Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/10/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - Planning Commission - RegularAGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM 6:00 P.M. OCTOBER 4, 2017 1. Call to order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes A. July 19, 2017 B. August 16, 2017 C. September 6, 2017 3. Hearings A. Platia Place – Preliminary Plat; Preliminary PUD Location: 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Boulevard Applicant: SLP Venture Properties Case Nos.: 17-19-S and 17-20-PUD 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment STUDY SESSION 1. Mixed-use Zoning District Concept Review If you cannot attend the meeting, please call the Community Development Office, 952/924-2575. Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call 952.928.2840 at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JULY 19, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Torrey Kanne, Joe Tatalovich STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, Meg McMonigal 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of June 21, 2017 Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of June 21, 2017. Commissioner Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed 4-0. 3. Public Hearings A. The Elmwood – Major Amendment to PUD Location: 5605 36th Street West Applicant: 36th Street LLC Case No.: 17-21-PUD Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. The applicant has proposed a five-story, 70 unit mixed-use building with 4,393 square feet of commercial space, 20.5% DORA and 127 parking spaces. Ms. Monson explained that the only changes to the site plan include an additional parking stall added within the surface parking lot and the removal of a residential patio staircase. All other changes take place within the interior of the building and on the roof. The development continues to be marketed toward residents aged 55+ and the dwelling unit mix remains the same. Ms. Monson discussed the proposed reduction in parking of the PUD amendment. She stated that staff is supportive of a reduction in parking in this location due to future transit service in the area, and because of the 55+ age restrictions in the building. She said staff has recommended a parking management plan be included as part of the Planning Development Contract. Ms. Monson reviewed uses, height, DORA and landscaping. Chair Peilen asked if the 127 parking spaces are resident parking only. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Page 2 Ms. Monson responded it is not specified where each use is but the 127 does accommodate guest parking. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about underground parking. She spoke about PLACE project’s need to rent parking from businesses along 36th St. She said given the reduction in Elmwood parking PLACE probably will not be renting parking spaces at that location. Ms. Monson responded likely not. She added that there is a large surface parking lot across the street by Hoigaard Village and a large surface parking lot at Burlington Coat. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. As there was no one present wishing to speak she closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson said overall the changes don’t alter the project visually from the original PUD. He said he understands the client’s need to work with the budget. He said he didn’t vote for the original PUD because he didn’t think it met the spirit of mixed use. He said he wouldn’t be voting to recommend approval of the amendment for the same reason. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she understands Commissioner Robertson’s view but she does like the amendment proposal, especially the project size and because of the number of two bedroom units. Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to recommend approval of Major Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 8 subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-1 (Robertson opposed). 4. Other Business: None 5. Communications: None 6. Adjournment Chair Peilen adjourned the meeting at 6:18 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA AUGUST 16, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COMMUNITY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Robertson, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Richard Person STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Joe Ayers-Johnson, Jacquelyn Kramer, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison 1. Potential request to allow 3rd shift adjacent to residential in industrial districts with conditions Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, introduced the subject. He stated that Lyman Lumber, located in Westside Center, is interested in starting a third shift, but cannot because the code prohibits a business from operating a third shift if the property is adjacent to another property zoned residential. He explained that Novartis and Nestle both occupied the building before it was sold and remodeled into the Westside Center, and that they both operated a third shift. They were able to do so because at the time, the property consisted of two parcels, and the parcel occupied by the building was not adjacent to residential. The redevelopment of the property included combining the two parcels, into one. As a result, the building is now adjacent to residential, and no longer qualifies for a third shift. While the combination of the two parcels was necessary for the redevelopment, the loss of the ability to operate a third shift was inadvertent. Lyman Lumber will be submitting an application to operate a third shift, and will be submitting recommended language for a code amendment to allow it. Staff will review how the proposed amendment impacts Lyman Lumber and its neighbors. Staff will also review how the proposed amendment impacts other industrial and residential properties around the city. The results of the review will be presented to the planning commission at a future date, assuming an application is received. Jim Yarosh, attorney, representing Lyman Lumber, located at Westside Center, spoke about the company’s desire to allow a third shift. Commissioner Kanne spoke about concerns regarding noise. Commissioner Peilen said the example of Lyman Lumber looks pretty good to her. She said she couldn’t make a decision on an amendment more broadly Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission Study Session August 16, 2017 Page 2 without analyzing other properties which would meet the conditions and what the potential impacts are. Mr. Morrison presented a map of other properties in the city that are currently prohibited from having a third shift and would become eligible to have a third shift if new conditions/exceptions were allowed as presented. Commissioner Kanne asked what would happen if there were problems and complaints about a third shift. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, replied that becomes an enforcement issue. If there are noise issues related to equipment, the city could take noise measurements to determine if there is a violation, which can be grounds to revoke a permit or take other enforcement action. Mr. Walther said the Planning Commission should also consider whether allowing the third shift would require a Conditional Use Permit or if the exception could be handled administratively. What kind of process will we propose? Commissioner Carper said he could support an amendment and he’d like to see it handled administratively. Commissioner Peilen stated she wanted to help the community’s businesses as long as it doesn’t cause problems for neighbors. She said the amendment is certainly worth exploring and discussing. 2. Zoning Amendment Ordinance – Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, introduced the topic. She said staff is looking for feedback on concerns, research, and items the Commission would expect to see on a final amendment. Commissioner Carper said he’d like to see station locations be a premium location. He said he recognizes there aren’t that many electric vehicles today. He suggested mandating that developers include components so that at some point charging stations can be put in very easily. Commissioner Tatalovich asked if there is a standard hook-up at stations. Ms. Kramer explained that there are different types for slow or fast charging. She explained that staff is looking at how to define policy on technology that changes so quickly. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission Study Session August 16, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Kanne asked if staff is looking at what Minneapolis is doing. Ms. Kramer said staff will be looking at examples from other cities near us and other comparable cities throughout the nation as a guide. Staff will also look at the work of transportation advocacy groups and university study recommendations. Commissioner Peilen said she supported the concept totally. 3. Small Cell Wireless Mr. Walther discussed changes in technology and the use of booster equipment to supplement wireless towers in areas of high use. He discussed recent statutory language which limits the city’s ability to regulate installation of small cell wireless technology in public right-of-way. Mr. Walther said staff is weighing options, including whether or not requests in single family residential zoning districts would be handled administratively or through CUP. Staff will be providing a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council in the coming months. Mr. Walther provided a description and examples of what the equipment typically looks like. 4. Mixed-use Zoning District Concept Review – Basic Building Form Jennifer Monson, Planner, gave a presentation. She explained that in 2015 the city adopted a specific PUD zoning district, reducing the effectiveness and usefulness of the existing MX District. She said the city is now proposing an update to the existing MX District to provide a district that allows a standard for mixed use developments in the MX district that are site and context sensitive, and do not require a PUD. Ms. Monson said staff desired to present options for best determining basic building form at the meeting. Then at future study sessions staff will present additional MX code options for consideration including permitted uses, setbacks, height bonuses articulation standards, landscape requirements, etc. Ms. Monson discussed primary and secondary frontages and building orientations. She presented options for determining primary and secondary frontages based on street classification in the Comprehensive Plan. Commercial and active uses were discussed. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission Study Session August 16, 2017 Page 4 Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, discussed height standards. She said staff is proposing looking at scale and the ratio between the building height and the street width, rather than having a hard maximum cap to height. She spoke about an overall goal of MX district to encourage pedestrian activity and connectivity; saying that ratio is one way to facilitate that. She asked the Commission to consider what ratios they are comfortable with. She presented renderings illustrating different ratios. Commissioner Peilen said one of her concerns is fear of a cookie-cutter look all over the city. Ms. Kramer said there is variety because the streets are different widths. She added that the mixed use zoning district designation wouldn’t be used all over the city. Commissioner Carper discussed transitions between housing which is adjacent to mixed use in the city. He spoke about Bridgewater and Ellipse. Mr. Walther noted that transitions will be discussed later in the presentation. Ms. Kramer said staff will be providing existing examples that the Commission is likely familiar with. Also, Commissioners are welcome to share examples they would like us to consider emulating. Commissioner Carper spoke about development in Vancouver, B.C., which uses more transparent building materials for openness. Joe Ayers -Johnson, Community Development intern, spoke about transitions from MX to residential, and how mixed use buildings should relate to surrounding residential or other low density residential zoning districts. He spoke about options for height and setback transitions adjacent to single family residential zoning districts. He discussed common transition techniques of setback and stepbacks to create a visual break. He explained how the city’s current PUD district regulates heights and setbacks in these transition areas. Commissioner Carper asked why the same language couldn’t be used. Mr. Walther said staff is comfortable with using the same approach but wanted confirmation from the Planning Commission. Mr. Ayers-Johnson presented examples from the Ellipse development where the building was stepped back. Commissioner Carper spoke about the shading ordinance and the Ellipse. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission Study Session August 16, 2017 Page 5 Mr. Ayers-Johnson shared specific examples of the stepped back approach with previous St. Louis Park developments. Mr. Walther asked for reactions on approaches being presented. Commissioners Kanne and Peilen commented that it seems to make sense. Commissioner Carper asked about making a wider curb and more green area, and have the first portion of the building taller, rather than using that first step back. Ms. Kramer responded that wouldn’t have as much impact on the ratio. Commissioner Kanne said it looks good and the examples do make it seem more open. She asked which areas would have walkability as a focus. Mr. Walther responded that the city has a goal for walkability everywhere, but there are community sidewalk grids every quarter mile. That would be the higher priority and would likely coincide with areas that may be suitable for an MX zoning designation. Mr. Walther said staff’s preference would be to pick one frontage rather than having two primary frontages. This gives more flexibility. Mr. Walther said staff will be illustrating mixed use concepts further. Additional details will be provided and the discussion will continue. The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 6, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson, Ethan Rickert (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Torrey Kanne, Richard Person, Joe Tatalovich STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Jacquelyn Kramer, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison 1. Call to Order – Roll Call Chair Peilen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of August 16, 2017 Commissioner Carper made a motion to approve the minutes of August 16, 2017. Chair Peilen seconded the motion. The motion failed on a vote of 2-0. Commissioners Johnston-Madison and Robertson abstained. 3. Public Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit – American Legion Post 282 Location: 6509 and 6515 Walker Street Applicant: Paul Revere Masonic Lodge and the American Legion Case No.: 17-24-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The request for a conditional use permit is to operate a Places of Assembly. The Paul Revere Masonic Center has reduced the size of its operation and are in the process of remodeling the building to convert it to a two-tenant building. The second tenant space is proposed to be leased to the American Legion. Mr. Morrison explained that the American Legion proposes to operate the existing kitchen and an Assembly area on the east side of the building. The Assembly area is expected to be used primarily as a food service area where meals and drinks will be served to club members and guests. Mr. Morrison reviewed conditions specific to Assembly use. He provided a detailed review of parking conditions. He discussed conditions regarding intoxicating liquor. The application does meet all conditions. Mr. Morrison stated a neighborhood meeting was held on August 29, 2017. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 2 Commissioner Carper asked about the use of surrounding buildings and related traffic. Mr. Morrison responded uses include NTB, the historic Walker Building which consists of small offices/low occupancy, print shops, manufacturing, therapeutic massage, and a school maintenance facility. He said traffic is pretty light during the week. The main traffic is down Lake St. going west to Louisiana. Commissioner Carper asked Mr. Morrison to point out the location of the Community Center. He asked about programming for children at the center. Mr. Morrison responded Spanish Immersion is in the building. There is some thought to relocate that use and make the Community Center an administrative school building. Commissioner Carper asked about traffic controls at Walker Street and Lake. Mr. Morrison responded that is a two-way stop. Commissioner Carper asked about access for the American Legion. Mr. Morrison showed property lines for the building right along the south side wall. Everything else south of that is public right-of-way. He spoke about the agreement the city has with the neighboring property that will not allow the PRMC or American legion to have access to the right-of-way to the east, and that the gate will have to be removed. Commissioner Johnston-Madison suggested that bike racks be added to the site plan. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about number of employees of American Legion and parking. Kristine Strout, 2935 Rhode Island Ave. S., manager, said they have about 12 total employees, with three during the day shift. She would like employees to park in the public parking except for the closers. She’d like closers to park near the building. She said the American Legion is family friendly, and kids do come in with their families to eat. The Chair opened the public hearing. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 3 Megan Phimister, 3451 Zarthan Ave. S., co-chairs the Sorensen Neighborhood Association. Both she and her co-chair Lois Zander support the request. The Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said new businesses are coming to the area and there is a lot of potential for revitalization. She said she supports the request with concern about the addition of bike racks. Commissioner Carper said it is a reasonable request. Chair Peilen supports the request. Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Place of Assembly uses at 6509 and 6515 Walker Street with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. 4. Other Business None 5. Communications None 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION MINUTES September 6, 2017 1. Mixed-use Zoning District Concept Review—Building setbacks, step backs, façade details and buffer yards Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, explained the discussion item is for continued feedback from the commission before staff generates an official request for a zoning amendment on the topic. Jennifer Monson, Planner, noted that the topics of building orientation, building height to street width ratio, and transitions between residential districts were introduced at the August 16 study session. Ms. Monson gave a summary of the direction staff proposes for building orientation with a primary street frontage and a secondary street frontage. She stated that there wasn’t Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 4 agreement on a specific ideal ratio. Staff proposes a range of acceptable ratios. Minimum and maximum overall heights will be discussed at a later date. Regarding transitions between mixed-use buildings and R1/R2 districts, Ms. Monson said staff proposes using the existing PUD language for buildings within the M-X district. Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, discussed height bonuses. She said examples include creating public space on site, creating bicycle or pedestrian paths that connect different public spaces, public art, water features, innovative storm water treatment on site, green roofs and other high performance green standards, more affordable housing units, and affordable commercial space. She asked if these should be bonuses or required throughout the district. Commissioner Robertson said he liked the idea of a bonus, providing options and creativity to the developer and architect. Commissioner Carper asked who would be authorized to do negotiations on bonuses. Mr. Walther said ideally it would be more formulaic to avoid negotiating these issues on each site and application. M-X would be a stand-alone district that doesn’t have to operate with a PUD. The Commission would review and the City Council would approve any formulas that staff develops when preparing the ordinance. Commissioner Johnston-Madison discussed green space and features of Excelsior & Grand and Uptown developments. She said she would like to see more green space in M-X. Commissioner Peilen said she had concerns about requirements on the makeup of housing. An option is one thing, but a requirement is another thing. Mr. Walther asked the commission to consider items they wouldn’t want to be included as a bonus, and items that should instead be required. Commissioner Robertson said green roof might not be with height bonus as it is mostly used with storm water management. He said he loved the idea of affordable commercial space. Commissioners agreed about that. Commissioner Peilen said she liked the idea of options. Commissioners discussed height and what a development like Excelsior & Grand might look like with another story. Ms. Monson suggested bringing this question back to a future session. Ms. Kramer discussed setbacks which minimize the impact on adjacent parcels and on the street level. She showed diagrams with 2-story versus 3-story where the 3rd story is Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 5 stepped back so not as visible from the street. She spoke about tying it to the height bonuses and stepping back. It wouldn’t then impact the building-to-width street ratio, or impact pedestrian realm, but the developer still gets the extra story. Ms. Kramer discussed different step back requirements for front and rear buildings. Commissioner Carper spoke about angle of visibility and complaints regarding the Bally’s site proposal. He noted concerns from residents to the south that by allowing the Bally’s site to be one story taller it would be above the tree line of the residential on Vallacher and in view of the neighborhood. Commissioner Johnston-Madison remarked that at this point the discussion is general, not about specific sites. It’s all relative to the area. She added that the Commission did not recommend approval for the Bally’s site development. Mr. Walther said staff’s intention as we are developing these codes will be to use some test sites. Whether or not they are rezoned to M-X or not they will at least fit the criteria that might be suitable for M-X. Then it can be tested to show what these rules look like when applied. Ms. Kramer discussed setbacks versus build-to lines keeping buildings relatively close to the street to create the street edge. Instead of just a hard line such as setback, there would be a build-to zone. The building has to fall within the zone for a certain percentage of the building frontage, so there would still be some flexibility. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she still thinks more green space is needed. Mr. Walther said he wonders about the right amount of green space the Commission is looking for. He said staff is thinking to propose a larger setback than what we’ve been seeing for that reason. The struggle is how much is enough, how much is too much? He asked commissioners to share examples of areas and properties that seem about right to them. Commissioner Robertson spoke about courtyard houses and doing bigger houses on smaller lots with good landscaping. Ms. Kramer provided definitions and illustrations of different considerations that go into a selecting a build-to line. Ms. Monson asked commissioners to consider their preference for specific setbacks based on adjacent uses or the alternative based on building code. Ms. Monson discussed building siting and façade articulation to identify how the building interacts to the sidewalk and build-to zones, how to make a large building seem smaller, and courtyards. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 6 Commissioner Robertson said he was a little uncomfortable with requiring courtyards. He said it might be if you provide a courtyard you get something for it. But to have a rule that you must include a courtyard open to sky means you are designing my building and I might not like that. There might be a reason I don’t want to do that. I might pass on what you can offer me. He said that becomes more like building design, not street design. Chair Peilen said she agreed that it might get too heavy handed, too specific and too controlling. Ms. Monson spoke about façade divisions which visually break up the building. There was a discussion about formula and language. Commissioner Robertson suggested language saying large facades shall be broken up architecturally, but not indicating required numbers. He said a lot of cities are trying to provide formulas. Building design is not a formula. Mr. Walther asked how we prevent bad design, and how one would decide if what the architect provided has met the intent of the regulation. Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, spoke about formulas as the simplest thing. For instance, you’ve got to have a total of 20 ft. of depth added somewhere in the façade. Commissioner Robertson spoke about percentages of building materials as an example. He said it gives the architect a palette. There was a discussion about making M-X language easy to understand, making it flexible and inspire to do better. Commissioner Carper said the bonus concept is a way to inspire. Ms. Monson and Mr. Walther stated that other topics for future discussion may include side and rear buffer, screening and landscaping, maximum height, distance of step backs, width of step backs, minimum commercial depth/uses, ground floor transparency, site circulation, trash location, entrances and their locations, parking and loading, landscaping, and uses. Commissioners said staff should decide the order of topics to be presented. Commissioners said they prefer continuing with the discussion format rather than having staff present proposed ordinance language for consideration. Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission September 6, 2017 Page 7 The study session was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 4, 2017 Agenda Item: 3A 3A. “Platia Place” – Preliminary Plat; Preliminary PUD Location: 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Blvd. Case Nos.: 17-19-S, 17-20-PUD Applicant: SLP Venture Properties Recommended Motions: • Reopen and close the public hearing. • Motion to approve the Preliminary Plat of Platia Place with conditions as recommended by staff. • Motion to approve the Platia Place Preliminary Planned Unit Development with conditions recommended by staff. Review Deadline: • 60 days: July 30, 2017 • 120 days: September 28, 2017 • Extension: October 18, 2017 REQUEST: SLP Venture Properties requests a Preliminary Plat and a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow construction of two buildings: a six-story 149-unit apartment building and a six-story 112-room hotel. The buildings would be located on two parcels in the northwest corner of I-394 and US 169, and adjacent public land along Wayzata Boulevard. The PUD would be a rezoning of the property under the city’s PUD ordinance. SITE INFORMATION: Site Area: 3.19 acres Current Zoning: O - Office Proposed Zoning: PUD - Planned Unit Development Comprehensive Plan: OFC - Office Current Use: Billboards, vacant land Surrounding Land Uses: North: Parking garages, office towers East: 394-169 interchange and US-169 South: Wayzata Boulevard and I-394 West: Mixed use commercial and apartment building. Shelard Park is also located about 700 feet to the northwest. BACKGROUND: The site includes three parcels improved with two billboards. The previous use of the site was the Santorini restaurant, which closed and was demolished in 2013. PRELIMINARY PLAT ANALYSIS: Description: The developer requests a preliminary plat to combine and subdivide previously unplatted parcels into two new lots. There are two parcels that are privately owned. In addition, Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 2 Subject: Platia Place the application proposes to acquire publicly-owned land adjacent to the site along Wayzata Boulevard. The city recently acquired the land from MNDOT. The land was released to the city in 2013 and conveyed by quitclaim deed to the city in August 2017. The applicant intends to acquire the land shown in the plat from the City of St. Louis Park. Lot 1, Block 1, Platia Place is the westerly lot and is proposed to be 73,072 square feet (1.68 acres) in area. The site is proposed to contain a multiple family residential building. Lot 2, Block 1 Platia Place is the easterly lot and is proposed to be 63,143 square feet (1.45 acres) in area. A hotel is proposed on this lot. The lots in the proposed plat meets all subdivision requirements for minimum lot size, shape, and dimension, as shown in the table below. Utility Easements: The proposed plat provides perimeter drainage and utility easements. The easements are 10 feet wide adjacent to public roads and five feet wide on both sides of all interior lot lines including the north lot line adjacent to the parking ramps. The plat includes additional easements over the proposed location of public utilities that would be relocated as part of the redevelopment. The application proposes relocating existing sanitary sewer forcemain and water mains around the southwest corner of the apartment building, and extending utility easements to accommodate these utilities. The proposed easements are sufficiently wide for the depths of the force and water mains. The applicant provided details for this relocation including new forcemain and water main profiles. Additional details for final design will be submitted with the final plat and final PUD applications. Park and Trail Dedication: Park dedication fees due for the proposed Platia Place subdivision are $290,795. Trail dedication fees are $33,750. These figures are based on $1,500 park dedication fee and $225 trail dedication fee per dwelling unit for the multiple family residential use, and five percent of the commercial assessed land value of the hotel use. The city will collect these fees prior to signing the final plat. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) recommended that city council approve of cash-in-lieu of park land dedication on June 7, 2016. PUD ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan: The 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site as OFC – Office. Office land use is intended for employment centers and mixed use development with high floor area ratios (FARs) and building heights. Hotel and residential uses are considered appropriate for this land use type when they are part of a larger office development district, and when the uses will be compatible with existing land uses on nearby parcels. This site is adjacent to the Shelard Park office development and a parcel that includes multiple-family residential. This development will follow the city’s Green Building and Inclusionary Housing Policies, which require that a certain percentage of multi-family housing meet the following affordability thresholds: 1. The development will include either 10% of the units as affordable to households earning 50% of the area median income (AMI), or 2. 18% of the units at 60% AMI. Therefore, the development will contribute to the city’s goals for sustainable development and for providing a mixed-income development that expands housing choices for the community. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 3 Subject: Platia Place Staff finds that this site is suitable for the proposed development and meets many of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Building and Site Design Analysis: The PUD ordinance requires the city to find that the quality of building and site design proposed will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the following criteria shall be satisfied: (1) The design shall consider the project as a whole, and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. (2) The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. (3) A PUD shall comply with the city’s Green Building Policy. (4) The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged. ZONING ANALYSIS: The property is currently zoned Office, and as part of the PUD request, the applicant will be asking for reduced setbacks, and reduced parking for the hotel. The maximum residential density allowed for residential in the Office district is 50 units per acre, or more with a PUD. The PUD is 3.13 acres which allows up to 156 units. The requested 149 unit apartment building fits within this limit. The PUD will be split into two lots. The proposed density for just the residential parcel would be 89 units per acre, however, additional residential development will not be permitted on the hotel property. The following table provides the development metrics. The property will be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requirements for this property if approved. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 4 Subject: Platia Place Zoning Compliance Table: Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Primarily employment centers; limited uses such as hotels, parking ramps, residential, day care, retail, and restaurants Multi-family residential & hotel Yes Lot Area 2 acres minimum for PUD 3.19 acres (138,956 sq. ft.) Yes Height Established by PUD Residential: 6 stories, 67 feet Hotel: 6 stories, 71 feet Yes Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials Elevations consist of 60% - 78% of Class 1 materials visible from off-site. Yes Residential Density 50 units per acre; more with a PUD Lot 1: 89 units per acre Combined 47.9 units per acre Yes Floor Area Ratio 1.5, None with PUD Residential – 2.81 Hotel – 0.97 Yes Ground Floor Area Ratio N/A Residential - 0.6 Hotel – 0.16 Yes Off-Street Parking Residential – 203 spaces, including 20 visitor spaces Hotel – 168 (1.5 per room), fewer may be allowed with a PUD Residential – 208 (23 visitor) spaces Hotel – 114 spaces (1 per room) Yes Bicycle Parking Residential – 169 spaces Hotel – 11 spaces Residential – 157 spaces Hotel – 16 spaces No Open Area/DORA Residential – 8,769 sq. ft.(12% of lot area) Hotel – 7,577 sq. ft. (12% lot area) Applicant proposes 44% of residential lot area and 17% of hotel lot area. Staff estimates 40% of residential lot and 7% of the hotel lot area qualifies for DORA. TBD Landscaping See Landscaping section Yes Setbacks – Lot 1 Residential property Established by PUD North: 15 feet South: 23 feet East: 40 feet West: 17.9 feet Yes Setbacks – Lot 2 Hotel property Established by PUD North: 45 feet South: 10 feet East: 16 – 172 feet West: 131 feet Yes Mechanical Equipment Full screening required All roof top equipment will be screened. Yes Sidewalks Required along all streets and building frontages Provided along all streets and building frontages Yes Refuse handling Full screening required Full screening proposed. Yes Stormwater Management Required Managed on site. Yes Uses: Specific uses on the site are governed by the proposed PUD Zoning Ordinance, and includes the proposed high density multiple family residential and hotel uses. A draft of the ordinance is attached to this report. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 5 Subject: Platia Place Architectural Design: The applicant proposes two buildings of wood frame construction over one story of concrete with facades of mixed materials including brick, metal panel, and fiber cement siding and glass. The building facades are required to contain at least 60% Class-1 materials. The information provided indicates the building will meet the city requirements for preliminary approval. Details and material samples will be submitted for review and approval for the final PUD. Building wall deviations are required by the zoning ordinance where the building wall length to wall height ratio meets or exceeds 2:1. The north elevation of the apartment building exceeds this ratio. The applicant has added privacy screen walls between adjacent balcony units to increase privacy between units. This elevation faces existing tree canopies and parking structures, and is not visible from Wayzata Boulevard. Because of these factors, staff recommends accepting the privacy walls as meeting the building deviation requirement for the north elevation only. Vehicular Parking: On-street parking is not allowed on Wayzata Boulevard. Accessible parking spaces need to be reviewed to ensure they meet code. Residential: One off-street parking space is required for every bedroom in the apartment building. Of these spaces, 10% shall be permitted for visitor parking. The applicant proposes 203 bedrooms in the apartment building, therefore, 203 parking spaces are required and 20 of these should be available for visitor parking. The application shows 206 parking spaces for the residential building, of which 23 are designated visitor parking. Commercial: One and a half off-street parking spaces are required for every hotel room. However, a parking study was conducted in conjunction with the Courtyard by Marriott hotel currently under construction on Shelard Parkway and Wayzata Boulevard. The study indicated that required parking for limited service hotels, hotels that do not include restaurants or significant meeting rooms, could be reduced to one space per room. Based on this study and the proposed 112-room limited service hotel, staff supports reducing the requirement to the 114 off-street parking spaces shown in the application for the hotel which are sufficient to meet this reduced minimum parking requirement. Bicycle Parking: Residential: City ordinance requires one bicycle parking space for each residential unit, and additional bicycle parking spaces equal to 10% of the required off-street vehicular parking spaces. The apartment building therefore requires 169 bicycle parking spaces. The application proposes 157 spaces provided in private racks in the parking structure as well as bike racks both inside the building and on the exterior. Proof of parking must be shown for the remaining 12 bicycle parking spaces in the final plat and final PUD application. Hotel: Non-residential development is required to provide on-site bicycle parking equal to 10% of the required off-street vehicular parking. The hotel therefore requires 11 bicycle parking spaces. The application proposes 16 bicycle parking spaces which is sufficient to meet minimum parking requirements. Access: The site plan has three access driveways connecting the site to Wayzata Boulevard. Staff supports the proposed driveway locations and spacing. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 6 Subject: Platia Place Loading/Service Areas: Residential: A 442-square foot trash room is located in the parking garage on the ground floor; and floors 2-6 each have a 121 SF trash room. Staff recommends that for the final plat and final PUD, the trash rooms’ layouts be updated to show three chutes for garbage, organic recycling and non-organic recycling. Hotel: A waste enclosure is shown on the north side of the large surface parking lot. The parking garage also contains a delivery receiving room. Landscaping: The landscape plantings were calculated separately for the residential and hotel lots. The plan increased the number of trees and shrubs compared to the plan reviewed by planning commission in June. Residential Lot: The plan proposes 84 trees and 931 shrubs on the residential lot. Based on the number of residential units, the city’s zoning ordinance calls for 149 trees and 1,234 shrubs. There is a shortfall of 65 trees and 303 shrubs. Hotel Lot: The plan shows 69 trees and 633 shrubs on the hotel lot; the hotel lot is required to contain 61 trees and 369 shrubs. Alternative Landscaping Options: The landscaping ordinance provides some flexibility to meet landscaping requirements through alternatives to tree and shrub plantings. These alternatives are features that are not necessarily plantings, but also contribute the design of the site. These may include native landscapes, green roofs, rooftop gardens, public art, and other constructed features. If the applicant cannot meet the minimum tree and shrub planting requirements, these alternatives may be employed to meet the landscaping requirements. The planting plan includes native landscaping, including 596 perennial plantings on the residential lot, 10 native canopy trees on the residential lot, and 26 native canopy trees on the hotel lot, which qualifies under the alternative landscaping provision. Other features include planting trays and green roof features on private balconies and the upper amenity patio. There is opportunity to provide additional amenities at the hotel outdoor patio, and the residential pool deck. Tree Removals: A tree inventory is included in the application, which defines the size and type of all existing trees as well as designating which existing trees are to be removed. As a result of the tree removal, the code requires at least 373 caliper inches to be planted. The proposed landscaping plan shows 392 caliper inches to be planted. Therefore, the planting plan meets the replacement requirements. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The developer indicates 44% DORA on the residential lot, and 17% DORA on the hotel lot. The plan includes setback areas and parking lot islands as DORA on the hotel lot. These areas, however, do not meet the criteria for recreation areas, and therefore, should not be included. Staff estimates the current plan shows 7% DORA on the hotel lot. This DORA lies along the west, south and east side of the hotel, and is improved with patio amenities and landscaping. While this is short of the required 12% minimum, the surplus DORA on the residential lot makes up for the shortfall. It should be noted, however, that the residential DORA is not readily available for use by hotel residents. Staff suggests a revised DORA plan showing at least 12% DORA on the hotel lot needs to be resubmitted as a condition of approval. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 7 Subject: Platia Place The residential DORA includes a dog run north of the residential building, landscaped outdoor space south of the residential building, and a pool and amenity deck on the second story of the residential building. Signage: A sign plan was not submitted for review. The PUD proposes that the apartment building comply with the RC High-Density Multiple-Family Residence district standards, and the hotel comply with the O Office zoning district standards. Utilities: The water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater mains in the area have the capacity to accommodate the proposed development. The primary issue with the current plans is the conflict of existing water mains and existing sanitary sewer forcemain with the southwest corner of the proposed apartment building. To resolve this issue, the applicant proposes relocating the existing utilities around the proposed building. Plans have been submitted addressing these concerns; and staff recommend requiring further construction design details to be submitted as a condition of approval for the final plat and final PUD. The plans indicate a footprint for a stormwater management system under the surface parking lot between the buildings. Details on the stormwater system design and stormwater calculations have been provided, and it appears the system meets the city’s rate control and Bassett Creek’s Watershed Management Organization’s treatment requirements. The existing soil conditions on this site are poor and will require soil correction. The proposed soil conditions will have a bearing on the system design. Additional details on the soil corrections will be required with the final plat and final PUD applications. PUBLIC INPUT: A neighborhood meeting was held June 14, 2017 on the proposed project. Two residents attended and expressed support for the project and development on the site, and no objections from residents were expressed. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: Staff presented the application to Planning Commission on June 21, 2017. The applicant gave a brief presentation on the project. Two citizens spoke at the public hearing, and both were in favor of the proposed development. Commissioners discussed various aspects of the proposal, including existing utilities on site, the plantings shortfall, the significance of the site as a “gateway” to the city, and the architectural design of the buildings. The Planning Commission then passed motions to reopen the public hearing at a later date, table the application, and request additional information from the applicant as requested by staff. The public hearing was advertised for October 4, 2017. For additional details on the public hear see the attachment “Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2017.” STAFF RECOMMENDATONS: Staff determined that the revised applications for preliminary PUD and preliminary plat have included most of the details necessary to determine that the proposed development meets city code. The areas that are deficient could be submitted with the Final Plat and Final PUD. Therefore, staff recommends the following: 1. Reopen and close the public hearing. 2. Motion to recommend approval of the applications for preliminary plat. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 8 Subject: Platia Place 3. Motion to recommend approval of the preliminary PUD with the following conditions to be met before approval of the final plat and final PUD: a. Provide revisions to the utility, drainage, grading and Stormwater plans as discussed in the attachment “Engineering Comments.” b. Confirm that all mechanical equipment shall be screened per the zoning ordinance. c. Provide details and material samples of the proposed exterior materials for the apartment and hotel. d. Submit plan for Alternative Landscaping to meet the shortfall in the required landscaping. e. Provide a revised DORA plan that meets all requirements per the zoning code. f. Provide details explaining how the development will address soil correction issues. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2017 Engineering Comments 9/19/17 Official Exhibits: 1. Existing Conditions 2. Preliminary Erosion Control and SWPPP Plan 3. Preliminary Utility, Drainage, Grading and Stormwater Plan 4. Utility Detail 5. Preliminary Copy of Final Plat 6. Preliminary Plat Lot 1 7. Preliminary Plat Lot 2 8. Tree Inventory 9. Boundary Information 10. A0.2 Reference Views 11. A0.3 Hotel Plans and Elevations 12. A0.5 Multi-Family Housing - Elevations 13. A0.6 Multi-Family Housing - Plans 14. A0.7 Multi-Family Housing - Plans 15. Site Details 16. Landscape Plan 17. DORA Plan 18. Parking Lot Lighting Prepared by: Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 9 Subject: Platia Place DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD _#_ AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9808 AND 9920 WAYZATA BOULEVARD THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 17-19-S, 17-20-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Office. Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from O Office to PUD _#_: Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Platia Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD _#_. (a) Development Plan The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1. Title Sheet 2. Existing Conditions 3. Preliminary Site Plan 4. Preliminary Erosion Control and SWPPP Plan 5. Preliminary Erosion Control and SWPPP Plan Details 6. Preliminary Utility, Drainage, Grading and Stormwater Plan 7. Utility Details 8. Preliminary Copy of Final Plat 9. Preliminary Plat Lot 1 10. Preliminary Plat Lot 2 11. Tree Inventory 12. Boundary Information 13. Details 14. Engineering Comments 15. Exterior Materials Table 16. A0.2 Reference Views Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 10 Subject: Platia Place 17. A0.3 Hotel Plans and Elevations 18. A0.5 Multi-Family Housing - Elevations 19. A0.6 Multi-Family Housing - Plans 20. A0.7 Multi-Family Housing - Plans 21. Site Details 22. Landscape Plan 23. DORA Plan 24. Plant Key 25. Parking Lot Lighting 26. Site Lighting Calculations The site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1) The property shall be developed with 149 residential units and 61,411 square feet of hotel space. 2) At least 322 off-street parking spaces shall be provided. 3) The maximum building height shall not exceed 71 feet and six stories. 4) The development site shall include a minimum of 17% percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b) Permitted Uses Lot 1: (1) Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity space are limited to a maximum of 40% of the building first floor. Lot 2: (2) Commercial uses. Commercial uses are limited to the following: a. Hotel (c) Prohibited Uses (1) Extended-stay hotels (2) Restaurants (d) Accessory Uses Accessory uses are as follows: (1) Home occupations are permitted on Lot 1 with the condition that they comply with all of the conditions for home occupations located in the R-C district. (2) Gardens. (3) Parking lots. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 11 Subject: Platia Place a. All parking requirements must be met for each use. b. A minimum of 17 parking spaces shall be designated and signed visitor parking on the residential lot. (4) Public transit stops/shelters. (5) Outdoor seating, public address (PA) systems are prohibited. (6) Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. (d) Special Performance Standards (1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2) All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. Trash enclosures shall be constructed from the same materials as the principal building. (3) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the requirements found in the following districts: a. The apartment building signage shall be consistent with the R-C High-Density Multiple-Family Residential zoning district. b. The hotel building signage shall be consistent with the O Office zoning district. c. Exemptions located in the zoning ordinance for wall signage shall not apply. Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-19-S, 17-20-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearings June 21, 2017, and October 4, 2017 First Reading Second Reading Date of Publication Date Ordinance takes effect Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ____________ Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 12 Subject: Platia Place Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 13 Subject: Platia Place OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JUNE 21, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Ethan Rickert (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of May 3, 2017 Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of May 3, 2017. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-1 (Tatalovich abstained). 3. Public Hearings A. Platia Place – Preliminary Plat; Preliminary PUD Location: 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Blvd. Applicant: SLP Venture Properties Case Nos: 17-19-S and 17-20-PUD Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Ms. Kramer stated the application is being requested to allow construction of two buildings including a six-story 150 unit apartment building and a six-story 111 room limited services hotel. She presented drawings for the project. She spoke about the mix of façade materials. She said right now it appears that the materials meet the requirements but staff has asked for more information to make sure materials are classified correctly. Ms. Kramer discussed mix of units and parking. Ms. Kramer presented the hotel drawings. Ms. Kramer spoke about the landscape plan and requirements. She said the applicant is short about 100 trees and short several 100 shrubs for the apartment site. She said the applicant is short on shrubs on the hotel side. There are alternative landscaping requirements that the applicant can use to enhance the site design. Ms. Kramer discussed the tree inventory plan. She said it appears the proposal meets tree replacement requirements but more details are required to determine the application’s compliance. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 14 Subject: Platia Place Ms. Kramer discussed Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA). More detail is being requested of the applicant. Ms. Kramer spoke about the utility easements. She said more details are being requested of the applicant regarding stormwater management system design and calculations. She said a conflict exists with the building location and existing water main and existing sanitary sewer force main that will need to be resolved. Ms. Kramer reviewed zoning compliance for the project. Ms. Kramer recapped that staff finds that more information needs to be provided in order to fully evaluate the application, including the utilities, parking plan, stormwater details, bicycle parking, landscaping, tree inventory, façade materials mix, labeling of site dimensions, DORA, garbage collection and recycling. Commissioner Robertson asked for clarification of allowed residential units and the PUD. Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, explained that staff has been advised by the city attorney that density can be spread out over the entire PUD on a PUD with multiple lots. He said staff experience with mortgage companies, however, is that during refinancing there are often questions about whether or not it is meeting the city density requirement. Staff decided to call out Lot 1 density so it is very clear to a mortgage company that the city did intend for that density to be allowed. Further, the city can allow an increase density over 50 units per acre with a PUD. Commissioner Kanne asked if the city has suggested a timeframe for the applicant to address the outstanding issues. Mr. Walther responded a specific date hasn’t been set. He spoke about the statutory time limit for the city to act upon an application, which can be extended or waived. He added that the issues staff has identified can be resolved in a short amount of time. Commissioner Person asked for the definition of a limited service hotel. Ms. Kramer responded that limited service hotel means there isn’t a restaurant on site, only breakfast is provided, and it is not an extended stay hotel. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated she doesn’t have questions until the plan is complete. Mr. Walther stated it was hoped that the Commission share any specific direction or issues with staff and the applicant at this time. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the planting shortage is of concern to her. She spoke about the site being an entrance to the city and she’d like to see the plan adjusted to include more plantings. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 15 Subject: Platia Place Applicant Bill Stoddard, SLP Park Venture Properties, said he welcomed feedback on the project. He spoke about the market research done for rental units. He said he agrees that more trees and shrubs would be appropriate for a gateway property. He said he will be meeting with city staff very soon to resolve outstanding issues. Commissioner Robertson stated for a gateway and prominent spot he finds the two buildings pretty uninspiring and formulaic architecturally. He said he would hope to see something more unique and substantial on this spot, which he understands is more expensive. He said it falls short. Mr. Stoddard says they will keep that in mind as they balance all factors. Commissioner Tatalovich asked how the applicant approaches the utilities. Mr. Stoddard responded they’ve been in discussion with the Engineering Dept. about that. He said with most utilities developers are always installing new and frequently relocating utilities. He said this situation is a little different because of the forcemain. Right now he is inclined to leave the footprint of the building as is. Further discussions will be held later this week. Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. Jerry Kern, 1155 Ford Rd., #316, said the lot which is next to his condo building has been vacant for eight years. He spoke about the difficulty of living next to what has become a dump site. He said he is extremely happy about the proposal. He said he doesn’t see anything that should prevent the project from moving forward. He stated he is in full support of having two beautiful buildings, walkways, trees and landscaping on the site. Mr. Kern said he is present to support the project 100%. Jalini Dhalgara, 1155 Ford Rd., #209, said she agrees with Mr. Kern’s points but she is concerned because there are already three hotels in the area and many other apartment buildings. She said her building, the Westmarke building, is struggling to sell units because it is not occupied by as many tenants as it should be for regular mortgage approval. She is wondering what value would be added or removed with an additional hotel and apartment building next to Westmarke. She asked if there is anything else that can be added to increase the value of the Westmarke building so it can be sold or so more of the units can be sold or they can have something for more rental income. Chair Peilen continued the public hearing. Chair Peilen commented that it is a good thing to develop the vacant parcel. She said she is concerned about the discrepancy between what the city requires for trees and landscaping and what was proposed. She said there were other significant gap areas in the application as well. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she agreed with the Chair and with Commissioner Robertson. She said she agreed with the city’s expectations of what needs to be worked out and completed on the plans. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 16 Subject: Platia Place Commissioner Robertson said the Commission is glad to see development on the important site. He said he doesn’t see any major obstacles to the development but details need to be worked out. He said the big picture for the development is good. Commissioner Person noted he has been amazed over the years at the level of interest in building hotels along 394 and the demand for apartments. Commissioner Tatalovich said he is in favor of the staff recommendation regarding issues to be worked out. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to table the application for preliminary plat and preliminary PUD and request additional information as outlined by staff and the Commission. Commissioner Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Mr. Walther said upcoming meeting dates and any new plans for the project will be posted on the city website. 4. Other Business: None 5. Communications Mr. Walther said the July 5 meeting is cancelled. The next scheduled meeting is July 19. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 17 Subject: Platia Place Engineering Comments 9/19/17 General Comments • All plan sheets should have legends to allow identification of lines and symbols including existing watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and forcemain. • City standard plates should be included in the construction details on all utilities, sidewalk and driveway entrances. • The grading and drainage plan should be separated from the utility work. EXISTING CONDITIONS SHEET 2 • There are a number of lines on the plan that are not identified, and too many of the lines are the same width. Use different line widths to differentiate lines. Remove the unnecessary lines and identify the relevant information on the plan or legend. • All manholes identified on the plans should show the type and direction of pipe connected to them, so that utility conflicts can be identified. • All existing utilities should be shown on existing conditions. Gas lines show up on later plans that are not identified on the existing conditions sheet. New lines are difficult to discriminate due to the similar line width. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SHEET 3 • Plans show existing stormwater manholes under the building. If these are not being used, they should be removed. • Remove or label unidentified lines on the plan. • Identify the entire length of existing electrical lines through the site, not just segments. • Gas lines on plan should be identified for relocation. • The hydrant on the south side of Lot 1 must be relocated; will not be allowed in the sidewalk. • Identify the pipe locations associated with manholes and gate valves shown on the plan. Currently it is too hard to see which lines are connected to what manholes. EROSION CONTROL SHEET 4 • The location of the silt fence should be shown on the plans. Currently there are too many lines and too much unnecessary text to determine fence location. • Identify the location of the catch basin inlets to be protected during construction. PRELIMINARY UTILITY, DRAINAGE, GRADING AND STORMWATER PLAN SHEET 6 • A Utility profile sheet is necessary for areas where the city’s utility lines are to be re- located. This plan should have the all existing utilities and their elevations to show proper separation. Currently there is too much unnecessary text and objects. If items are removed, such as pipes, they do not belong on the proposed condition plans. • Was the elevation of the existing off-site lift station forcemain surveyed? No indication from the plans. • The plan sheet needs to be extended to show the extent of construction limits – west parking lot specifically. • Plan must have construction notes detailing the methods of replacement and re-location construction methods. • Bends are shown in the watermain service lines without identifying the location or degree of bend. Meeting of October 4, 2017 Page 18 Subject: Platia Place • Construction still encroaches across the property line. Plan needs to show details and construction limits. • The maximum allowable bend for both the watermain and forcemain is 45 degrees with a minimum pipe length of 5 feet between bends. This should be shown on plans. • Existing utilities to be removed from the final utility plan. • In addition to the 10 foot separation between the forcemain and the watermain, there must be 18” vertical separation where the watermains and forcemain cross the storm sewer. All joints of pressurized pipes must have adequate blocking. • Utility pipe relocation should also include the abandonment of old easements and new easements over the relocation areas. The easement width should be 2 times the depth of the pipe for maintenance purposes. • The City forcemain records indicate that pipe is buried at a depth between 14’ and 16’. This pipe should be “pot holed” to identify exact depth for easement determination. Has the existing forcemain been surveyed at the lift station? • All existing utilities, public and private, should be identified on the plans. • It is unclear from the plan whether existing storm sewer pipe and manholes are being removed. If not part of the building drainage plan, the pipes and manholes should be removed. • More detail on the grading plan is needed where existing contour lines meet proposed contour lines. The building is proposed to be at an elevation of 903.5, yet there are 904 contours adjacent to the building suggesting drainage toward the building. Proposed contours should be included around proposed islands and catch basins to demonstrate how the parking lot will drain. • The proposed sidewalk will need spot elevations to demonstrate that a 2 percent slope is possible. • The plans should show the proposed curb line at the east driveway that is proposed to be abandoned. • ADA compliant curb ramps must be built at each driveway crossing. • Sanitary sewer service connection will require a manhole with an outside drop. Outside drop MH should replace the manhole in the ROW. • Proposed utility connections should have elevations identified. • The proposed watermain connections at the hotel were installed 30 years ago as part of the 394 project. These lines should be inspected/televised to determine their condition before construction. These lines should also have gate valves at each connection point identified on plan. • All new connections to watermain and sewer lines should be at 90 degree angles. • Unnecessary text continues to clutter the plans. For instance: engineering utility drawings do not need parking lot and access route labels.