Loading...
7.6. SR 03-20-1995ITEM 7.6. of ~~ MEMORANDUM .~ • River TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: TROY LANGER, PLANNING INTERN DATE: MARCH 20, 1995 SUBJECT: A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST PHOENIX ENTERPRISES, PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. CU 95-01 REQUEST Phoenix Enterprises has submitted a conditional use permit application for a zero lot line development. LOCATION Southeast corner of Highway 169/193rd Avenue N.W. • ZONING /LAND USE C-3 (Highway Commercial) / HB (Highway Business) ATTACHMENTS Letter from City Engineer. and Staff report to Planning Commission. INTRODUCTION Phoenix Enterprises, LLC, is proposing to construct an approximate 24,000 square foot commercial center on Lot 2, Block 1 Hillside Crossing South. In addition, the parking and driveway area, as proposed, would be paved up to the property line and allow traffic to access additional sites without leaving one site to enter another. In order to accommodate this type of development, a conditional use permit for a zero lot line development is required. This conditional use permit is for all three lots in both the Oak Parc Plaza and Hillside Crossing South developments. The proposed development is located in a replated area that was referred to as an Outlot in the Oak Parc Plaza development. That Outlot is being • replated into Hillside Crossing South. That plat is a separate item. 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-O1 March 20, 1995 • Page 2 The reason this item is being brought before the Planning Commission is the zero lot line item associated with the development. The development without the zero lot line issue would meet current C-3, Highway Commercial, zoning requirements. Also attached, is a letter addressed to Mr. Gongoll addressing concerns related to the site plan review of the proposed development. ANALYSIS The zero lot line development is not being done to circumvent the current setback requirements. It is being request to allow an improved traffic pattern between all sites. The main issues associated with a zero lot line development for a common parking area and common drive area are: - Make sure the parking area has a mutual benefit for each of the properties. - Proper cross-access and cross parking agreements are prepared and executed between commercial and Super America sites as well as the commercial and office sites. - The maintenance and future repair of areas located on property lines is maintained and a mutual agreement between property owners exist to maintain those areas. SITE PLAN REVIEW Since this development is a permitted use, a specific review of the development plans has been completed by the Concept Review Committee. However, the following is an overview of issues associated with the development: Landscagin~ The Super America site, Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Parc Plaza, already has landscaping adjacent to the proposed commercial development. It would not be necessary for extensive landscaping by the commercial development to . landscape this area. Landscaping may be concentrated in other areas. Located on Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Crossing South, is approximately twenty s:/planning/troy/cc-cup01 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-01 March 20, 1995 Page 3 -------------------- • (20) existing mature evergreen trees. These trees should be protected and be used as a credit in the calculating for landscaping requirements. No additional plantings are being proposed along Highway 169. After discussing the submitted landscape plan, which does not indicate additional trees or plantings being placed in the area along Highway 169, the applicant addressed concern of visibility with the development. It is the desire of the applicant to have this area remain open for improved visibility of the site from Highway 169. Staff is of the opinion that the applicant should provide landscaping similar to Elk Park Center or Hillside Crossing to help improve the image of the Highway 169 corridor. Plant materials similar to shrubs planted along Highway 169 would meet the landscaping requirement. It is not the intent of staff to require the applicant to plant landscaping plantings that would impede the visual traffic from Highway 169. Parking Area The parking area should be constructed with a bituminous surface and bounded with B612 concrete curb and gutter. Curb-islands should be used to better indicated the intended traffic pattern for the parking lot area. Common Drive Area This common drive area between Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Parc Plaza and Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Crossing South, as well as the common drive area between commercial and office development should provide a traffic pattern that works well with both sites. There is particular concern between the Super America site and the proposed commercial development. The Super America site already contains an existing traffic pattern and the addition of a new access/exit into and from this site may effect the current traffic pattern. The applicant should contact the property owner of this site and receive a letter indicating their approval of this type of development. This common drive area should be constructed with a bituminous surface and bounded with B612 concrete curb and gutter. Signage The commercial development is being proposed with a pylon type sign located along Highway 169. Other signs have not been indicated on the submitted site plans. The proposed pylon sign is located within the ten (10) foot setback that is required. The applicant addressed this by indicating that there needs s: /planning/troy/cc-cup O 1 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-O1 March 20, 1995 Page 4 • to be a setback distance from the drip-line of the overhead power lines. Because of this distance, this is the furthest distance from the right-of--way the sign could be located. Staff would like a written letter from U.P.A. that addressed the distance from the drip-line of the overhead power lines. A variance application may be required for the pylon sign. Staff is of the opinion that the pylon sign should be a monument sign to remain similar to other development along Highway 169. STAFF COMMENTS Currently, zero lot line developments require a conditional use permit and they must advance through the conditional use permit process before receiving approval. This procedure may extend the development process by several months. The zero lot line development has, in the past, been considered a somewhat uncomplicated item in relation to the entire site plan review. Because the zero lot line development has become more standardized, consideration may be given towards amending the current code requirements in order to allow a zero lot line development with some set standards. PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission reviewed this request on February 28, 1995 and recommended approval of the zero lot line development. There was discussion related proposed commercial development access drive located near the Super America site. The Planning Commission addressed concern regarding the proposed location of that drive area. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request by Phoenix Enterprises, LLC, for a conditional use permit allowing a zero lot line development with the following conditions: 1. CROSS ACCESS/CROSS PARKING AREAS HAVE AN AGREEMENT PREPARED AND EXECUTED BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS. THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH SHERBURNE COUNTY. 2. ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVE AREAS SHALL BE IMPROVED WITH A BITUMINOUS SURFACE AND SHALL BE BOUND WITH B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. s:/planning/troy/cc-cup O l Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-01 March 20, 1995 • Page 5 3. A LANDSCAPE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS BE IMPLEMENTED. 4. ALL ISSUES OUTLINED IN CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO REGARDING THIS ITEM BE INCLUDED AND MADE PART OF THIS RECOMMENDATION. 5. A WRITTEN LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER'S OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, OAK PARC PLAZA (SUPER AMERICA) BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY INDICATING THEIR APPROVAL OF THE ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT. 6. A WRITTEN LETTER FROM U.P.A. IDENTIFYING THEIR APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING LOT AND IDENTIFYING THE DISTANCE THE MONUMENT SIGN SHALL BE FROM THE DRIP-LINE OF THE OVERHEAD POWER LINES. 7. SEDIMENTATION POND, SOUTH OF LOT 3, BLOCK 3, HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH, BE COMPLETED BEFORE RECORDING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 8. ITEMS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT, MR. GONGOLL, BE COMPLETED. • s:/planning/troy/cc- cup O 1 Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1995 Page 5 2. THE VARIANCE IS MINIMIZED BY REDUCING THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND ESTABLISHING A BUFFER OF LANDSCAPING. 3. THE CAMPUS SETTING OF THE ICE COMPLEX AND HIGH SCHOOL IS A UNIQUE SITUATION WHEREBY SHARED PARKING AND PROPERTY LINES FOR OWNERSHIP PURPOSES EXIST. 4. THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE PARKING AREA INTO THE SETBACK WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES NOR CREATE A PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN-SLOCUM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE .MOTION CARRIED 5-0. ~" 5.1. 'Phoenix Enterprises, LLC Request for Conditional >lise Permit; Public Nearing Case No.95-O1 Staff report by Troy Langer. The applicant is requesting is for a zero .lot line development to construct an approximate 24,000 square foot commercial center at the southeast corner of Highway 169 and 193rd Avenue NW. Approval of the conditional use permit would allow traffic to access the proposed commercial center, the SuperAmerica site and a future office development without leaving one site to enter another. Zero lot development is allowed in C-3 as a conditional use. Troy explained the main issues associated with the request as follows: -Make sure the parking area has a mutual benefit for each of the properties. -Property cross-access and cross-parking agreements are prepared and executed between commercial and Super America as well as the commercial and office sites. -The maintenance and future repair of areas located on property lines is maintained and a mutual agreement between property owners exist to maintain those areas. Troy also highlighted issues associated with the site plan review of the development including landscaping, parking area, common drive area and signage. Troy explained that staff has recommended the drive area north of the proposed building be moved closer to the building to create more space between the drive leaving the SuperAmerica site. Staff is also recommending that a letter be obtained from UPA addressing the distance from the dripline of the overhead power lines, as well as a letter from Super America allowing access to their site. Also, a variance may be necessary for placement of a sign. Staff recommends a monumen#-style sign. Troy added that staff requests the Planning Commission consider making a recommendation to the City Council for an ordinance amendment to allow zero lot developments as permitted uses with certain standards. Terry Maurer, City Engineer, stated that his major concern with the plat is that they receive drainage calculations to ensure that the site will not be overwhelmed by storm water runoff. He added that he also had concern regarding the two access points only being 20 feet apart and suggested in his memo that they be combined into one. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 February 28, 1995 . Jeff Gongoll, representing Riverside Development, stated that staff's recommendations are reasonable and workable, i.e., a monument-style sign rather than a pylon sign, location of the access, realignment of the drive aisle with the property across Evans Avenue, and letters from UPA and Super America. He did express his concern for the Highway 169 landscaping recommendation, citing the visibility issue. Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued regarding the location of the drive aisle between the Super America and the proposed commercial strip. Jeff Gongoll stated that the options may be limited due to the existing fixtures (gas pumps). Steve Ach explained that signage at Evans and 193rd would clearly identify the entrance to the commercial site. Terry Maurer stated that his concern regarding the drainage plan relates to whether or not there are sufficient catch-basins throughout the plat to handle the drainage. Commissioner Dillon expressed his concern that both the access to the commercial center and the access to Super America allow two-way traffic. He suggested that one access be identified as an entrance and one as an exit. Further, he suggested that the entrance to the future office development across Evans Avenue be coordinated so as not to add to traffic congestion. Terry Maurer stated that the best scenario would be to abandon the Super America access and have one entrance/exit point to both sites. Jeff Gongoll. stated that Super America was not in favor of that proposal and that is why it was constructed as it appears today. Judy Thompson questioned Terry Maurer's memo regarding the outdoor patio seating area. Terry stated that he felt there would not be a problem locating an open patio over a drainage and utility easement but he would not want a permanent enclosure that could potentially have to be dismantled in the event of a problem within the easement. Chair Kuester questioned whether or not Mr. Gongoll had a problem with the landscaping recommendations. Mr. Gongoll stated he was not in favor of plantings along Highway 169 that would interfere with visibility. Steve Ach suggested that medium size shrubs be used such as were recommended for Elk Park Center and other commercial projects along Highway 169. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY PHOENIX ENTERPRISES, LLC, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. CU 95-O1, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING A ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING: STAFF'S REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY ENGINEER' MEMOS DATED 2/17/95 AND 2/27/95, AND THE FACT THERE WAS NO PUBLIC OPPOSITION, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • Planning Commission Minutes February 28, 1995 Page 7 • 1. CROSS ACCESS/CROSS PARKING AREAS HAVE AN AGREEMENT PREPARED AND EXECUTED BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS. THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH SHERBURNE COUNTY. 2. ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVE AREAS SHALL BE IMPROVED WITH A BITUMINOUS SURFACE AND SHALL BE BOUND WITH B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. 3. A LANDSCAPE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS BE IMPLEMENTED. 4. ALL ISSUES OUTLINED IN CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO REGARDING THIS APPLICATION BE INCLUDED AND MADE PART OF THIS RECOMMENDATION. 5. A WRITTEN LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER'S OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH (THE SUPER AMERICA SITE) BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY INDICATING THEIR APPROVAL OF THE ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT. 6. SEDIMENTATION POND, SOUTH OF LOT 3, BLOCK 3, HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH, BE COMPLETED BEFORE RECORDING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 7. ITEMS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT, MR. GONGOLL, BE COMPLETED. COMMISSIONER DILLON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 5.2. Consider Variance Reauest by Don Schumacher, Public Hearing Case No. V 95-1 Staff report by Gary Schmitz. Don Schumacher has requested an eight (8) foot front yard setback variance to accommodate a ten (10) foot addition to the south side of his home, located at 212 Norfolk Avenue. Mr. Schumacher's home is located on a corner lot), requiring 2 front yard setbacks of thirty (30) feet on both Norfolk and Manor Place. Gary stated that there is already a precedence for varying setbacks, as demonstrated by the wide mix of homes in this area that do not meet the existing standards. He added that the options for placement of the addition are very limited and the applicant does not wish to detract from the colonial structure of the home. Staff feels there are adequate findings to grant the variance. Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. There being no comments -from the public, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN-SLOCUM MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AN EIGHT (8) FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST BY DON SCHUMACHER, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. V 95-1, CITING THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO PUBLIC OPPOSITION, INFORMATION IN STAFF'S MEMO, AND BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP BY THE FACT THAT APPLYING THE EXISTING SETBACK STANDARDS WOULD REQUIRE THE ADDITION TO BE BUILT ELSEWHERE WHICH WOULD • JEOPARDIZE THE UNIQUE COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOUSE. • • • ~~ 6 \ i - \ 6 ~ 10 - r------ ------ r c I ~ ~ r i ( 4 ~ 1 I 3 !~ >..,-; 1 : `" _ s • ~ .T.. S 4 ~I ~ r ~ - p 9 ~.. ~. ~ M ,_- . 9 LOCATION ~ . 1 9 Nw rn J (0 ~8 ~ ,~ ..z " - ~ ~~ Rte - I 3 , , . r~ ~t- ~'T.T_ z ~ I 3 i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 1 4~ ;~., ~ ! •Z K Y :J I ,~, .)~ ~' Z `1 -:6 ... .il ~ ~ . '' 1'..T ,1- ~ ,. ~ A \s, r ~ r SCFipp~ PARAER 1 EtEU. SM ~~. • ~. - _ J ZONING MAP '~f \l oc ~'~ CASE C~J 95-01 R.~ve~- P.o. B _~ ox 494. U06~ Orono ?ar'.cxav • Eik Ri ' "~~ Ii ~ y~l' 11I!) 1 } `` I { ._._-.. - 1_ . t _..~. 1 - ~~ G .`y ;' 1 , >\ `' .- .1,~~~ ~~,-;c. ~~'"~- ~..1 i +. ~ ` ~ ~ ' -p. TM a, .o+ o I ~ ~~ -~_ ~ ~ LUCATION -~~_ A N . E--- ~.- ` J J .•~ i t E • Z Cc ~ )~ H .n. ,•, PACs-. ~ I } ~ ~ 1. 3 ~ I ~ ~k~z~'=' H1L i ~ .l9 ~r a i.t't• f AF'• ~r t6 ~ + n } t +.. ~.. ,.r i •T. ,` _ ' -'7 ,.. ~+ ppp. i \ ~+ ~~ y ~.. yr °• ~ ` z~: ~~., _~ • i~ \ ,E •r ac, p + S •~: T j~ A,~, ~ 14:z ~, \11 c k '9 se __ - ti;`i- - ~ t- -~-- - - _ .ii'; °ELC NEVER AREA E1X •.}~, ~ ~` v• ', Hp/ SOgOI _ ELE4E-iTARY PARKER ~+\+~'}1 - ~ ~ \ i 9C~~OOI AtiMN ,11~ ~ \~ , -- ElEY. ' ~, ~ . t '+ ~Q~iPREHENS~VE LAND t~SE MAP HR High Density Residential p public CB Central Business OS Open Space HB Highway Business A Agricultural U Light Industrial LR Low Density Residential '!~ • ~ ~~ MI Medium Industrial MR Medium Density Residential Ciry of „~ a ~+AS~ C V 9 ~' Q 1 ~~ i ~ RIVe~' P'O. Bo;:"490.13E?6~ Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 5>»0 • (61?) 4.11-7420 i~ll)~ {'OtiSEI,TItiG E6'GI1EEItS February 27, 1995 1326 Energy Pack Drire File: 230-262-11 Si. Paul, MN 55108 612-644.4389 1-800.888-2923 fax:612-644.9446 Mr. Steve Ach City Planner City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN REVIEW Dear Mr. Ach: CIVIL ENGINEERING: ENVIRONMENTAL AS requested, we have reviewed the submittal package for the commercial development UNICIPAI proposed iri the Hillside Crossing South Addition. The submittal .package was prepared by ~~ANNING Lampert Architects out. of Anoka, Minnesota, and consisted of a site lan landsca Ian SOLID WASTE p ~ ~ p floor plan, and elevation drawings. Based on our review of this submittal, we would offer sTeuauRAL the following comments: SURVEYING TRAFFIC 1. No storm drainage calculations were supplied with the package.. The layout of the TRANSPORTATION site indicates that all drainage will. be conveyed overland to the south, ultimately ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL being picked up by three catch basins on the office building site immediately south ENGINEERING: of the commercial. property. We questioned whether or not this amount of drainage ~vAC can be adequately dealt with,. given. catch basins in only one location. We request rowER DisTRisunoN that some type of storm drainage calculation be provided to indicate how this system scA~A will work. SYSTEM CONTROLS 2. It is not clear whether the access drive on the east side of the site includes curb and gutter on both sides. It appears that the west side does contain concrete curb and :gutter, and on the east side the symbol on the plan would indicate no concrete curb and .gutter. We recommend that the access road have curb and gutter on both sides. 3. There are two delivery lanes shown on the west side of the access drive. These appear to be relatively narrow in width. We question whether or not a large delivery vehicle could get sufficiently out of the traffic lanes in utilizing. these. We ~FFICES iN: recommend that these delivery lanes be slightly widened and possibly lengthened ~FAINNEAPOLIS PRIOR LAKE ST. PAUL WASECA 230/262-2703.feb Ivir. Steve Ach February 27, .1995 Page Two to facilitate the easy movement of delivery vehicles. There is no delivery lane adjacent to the restaurant at the south end of the commercial strip. We question how deliveries will take place in this location. It appears the easiest method for any delivery vehicle to utilize would be to stop directly in the access road immediately behind the restaurant and unload from that. location. This may have an impact on traffic flow throughout the site. 4. We would suggest that at the south end of the access road as it turns azound the south. end of the commercial strip and accesses the business office site, that a radius be placed on the inside of the curve lines. to make a smoother transition. Currently, a vehicle would have to make almost a 90 degree corner. 5. We note that the. restaurant. shows an outdoor patio seating area which is proposed to be constructed within the existing 50-foot drainage and utility easement. This utility easement does contain trunk sanitary sewer and water which serve a large area to the northeast. Depending on the type of construction of this outdoor patio seating area, it may not be appropriate to allow it in the easement area. 6. At the southeast corner of the .parking area, we would suggest that an additional .concrete island be placed to define parking versus the travel lanes, as vehicles come. around the south end of .the commercial strip. Without this added concrete island, they will have a tendency to cut across the parking area to access the parking lot. itself. The addition of this concrete island will better define the vehicle traffic patterns in the pazking lot. 7. The existing access to the SuperAmerca site and the proposed access driveway on the northerly side of the commercial strip are only separated by a 20-foot median. This could potentially cause significant traffic conflicts as vehicles are trying to exit the SuperAmerica site and enter or exit the commercial site. We would suggest that consideration be given to a single driveway access to boththe SuperAmerica site -and :the commercial strip. Potentially, this could be made into a 4-way intersection in the future as development occurs east of this site. 8. There is an internal 30-foot wide driveway access shown between the commercial site and the SuperArnerica site. We question whether or not it is a location which will adequately allow traffic movements between these two. It would seem that this driveway would be better located further to the west where it would line up with the driving lane through the commercial parking lot and would allow movement from the SuperAmerica site without conflicting with vehicles accessing the SuperAmerca gas island. We also question whether this access will result in scut-through of traffic coming off of 193rd at the right-in to the SuperAmerica site directly to this driveway to access the commercial site. If this becomes a predominant movement, it will have a negative affect on traffic movements within the SuperAmerica lot. 2301262-2703.feb Mr. Steve Aeh February 27, 1995 Page Three 9. The sedimentation pond begun at the extreme south end of the Hillside Crossing South plat needs to be completed prior to the construction and ultimately outletting of storm drainage from this .proposed development. We understand that this. sedimentation panel was begun last fall, and we assume that it .will be completed this spring. well before development of this site. If you have any. questions regarding any of .these comments, please call. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~~~~ Terry~T. Maurer,. P.E. "TJM: tw • 230/262-2703.feb ~~~r o<< ay Elk Ri ITEM N0. 5.1 MEMORANDUM ~~~ TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: TROY LANCER, PLANNING INTERN DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1995 SUBJECT: A .CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST PHOENIX ENTERPRISES, PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. CU 95-01 RE(o1UEST Phoenix Enterprises has submitted a conditional use permit application for a zero lot line development. LOCATION Southeast corner of Highway 169/193rd Avenue N.W. ZONING /LAND USE C-3 (Highway Commercial) / HB (Highway Business) ATTACHMENTS Location Map, Zoning Map, Land Use Map, Site Plan Map, Letter. from City Engineer,. Letter addressed to Mr. Gongoll INTRODUCTION Phoenix Enterprises, LLC, is proposing to construct an approximate 24,000 square foot commercial center on Lot 2, Block 1 Hillside Crossing South. In .addition, the parking and driveway area, as proposed, would be paved up to the property line and allow traffic to access additional sites without leaving one site. to enter another. In order to accommodate this type of development,. a conditional use permit for a zero lot line development is required. This conditional use permit is for all three lots in both the Oak Parc Plaza and Hillside Crossing South developments. • 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-41 February 28, 1995 Page 2 The proposed development is located in a replated area that was referred to as an Outlot in the Oak Parc Plaza development. That Outlot is being replated into Hillside Grossing South. That plat is a separate item.. The reason this item is being brought before the Planning Commission is the zero lot line item associated with the development. The development without the zero lot line issue would meet current C-3, Highway Commercial, zoning requirements. .Also attached, is a letter addressed to Mr, Gongoll addressing concerns .related to the site plan review of the proposed development. .ANALYSIS The zero lot line development is not being done to circumvent the current setback requirements. It is being request to allow an improved traffic pattern between all sites. The main issues associated with a zero lot line development for a common parking area and common drive area are: °' - Make sure the .parking area has a mutual benefit for each of the properties. - Proper cross-access and cross parking agreements .are prepared and executed between commercial- and Super America sites as well as the commercial and office sites. - The maintenance and future repair of areas located on property lines is .maintained and a mutual agreement between property owners exist to maintain those areas. SITE PLAN REVIEW Since this development is a permitted use, a specific review of the development plans has been c©mpleted by the Concept Review Committee. However, the following is an overview of issues associated with the development: Landscaping The Super America site, Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Parc Plaza, already has some landscaping adjacent to the proposed commercial development. It would not s;lplanning/troy/pc-cupO1 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-01 Page 3 February 28, 1995 n ~J be necessary for extensive landscaping. by the commercial development to landscape this area. Landscaping may be concentrated in other areas. Located on Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Crossing South, is approximately twenty (20) existing mature evergreen trees.. These trees should be protected and be used as a credit in the calculating for landscaping requirements. No :additional plantings are being proposed along Highway I69. After discussing the submitted landscape plan, which does not indicate additional trees or plantings being placed in the area along Highway 169, the applicant addressed concern of visibility with the development. It is the desire of the applicant to have this area remain open for improved visibility of the site from Highway 169. Staff is of .the opinion that the applicant should provide landscaping similar to Elk Park Center or Hillside Crossing to help improve the image of the Highway 169 corridor. Parkine Area The .parking area should be constructed with a bituminous surface and bounded with B612 concrete curb and gutter. Curb-islands should be used to better indicated. the intended traffic pattern for the parking lot area. .Common Drive Area This common drive area .between Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Parc Plaza and Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Crossing South, as well as the common drive area between Lot 2 and Lot 3 should provide a traffic pattern that works with both sites. There is particular concern between Lot I and Lot 2. Lot 1 is the existing Super America site and already contains an existing traffic pattern. The addition of a new access/exit into and from this site may effect the current traffic pattern. The applicant should. contact the property owner of this site and receive a letter indicating their approval of this type of development. This common drive area should be constructed with a bituminous surface and bounded with B6I2 concrete curb and gutter. Sgnaae The commercial development is .being proposed with a pylon type sign located along Highway .169.. Other signs have not been indicated on the submitted site plans. The proposed pylon sign is located within the ten (10) foot setback that is required. The applicant addressed this by indicating that there needs to be a setback distance from the dripline of the overhead power lines. Because of this distance, this is the furthest distance from the right-of--way s:/planning/troy/pe-cupO 1 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-01 February 28, 1995 Page 4 the sign could be located. Staff would like a written letter from U.P.A. that addressed the distance from the dripline of the overhead power lines. A variance application may be required for .the pylon sign. Staff is of the opinion that the pylon sign should be a monument sign to remain similar to other development along Highway 169. STAFF COMMENTS Currently, zero iot line developments require a conditional use permit and they must advance through the conditional use permit process before receiving approval. This procedure may extend the development process by several months. The. zero lot line development has, in the past, been considered a somewhat uncomplicated item in relation to the entire site plan review. Because the zero lot line development has become more standardized, consideration may be given towards amending the current code requirements in order to allow a zero lot line development with some. set standards. RECOMMENDATION ~~ It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the "' request by Phoenix Enterprises, LLC, for a conditional use permit allowing a zero lot line development with the following conditions: 1. GROSS ACCESS/CROSS PARKING AREAS .HAVE AN AGREEMENT PREPARED AND EXECUTED BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS. THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH SHERBURNE COUNTY. 2. ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVE AREAS SHALL BE IMPROVED- WITH A BITUMINOUS SURFACE AND SHALL BE BOUND WITH B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. 3. A LANDSCAPE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS BE IMPLEMENTED. 4. ALL ISSUES OUTLINED IN CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO REGARDING THIS ITEM BE INCLUDED AND MADE PART OF THIS RECOMMENDATION. 5. A WRITTEN LETTER FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER'S OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH (THE s: /planning/troy/p c-cup O 1 Phoenix Enterprises CU 95-01 February 28, 1995 • -. Page 5 SUPER AMERICA SITE) BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY INDICATING THEIR APPROVAL OF THE ZERO LOT LINE DEVELOPMENT. 6. SEDIMENTATION POND, SOUTH OF LOT 3, BLOCK 3, HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH, BE COMPLETED BEFORE RECORDING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 7. ITEMS IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT, MR. GONGOLL, BE COMPLETED.. s:/planning/troy/p c-cup O l ~~ `City of Elk River February 17, 1995 Jeff Gongoll F~iverside Development 241 Main Street Suite #4 E1kRiver, MIST 55330 Subject: Conditional Use Permit CU 95-01 Dear Mr. Gongoll: The Concept Review Committee reviewed your proposed commercial site. plan for Lot 2 of Hillside Crossing South, and has the following comments: Slfe Plan 1. .The building site must meet a forty (40) foot setback from the rear .property line, The building site does not currently meet this setback. Please modify the plans as necessary to meet this requirement. 2. The trash enclosure area should be situated to allow large vehicles to access this area without obstructing the traffic of main drive area. If the trash enclosure area were angled from the main drive area, it may allow the garbage and recycling vehicles to access this area without obstructing the traffic. The building materials used for the trash enclosure .area should be consistent with the building materials for the entire structure. 3. Within the building site,. there were two (2) retail stores identified as .being a "food service" type of establishment. According to Cit}~ Code, these areas may be considered a Class II restaurant. Class II restaurants require a conditional use permit within a C-3 zoning district. 4. :Identify building materials for East Elevation, North Elevation, and South Elevation. 5. Sedimentation pond, located to the south of this site, must be completed prior to issuance of a building permit. s:pianningJtroy/it• gongoll 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 6. Indicate all parking areas and drive areas as being bounded with B61 Z concrete curb and gutter, specifically along main drive to access 193rd Avenue. 7. The service .lanes be made wider to allow service delivery vehicles to park completely within this lane and not obstruct traffic on main drive. S. Final plat for Hillside Crossing South be completed before issuance of building permit. Landscaping 1. .Some planting be placed within the curb-islands located in the parking lot area. Trees and/or shrubs maybe planted within these areas. 2. The :area located along Highway 10 be provided with some Landscaping. Trees. and shrubs may be planted within this area. 3. A five (5) foot strip located immediately adjacent. to the parking lot area and building site should be sodded instead of placing seed and mulch for grass. 4. Plantings located along north-easterly portion of building site, at the intersection of the access drive and the main drive, should be located to not impede traffic visibility. 5. A tree prevention plan be adopted using silt fencing. to define the areas of grading to prevent damage to existing trees on site. 6. All landscaped areas are encouraged to have an underground/inground irrigation system. Parkin~t and Circulation 1. The curb-islands Located within the parking lot be made smaller to allow for better circulation of traffic. A thirty-six (36) foot long curb-island would be allowed. 2. Anew curb-island. be created along southern edge of parking lot near building site to allow better circulation of traffic. 3. Anew .curb-island be created along south and westerly .portion of parking lot to better indicate direction traffic should flow. 4. Better design of the landing areas for handicap accessible individuals in :front of building site. Concern regarding the proximity of landing area to access area of building. There may not be enough distance to allow handicapped individuals to open doors • s:planning/troy/lt•gongoll 5. Must have at least a six (6) foot wall.-way or sidewalk for pedestrian traffic in front of building site. This accounts for parked cars near sidewalk area that ntay occupy some of the walkway area. Drainage and Utilities 1. No plantings shall be placed within the easterly easement located along main drive area to allow for transformers. Transformers require a ten (10) foot setback from all doors, windows, and flammable walls. Z. Anew drainage plan that better indicates the proposed drainage pattern for the development be submitted to the City before approval. 3. Coordinate installation of underground electrical equipment and transformer locations with Elk River Utilities. 4. A letter is forth-coming from City Engineer with additional comments relafed to drainage issues. Zero Lc3t Line Development 1. The City of Elk River is requesting a written letter from the owner of the Super America site with comments regarding approval of a zero lot line ~f development adjacent to their property. 2. Tl1e drive area connecting the Super America site be aligned with drive isles on their site. 3. The drive area accessing the main drive to 193rd Avenue be aligned so as to not be close to the Super America drive. 4. Future consideration be given to undeveloped property to the east that may need addition access along the main drive area. Alignment of that access should not create undesirable traffic patterns and cause confusion of traffic because of several access points in 5. The City of Elk Fiver is requesting a written letter from U.P.A.. (United Power Association) with comments regarding approval of development of a panting lot and sign located within their easement. S-.gn 1. The .pylon sign located along Highway 10 should be a monument style sign and must meet a ten (10) foot setback from the right-of-way. 2. A sign package indicating the size and location of all proposed signs be submitted before sign permits are issued. Signs should be in the "Individual-Letter" style. s:planning/troy/it-gongoll Qther Issues • 1. Within the C-3 (Highway Commercial) zoning district, mechanical :equipment needs to be screened from public view. Please incorporate the above mentioned comments into the revised set of plans. Prior to receiving a building permit, all the comments will need to be addressed. Once the revisions have been made, submit three (3) sets of complete plans for review. Upon .receipt and approved of the complete set of .plans, the Building Department may issue the necessary building permits. If you have any questions regarding and of the comments or items necessary to obtain a building permit, please contact the Planning Department at 441-4921. Sincerely, Troy Langer Planning Intern [~ • s: planning/troy/lt-gongoll • 4\r ~ u /~'',-, _~`\ ~_ ~. r~ ,- I I I I!II'~l///~ I I I~ I i I~t"I I I I I I J ~' 4~ ~° $ W ~1 ~r~~ $ s isY ~} ~g~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ i ii~li~i " °4 ~ va ~ II ~ ~~ ~~ i g~~ I ~ ° I L GC a ~ ~ m ~cq ~ S I els $ ~ ~~ a ~'a ! N I i8 ~ ' s ~ ~ ~ @ I ~~ I `'-r`m a t ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~~~ d. ~ ~ ~ „~ I ~~ ~ ( ~ ~ ~~ ~ M~ .. °" I ~ d ~ g ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~° ~ ~ ~ f 1 ~~ _ 1 -- r ~ 9.~~=.3,a,. a as ~~ ~ i; s ~ Q.~~f ~ ~` g ~ $ I I P~ i Y ~ L, ~ i ~~ ~ ~b I ~ ~~ 4 ~ ~ ~ \ 1~ 1 l i i I I I I s ~ I I 0 iY tY ~ ~_ ~= ~=~ ~~ ~-~ ~~ ~~~i ~- 193rd nvENUE N. w. ~ 1 ~1 1 1 N I S f -~ z 0 ~ t Y Y I /. A ~ arc, Riverside""rm"m~,,,,° a _ _.,.. ___. = = - ~.em SITEPI.AP1 Hiil4ride Croe4^fage S©uth Development °°""'°"O""` s0°,~i° Sik River, YinnesoL 5b93U N .uesa~w'o n[uw.,~ _ DIf >IW ~{.s~ rorto".m. ih.r, Iflf 46x10 -i~~srrn.`tr~r,r.rm nt ."t ~cs+r POew (61~ M1-0714 sxr _ u n_ "w, nt/ne-~n a aanr~-»r~ • ~,_ r~ • _q {~~ _ 9r 4~ ~~ ~~_ , ° ~ i ~~ L ~ ~,. ~ ~ ~. _ ~ ~ _ ~i I ~II~I~~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ 1- r' -~- - I p a < ~ -~ ___~ ~ r - - i •~ t , ,r 1 T. ~: a - o~ ~ t ~~ ~I t ~~ ~~ {~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ - - -~~, , ~ ~ ~ I I G ~, Y I -G Z 0 ~, I I I ~' ~`~ 193rd AVENUE M. W. ~ ~ L w~+orwrauao ram T ~ ~ [+4NDSCAP& Rivtrside ~ ~m°"° _. __._ ........ PLAN Hillside Crossinis South Development vawa,...,,..ou.~mae ffik Rher, Minnesota 563$0 WI rr sti..e, 9au. µ m~",.,a"~"aan.~ax~ tR l0•.r. IOf 16190 vem~ tusl s~rora r. ~.~..:o...,+ :,~ OR ~_ ~l ins • Aw NYilF.r}1t f ftYT.~. • • • i I sw ~~ ~~qq e . 4~ 4 ~q ti 0 4 q . ~~ ~ o a ;~ CD ~~ ~ ~~ n a s 0 e $~ ~. w a ~~ ~~ '"° Rtrerside ~na"a' axRUVOe _ - = _" FIAOR PLAN ~ ~a°u wea ~° "fl'~ Hillside Crossinss South Development ..a,....a.~.,a~.~ao„ .~aaa.oaefrmxNasaa _ _ Bik %r, Yianesota 55990 xs sear ae.t sae. h eRd..~. na w.c ~o..} 18 ilwr, IA 6680 ;w ~aww.+rK roar (tlt) xf-0714 we a's_ ww am.+N s ~.~ • •