10-06-03 PCITEM 3.1
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
RE: Otsego — Nathe Garden Center; Greenhouse Expansion
REPORT DATE: 2 October 2003 60 -Day Date: 24 November 2003
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 03.37 CITY FILE: 2003 -
BACKGROUND
Mr. Ken Nathe, owner of the Highway 101 Market, has submitted a site plan for
expansion of the green house portion of the existing building constructed in 2002. The
proposed 5,175 square foot building expansion is planned to provide additional indoor
storage as well as enclose the outdoor sales area on three sides for wind protection.
The subject site, located at the southeast corner of 90th Street and Quantralle Avenue
(east of TH 101) is zoned PUD District. The applicant's request is being processed as a
site and building plan review as the changes do not present potential significant impacts
to the overall site plan or provisions of the PUD District.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Site Plan
C. Building Elevations
ANALYSIS
Outdoor Sales. The area where the greenhouse is to be expanded was originally
approved as an outdoor sales area. The outdoor sales area was required to be fully
screened from view from the public rights-of-way as part of a landscaping/fence plan.
The proposed greenhouse expansion is to be constructed in such a way as to provide
wind protection for the outdoor sales area from the south and west. The design of the
building also provides a secondary benefit by screening the outdoor sales area.
Building Materials. Plans specific to the proposed greenhouse expansion are not
available. However, the proposed greenhouse expansion is to be constructed from the
same materials, by the same vendor as the existing structure. Provided that the height
of the greenhouse expansion is the same as the existing building and that the brick
wainscoting is continued along the front of the building, the proposed expansion
presents no material issues.
Impervious Surface. Development with the PUD District is limited to 25 percent
impervious surface in order to maintain compliance with applicable Wild and Scenic
River requirements. The impervious surface of the subject site and adjacent outlots
was calculated as 15 percent as part of the original site plan review. This calculation
included the outdoor sales area now being partially enclosed by the expanded
greenhouse as impervious surface area. Therefore, the proposed greenhouse
expansion does not increase the amount of impervious surface on the subject site. Any
grading and drainage issues related to the proposed building expansion are to be
subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
Off -Street Parking. The parking analysis done during the original site plan review
indicated that 45 parking stalls were required. This includes 32 parking stalls for the
outdoor storage area now being partially enclosed by the expanded greenhouse. The
parking ratio used for the outdoor sales area was the same as for the greenhouse floor
area at one stall per 200 square feet. As such, the proposed expansion of the
greenhouse and corresponding reduction in outdoor storage area will not increase the
number of required parking stalls.
Setbacks. The setbacks within this PUD District are based upon those required in the
B-3, General Industrial District. The requirements for a 65 foot front yard setback and
10 foot side yard setback are applicable to the proposed building expansion. The
proposed building is 145 feet from the front lot line and 25 feet from the nearest side lot
line in compliance with minimum setbacks.
CONCLUSION
The proposed expansion of the greenhouse at the Highway 101 Market is consistent
with the development plan for the overall property and presents no significant issues.
Moreover, the addition is positive in that it provides better screening of the outdoor sales
area as viewed from TH 101 consistent with the intent of the original site plan approval.
As such, our office recommends approval of the request as outlined below.
A. Motion to approve site and building plans for a greenhouse expansion at the
Highway 101 Market, subject to the following conditions:
2
The design and construction of the greenhouse is to be the same as that
of the existing structure, including building height and extension of brick
wainscoting along the west facade, subject to City Staff approval.
2. All grading and drainage issues are subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer.
3. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the application is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Motion to table the request.
PC. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Ron Wagner
Andy MacArthur
Ken Nathe
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
�� SITE PLAN
m
s
m
4Ilk
m
rD
e
m
0
Z%
rT F -T1
�v,�
• I I 0 I .I I � ` -
'°��-
'� I I I I I! _ t •,
o----- --
ru
PROPOSED NEW FACILITY FOR:
ryDoDD 1* >R
X
o
till
C R E +:Assoclmr101
MARKETA;;`'ecnc.
OTSEGO• MINNESOTA
.
ITEM 3.2
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
RE: Otsego - Grenins Mississippi Hills 2"d Addition
REPORT DATE: 2 October 2003 120 -DAY DATE: 12 December 2003
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 03.31 CITY FILE: 2003-43
BACKGROUND
Bulow Incorporated has submitted application to subdivide two new residential lots at
the northeast corner of the Grenins Mississippi Hills development located northeast of
Kadler Avenue and CSAH 39. The two lots are to be divided from Outlot A, which
includes the Vintage Golf Course, and would front to Kahler Avenue. This area was not
platted during the original subdivision of the property due to issues with providing on-
site septic systems and overall density of the project.
The subject site is within the rural residential preserve established by the
Comprehensive Plan and guided for rural residential uses. The subject site is zoned R-
C District and also governed by a PUD -CUP established with the original plat approvals
for density and lot design flexibility. The applicant's request requires an amendment of
the PUD -CUP and a preliminaryfnal plat to create the two additional lots. A variance
from Ordinance 91-24 was previously noticed but is not required to for the standard on-
site septic system.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Grenins Mississippi Hills 1St Addition Final Plat
C. Proposed 2nd Addition Preliminary/Final Plat
ANALYSIS
Density. Density within the R -C District is established at a base of four units per 40
acres, with as much as 12 units per 40 acres for creative rural cluster design. The
current density of Grenins Mississippi Hills, which included the Vintage Pro Golf Course
in satisfaction of required open space, is 8.2 dwellings per 40 acres.
The density of the overall development with the two proposed lots would be 9.2
dwellings per 40 acre, within the allowances for the R -C District. This area was not
subdivided into buildable lots at the time of the original plat because on-site sewage
treatment could not be provided by individual systems due to soil conditions. Provided
that the on-site sewage system issue can be resolved, the change in density related to
the two proposed lots is insignificant.
Openspace. Developments within the R -C District must provide at least 50 percent of
the net developable area of a parcel as permanent openspace. The area of the Vintage
Golf Course was platted as Outlot A in satisfaction of the open space requirement. The
area of Outlot A was 72 percent of the net area of the parcel exceeding open space
requirements. Platting Lots 1 and 2 from Outlot A reduces the area of the open space
by approximately 3.3 acres. The remaining area of Outlot A is 68 percent of the total
subdivision, exceeding open space requirements.
Lot Requirements. The table below outlines the lot requirements for the R -C District.
Each of the lots meet the area and width requirements of the R -C District. The
applicant must submit a development plan showing the application of required setbacks
on the proposed lots. Based on the size of the parcels, City Staff is comfortable that
there will be adequate building envelopes for each lot.
Lot
Lot
Setbacks
Area
Width
Front
Side
Rear
Required 1.0ac.
100.Oft.
35ft.
10ft.
50ft.
Lot 1 1.0ac.
106.Oft.
Not Identified
Lot 2 2.2ac.
232.1 ft.
Utilities. Lots within the Grenins Mississippi Pines subdivision are required to provide
on-site septic treatment and water systems. The applicant has submitted designs for
proposed on-site septic systems for the two proposed lots, which are subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer.
Access. The proposed lots each have access to Kahler Avenue, which is an improved
rural section local street. Kahler Avenue has adequate capacity to accommodate the
two proposed lots.
2
Park and Trail Dedication. The City's Parks and Trails Plan does not anticipate
dedication of land for public facilities in this area. As such, the applicant must pay a
cash fee in lieu of land equal to $2,100.00 per dwelling unit as required by Section 21-7-
18.1.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Based on two new residential lots, the required
cash fee in lieu of land is $4,200.00.
Easements. The final plat illustrates typical drainage and utility easements of 12 feet a
the perimeter of the lot and overlying the common side lot line. However, the drainage
and utility easements illustrated on the lots are 10 feet. There is an oversized easement
on the south line of Lot 2 overlying an existing stormwater drainage pipe. All easements
are subject to the City Engineer's review and approval.
Grading. The applicant has submitted grading and drainage plans for the proposed
preliminary/final plat. These plans are subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Criteria. The proposed PUD -CUP amendment is to be considered by the Planning
Commission and City Council based upon (but not limited to) the criteria outlined in
Section 20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment. The proposed development of a golf course surrounded by residential
dwellings was found to be consistent with the intent of the R -C District as part of
the original plat approval. The proposed amendment to subdivide two additional
lots adjacent to the golf course would also be consistent with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan and R -C District provided that all applicable performance
standards are met.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. The area immediately surrounding the two proposed lots is
developed with one -acre lots and single family dwellings. The two proposed lots
will be compatible with these existing uses.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment. The proposed subdivision will be required to meet all applicable
performance standards, including provision of adequate on-site utilities.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The addition of two lots in this developed area will have negligible
effect, except to add two additional home sites with amenity viewsheds of the
existing golf course.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment. Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment. The proposed use is anticipated additional traffic characteristic of
single family uses, which can be accommodated by existing Kahler Avenue.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
CONCLUSION
The proposed subdivision of two additional lots from Outlot A of Grenins Mississippi
Hills is generally consistent with the performance standards of the R -C District.
Provided that required on-site septic systems can be provided for each lot, our office
would recommend approval of the application as outlined below.
A. Motion to approve the PUD -CUP and Preliminary/Final plat for Grenins
Mississippi Hills 2nd Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. The terms and conditions of the PUD -CUP approved 23 June 1999 shall
remain in full force and effect and apply to Lots 1 and 2 of Grenins
Mississippi Hills Second Addition.
2. The design of proposed on-site utility systems shall conform to Ordinance
91-24 and is subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
3. The applicant shall pay a cash fee in lieu of land equal to $2,100 per lot or
$4,200 in satisfaction of park and trail dedication requirements.
0
4. All grading, drainage, easements and utilities are subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
5. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the request based on a finding that the application is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and City Code requirements for on-site sewage
treatment.
C. Motion to table the application.
PC. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Chris Bulow
5
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
4)
.I
EXHIBI
�`�
I
..: I i I i
I`"ul _ "••
II `'.:'I .nr�o.n ,r ..� �n ...•
I
1
7-0 1 1 d 3 0 a 3 I
• 1.O KJ,I • I I
I I wtv I 1 � I I I
I I
I �
EXHIBI
I
90
• 1.O KJ,I • I I
I I wtv I 1 � I I I
I I
I �
Ir>i I I
I I I I
��
'f i'
ti
I n •-
I� 1 i
I I
I I I
Ir
Idl Ia I
I
m
[/�
—+
1 I�
m
y
�rK •
_.
--
11
Ni\
co
I-
Lu
cn
vJ �_ _ _^ I vo I roan - r.�r.cl arw,.,,_1_•
J—LL
Y' C
•,,I' • I
t 1
_ _ --. - -4�e
Q
ZIP
LLj
4,7
Cz
xna
0
Z
I
�
J
-
I
EXHIBI
I
• 1.O KJ,I • I I
I I wtv I 1 � I I I
I I
I �
Ir>i I I
I I I I
��
'f i'
ti
I n •-
I� 1 i
I I
I I I
Ir
Idl Ia I
I
--
77:i-77.47,
EXHIBIT B
� I
0
c
9
ti
y
y
021
Baa;
9Y�$
Vie;=
R99�
333�s ea
'A
a=9
Via.^ S3a
;73d
_.Y9a
Y
"
Y
a
3
i
a
3
a
7
i
9 �
i
8 9
3
a s
]
a
i
9
a
9
g
All
__ s -------1 ---------j ";-- --
e� sasd S P13n'd ii'Ei
00'SLZ M.£C,S£.005
It I
►= �I t
S � vas 5 '=• 1 I
w I I 1 m I
N 1 I
So I :oar-� y I I N 1 N
•` n �0;9� aia � I I I '
6a '�s5a H I I I 1 z I
•' f ' M 076
i
9
4Lz L M.rs.se.00s
��• t—
' Ali , TTiM N�S5111 SMIN3I0 'Y XIOaI A /� STiM • -- SNNitl �
\� 3Mfi 14M 31LL A N06Nil%1 AINDiIN)N-� ;T IgOIB A Y411SM-�/ .
J '
TO/ZZ/6 :A3a
37NVVq OL 1730-6
IV -1d 43A33HONn
EXHIBIT C
Hakanson
1 Anderson
Assoc., Inc.
October 1, 2003
3601 Thurston Avenue, Suite 101, Anoka, MN 55303
Phone: 763/427-5860 Fax: 763/427-0520
ITEM 3.2.13
Mike Brandt, PE
John Oliver & Associates, Inc.
580 Dodge Avenue
Elk River, MN 55330
Re: Lot 1, Block 2,Grenins Mississippi Hills Addition And Grenins Mississippi Hills, 2nd
Addition Individual Septic Systems
Dear Mr. Brandt:
I have reviewed the submitted information for the proposed individual septic system for this Lot
1, Block 2 of Grenins Mississippi Hills Addition. I am assuming that this same septic treatment
system will be used for the remainder of the five lots in Grenins Mississippi Hills Addition and
also for the two single family lots proposed for Grenins Mississippi Hills, 2nd Addition if this first
system is approved by City Council.
The mound system you have proposed is similar to the community system previously reviewed.
The basic difference is that the pretreatment will be performed by a peat biofilter instead of the
synthetic filter box. The other difference is that the distribution to the rock seepage bed is
directly from the gravity filtrate through the peat filter rather than the pressure pipe method.
The same 0.24 GPD/SF loading rate of mound contact with the existing soils will be provided.
My opinion is that the system design will be adequate if the mound's lowest edge is one foot
above the ten-year local flood elevation. In order to verify this condition, we request that you
perform a flood storage analysis on the basin that contributes to this low area and document the
10 year and 100 year storage boundaries for a 24 hour rainfall event. Document the discharge
pipe from the low point and its capacity. Provide the time interval that the edge of the proposed
mounds will be inundated during the 10 year and 100 year storms.
If you have any questions, you may contact me at 763-427-5860.
Sincerely,
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
William L. Morris, Jr., P.E.
cc: Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, Clerk
Tim Roche[, Building Inspector
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Chris Bulow, Property Owner
Civil 6- Municipal ��
Engineering
Land Surveying far
G:\Municipa]\Aotsego2xxx\2271\OT2271 mb.doc
ITEM 3.3
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: John Glomski / Daniel Licht, AICP
DATE: 2 October 2003
RE: Otsego — Otsego Elementary School; Interim Use Permit
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 03.34
BACKGROUND
Elk River Independent School District 728 is proposing to locate a 1,900 square foot
temporary classroom at Otsego Elementary School due to increased enrollment in
excess of building capacity. The subject site, located along CSAH 42, is zoned INS,
Institutional District.
The Otsego Zoning Ordinance does not currently allow for use of temporary classrooms
at school facilities within the City. The School District has requested a Zoning
Ordinance amendment to make allowance for temporary classrooms as an interim use.
The School District has also applied for an interim use permit under the provisions that
may be adopted.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location Map
B. Site Plan (detail)
C. Site Plan (overall)
ANALYSIS
Use. Enrollment increases within the School District has lead to crowding at Otsego
Elementary School. Planning and budgeting requirements for school districts dictate
significant lead up time for capital projects such as expansion of existing buildings or
construction of new buildings, not to mention the time necessary for construction. This
means that there can be lag time between the growth experienced within a City and
expansion of school facilities. Furthermore, school districts are not certain of
enrollments at each school until shortly before each school year and increases from
year to year can be difficult to anticipate.
School districts generally have turned to temporary classroom structures as an interim
means of addressing classroom crowding. These facilities are typically metal sided
manufactured structures that can be anchored at a site as demand dictates. The
Zoning Ordinance currently does not allow for use of such structures. All school
facilities developed in an INS District are required to provide a permanent foundation
and be constructed of masonry exterior materials such as brick or concrete block.
Balancing the School District's needs versus the City's development requlations,
allowance of temporary classrooms as an interim use within the INS District may be the
most appropriate approach. An interim use is established to allow uses that may be
acceptable and appropriate in a given area for a set period of time or when planned
development dictates a replacement of a more appropriate use. The proposed issue
with temporary classrooms relates to conformance with the City's requirements for
public and semi-public buildings mandating permanent foundations and substantial
exterior construction materials.
Draft Amendment. We have drafted the following text that could be added to Section
20-90-3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for temporary classrooms as an interim use:
B. Temporary classroom structures for a public school, provided that:
The interim use permit shall terminate one (1) year from the
date of approval, unless a longer period is approved by the
City Council.
2. The temporary structure shall be subject to all principal
building setbacks and shall not occupy or disrupt on-site
parking, loading or vehicle or pedestrian circulation or
outdoor recreation areas.
3. Off-street parking stalls shall be provided for the temporary
structure as required by Section 21 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. Any exterior lighting shall comply with Section 20-16-17 of
this Chapter.
5. The structure shall meet all requirements of the State
Building Code.
2
6. Provisions for water and sewer service for the temporary
structure shall be subject to review and approval of the
Building Official.
Site and Building Plan. The following issues related to site and building plan review
for the proposed temporary structure at Otsego Elementary:
Location. The proposed 1,900 square foot temporary classroom is to be located
northeast of the existing school building, near Door #6. The location of the
temporary structure is approximately 80 feet from the property line from the
exception parcel to the east and more than 435 feet from the north side lot line.
The side lot line setback is 100 feet. The proposed building location meets all
principal building setbacks.
The location of the temporary structure will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle
circulation and does not interfere with outdoor play areas. The location of the
temporary classroom is in an area indicated to be grass surface on the site plan.
Gravel or other material that can withstand having the structure over it and will
control dust must be placed on the site of the temporary structure, subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer.
Parking. Elementary schools are required to provide one parking stall per
classroom, plus one stall per 50 students. The proposed temporary structure
includes two classrooms. We assume the capacity of the class rooms will not be
more than 100 students. As such, the proposed temporary classrooms would
require a most four additional parking stalls.
The Planning Report dated 17 February 1994 identified a parking demand of 113
parking stalls for the existing building and a supply of 109 stalls. The deficit in
parking stalls was off -set by bus stalls that could be used for cars in an overflow
situation providing a total of 139 parking stalls. Based on the current supply,
there is adequate off-street parking for the temporary classrooms.
■ Utilities. The proposed temporary classroom will not be connected to water and
sewer utilities. Facilities in the existing principal building will be used for drinking
water and restroom needs.
■ Building Permit. A building permit will be required to locate the temporary
structure to the subject site. All building code issues are subject to review and
approval of the Building Official.
Permit Term. The proposed language for the Zoning Ordinance amendment would
limit the use of the temporary classrooms to one year unless extended by the City
Council. The intent of the draft provision is to ensure that such structures are in fact
temporary. The School District will likely ask for longer use of the temporary
3
classrooms at Otsego Elementary due to the time involved with expanding the building
or building a new school. The Planning Commission and City Council may take these
considerations under advisement and set a longer period for allowing the temporary
classrooms.
Criteria. Applications to amend the Zoning Ordinance and applications for an interim
use permit are to be evaluated based upon (but not limited to) the criteria outlined in
Section 20-3-21 and 20-4-2.17 of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan states that public facilities are to provide
the highest standards of design to serve as examples to private development,
which is exemplified by the design and construction of Otsego Elementary
School. However, the demands of public planning and finance dictate significant
lead time for capital projects such as school expansions or new school buildings.
As such, it is necessary to consider allowance of temporary classroom facilities
as an interim measure until more permanent facilities can be provided.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The proposed location of temporary classroom facilities will not
significantly alter the compatibility of the school use with surrounding properties.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The proposed location of temporary classrooms as an interim use will
be required to meet all applicable perfonnance standards to protect site function
and compatibility.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment. The proposed interim use will allow for better delivery of school
programs and allow time to plan and budget for expansion of the existing school.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
4
Comment. The proposed use is not anticipated to generate significant additional
traffic.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
CONCLUSION
Providing for the educational needs of the City's children is an essential service in the
community. Allowance of temporary classrooms is necessary to accommodate the
necessary planning and budgeting process to expand existing school facilities or
construct new buildings to keep pace with the rate of new development in growing
school districts. Subject to approval of the text amendment allowing temporary
classrooms as interim use within the INS District, the proposed temporary classroom at
Otsego Elementary School will be consistent with applicable performance standards.
Decision 1 - Zoning Ordinance (Text) Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to allow temporary
classrooms as an interim use in the Institutional District.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
C. Motion to table the application.
Decision 2 - Interim Use Permit
A. Motion to approve the IUP allowing the construction of a building for temporary
classrooms in the Institutional District based on a finding that the request is
consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The interim use permit shall terminate one (1) year from the date of
approval, unless a longer period is approved by the City Council.
5
2. A building permit will be required to locate the temporary structure to the
subject site and all building code issues are subject to review and
approval of the Building Official.
3. The temporary classroom is located upon a gravel or other type surface to
control dust and drainage, subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
4. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the application is inconsistent with the provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Motion to table the application.
PC. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Ronald Bratlie
rel
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
2
ti
52 'e
0o��a�l
S2 / \
V \ V
EXISTING
BUILDING
SITE FLAN 1\
I — 3sD ->a 4 ►
NORTH
EXHIBIT B
V k
o�
.fit 0.�� �, �Y-� � �• �/j�
EXISTING
BUILDING
SITE FLAN 1\
I — 3sD ->a 4 ►
NORTH
EXHIBIT B
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------------------------r—
/*
lit
7
uj
ce
g0
0
•
Ln
kn
uj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------------------------r—
/*
lit
ITEM 3.3.0
ENGINEERING REVIEW Review No. 1
Hakanson Commercial Subdivision
Anderson
s nn Preliminary Plat Review
for the City of Otsego
by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to: Mike Robertson, Administrator
cc: Judy Hudson, City Clerk
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Jeff Shopek, P.E., Loucks Associates
Bob Fields, LandCor Construction, Inc.
Steve Fischer, LandCor Construction, Inc.
Reviewed by:
Ronald J. Wagner, P.E.
Shane Nelson, E.I.T.
Date:
September 23, 2003
Proposed
Development:
Otsego Waterfront East
Location
of Property:
A portion of the E %Z of the SE '/4 of Sec. 15 T121 N R23W and a
portion of the W'/2 of Sec. 14 T121 R23W located in Wright
County, Minnesota
Applicant:
LandCor Construction, Inc.
9464 Hemlock Lane
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Developer:
LandCor Construction, Inc.
Owner: Waterfront East LLC
Purpose: Provide commercial and townhouse development along TH 101
and the Mississippi River
Jurisdictional Agencies
(but not limited to): Wright County
Mn/DOT
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Permits Required
(but not limited to): Wright County R.O.W.
NPDES
Mn/DOT R.O.W.
Mn/DOT Stormwater Permit
Page 1
G:\Mun icipa IVlotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW 1.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
EXISTING CONDITIONS
PRELIMINARY PLAT
STREETS
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
WETLANDS
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
ENVIRONMENTAL
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
Page 2
1\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW1.doc
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Title Sheet, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Existing Conditions, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Site Plan, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Site Layout Plan, not dated, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Plat, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Grading, Drainage, & Erosion Control Plan, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks
Associates
Preliminary Utility Plan, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Grading Details, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Utility Details, dated 8/26/03, by Loucks Associates
Preliminary Landscape Plan, not dated
ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surrey, dated 8/11/2003, by Loucks Associates
City of Otsego Engineering Manual, March 1999, 5/12/03 Revision
Trunk Stormwater Facilities Study for Portions of Mississippi Watershed District, Feb. 2000
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, February 1991, Amendments through
October 14, 2002
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Revise to depict floodway fringe zones on the plan.
2. Call out existing 100 -year flood elevations for the Mississippi River and any
sedimentation basin within 150' of the proposed plat. (21-6-2.B.9.)
3. Depict existing easements on the plan. (21-6-2.B.4.)
4. It is unknown what the line crossing T.H. 101 just to the west of the trunk watermain
and sanitary sewer stubs represents. Please label.
5. The plan shall be easily readable. Much of the text is too small to be legible.
6. Street names shall be labeled on the plan. (21-6-2.B.4.)
Page 3
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\Municipal\Aotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW1.doc
7. Existing zoning classifications for land in and abutting the proposed plat shall be
shown on the plan. (21-6-2.B.2.)
8. Identify name and ownership of adjoining subdivided and unsubdivided land. (21-6-
2.6.6.)
9. Developer shall investigate, with the help of the City, Mn/DOT deeding back
Quantrelle Ave NE and 90th Street NE right-of-way so more options are available
when setting intersections and building locations.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Preliminary plat shall clearly depict all lots, blocks, and outlots. Lot and block
numbers shall be labeled. (21-6-2.C.6)
2. Existing contours, proposed pond grading, and grading notes are not considered
necessary on the Preliminary Plat sheet when a separate Preliminary Grading,
Drainage & Erosion Control Plan is provided within the plan set.
3. It does not appear that the Quantrelle Avenue NE right-of-way is being properly
depicted. Quantrelle Avenue NE and 90th Street NE are under Mn/DOT control and
needs Mn/DOT approval for vacation.
4. Although no floor elevation is given, the proposed underground parking appears to be
much below the 100 -year flood elevation of the Mississippi River, which would not be
allowed.
5. Overall, consider "cleaning up" the Preliminary Plat sheet to depict only the pertinent
information. Information such as building and parking lot layouts, first floor
elevations, building types, parking stall counts, and retaining wall information shall be
removed from the Preliminary Plat sheet, as that information is on the Site Plan.
6. We recommend revising the site map (zooming out) to show a larger area. Also, we
recommend shading or hatching the site to clearly depict the limits.
STREETS
The intersection of Quantrelle Avenue and 90th Street is too close to the intersection
with the future on-ramp to Trunk Highway 101. The intersection shall be moved to
the east.
2. Layout of proposed streets, public right-of-way's, and street names shall be depicted.
Include horizontal curve information. (21-6-2.C.1.)
3. Include typical sections for streets and parking lots. Bituminous shall be in
accordance with Mn/DOT 2350. Type 8618 curb and gutter will be required.
Page 4
Ma01\Shared Docs\Municipa[\Aotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW1.doc
4. Although sufficient data to was not provided, streets do not appear to meet City
standards for public streets.
TRAFFIC/ACCESS ISSUE
1. Access will be provided by Trunk Highway 101 and 90th Street NE. Mn/DOT has
plans that a future 90th Street NE interchange will be constructed at the T.H. 101
crossing.
2. Public right-of-way from 90th Street NE to Quantrelle Avenue south of the proposed
plat must be maintained.
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
NWL, 2 -YR, 10 -YR, and 100 -YR elevations shall be called out for all sedimentation
basins.
2. All sedimentation basins must be constructed per City standards. The permanent
pool average depth shall be 4' minimum, 10' maximum. Basins shall have a 10' wide
bench at a 10:1 slope beginning at the NWL, shall have a maximum side slope of 4:1
above the NWL and a maximum side slope of 3:1 below the 10:1 bench. All
sedimentation basins shall utilize a skimmer structure. (5.0.E)
3. 1' of freeboard shall be provided from the 100 -year pond elevation to the top of the
perimeter berm or pond limits.
4. Garage floor shall be a minimum of 18" above the adjacent street. (21-7-4.C.)
5. Soil boring locations shall be shown on the plan.
6. Show the overhead wires and easements on the plan.
WETLANDS
1. Submit a wetland delineation report or a certificate stating that no wetlands are
present.
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
1. Submit a complete stormwater drainage report, as outlined in Appendix C, Section
7.0 of the Engineering Manual, for review.
2. Although no computations have been submitted for review, it appears that the
stormwater ponds may not have sufficient storage.
Page 5
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\MunicipaMotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW1.doc
SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM
1. A sanitary sewer stub shall be provided to the property to the south for possible future
connection. This sanitary sewer line must follow the most efficient route to the serve
areas south of the proposed plat in order to maximize areas that can be served by
gravity sewer. SAC credit will be given for any extra depth or extra sewer lines
required.
2. All sanitary sewer manholes shall be coated inside and out with hi -build tneme tar
46H-413 or approved equal.
3. Chimney seals are required for all sanitary sewer manholes.
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
1. Hydrant spacing shall be a maximum of 300'.
2. The watermain shall be internally looped wherever possible. Additional lines are
needed for the loops.
3. Watermain must be looped under T.H. 101 to 88th Street NE. Some WAC credit will
be given.
ENVIRONMENTAL
1. Submit a statement certifying the environmental condition of the site. (21-6-2.B.10.)
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
1. Submit a geotechnical report for review. (21-6-2.B.11.)
2. Submit a Letter of Map Revision to FEMA, as a good portion of the site is located
within the floodplain of the Mississippi River. Without this "LOMR" the properties may
have difficulties being insured.
3. Submit plans to Minnesota DNR for review.
4. Submit plans to Mn/DOT for review.
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
Not recommend for approval. Review was not able to discuss all aspects due to
incompleteness of preliminary plans. Revise and resubmit for review.
Page 6
\\Ha01\Shared Docs\MunicipalWotsego2xxx\2272\ot2272RVW1.doc
ITEM 3.4
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
RE: Otsego —Waterfront East; PUD Development Stage Plan
REPORT DATE: 2 October 2003 60 -Day DATE: 26 October 2003
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 03.33 CITY FILE: 2003 -
BACKGROUND
Landcor Construction, Inc. has submitted plans for development of 270,000 square feet
of commercial businesses and 60 residential townhouse uses. The project entitled
"Waterfront East" is to be constructed on approximately 50 acres located east of Trunk
Highway 101 and adjacent to the Mississippi River. The commercial uses include a
movie theater, supermarket, retail stores and restaurants.
The subject site is guided for commercial uses by the Comprehensive Plan within the
East Sanitary Sewer Service District. The current zoning of the subject site is A-1,
Agriculture Rural Service District and the site is also within the WS, Wild, Scenic
Recreational River Overlay District related to the Mississippi River. The applicant's
request involves consideration of a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the site to PUD,
Planned Unit Development District, PUD Development Stage Plan and preliminary plat.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Existing Conditions
C. Site Plan
D. Preliminary Plat
E. Landscape Plan
F. Commercial Building Elevations
G. Residential Building Elevations/Floor plans
H. Grading Plan
I. Utility Plan
ANALYSIS
EAW. The project requires preparation of an EAW in accordance with Minnesota Rules
4410.4300, Subp. 32 for a mixed commercial/residential development with more than
200,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The developer submitted an EAW dated
26 September 2003 for publication in the 13 October 2003 EQB Monitor. As required
by Minnesota Rules and Section 38 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission
must consider the EAW during the 30 day comment period. Furthermore, the City
Council cannot act on the EAW (and accordingly the preliminary plat) until after the
close of the 30 -day comment period, which ends 12 November 2003. City Staff will
schedule consideration of the EAW (and any comments received) by the Planning
Commission for their meeting on 3 November 2003. The City Council would then act on
the EAW and the preliminary plat at their meeting on 24 November 2003.
Zoning. The proposed uses are to be developed under a PUD District. The use of a
PUD District is necessary to allow for the proposed mix of commercial and residential
uses, integrated site design for the commercial project, specific architectural and site
design controls in the form of design guidelines and flexibility from the provisions of the
current Wild and Scenic District performance standards in favor of those proposed as
part of the DNR's updated Mississippi Scenic River Management Plan. In considering
the proposed PUD District, the decision of the Planning Commission and City Council
are to be based upon (but not limited to) the criteria outlined in Section 20-3-21 of the
Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for commercial
land use as part of the City's primary service center focused around the TH
101/CSAH 39 intersection. The proposed mix of 270,000 square feet of
commercial uses including a theater, supermarket, retail stores and restaurants
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges the current Mississippi River Wild,
Scenic and Recreation River management plan, implemented through Section 95
of the Otsego Zoning Ordinance, as restricting commercial use of the site.
However, the DNR initiated an update of the management plan in 1998 and
released a draft document that would potentially make allowances for
commercial land use in this area.
Although not formally adopted, the City of Otsego intends to utilize the
performance standards outlined the draft management plan through a PUD
District in order to implement its Comprehensive Plan. The City seeks to realize
a project consistent with its goals for commercial development of the subject site
2
while at the same time consistent with the intent of protecting the Mississippi
River corridor as a valuable natural resource.
The proposed development plan includes 60 residential units in 13 buildings
along the Mississippi River. Although not anticipated by the Comprehensive
Plan, the proposed residential uses offer a land use more compatible with the
natural river corridor, create immediate market support for the proposed
residential use and take better advantage of the site's amenities than the
commercial uses oriented towards TH 101 based on market factors.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment: The subject site is situated between TH 101 and the Mississippi River
in the northeast part of the community. The only adjacent use is the Highway
101 Market, a garden and landscape supply store. The proposed mix of
commercial and residential uses is ideally oriented to take advantage of the
amenities available to both land uses. Furthermore, the proposed development
provides an opportunity to buffer the Mississippi River corridor from the impacts
associated with traffic on TH 101.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The proposed use will conform to applicable performance standards
of the Zoning Ordinance and specific approvals granted through the PUD
process. Specific to the Wild and Scenic District performance standards, the
City's intention is to implement the requirements outlined in the draft
management plan:
3
Existing
Proposed
District
Subdist. C
Rivertown
Land Use
Single Famil
Local
Lot Size
2.5ac.
Local
Lot Width
200ft.
Local
Density
1 unit
Local
Water Setback
100ft.
100ft./75ft.
Tributary Setback
100ft.
100ft. /75ft.
Structure Height
35ft.
Local
Bluff Setback
20ft.
30ft.
Max. Impervious
25%
25%
1. 100ft. is unsewered,
75ft. if sewer.
3
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed use will have a positive impact on the community,
expanding retail and service business opportunities and increasing the local tax
base. The project also provides for additional public access to the Mississippi
River corridor and enhancement of natural buffers protecting its character.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: The proposed use is anticipated to generate significant additional
traffic. Improvements to provide capacity for existing traffic and that generated
by the project are currently be planned for construction in 2006.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment. The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity provided that it is phased with expansion of sanitary sewer
and water capacities and adequate improvements are made to local and regional
transportation systems as currently planned.
Lot Area and Width. With a PUD District, the City has the flexibility to determine
appropriate lot area and width requirements for an integrated project. Rather than a set
area, the necessary land area to accommodate a project is a function of building size,
greenspace, ponding requirements and parking. These issues are evaluated in
subsequent paragraphs in detail.
The only set standard we would seek to apply to the project applies to the residential
element. Section 20-17-9 of the Zoning Ordinance specifies a minimum lot area per
unit of 5,000 square feet for townhouses. Based on 60 units, a minimum area of 6.89
acres must be provided for the proposed townhouse uses. The area on the preliminary
plat currently provided for the residential dwellings is 9.69 acres. This area will be
reduced with dedication of a public buffer area and trail along the Mississippi River,
however.
M
base. The project also provides for additional public access to the Mississippi
River corridor and enhancement of natural buffers protecting its character.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: The proposed use is anticipated to generate significant additional
traffic. Improvements to provide capacity for existing traffic and that generated
by the project are currently be planned for construction in 2006.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity provided that it is phased with expansion of sanitary sewer
and water capacities and adequate improvements are made to local and regional
transportation systems as currently planned.
Lot Area and Width. With a PUD District, the City has the flexibility to determine
appropriate lot area and width requirements for an integrated project. Rather than a set
area, the necessary land area to accommodate a project is a function of building size,
greenspace, ponding requirements and parking. These issues are evaluated in
subsequent paragraphs in detail.
The only set standard we would seek to apply to the project applies to the residential
element. Section 20-17-9 of the Zoning Ordinance specifies a minimum lot area per
unit of 5,000 square feet for townhouses. Based on 60 units, a minimum area of 6.89
acres must be provided for the proposed townhouse uses. The area on the preliminary
plat currently provided for the residential dwellings is 9.69 acres. This area will be
reduced with dedication of a public buffer area and trail along the Mississippi River,
however.
Impervious Surface. One area where the development plan is in conflict with both the
current and proposed Wild and Scenic District performance standards is impervious
surface. The current and proposed Wild and Scenic District performance standards
would limit impervious surface for any development to not more than 25 percent of the
Townhouse Unit Design. The townhouse area is not shown as part of the preliminary
plat in lots/blocks, which is appropriate given the current lack of sewer capacity for
residential development within the east sanitary sewer service district. The preliminary
plat should be revised to provide an outlot for the townhouse area.
We did not receive architectural plans for the proposed townhouse buildings that
included scaled elevations and identification of exterior building materials. These plans
must be submitted. The artist rendering of the proposed townhouse units indicates that
the structures have multiple units per building consisting of three-story walk-up units
with tuck under garages. The floor plans submitted with the application indicate a two
story structure with an area of 1,162 square feet.
Building Height. Under the current WS District requirements and those applied to the
B-3 and R-6 District, no structure in the PUD District may exceed a height of 35 feet.
Landscaping. A landscaping plan has been submitted. The landscaping plan
indicates general planting types and locations for the commercial portion of the project.
A more detailed plan must be submitted indicating the specific species, size, quantities
and location of proposed plantings. Landscaping must also be addressed for the
residential area of the development, including an inventory of trees along the Mississippi
River. Supplemental trees will be required to be planted between the proposed
townhouses and Mississippi River in areas where the vegetation may be less
significant.
Access. The subject site is currently accessed via 90th Street and Quantrelle Avenues,
which are both MNDoT rights-of-way. The roadways within the project generally do not
meet City design standards and are assumed to remain private in that the entire area
functions like a private shopping center. The proposed development plan would require
vacation of a portion of Quantrelle Avenue north of 90th Street, is subject to MNDoT
approval.
The proposed development is anticipated to generate significant traffic. Studies
completed as part of the Waterfront West development demonstrated poor traffic
conditions at the existing signalized intersection of TH 101 and CSAH 39/90th Street.
Alleviation of these conditions, which the proposed project would likely worsen, requires
construction of an overpass and interchange ramps between TH 101 and CSAH 39/901h
Street. MNDoT has announced funding for construction of an interchange at TH 101
and CSAH 39/901h Street beginning in 2006. No plans for the interchange have been
developed, but MNDoT officials and the City Engineer believe a standard diamond
design is the preferred alternative. The proposed development plan does not reflect a
standard diamond design for the TH 101 and CSAH 39/901h Street interchange. The
space needs for the proposed interchange design will likely impact the design of the
project significantly, requiring major changes to the current layout. Until a preliminary
design for the interchange is prepared, approval of the preliminary plat may be
premature because a functional intersection between TH 101 and CSAH 39/90th Street
is necessary to support traffic that will be generated by the project.
C1
The proposed roadway providing access to the residential units is a 30 foot section.
The City typically requires only a 28 foot street section for local residential public
streets, with a five foot wide sidewalk on one side. All though this roadway will remain a
private drive, the section design should reflect the City's local street standard. The
south end of this roadway is to be a bridge crossing over a connection between two
stormwater drainage ponds. Plans for this bridge, also to be a private structure, must
be submitted and are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
The design of the roadway leading to the residential units at the intersection of the
movie theater parking should also be reconsidered. The current design encourages
traffic flow to the residential areas versus the commercial parking lots where the
majority of traffic is likely going. The roadways should be revised to provide more direct
traffic flow into the parking lot and ramp and require turning movements to access the
residential area. Revisions of the roadways to require additional maneuvers to reach
the residential areas will likely discourage through traffic.
Off -Street Parking. The site plan shows that all parking stalls have been designed to a
9 -foot by 18 -foot dimension, with 24 -foot drive aisle widths as required by Section 20-
21-4.1-1.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The number of required off-street parking stalls has
been analyzed on an individual use and project basis, as shown in the table below:
Location
Use
Net
Area
Requirement
Required
Stalls
Proposed
Stalls
Net
Lot 1
Restaurant
5,040sf.
1/40sf. of dining +
1 /80sf. of kitchen
104
230
+115
Lot 2
Restaurant
5,040sf.
1/40sf. of dining +
1/80sf. of kitchen
104
124
+9
Lot
—3---Y—heater
55,040sf.
1 per 4 seats +
1 per 2 employees
550
776
+76
Retail
13,500sf.
1/200sf.
68
Retail
13, 500sf.
1 /200sf.
68
Lot 4
Retail
7,200sf.
1/200sf.
36
327
-20
Retail—
23, 760sf.
1 /200sf.
119
Retail
31, 500sf.
1 /200sf.
156
Lot 5
Lot 6
Supermarket
Retail
36,000sf.
7,920sf.
1/200sf.
1/200sf.
180
40
230
68
+30
-99
Restaurant
5,355sf.
1/40sf. of dining +
1/80sf. of kitchen
110
Lot 7
Retail
17,370sf.
1/200sf.
87
163
+66
Lot 8
Restaurant
7,200sf.
1/40sf. of dining +
1/80sf. of kitchen
149
124
-42
Lot 9
Lot 10
Retail
Retail
7,488sf.
7,488sf.
1/200sf.
1/200sf.
37
37
92
86
+50
+9
Retail
6,30 f.
1 /200sf.
32
TOTAL
249,701sf.
1,877
2,220
+343
NOTES: Restaurant uses assume 1/3 Kitchen and 2/3 dining area
At this time, it is not known exactly how many seats or employees the proposed theater will have.
7
The parking analysis indicates a collective surplus of 343 parking stalls. While some
individual sites have a shortage of parking stalls, surpluses on adjacent lots provide
sufficient overall supply. A cross parking and access easement will be required over
Lots 1- 10 of the development under the PUD District to allow for cross parking. Given
the amount of surplus parking, we would recommend that the 59 parking stalls facing
the drive aisle parallel to TH 101 at the west side of Lots 4 and 5 be removed. This
area may be planted with two staggered rows of boulevard and ornamental trees to
minimize the visual mass of the parking field in front of the supermarket and retail stores
as viewed from TH 101.
The remaining surplus parking is positive in that it allows some flexibility in leasing the
tenant spaces, particularly for Lots 6-10, where a small restaurant may seek to locate.
Restaurants require approximately 16 more parking stalls than general retail space per
1,000 square feet of floor area. A condition of the PUD development stage plan should
be that the total floor area devoted to restaurant uses is not to exceed 25,150 square
feet unless approved as part of an amended development plan.
Parks and Trails. Basic park and trail dedication required by Section 21-7-18 of the
Subdivision Ordinance is outlined below:
Use
Development
Dedication
Land
Cash Fee
Plan
Requirement
Dedication
Dedication
Commercial
40.19ac.
10% land or
4.02ac.
$281,330
$7,000/ac.
Residential
60 du / 9.69ac.
17% land or
1.65ac.
$126,000
$2,100/du.
TOTAL
- -
- -
5.67ac.
$407,330
As a PUD District, the City is not limited to only requiring the land and/or cash fees in
lieu of land specified by Section 21-7-18 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Dedication of all
or a part of the setback area from the OHWM as a buffer zone outlot with a paved trail
will be required to allow public access to the Mississippi River. Because the dedication
is required in order to maintain compliance with the intent of Wild and Scenic
requirements, no park and trail credits will be granted.
The applicant is also proposing a pedestrian bridge be constructed over TH 101
connecting the Waterfront West development to the subject site. The pedestrian bridge
is an amenity both to the project in terms of potential business interchange with patrons
at Waterfront West and to the community by facilitating access to the Mississippi River
and expanding the trail system. The City Council may elect to credit the park and trail
cash fees in lieu of land to be collected from the subdivision of the subject site to this
project with the balance to be paid for by the developer. Specific plans must still be
submitted for the bridge. Construction of the bridge is subject to further review by the
City Engineer and approval of the City Council and MNDoT.
Pedestrian sidewalks are shown along both sides of the driveway paralleling TH 101
extending to the townhouse uses. The sidewalk should be extended along the front of
the townhouse dwellings and to provide multiple connections to the trail along the
Mississippi River. A pedestrian sidewalk extending from the south side of the
supermarket to the main street area should also be provided.
Lighting. No plans for exterior lighting have been submitted. This is a significant issue
given the proximity of the subject site to the Mississippi River and must be reviewed. All
light fixtures must be of the same type and design as those specified by the PUD
Design Guidelines and used in the Waterfront West Development. A photometric
lighting plan shall be submitted for review and approval for compliance with Section 20-
16-17 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Signs. Plans for freestanding signs and wall signs have not been submitted. All signs
must comply with the provisions of the PUD Design Guidelines and Section 37 of the
Zoning Ordinance. Only one freestanding sign shall be allowed per lot and only for the
uses of Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5. All freestanding signs must be located on the property on
which the business identified is located as the City strictly prohibits off -premises
business signage. A sign permit is required prior to construction of any signs.
Grading Plan. The applicant has provided a preliminary grading plan. The grading
plan includes a number of retaining walls. The design and construction of the retaining
walls are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
The grading plan proposes filling much of the property that is within the 100 -year
floodplain of the Mississippi River. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) is required from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to formally remove the property from the floodplain.
Without the LOMR, the areas of the development within the 100 -year floodplain are
subject to the performance standards for uses within a floodplain outlined by Section
20-94-7.13 and 20-94-7.0 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Utility Plan. Plans have been submitted for extension of sanitary sewer and water
utilities from stubs located during construction of the Waterfront West development.
These plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. The City has
approximately 67 REC of sanitary sewer service capacity remaining to be allocated from
the 400,000 gpd. east waste water treatment plant. As a condition of approval, the
applicant will be required to agree that preliminary plat approval does not guarantee
access to sanitary sewer capacity, which is only allocated to approved final plats with
executed development contracts consistent with City policy.
Development Contract. Upon approval of a PUD Development Stage plan, the
applicant is required to enter into a development contract. A PUD development
agreement specifies the terms conditions and applicable flexibilities approved as part of
the PUD District, as well as standard provisions regarding property development. The
development contract is subject to review and approval of the City Attorney.
E
CONCLUSION
The proposed development is consistent with the City's goal for a primary commercial
service area located around the CSAH 39 / TH 101 intersection. Use of a PUD District
to provide for development of the project is necessary due to the mix of commercial and
residential uses, design issues and, most significantly, flexibility in meeting the intent of
existing Wild and Scenic River requirements. However, action on a PUD Development
Stage Plan and preliminary plat applications is premature for three major reasons:
A preliminary design for the proposed interchange at CSAH 39 and TH 101,
which is necessary to support traffic generated by the project, must be prepared
to determine space needs and intersection locations.
2. The applicant must revise the development plans to incorporate specific low
impact development measures mitigating the amount of impervious surface
within the project, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.
3. The mandatory environmental review process establishes a timeline that the
Planning Commission and City Council must follow in order to receive and
respond to agency comments on the proposed development. City Staff expects
potentially significant comments from the DNR and MNDoT.
Furthermore, the submitted plans lack sufficient detail and information for a PUD
Development stage plan approval. Because the City Council cannot act on the
preliminary plat until after the close of the EAW comment period, the applicant has time
to prepare and submit additional information for further review. As such, our office
recommends that the application be tabled until the Planning Commission meeting on
12 November 2003 with direction that the applicant is to provide additional information
responding to the comments outlined under Decision A.
A. Motion to approve a rezoning to PUD District, PUD General Development Stage
Plan and preliminary plat for Waterfront East, subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of the preliminary plat does not guarantee sanitary sewer
capacity. Sanitary sewer capacity shall only be allocated to approved final
plats with executed development contracts to assure the City of timely
development.
2. The submitted EAW is to be processed in accordance with Minnesota
Rules and Section 38 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The applicant shall revise the development plans to utilize Low Impact
Development techniques to minimize the effects of impervious surface
equal to an area not exceeding 25 percent, subject to review and approval
of the City Engineer.
10
4. The preliminary plat is revised to reflect the design of a standard diamond
interchange at TH 101 and CSAH 39/901h Street and provide for dedication
of necessary right-of-way, subject to approval of the City Engineer.
5. The preliminary plat is revised to designate the area for residential use as
an outlot.
6. The design of the private driveway accessing the residential units shall be
28 feet wide with concrete curb and gutter with an adjacent 5 foot
sidewalk. The northern access to this roadway is to be redesigned to
encourage traffic flow into the commercial parking and discourage through
traffic into the residential neighborhood. The design of all private
roadways and bridges is subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
7. The development plan is revised to eliminate the 59 parking stalls at the
west edge of Lots 4 and 5 to provide a green landscape area with two
staggered rows of ornamental and boulevard trees, subject to City Staff
review and approval.
8. A cross parking and access easement shall be recorded against all lots
within the PUD District, subject to approval of the City Attorney.
9. The total gross floor area of restaurants within the PUD District shall not
exceed 25,150 square feet, unless approved as part of a PUD
development plan amendment.
10. The building plans for the commercial structures shall be revised to
specified proposed exterior facade materials.
11. The applicant shall submit scale elevations depicting the exterior of the
proposed residential structures, including all exterior building materials.
12. The maximum height of any building shall be 35 feet.
13. The landscape plan is revised to specify the type, size, quantities and
location of all proposed plantings for the commercial and residential
elements of the project. An inventory of existing trees adjacent to the
Mississippi River shall be submitted and additional plantings provided as
necessary to supplement existing vegetation to screen the riverway.
11
14. The following setbacks shall apply within the PUD District, except for Lots
4 and 5 which shall be allowed a zero setback on their common side lot
line:
15. The residential portion of the project shall provide 5,000 square feet of lot
area per dwelling unit.
16. The PUD Design Guidelines dated shall apply to the
development plan and are incorporated as part of the PUD District.
17. The preliminary plat and development plan shall be revised to create an
outlot adjacent to the Mississippi River generally including the 75 foot
setback area to be dedicated to the City. The developer shall construct an
8 foot wide trail within the outlot at their cost.
18. Construction of a pedestrian bridge over TH 101 shall be subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer and MNDoT. Construction of the
pedestrian bridge shall be at the applicant's cost with potential credits for
park and trail dedication fees, subject to approval of the City Council.
19. Any and all park and trail dedication requirements shall be subject to
review and approval of the City Council.
20. A lighting plan shall be submitted indicating the location, type and
illumination pattern of all proposed exterior lighting, subject to consistency
with the PUD District Design Guidelines and City Staff review and
approval.
21. All signs must comply with the provisions of the PUD Design Guidelines
and Section 37 of the Zoning Ordinance. Only one freestanding sign
shall be allowed per lot and only for Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5. All freestanding
signs must be located on the property on which the business identified is
located. A sign permit is required prior to construction of any signs.
22. The development plan is subject to the performance standards of Section
20-94-7.13 and 20-94-7.0 of the Zoning Ordinance unless a Letter of Map
Revision from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is submitted removing
portions of the subject site from the 100 -year floodplain.
12
Arterial/ Local
Private Adj.
Wetland
OHWM
Bluff
Collector Street
Street Bldgs.
'
Street
Commercial
65ft. 35ft.
Oft. 20ft.
40ft.
75ft.
30ft.
Residential
65ft. 35ft
25ft. %s sum of
40ft.
75ft.
30ft.
bldg.
height
1. The OHWM
or Bluff setback shall apply, whichever is greater.
15. The residential portion of the project shall provide 5,000 square feet of lot
area per dwelling unit.
16. The PUD Design Guidelines dated shall apply to the
development plan and are incorporated as part of the PUD District.
17. The preliminary plat and development plan shall be revised to create an
outlot adjacent to the Mississippi River generally including the 75 foot
setback area to be dedicated to the City. The developer shall construct an
8 foot wide trail within the outlot at their cost.
18. Construction of a pedestrian bridge over TH 101 shall be subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer and MNDoT. Construction of the
pedestrian bridge shall be at the applicant's cost with potential credits for
park and trail dedication fees, subject to approval of the City Council.
19. Any and all park and trail dedication requirements shall be subject to
review and approval of the City Council.
20. A lighting plan shall be submitted indicating the location, type and
illumination pattern of all proposed exterior lighting, subject to consistency
with the PUD District Design Guidelines and City Staff review and
approval.
21. All signs must comply with the provisions of the PUD Design Guidelines
and Section 37 of the Zoning Ordinance. Only one freestanding sign
shall be allowed per lot and only for Lots 1, 2, 3, and 5. All freestanding
signs must be located on the property on which the business identified is
located. A sign permit is required prior to construction of any signs.
22. The development plan is subject to the performance standards of Section
20-94-7.13 and 20-94-7.0 of the Zoning Ordinance unless a Letter of Map
Revision from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is submitted removing
portions of the subject site from the 100 -year floodplain.
12
23. All grading, drainage, utilities and easements are subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
24. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the application based on a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
C. Motion to table the request.
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Patty Fowler
Bob Fields
Audie Tarpley
13
ARCIA
VV
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
'ol
-0 10 Xl-.Al. MF
11.1 A,
PROVIDE PUBLIC OUTLOT
sNK� a C ` � 'll� ::
W a
T- 3
j17
znz—
o!l
-So
Zlk
Ir
.,,="=Z-zz
k4 101
cr3 A-,�
NO.
IL
fon'li 0
IN
.......... ......... ........ ACIVIII.1111110111'r n
m
'ol
-0 10 Xl-.Al. MF
11.1 A,
PROVIDE PUBLIC OUTLOT
sNK� a C ` � 'll� ::
W a
T- 3
j17
znz—
o!l
-So
Zlk
Ir
.,,="=Z-zz
k4 101
cr3 A-,�
NO.
IL
fon'li 0
IN
.......... ......... ........ ACIVIII.1111110111'r n
nine :r ,ao, sr,us ,.I, ti .xr• ra eoa a r.lrq
Anuc PAaccn xlrzeeoi Y v pee
„n sr s
•p[• IO
jYI-B•l u 4A
1, 91reJSt Y d ,9i
pM
' K
rtr.[" sssAuwsr
ns
\ ,. __ ..°�• ,s.W � "Is Kua ^Kris,
srre snsw `\ ` V (('�� Ksq 1 Ksr" "�'1• � �
Es,
' REVISE DRIVEWAYS _ l
ELIMINATE 59 STALLS I
IA[Y[K
N,
� huuu;ll.utt�u:u
II R' I
ri 1� Ot',iit4tritla — ;1
A _
�� � IAlt1il �Iill,ll [i!!tfl A,Iln ili[�niinn nnlrll„II fa V���w ��. w
OTSECO
WATERFRONT
EAST
I
C I T -Y0 F
Eft
M I N N E S O T A
L. LaridCx
'Conslmcfioq Inc.
Waterfront East LLC
� .x,lwo nw v,nllx.
1
ASSOCIATES
PREIJY[NARY
HTC PL•x
a �so Ileo
SCALE IN FEET
RIVER
1
OTSECO
WATERFRONT
EAST
I C I T Y O F
M I N N E S O T A
�. LandCor
Construction, Inc.
Waterfront East LLC
t
S
E:i F�Fz:n
ASSOCIATES
PRELIMINARY
AREA ro Ser -SACK car
_ -
o loo zRj1l R�,9t
oo
Ri M
SCALA IN PEST AREA S
9'=t 10]9.7 9
ss ..Ac`c
(34
7.15acs
S iy
K
RATA r0 EOa rA/E9 �. y9V' S.✓ J ^M>y O _.
LrCE r7.960t a'/• ��;� i
,q���� 4
9W EUMcEt
% : 9Eru rn wPEAIw.Er
�' ... w•r.'
9EtAl ..:.. .n..0
x A
N t M
'..,�•r' l __ \ xE4l aw.. I REfu ;
9H qF9.
04
vJf Rr.l � xESr "' ✓ ✓'
nr w� 2"
—Riro09"+
SILT FENCE-s.i75- i.15JS.cl� I m/
Hl
Tw PT OP L 1
dl/NNFSO D£ A f10
1 NT..Of. -
~qr PLAT
�LI rl rn�
1
1 � ,
OTSEGO
WATERFRONT
EAST
III((I''
.2-1 —�T����,,_Y,,-- __O F
��
MSI N N E S 0 T A
L. LandCor
'Construction, Inc.
Ylo.ay.r
ou[a w alr wr
W vwn nulraarrr
Waterfront East LLC
ran'wnirwnsal r
PRELIMINARY
1.1M95C.PE PIAM
( soon+ ELEVA'NON
�1YEST ELEVATION
av
RTH ELEVATION
KKTJ'm
architects
minneapolis
newport beach
KKE Architects, Inc.
300 first avenue north
minneapolis, mn 55401
phone: 6121339-4200
f.: 612/ 342-9267
C� Land(or
�Inlc_-
Ho. o.�• �.wo, oma,
OTSEGO
WATERFRONT EAST
OTSECO, MN.
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
EXHIBIT F
i"A a e.wwr
^ .eL�u lye '.� •: ,
i i 11,'lt - t• 1 � �a� i.1 F] 3r '� 12P" y�
� •f : l J v 14y ! ,, I:�y {�,-�I� hLLUAI'll ��`n n.,, Ii�l�r U -
t-71
9
4r1„A - f f T }' --
fy i
�M I I
'h1�rYy�}i��Yvftl mit: ,t S -', (I %� � � `� ,� �%•
f Y
•. `'�
11
wa i <
-01
,
r ti
�����I
a._ � �.r_ --.d
4dH.v'� "t Y
� ���
� �,t..
1
j. �
��
;
«i
�����I
a._ � �.r_ --.d
Msl=
J-- 0 too 2DO
scall M FEET
Oe
ZARCA rO cote
W n 49661-
-or A,
--1 S d 11— as
vs-N.M.-I-M 1-4
ja
M:
my
W"L
OF
rArAd
EXHIBIT H
= M."
iw:<
AREA M Sri &ACN W
Y d lldvl 4
0 Im 200
AREA fOz 5F
SCALE IN FEET
—ffmri7TL
7-7
�J y O�
K-3
q H1'j sl
REGAL
d
i
j !LLL