Municipal\Aotsego22xx\2500\ot2500bldgervwl.doc
ITEM 3-2
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
`.4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 plan ners(a,nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Laurie Shives/Daniel Licht
DATE: 2 November 2005
RE: Otsego - Zoning Ordinance; Fowl in Residential Districts
FILE: 176.08 — 05.07
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission has had a series of discussions regarding the allowance of
chickens and other small, non -water fowl in residential districts. Generally, the Planning
Commissioners are in favor of allowing such birds in residential districts. The latest
discussion revolved around whether or not potential small fowl owners should be
required to obtain an Administrative Permit. It was decided by the Planning
Commission that an Administrative Permit was too costly for this type of use, thus they
have directed staff to present an alternative.
ANALYSIS
Zoning. Discussions had at the past two Planning Commission meetings have
determined that chickens (and other small, non -water fowl) should be allowed in
residential districts, but limited by density.
Permit. The Planning Commission has determined that a Zoning Ordinance
administrative permit is not the appropriate permit for the request of keeping chickens
and similar small fowl based on cost. Staff still believes that residents seeking to keep
and raise chickens and other small fowl on their property obtain a permit so that
conditions can be attached and the use can be regulated. Staff recommends that a
potential chicken or similar small fowl owner obtains a small animal permit, which would
be issued by the Zoning Administrator. The permit should cost around $25.00 and
would be a "lifetime" permit, similar to the City's dog permit. A resident would have to
obtain a new permit if the number of chickens or other small birds kept on their property
were to change or if the conditions in which the permit was issued were to change.
To obtain the permit a potential owner would need to furnish the City with the number of
birds proposed, the conditions in which the birds are to be kept, including a site plan
showing were the birds are to be housed on their property, and a receipt of purchase or
other documentation showing where the birds are coming from.
Density Allowed. The number of chickens allowed per resident should be regulated
based on an animal unit per acre basis, similar to how farm animals are regulated for
rural farm and non-farm properties. A chicken has a defined animal unit value of 0.01.
Within the Agricultural Districts, a property owner is allowed to have up to 50 chickens
per one acre of land. We recommend a ratio of 0.1 animal units per acre for the
allowance of chickens in residential districts, equivalent to 10 chickens per acre. For
example, if a resident has a 12,000 square foot lot they would be allowed to keep 2
chickens on their property upon approval of a small animal permit.
Accessory Building. Discussion at the Planning Commission meeting on 19
September 2005 concluded that either an attached or detached an accessory building
would be adequate for the housing the chickens. The size of the accessory building will
still be subject to the accessory building standards for each district. We recommend
that the building which houses the chickens be located within a rear yard and that the
side yard setbacks applicable to the structure be at least double those required of the
principal building.
Avian Bird Flu. With the recent awareness and cautioning of the Avian flu through
various articles and newscasts, concerns may arise to the safety of keeping chickens in
residential districts of the City. While this is a valid concern, public health officials are
only cautioning the American public and sending an early warning as to what may
happen if Avian flu strikes. Public health officials are saying, however, that those who
are most at risk are people who come in contact with the infected birds, such as families
who keep chickens near their homes. At this point though, the only precautions being
issued to people in non -affected countries (so far, infected countries include Malaysia,
Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, China, Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkey and
Romania) is to "wash your hands" and "cover your mouth when you cough", similar to
defenses recommended in order to help prevent all viruses and infections. At such time
when the potential for the Avian flu to come to Minnesota is greater, the Planning
Commission and City Council may elect to put in place a moratorium on the allowance
of chickens and similar small fowl in the City limits.
Revised draft amendment. Based on the issues set forth above, we have drafted the
following language that could be considered for further discussion to allow the keeping
of chickens within residential districts of the City:
2
20-26-4: FARM ANIMALS:
G. The keeping and maintaining of chickens, pheasants, doves
pigeons and similar small fowl shall be allowed in all residential
districts by issuance of a fowl keeping license, subject to
compliance with the following standards:
1. The number of fowl allowed per propertv_shall be eauivalent
to 0.1 animal units per acre.
2. The keeping of roosters, male peacocks and water fowl shall
be prohibited.
3. The fowl must be housed within an enclosed accessory
building and fenced outdoor yard that conforms to the
accessory building provisions applicable to the district in
which they are kept.
4. The accessory building containing the fowl must be within a
rear yard and shall be subject to the required setbacks for
principal buildings within the respective zoning district with
the additional stipulation that the side yard setbacks must be
double those required for principal buildings.
5. The keeping and care of such fowl is provided as regulated
by the City Code.
6. The owner/keeper of the fowl shall control the animal manure and
dispose ofit properly.
7. If eggs are harvested, they shall not be offered for sale from the
premises.
8. The fowl keeping license shall apply only to the named applicant
shall not run with the land and may not be transferred It shall
automatically terminate upon the vacation of the property by the
applicant.
9. The fee for the fowl keeping license shall be as set forth by
Section 2-4-1.H of the City Code
CONCLUSION
Following discussions at two Planning Commission meetings, including testimony by an
Otsego resident who currently keeps chickens on his property within the R-3 District, the
Planning Commission has recommended that the keeping of chickens and similar other
small fowl within residential districts be permissible by permit. The preceding
memorandum outlines these recommendations and shall be discussed further at the
Planning Commission meeting on 7 November 2005. Upon review by the Planning
Commission, the next step in the process would be to set a public hearing to formally
consider the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
C. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Timothy and Peggy Boyle
E