Loading...
4.0. BASR 01-27-1998 .(./ A( Item# 4. ` of MEMORANDUM lk • River TO: Board of Adjustments FROM: Steve Ach, City Planner DATE: January 27, 1998 SUBJECT: Request by Guardian Angels of Elk River, Inc. for Variance, Public Hearing Case No. V 97-21 Issue Guardian Angels of Elk River, Inc. is requesting the following variances: A. Variance to exceed the allowable density within the Shoreland District by allowing six additional units for a multi-story assisted living facility. B. Variance to the maximum allowable impervious surface coverage of 25%. Location The northeast corner of Highway 10 and Joplin. Zoning/Land Use R2b (Two-Family Residential) / MR (Medium Density Residential) Attachments • Location map • Letter from Guardian Angels dated November 25, 1997 • Letter from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources dated October 22, 1997 and December 19, 1997 • Parking analysis prepared by Michael Trossen dated January 16, 1998 • Commercial planned unit development evaluation • Revised development plans 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 •Elk River, MN 55330 •TDD &Phone: (612)441-7420•Fax: (612)441-7425 Memo to Board of Adjustments/V97-21 January 27, 1998 Page 2 Overview Guardian Angels is proposing a mixed planned unit development of an 11 acre parcel adjacent to Lake Orono. The planned unit development has been divided into both a residential and commercial planned unit development. The townhomes adjacent to the lake have been considered residential while the assisted living and commercial parcel have been treated as commercial entities. This project is somewhat unique in that it is a mixed planned unit development. Since the project is a hybrid, the DNR and City staff have worked together to use a flexible interpretation of the ordinance. In some cases, the interpretation has helped Guardian Angels, while others are still in conflict with their plans. Density Variance The Shoreland Ordinance which applies to the property has specific density criteria for development within each tier adjacent to the lake (see attached map). After going through the lengthy calculations to determine the allowable density within each tier, it was found Guardian Angels would need a variance for 6 assisted living units to accomplish the proposed 80 unit assisted living complex. According to the Shoreland Ordinance, a total of 74 assisted living units could be developed in tier 2 without a variance. IPAs the Planning Commission discussed at the last Board of Adjustments meeting, the 6 unit variance could be avoided by deleting one townhouse unit along the lake. Eliminating one townhouse unit allows the density from that townhouse unit to be transferred to the second tier which is where the assisted living is proposed to be constructed. Based on the one townhouse and applying the added bonus that may be achieved, 6 units can be transferred to the second tier and included in the assisted living achieving the desired 80 unit complex. Obviously, Guardian Angels is opposed to this as they feel sacrificing additional units at this point will not meet their market projections to serve this area. Impervious Coverage Variance The second variance involves exceeding the maximum allowable surface coverage within the second and third tier. The Shoreland Ordinance under commercial planned unit developments specifically reads, "iii. Erosion control and storm water management for commercial planned unit developments shall (C) be designed and constructed to effectively manage reasonably expected quantities and qualities of storm water runoff. Impervious surface coverage within any tier shall f:\shrdoc\planning\pc\v97-21x.doc Memo to Board of Adjustments/V97-21 January 27, 1998 Page 3 not exceed 25 percent of the tier area except 35 percent impervious surface coverage may be allowed in the first tier of general development lakes with an approved storm water management plan consistent with Part 904.08(3)." As presented at the last meeting, Mike Trossen, the architect for Guardian Angels, provided a development evaluation form (see attachment) which outlined the amount of open space, building coverage, hard surface and total impervious area. The 25 percent maximum impervious area does not apply to tier 1 because this is the residential portion of the planned unit development. The design criteria listed in this section of the Shoreland Ordinance basically requires 50 percent open space be preserved as well as meeting several other design criteria. On the other hand, tiers 2 and 3 are considered commercial and are therefore required to maintain a maximum impervious area of 25%. If tier 1 was also considered commercial, it too would have to adhere to the 25% maximum impervious area. As outlined on the development evaluation forms in tier 2 the amount of total impervious area which includes building and parking areas, is 49%. In tier 3 the total impervious area is 40%. As Guardian Angels architect Mike Trossen presented to the Planning Commission at last month's meeting, there is no way they can meet the maximum 25% impervious area unless • they reduced their plan by 50%. Therefore, the efforts made between the last meeting and this meeting was to try to minimize the need for a variance. One item the architect has taken a look at is reducing the footprint of the commercial building and making it a three story building. The building coverage area has decreased from 21,500 sq. ft. (22%) to 13,000 sq. ft. (13.5%). However, the hard surface area or parking lot has increased from 16,597sq. ft. (17%) to 25,331 sq. ft. (26%). The bottom line is the total amount of impervious area has not decreased from the original proposal and is still at 49% in tier 2 and 40% in tier 3. Recommendation A. The variance regarding the increase in density to allow 6 additional assisted living units is a variance that could be avoided by eliminating one townhouse unit and transferring that density to allow the assisted living to have a total of 80 units without the need for a variance. However, if the assisted living building is constructed as proposed, the footprint of the building could allow the additional six units to be included within the footprint of the proposed building with no physical change to the development. If the site plan proposed for the assisted living is approved, staff would recommend approval of the variance • f:\shrdoc\planning\pc\v97-21x.doc Memo to Board of Adjustments/V97-21 January 27, 1998 Page 4 request to allow 6 additional units in the assisted living building, • based on the following findings: 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE SHORELAND ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP, GIVEN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT WILL BE LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE A TOTAL OF 80 UNITS. THEREFORE, WHETHER THE STRUCTURE HAS 74 OR 80 UNITS WILL NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL EFFECT ON THE LAKE. 2. THE PROJECT IS A MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHICH HAS UNIQUE AND FLEXIBLE STANDARDS. 3. THROUGH NUMEROUS MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS,THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SIX(6)ASSISTED LIVING UNITS HAS BEEN MINIMIZED. 4. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF ADJACENT RESIDENTS OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH THE DEVELOPMENT IS TO OCCUR. 5. ASSISTED LIVING IS A UNIQUE TYPE OF FACILTIY MUCH DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE DNR WATERS. THE IMPACT FROM THE ASSISTED LIVING UNITS ONTO LAKE ORONO WILL BE VIRTUALLY UNOTICEABLE COMPARED TO OTHER TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. B. At this time it is difficult for staff to support the variance request to exceed the maximum impervious area of 25% in tiers 2 and 3 of the Shoreland District. One suggestion the Board of Adjustments may wish to consider is granting a variance in tier 2 since that is where the first phase of construction will be occurring for the assisted living project. As indicated on the attached map, a majority of the commercial parking lot is included in tier 2 and is considered impervious. This parking lot will not be constructed until a later date when the commercial building has been proposed and approved through the Planning Commission and City Council. Therefore, by leaving the proposed parking lot pervious, the percent of impervious area in tier 2 is reduced to approximately 30%, much closer to the 25% required in the ordinance. When an application for the commercial building is finally submitted, a specific plan will be provided illustrating the exact amount of impervious area needed; which, may be less than is presently shown on the concept plan. Basically, a variance could be granted in tier 2 and no variance granted in tier 3 until a later date when a specific plan has been submitted which may be a more appropriate time to look at minimizing or reducing the amount of the variance that is being requested. S \shrdoc\planning\pc\v97-21x.doc Memo to Board of Adjustments/V97-21 January 27, 1998 Page 5 Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the variance request by S Guardian Angels to exceed the 25% impervious coverage requirement in tier 2 of the proposed Orono Lake Planned Unit Development based on the following: 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMEN TOF THE SHORELAND ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP ON DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. 2. THE PROPERTY HAS SOME UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS IN THAT IT IS BOARDERED BY A STATE HIGHWAY(10) AND IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE SHORELAND DISTRICT. THE VARYING SHORELAND ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO THE SPECIAL CONDITIONS WHICH APPLY TO THE PROPERTY. 3. OTHER EXISTING COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH ARE SANDWICHED BETWEEN STATE HIGHWAY 10 AND LAKE ORONO HAVE RIGHTS THAT WOULD NOT BE ENJOYED BY GUARDIAN ANGELS IF A VARIANCE WAS NOT GRANTED. 4. THE AMOUNT OF THE VARIANCE IS MINIMIZED BY CONSTRUCTING A MULTI- STORY BUILDING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS AREA. FURTHERMORE,THE IMPERVIOUS AREA WHICH EXCEEDS THIS ORDINANCE IS OCCURRING AS FAR AWAY FROM THE LAKE AS POSSIBLE. 5. THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF RESIDENTS. THE USE OF STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PONDS WILL TREAT THE RUNOFF PRIOR TO DISCHARGE INTO LAKE ORONO. This variance to the amount of impervious area applies only to tier 2 of the Orono Lake Planned Unit Development. A variance application will need to be submitted for tier 3 when a specific plan has been prepared and is ready for presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council. S f:\shrdoc\planning\pc\v97-21x.doc I 11 N.1 T I e J I ., I sis 1°4 PF1 .‘ ' ` , CITY � '� tq k. ---1 t\ PARK - 1`Ile F . f-As '"1111.111111. . . 1-7/41ZIA 6 M NER-- .J 11/tf r� Mr.•,. Imial K!, i �� "' `1 LOCATION immii amv- • • Mitt ) (''.; '41. A . a -111": muff ,ftvLityp -•. 9 . U� ......i-,-, - E'er C Iw.'..°. .'� _ .Y..en •- ✓✓✓ /�-� \ r..,( I — 4" as is mi.: 1�DIj 60T/44� ,: / \ OM �'i wn e.. :ego ♦e a ( W /- LAKE IA ..1/ ■�-!��.���;� ��"t- .4( p p .g ), N� / l ) = - bib a Tr'fir _-i IrriLaV": *' w- -- I Ii.. LAKE � . 4; . F r U S HIC/YfA1 N0 62 I 0 0.0 ♦.1� / - Ric .\ rwn\ OG'1'NU I PM1MS •• . P I „N•I 4\ S _. of 11.11 .1:.-..i..6104,pe, 1 II 1 at 111:X=Mr1111 "1"----'44111'.. 1"ifir- kiIN %ht.' "It rrill- allik 11■1' - E�" V=MIN A *.11 PP 167:111112.4 1111MI ug gm ID!• aI 1 _ -4 s t r I E �®iniim■ ►l FAMRf" iIlTmt rm. mgo- 1 s"— id . °ra!>�h /*I -a M(� . �wa r. N. .. _____- - .u.:, :, . % tor Iva -�'./; �� .._----- _ : ; it . r• ek/ .\( . / LOCATION V 97-21 N City of ' A I IAP LU 97-2 •E1ITP 97-12 lover 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 CASE' ZC 97-2 CU 97-20 Elk River. MN 55330 Guardian Angels of Elk River, Inc. Variance Request for Orono Shores November 25, 1997 Description of Request for Variance: Over the past five months, Guardian Angels has worked with City Staff and the Regional Hydrologist from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources on density issues for Guardian Angels' proposed Senior campus development. The DNR has calculated densities from the Shoreland Ordinance which was adopted by the City of Elk River in 1991. In their opinion letter of October 22, 1997, the DNR has recommended 20 units of townhomes (10 buildings) and 72 units of Assisted Living. Guardian Angels, as determined from its market analysis, would like to plan a total of 80 units of Assisted Living: 60 units in Phase I and 20 units as the future need is documented. In order to meet the projected needs of this special Senior population, Guardian Angels is requesting a variance of 8 units. The DNR concurs with this variance request and has stated in their letter that 8 units would be justified. Rationale: Based on the conditions the City has established in granting a variance, Guardian Angels would like to offer the following comments: +Hardship - The project intends to meet the demand and needs of Guardian Angels' projected waiting list, but also the demographic projections of the"over 85-year olds". Based on the statistics recently published by the Central Minnesota Council on Aging, Guardian Angels, as a service provider for this area, must be prepared to respond to the needs of the"baby boomers" who will turn 85 in the year 2030. Reducing the campus by 8 units would diminish our objective. +Land and Structure-The property is configured in an unusual pattern with the 1250 ft. of lakeshore on one side and the highway angling the property on the other. With the DNR Shoreland Ordinance dividing the property into Tiers, there is definitely a hardship based on the"lay of the land". Guardian Angels is also required to meet certain regulations for green space, ponding, storm drainage, street utilities easements, etc. Whereas Guardian Angels had planned for a commercial development by the lake at Hudson Street, the DNR requires this area be used as residential for townhomes versus commercial development. , • • +Literal Application of Provisions- Other Assisted Living projects which are built on • lakeshore have enjoyed higher densities. Guardian Angels, as petitioner, would feel deprived to be denied our variance. An example of an Assisted Living project with higher density per lakeshore acre would be Rosewood Estates in Roseville Minnesota that has 100 units of Assisted Living built on 2 acres right next to the lakeshore. + Special Conditions & Circumstances-The petitioner, Guardian Angels, has not created any special conditions or circumstances by its own actions or inactions. Our market analysis and our waiting list to-date reflect the need for our 80 units of Assisted Living and we created our plans accordingly. +Injurious Effect on Other Residents of the City- The Lake Orono Association has had an opportunity to learn of Guardian Angels' plans. Sixty neighbors on Lake Orono were in attendance and seemed comfortable with the development plans. Guardian Angels does not believe that our project will adversely affect other residents of the City or neighborhood. +Docks and Public Access to the Lake- Guardian Angels plans to have one dock for the Assisted Living residents so that they can have an occasional pontoon ride. The townhomes will have no more than one dock for every two units. • Guardian Angels' Mission Guardian Angels of Elk River is committed to enhancing the lives of those it serves by providing quality health care and supportive services; its primary focus is on the provision of services to older persons. The organization seeks to develop and cultivate a continuum of services in a variety of settings that enable individuals to maintain their highest level of independence, dignity and spirituality. Working in cooperation with other organizations and individuals, Guardian Angels assists in meeting the health care and supportive service needs in the community and beyond. GUARDIAN ANGELS: 1962- 1997 As a continuing care community for Seniors, chronically ill and post hospital clients, Guardian Angels has provided Senior housing and health care options in a supportive environment for the past 35 years. Founded in 1962 under the sponsorship of Holy Trinity Episcopal Church of Elk River in cooperation with Elk River's business leaders and medical community, Guardian Angels began with a vision of an acute care hospital. However, as the dream grew it became apparent the community needed services for Seniors rather than an acute care facility. A 60-bed skilled nursing Care Center was built in 1965 along with a 24-unit Senior apartment building on the Mississippi River. Today leGuardian Angels serves over 1,000 people per month in its various Senior programs. Enhancing people's independence, dignity and spirituality has been the focus of all services and the guiding force behind development of buildings and programs. Guardian Angels has developed congregate Dining Sites, Mobile Meals, Assisted Living services, Adult Day Care, a Senior Center, a 120-bed skilled nursing Care Center in Elk River and 216 Senior Apartment units in Elk River, Zimmerman and Becker, Minnesota. In 1998, 21 units of Senior { Housing, Pine Cone Manor, will be added to the Pine Tree Manor Senior Housing in Zimmerman. Most recently, the organization's Home Health Care merged with Elim Care Ministries to form a broader Home Care agency. Also, a community Hospice program at the Care Center provides services to the terminally ill and support to their families. Looking ahead to a growing population of Seniors, the Board of Directors is planning its newest campus on Lake Orono. In 1998 on 12 acres at Lake Orono, Guardian Angels plans to build Assisted Living and townhouses for Seniors. With a successful`Be An Angel" $1.1 million Capital Campaign, Guardian Angels has been able to expand the skilled nursing Care Center with three new wings, 20 additional private rooms plus ancillary spaces such as family dining room, chapel/community room and reflective area. At the completion of the Campaign by 1998, the Elk River Senior Center/Dining Site will be expanded by 8,108 square feet so that more community Seniors can come to share dining and social events with the Seniors living on the Guardian Angels campus. ASSISTED LIVING In the broadest sense, assisted living could be described as a program approach that emphasizes consumer values, a residential setting and care service capacity to facilitate"aging in place." This definition incorporates the underlying premises around which consensus exists: a consumer orientation, a residential setting and some available services. The rationale for this level of consensus is straightforward. First,because older adults do not want to leave their own homes, the setting must be as much like a private home as possible. Second, availability of services is a strong motivation to move into congregate housing. Finally, both the setting and services have to be consumer friendly to be market competitive. While a variety of assisted living models exist, the models can be categorized as one of three types: housing with services, assisted housing and nursing home replacement. The type of assisted living that Guardian Angels is planning for its Lake Orono campus is assisted housing. Because assisted housing emphasizes easing the impact of communal aspects of congregate living (e.g., meal services, scheduled use of community space, scheduled personal care services, etc.), individual autonomy often is viewed in terms of group norms. Clients are encouraged to make decisions that fall well within acceptable ranges for the group as a whole. This model typically fills a gap between housing options where residents are able to direct and usually 41 arrange their own services and settings where occupancy is dictated by service need. This model emphasizes the need for oversight and the role of staff in ensuring needs are identified and services provided. Typically, the setting (not the services) is licensed, often resulting in more restrictive building codes and fewer residential features. For example, more support services spaces- such as an activity room, medication storage area and central staffing area- are built in. There is more emphasis on safety features and less emphasis on the amenity level of units. However, wood trim, upholstered furniture, indirect lighting and other residential treatments are used to soften the feeling of the building. Assisted housing has more service capacity. Personal care services are routinely available, including assistance with bathing, grooming, walking, eating, taking medications and toileting. In-house staff often deliver all of the hotel-type services and many of the personal care services. External staff such as home care and home health aides deliver complex personal care and perform any nursing-related tasks. Pricing mechanisms typically include shelter and a basic package of services. Additional services are offered via individual contract. From the provider's point of view, the assisted housing model may be a mixed blessing. Marketing units may be easier, and residents have a high desire to remain where they are. But assisted housing may require more expensive construction, licensure and more intensive management skills. Additionally, service funding is a significant issue, particularly for low- and moderate-income am residents. • �nn��STATE nn OF � . DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 414 ELMAN LN., #203, ST. CLOUD,MN 56301 litiONE NO.(320)255-2976 FILE NO. October 22, 1997 RECF,\, Carol Mills OCT / 1997 Executive Director Guardian Angels of Elk River GUARDIAN rt!ti L; �L�,A�I�r 280 Evans Av. Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Ms. Mills: PROPOSED SENIOR CAMPUS, LAKE ORONO (71-13P), SHERBURNE COUNTY First of all let me apologize for missing the last meeting. I was under the impression that you were going to confirm the meeting date, time and place after speaking with the city staff. I also wanted to thank you for your cooperation with the city and the Department as we try to work through the remaining issues on this project. I do want to clarify some issues that seem to keep coming up. First of all, I want to reiterate that the shoreland ordinance does not appear to prohibit development of the campus. However, it does limit the densities under which this development can occur. This is also true of the other city codes. It is also important to understand that the shoreland ordinance is meant to reduce aesthetic, as well as recreational use impacts of the shoreland and accompanying water body. The standards for PUD's allow for increased densities in part through increasing setbacks, transferring densities from near shore further back, and managing vegetation and stormwater in a collective fashion. The ordinance also provides for commercial development, with increased setbacks. The shoreland ordinance is not the only city code involved and cannot be separated from any other controls the city has. That is why I have encouraged you to include city staff in the discussions. A meaningful solution cannot be reached by breaking this into pieces. We need to make sure that in satisfying one ordinance we do not run into another problem with another section of ordinance. There has been a great deal of debate about the PUD standards and specifically whether this is commercial or residential. The letter from Ed Fick, indicated that there is clearly portions that are residential (the townhomes) and commercial (the retail/clinic). The assisted living facilities fall in between the two definitions. They have characteristics of both. However, in looking at the service and transient nature of the facility it appears to me that it is appropriate to call the assisted living commercial also. I am comfortable with treating the assisted living under the commercial PUD standards. I have never felt that it was appropriate to classify the townhomes as anything other than residential. What I have said is that if this remains to be a question, the Board of Adjustment is set up to make those interpretations, although I do not see any other way to classify the townhomes and my comments to the Board of Adjustment would be that the townhomes are clearly residential. Furthermore, because this is a mixed use PUD, the standards for commercial and residential PUD's must be applied to each portion. This does raise some questions when transferring densities from the residential portion to the commercial. Your architect has asked about whether the ordinance allows the transfer of a quad from the first tier to the second tier commercial, based on floor area rather than units. Ash Specifically, can the four 1200 ft2 units be transferred and then converted to twelve 400 ft2 units of AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Ali Guardian Angels, 10/22/97 page 2 assisted living in tier two. The answer to this question is yes. In our opinion this can be done under the present ordinance and according to the preliminary calculations this would yield an allowable density of 72 units. In order to get the 80 units you desire you would need to ask for a variance. However, considering the physical limitations of the property a minor variance of 3200 ft2 in this situation, I believe could be justified. With this clarification it appears that the shoreland ordinance will allow you to develop the 20 units of townhomes in tier one, 72 units of assisted living in tier two, and a commercial building in tier three of 43,173 ft2, without any variances to the shoreland standard. Again,please bare in mind that this assumes that all the other standards for open space, stormwater, etc... are also met as well as any other city codes. Lastly, I have checked into the issues that were brought up, regarding Cambridge. Rather than going into great detail, it appears that this would have no bearing on your situation. Specifically, the City allowed commercial development (the assisted living) to occur in an area where commercial development is prohibited (the Wild and Scenic River district). I hope that this clarifies the department position as well as allow you to go forward with design process. I strongly recommend that you work with the city staff to resolve all of the outstanding issues and not focus on the shoreland standards. Si cerely, 0*(8 Larry Kramka Area Hydrologist c. David Hills, Regional Hydrologist City of Elk River Michael Trossen, Trossen Wright Architects P.A. • y�P,��pF MIN,v4:9 9 ��►► Minnesota Department of Natural Resources \iUt rcg DNR WATERS I i �� 0 4140 THIELMAN LN., #203, ST. CLOUD, MN 56301 L_-_=- 0 Fti,. P�h Phone No. (320) 255-2976 TT °F NaTUO\- December 19, 1997 Steve Ach City Planner City of Elk River P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330-0490 Dear Mr. Ach: Preliminary Plat of Orono Shores, Orono Lake (71-13P), Sherburne County Thank you for sending a copy of the proposal for our review. As you know we have worked with Guardian Angels and their consultants to develop a proposal that meets the requirements of the City including preserving the shoreland values of the property. It appears that the proposal will balance all of the requirements and still provide for the desired senior housing project. The PUD requirements in the shoreland ordinance, appear to have functioned well in helping to create a suitable development within the context of the developers needs and the City code. I 0 have reviewed the plan sheets and supplemental data you provided and have the following comments. First of all, the densities being proposed appear to be consistent with the shoreland ordinance. They also follow with the discussions we have had with the proposer. There is the need for a small variance to the allowable units in tier 2. This variance does not conflict with the integrity of the Shoreland Program, if the Board of Adjustment believes that a suitable hardship exists. One factor that is not discussed in the plat, is that the density multiplier requires that the building setbacks exceed the standard by 25% and that there are other methods used to screen and reduce visibility approved by the City. The most likely approach to use in this case would be to preserve and enhance the vegetative conditions of the site. Obviously views of the lake are important. Therefore a vegetation/landscape plan should include a strategy to balance the need for view with site specific plantings of mixed tree and shrub species to meet the overall intent of this section. The tier calculation tables have a couple of discrepancies that should be corrected. First of all, the tier 2 summary includes the statement that there are no commercial buildings present. This is inaccurate, since the assisted living complex is being considered a commercial building for the purposes of the PUD. In addition, the open space in tier one is more accurately stated as 51%. The proposal is a mixed use PUD. Therefore, the proposal has the characteristics and • DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 • TTY:612-296-5484, 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer IS, Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Who Values Diversity '1E4 Minimum of 10'4 Post-Consumer Waste Preliminary Plat of Orono Shores 12/19/97,page 2 requirements of both residential and commercial PUD. The standards for stormwater management require that there be no more than 25%total impervious area within tier 2 and 3. The current proposal exceeds this requirement. In tier 1, the residential PUD language allows deviation from this standard with an approved stormwater management plan. The proposal was developed with a stormwater management system which incorporates sufficient ponding to adequately treat the generated runoff of the site. This deviation from the standards needs to be addressed, most likely with a variance. If the Board of Adjustment found that a variance was justified we would not object. However, stormwater management practices should be sufficient to have no net change on the rates and qualities of runoff from the site than would have been allowed if developed according to the standard. Lastly, the ordinance requires that there be agreements and restrictions in place governing open space and common area, maintenance and preservation. I am not sure if these have been drafted at this time. However, I recommend that any approvals be issued under the condition that these items need to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to final recording. Thank you again for the chance to review the project. I appreciate your work on trying to balance the complexities of a mixed use PUD as well as the other City code requirements. This proposal has been greatly modified from it's original form and appears to strike a balance. The PUD requirements have worked well in numerous projects around the state, when the level of development is matched to the site characteristics. This site has some significant limitations for the level of development originally anticipated, which increased the amount of frustration and • tension within the process. I hope that in its final form we have an acceptable project for all the participants. Si cerely, Larry camka Area Hydrologist c. Michael Trossen, Trossen Wright Architects P.A. Carol Mills, Guardian Angels of Elk River David Hills, Regional Hydrologist Ed Fick, Shoreland Hydrologist TOSSES WRIGHT ARCHITECTS P.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Sherry EmersonMutterer Guardian Angels 350 Evans Avenue Elk River, Minnesota 55330 FROM: Mr. Michael Trossen Trossen Wright Architects, P.A. 405 Sibley Street, Suite 230 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 DATE: January 16, 1998 RE: Parking Statistics—Projects Throughout Minnesota The following is the outcome of research conducted by our office on the statistics for both assisted and congregate living projects throughout Minnesota. This listing is a combination of projects done by both Trossen Wright, as well as other sites we have personally visited over the past several weeks. • Assisted Living Units Parking Stalls Rosewood Estates 100 52 Roseville, Minnesota Rosewood Estates 100 37 Saint Paul, Minnesota Rosewood Estates 106 54 Maplewood, Minnesota Homestead at Maplewood 62 38 Maplewood, Minnesota Heritage Living Center 18 14 Houston, Minnesota River Heights 60 30 ono South Saint Paul, Minnesota (Proposed) (Proposed) 111' Assumption Court 35 22 405 SIBLEY STREET Cold Spring, Minnesota • SUITE 230 ST. PAUL, MN 55101 1612) 222-1244 Ms. Sherry EmersonMutterer Guardian Angels January 16, 1998 Page 2 Evergreen Place 24 19 Pine Island, Minnesota Saint Anthony Health Center 26 9 Saint Anthony, Minnesota Congregate Living Units Parking Stalls Willow Wood Apartments 46 36 White Bear Lake, Minnesota Shepherd Oak 46 31 Sauk Rapids, Minnesota Angel Ridge Apartments 54 17 Elk River, Minnesota Lilac Parkway 44 26 Robbinsdale, Minnesota Summit Point 29 20 Edina, Minnesota • Pleasant Place 24 12 Rogers, Minnesota Maple Terrace 38 19 Maple Plain, Minnesota Rose Court 16 12 Pierz, Minnesota c:lorojectslgaardangel bronobch • Guardian Angels on the Lake Nurse Staffing Patterns for the Assisted Living Facility Proposed staffing for 60 Units: Daytime shift: 7 to 10 staff total Evening shift: 3 staff total Night shift: 1 staff total Proposed staffing for 80 Units: Daytime shift: 10 to 12 staff total Evening shift: 4 to 5 staff total Night shift: 1 to 2 staff total These numbers are based on an average acuity level of assisted living residents. These numbers could vary slightly as the acuity level fluctuates. • Administrative Staffing Patterns for Assisted Living Project Daytime Shift: 2 Staff total Dietary Staffing Patterns for Assisted Living Project: Daytime Staffing: 3 Staff total Maximum total staff: 17 Staff at any time 1-19-98 S 'bUHHH n r 0 yy 3 0 0 5 rn HOHHU �' Nd � °0 � ° ado ° � o 0d m � m tii $ rizyo 0til z Xi n ap r� z �, ao . 5 g V01 PI g Pg .% Hg .--3 ci)� PCtriEn 0 0 � PCtr7v, 0 p PC t� v) 0 0 �, b °z m cn a Z C' � a Z �' cD v o - - - ... ... ►C CZ �, C) DC O 1O O 0. o 0 0 0 0 — o' o' - co O `� N Cr1 0 0 N 0 0 N N '-• ^ MM ON 00 O O O ^ G9 r 11J p O O ■--• !-'� 10 0.1 tni A 0000 00 O �N- /b ? Z ^ ? ^ (7 ID r .r tri ON lim,■1 r CD dCD A O. til V VD O r o e. ... z I tl O Z t co Q b N v► W N r•-• .p 0 ■ ria 'b W 0o 00 .A t 00 �-• W cm — .-. J W N IJ ��--ee�� t!) -. oo v, W W N t) CD O ON - '0 to O -1 O O N_ ---• 00 C\ O W A �• ^ O` W W O O -P 0 -. "h N W -O N i-r 0 ^ CD 0 V"4'. /► 00 O p O�YI CD 0 0 t� - .-• O O o CT "§ `� ~ W �D .0 O `�� C� y -4 N 00 - 0 O of no= a �n cn y to cn o►-t) c/) (. 0 to vi .cn En y N go 0 ^ '-' N cn U) 5. N rp, !., !, i-y i-� A' !', 0. (D „ ! l r-n r-41 !') > C!] 0 o P to r-ri i-h EA izi (D .r. !'h ! O C 0 d - ~ �. 'L7 O '17 C2 CA CD CD .. 0 0 rte. .-. Z try � � CD cn � � � r". :4 CD cn � � 0 CA o o ° 5. o o < c o 0 1 r •A• A)' 0 N ... - C 0 — p ^' UQ U 0 O �n .-+ b.. r.+ ^ V. ^ o � o � o °e o � z ' - 3 cry c 0 0 o == CD b o O_ . = 0 lg. 0 p) = ^ CD ►� "' _ a U �. CD v C. 0 "C1 = y .-1 D' 0 U2 '173_ ti 0 '-' (OD "CI .� .-. Un �. W "C3 y CD 0 CD H 0 co ta 0 O . .0 ' o ^ W v' ._. 0 CD y ,� :-h ... L].. -1 -•• o CO CD N M (A) ' " ... c CA II a `-' ti = 0. = caD N CL CO I y0 ^ = U O IIo 0 ,.... R7 n b 0' 'C3 cn y K 0 cm y 0 3 C 'C7 I 0 0 H �-- "cl co a Er =-.�, ., ._ .. �_._, 0. ..._. W W cn rn rn Z 0 w 0 r r r g -u -a -v o 0 0 co J 'd W O bd CO-N '-3 -----"ti bd O ea-N ►-3 —I -0 bd C/) O bdd CO N H —I P � PP1 � rn a 0o rn P 51 NgPP1 � rn Illik; 0 dd � w dzdd dy � � 8[ O � � m � c � � n Can c Cn n C m 0 '6 m n 0 p m n 0 J m n P m � p to m � a � '� o v � yo n0 � o n 0 `x" t Cn - z � m �, H n � Cr] Cn 0 b u' `°° G7 0 0 VI Cn > a 0 `� t el 0 o. Cri a. Cn cD 'C rte., C/1 o `° = x o 0 O O ... O O — O C ' ' N O N O O N — 11 En •A 00 v 00 O J tT1 O L+ _ M N .� �d m - Cl "Ens ^ La CD d ° 0 o' til a 0 o m r o lA 4 tri ^ cr til 0 Z a N 0 'd N LA r-. N A n '0 C/) b w 00 1� W 00 H w LA .-• �1 w N N ..., m lA VD Ch ►-. w 1 Ln CD P O O\ VD LA 0 - 0 0 N 00 ON 0 w on ^ W to A O N \O R. 'T.' ^ .--. O ■0 r 0 ,. Z,01 t' O H-3 !" 0 O V) v O O O OOi 0 O' ti v VD O\ O ''r o' ti CD O 00 O O O'. CD O O 'Ls o .-. N .A O �L! O to = CA N CA N RCA CA n = CA CA CA CA N P '..7 •^ ..-+ y F' !•� LA•=, C)D ;;-- ;'h ,n',. :'h A' !.17 .- N V"i :"h !'y� ;'.h > V1 0 „ .s to ;"r'� ,'..r'� JG 00 - A� o d O tv �n' Cep O CD (FR A ^ g x A ^ El -I ^ rn v' Cl. ON J N �. O pc- C N N N p. C 4. = l!' w v. o o o ti A O CCDD °o 0 o C~ O• CAD y o 0 0 Z _ _ _ pQ ° ° z .4 " 3 * ' i y a n lit sz A)4' ° < o 5 3 CZ 0 al) ^ 0 O A CAD C CAD O' P ... _ CD , ~h G �'.. ti O "- O' CD 'L3 O �. ((Q CD p (�D v EA 0 0 co A CO ' y w O � _. a r) ' � O a O _ D D Ey n c X §N 0 A" c O ' 0• P Cl) .i ti = CO A COD CAD N Q. 11 r R o. `y 0 - 1 O "7 CCD .-. 'L7 LO CD 0 Cl. �. CD aiklIV My v E 0 n E.s O O- ° y .d CD o O ° O i�T1 (I) 0 E Cl) 0 v 0 rn rn o Cam) ° CC)) --II r P'te— r 13 13 0 I C C • • • /-sw '% k t --- • • , • • II As , , - - - • • Y• S • • awn.. I .ate • • ■ • • • • r +� • • ��---- ---N --- ° G —- - -- IN i • 1 - . I : . :: i ! ,a�p © �� I I r ' .• I _ • ° ° �� 1- 0.. --iv—, 0,6 / ,,,, ...Aky,... • , 1 LL_____r. , i n"A k , . I• ' : - -70 4,,,,,...4%. / f9' 0-66 - --e..:-. 1.e..._0 , ) '.'•' i or:ft' /....: I / p-..iiVIP6--%:-.s o / Ilf. *Pektkir ., , it#1.14te-o°d"y..-i ,..'-' ,' , . i. 0 0 411■ ., , f), ii,..41.:::,y4 4;4 e*.cizzi...°/9 i / / i .! -: • e., / i i 0 ,•Awii-lt 4..7-4 , , 4_,:pyi," ... / a rOlk., 0 (�� ita/,--- X s..:.- i • in :, . `� ?':- �� ° i�J� �� 110 0� Cis <• i DJ sr I ( . ' AVA 41' %V Cr 1 * ')14;.. .0 14.11; .(11, i (1) *8 ...dgftv A 0 n ., lo 33 r �L ' r o11 i„, \111' rw'•..� 1..1.E u -,e i' d i ' '�(� . 0 0•iv... qw, \0,,2, 0 0 ,.. T.Itia4 ° ,,,,,l ;',9"-AN a 1111010 . ' .,O eon .`�`., O N /^ "�A`, `` \ ��i , ® y� rn 1) c �� , I{l� (III% 33 1 - • Mi. � , , ��° e =i ° �, , e 0" 14%,\ k • •‘ '• 1., Ati el \ plit‘ / iiiir \, .', \ • K \ , \ ic)° 4 ' \- 00 , , M , \,,,,„z„or ..... ,,..viit Ike (.....1 :, . ,,, i ` • �► O/*• $ : 1rd ) ., ...../ gpA,.,..,' (•)' Aer,der Ilr . .-" ....... ....... - 'ki)' ' ' '9'' •. ''' tkto■ I . V ■ . J• \to .15.1iiiii;. "iy,•. i 1.111111181.40 Ist) < 41) 1 dillik.1 '‘‘ -. ;1 .,4 i I 4 I or ori g . . - ' A t NO (-----All ‘• W -< =11=11GI=1- 6 I 11-11=11=11` .,; 1 1 11-11`=11—'1 / g ��� D !:1- =" D '� „- D 11ji-.,_� .; ■ ���� • T: -* 0 �� 0 P,, 74 X.: 1 Ditl"- i.4.1tU I,%...... k-n Ili.11- �� t _Js 11 ea-:Jh172;. -: :z: r al....�►_, T m C/1 4': 4 p i i!112 i .t, 1!to ? 1 g u,i, , I Igo 3 ig ply 1 1 i IF)2. 4 il r- . I k ii.- t. ; z i 3 a i 4 hi& 1 1 II a • [ C81 1) I LAND>Wr iii:::: ua CERTIFICATION U.E ♦ ry� I-20-•J6 t ws. va a..nR..vws a< o{,•I•oU N ANOas a ax /swot. .•o. O=O .til l ram ire .'asm.:�a�is Yc'::°@.om� ORONO LAKE DEVELOPMENT �"' WRIGHT Amaral "µ' �1 R X01°°s uw a s ans DATE BY gHVIE-GE16 O.K I•NO•. u-NCSOTA 140. MT BOilt7ilEC • III 0 • liNpraple•NATIST VOW 1-30-111 N..• , CO % m m . I.O.„ c,..7....... .....—...1 m • • ." 10 wil , •. a.. , • • . , ... • • _ • • ....„ .. .. . • • ,.,_,.. • • ..... • • • • .. • • 01111111M • • 7.1■0 • • • • F.....___ . • ._. I . . -:: 4 •.. .. .. .. ._ .. ... ... . , ..... . / • : • .--iellt • . • • . . . . 1 1 : AWAY / I - . ____ ._ __________________ 1 • ---- ----- 114 404 ----4-,----__ ._ . r ,, .. • 4 ii ,, .., , • _____, • i . • • . „,.:_... 41ttgl/ ,.• • 1 . . , • ....... . ,, • . , , • . • ,,, ______ 1\_ AL * :4 Atilts.i.,b-ty./../ ,,‘ 1 ,_ _ ____ __ ,. . "_ ,, . , ....4: ,7, ,'c-8 -14tolit,./•• , .: 'fl? . , , kV'', 1:4;■ty.:, .,:!,,;,41. . , / 1 4 4 ' • i li ' • a ,,,,,,cii,vi.•.•,_kkiii • / AVaraz. • P . / ‘,,,' • • • • • ,0 • • is k . . .;-iri? f,./..:-V , P:00•0 'Pr; ii!..''i'.-1•1'' . , 4, : : 4,',:Co \ - .‘ • it.. • 7 1 .41114 *Oki( .' -N. , 1 ‘1! • -,- / g ----- ,,z, Z. , . I i I , alitafti .-... Z / . . I • : I '43 4 V : , I I L4`11?I • VO 1,• ; ..- • l /' z' • •. W • I . i jr..!(40• r''•Le4. :I'll I I ;I ----------- ,,,,, 7 • I I -'--tkr‘PC ' I I biliaftfri 4.14' '' i I k.-1., • / . VO394/•4 • 1 — •g ■ ---- c, • ------ 'r I I • • ••• .----- . _-- , •;,,,,, • j r ...,.....1 , , , . i , 00 4 • . • •. ;.•: Ulf. I I 'ma.,..1 I 403k ri. • 6, I 1 j I I I I I I r :..r,1"4!74 : i 1 i ZIE ,- .0., Z,• • . \ anva,; i , "Ifir • I • • I ' = • , • VII W., ,i':-.41 • lillki.145554 1 till, "I, 1•1:•. 1;:mk 0. :.• \ ON•,:,.i , ..•-• 1LOA Cil AA % \ 11104101Airj IP' At■ M.. ,: i:Ir' . Vd4WIP-ik. . , '- A • ., 4.joefor- ', s A ttil,',1 \ 1p IV'11.;41 ii:,' ■ Ina\ .. \ \ 1.•o 4, ,A .. %VIVO * I 1 \ctr.1....' ‘ • , \ • \ .t■ • • ..„ s .404 Tx • „,, ,,... . 4. • . .::";:+:.. Illrs. illik.';' • • 1!) • \ , \ It,'7 / S \ Ilp.,. 0. 1°P-1 \ ,s. 40".. AL , 40, i i ! . ‘ • , . s \ .,. sz-_-_ - . . • \ .t. . ir• • . s, \ •, ., ••• .- - \ . .. . 441 '13Nir ; .. • . V Nal 1%, •'''. ' 11‘ . \ , / '' (./ ,,i0V Illir .- 0 • s, e,,, -,, ''',,,:,- /,: r . •1 \ .• 0 U S . . 4111, 4: .. . Viltik,.. . . . • . ., \ \•',, 044r , , .. . \ ;° &flri, / .1‘v/ ;it i i 5 o ‘■ . ■ .... • \ ■ _. • • . • • E i i •' . : _ .• • --------) • . . SITE PLAN iii.iiiiiiiiii OAT* CERM1CATION , ][ irk TROSOI ............1•••■••MAR PM I-20-W Da&lit et I WY COEWT TM TES MK lEICEIDEPEI CC MEOW NA~um nix am WEE ET MR/ WRIGHT --------- sur---.,....,--.Ai:era Ka stazimmilluor ORONO [a DEVELOPMENT ......_P.A. IPAIMAP NO.PIM MP=DPI PGA 1[ LEE maim it[ Il° /[io. DATE ISY WC RPM% 1.01.4•1CSOTA MT I[ suIRATURit 11K114- —MT-