Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4B - Jeffers Lodge PUD Amend PC agenda packet 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: JULY 10, 2023 AGENDA #: 4B PREPARED BY: JEFF MATZKE, PLANNER PRESENTED BY: JEFF MATZKE AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOP- MENT (PUD) PLAN FOR JEFFERS APARTMENTS ON OUTLOT A, JEFFERS CORNER 1st ADDITION DISCUSSION: Introduction The Jeffers Foundation, the property owner, applied for an amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as Jeffers Pond for an office building and learning center. The subject property is in the southwest corner of the CSAH 42 and CSAH 21 intersection, along Fountain Hills Drive NW. History The original PUD Plan for Jeffers Pond was approved in 2005. Since that time, residential neighborhoods have been platted and developed, as well as the streets, public park/trail system, the elementary school, and the fire station. Three outlots (totaling three parcels) remain undeveloped, including: · Outlot B – approximately 9.28 acres in the Preliminary PUD Plan has since been approved for a 197-unit high density residential housing building. · Jeffers Pond Outlot C/Jeffers Corner Outlot A– Three parcels, approximately 11.3 acres and 7.4 acres respectively. This area was designated as “The Pier” which included a mix of commercial and residential uses in the PUD Plan. The 16,700 square foot Lil’ Explorers Child Care Facility (approved in 2021) is the only part of this area currently constructed. The Jeffers Pond PUD was designed and approved as a lifecycle housing project which would offer various types of housing in a range of density and models in- cluding small single-family homes, large single-family detached homes, attached one and two-story single-family townhomes, and apartments as well as support- ing commercial uses. The original PUD approval anticipated 693 total housing units; however, as many individual phases of development were submitted for review, the housing densi- ties were proposed to be reduced. In 2015, the City of Prior Lake and Metropolitan Council approved an amendment to the Jeffers Pond PUD related to Outlots B, C, and D. The amendment reduced the overall residential units from 693 at a density of 3.57 units per acre to 663 at a density of 3.42 units per acre. The res- olution also stated the overall density shall be no less than 605 housing units at a density of 3.10 units per acre. 2 To date, nine neighborhoods have been developed within Jeffers Pond. These neighborhoods were originally anticipated to provide 579 units; however, only 345 units have been created. In addition to adjusting the residential unit mix, the 2015 resolution amending the Jeffers Pond Preliminary PUD plan related to Outlots B, C, and D changed the commercial requirement from 270,000 square feet to a minimum of 87,000 square feet of commercial space on Outlots B and C. The following paragraphs outline the physical characteristics of the site, zoning designations, and information as it relates to the proposed project. PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Site Area: Outlot A, Jeffers Corner 1st Addition consists of approximately 7.3 acres. The site is current vacant. Topography: This area has elevations which change approximately 20 feet from 860’ by the Prior Lake Outlet Channel on the west portion of the property to ap- proximately 880’ near the access point to the site from Fountain Hills Drive. Wetlands: The Prior Lake Outlet Channel is a DNR protected wetland bordering the west end of the site. No wetland impacts are proposed to the channel area. Access: The current access to the site is from the intersection Fountain Hills Drive at the Enclave Court intersection. This access will remain as the main in- tersection to the proposed commercial area. Zoning: The site is presently zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD). PROPOSED PLAN Building/Parking: The development plan proposes a single-story 7,500 square foot office building that will house the Jeffers Foundation offices as well as leas- able office space. In addition, the Jeffers Foundation will conduct its learning programs and workshops from this location. 32 parking spaces are proposed to accommodate the office building. Building Setbacks: As a part of the PUD the developer is not requesting any modifications to the standard property line and shoreland setbacks outside of a zero foot setback on the parking lot since it is planned to be incorporated into a larger joint parking lot in the future for other commercial uses that would occupy the remainder of the property. Landscaping: The City Code requires 1 tree per dwelling unit, which equates to 140 trees. The applicant has prepared an extensive landscape plan which will incorporate these trees on this property. Sanitary Sewer / Water Mains: Sanitary sewer and watermain service are avail- able in Fountain Hills Drive NW. 3 Grading / Storm water: The applicant proposes to direct storm water towards storm water facilities at the north end of the development. The applicant has also indicated a design to handle the stormwater for the future commercial areas of the site. Final Plat / Development Fees: The site requires approval of a Final Plat by the City Council prior to any construction. A Development Agreement will accompany the Final Plat and will specify standard development fees. ISSUES: PUD’s provide a flexible approach to development that allows creative, efficient, and effective use of land, including the mixing of land uses. The PUD must be reviewed based on the criteria found in Section 1132 of the Zoning Ordinance. The criteria which are applicable to the proposed Major Amendment request are discussed below: (1) Provides a flexible approach to development which is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed PUD Amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan designations for this area. (2) More creative, efficient, and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses. The joint access to Fountain Hills Drive from the Enclave Court intersection maintain the vehicular efficiency of the commercial site. (3) Create a sense of place and provide more interaction among people; The proposed PUD amendment proposes commercial office space as well as future commercial uses that will provide services to the area. (4) Increase transportation options, such as walking, biking or bussing; Trails/sidewalks are currently in place along the Fountain Hills Drive area. (5) Provide opportunities for life cycle housing to all ages. The proposed PUD amendment is not applicable to housing since it only includes commercial uses. (6) Provide more efficient and effective use of streets, utilities, and public facilities that support high quality land use development at a lesser cost. The proposed PUD amendment will utilize existing street and utility infrastructure which was designed and installed previously to accommodate land uses in the areas of Outlot C. (7) Enhanced incorporation of recreational, public and open space components in the development which may be made more useable and be more suitably located than would otherwise be provided under conventional development procedures. The PUD district also encourages the developer to convey property to the public, over and above required dedications, by allowing a portion of the density to be transferred to other parts of the site. The proposed PUD amendment is consistent with previously approved commercial designations in this area of the Jeffers Pond development. 4 (8) Preserves and enhances desirable site characteristics and open space, and protection of sensitive environmental features including, but not limited to, steep slopes, wetlands, and trees. Where applicable, the PUD should also encourage historic preservation, re-use and redevelopment of existing buildings. The proposed PUD amendment does not include any changes to the existing wetlands near the Prior Lake outlet channel. (9) High quality of design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. The developer is proposing the use of architectural standards including but not limited to a variety of building materials and colors, as well as accent design features. ALTERNATIVES: Conclusion The Jeffers Foundation has chosen to incorporate their own office areas in the Jeffers Pond PUD site. The commercial site plan will satisfy 7,500 square feet of the total 87,000 square feet designated for the commercial areas of Jeffers Pond. The City Staff recommends approval of the Major PUD Amendment subject to the following listed conditions: · The applicant shall address the comments in the June 15, 2023 City En- gineering/Public Works Depart. Memorandum · The applicant shall address the comments in the June 23, 2023 Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District Memorandum 1. Motion and a second recommending approval of the Major Amendment to the Jeffers Pond PUD subject to the listed conditions, or others that may be added or modified by the Planning Commission. 2. Motion and a second to recommend denial of the Major Amendment to the Jeffers Pond PUD plan based on findings of fact. 3. Motion and a second to table this item to a future Planning Commission meet- ing and provide the applicant with direction. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Alternative #1. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. PUD Plans 3. Engineering/Public Works Dept. Memorandum – June 15, 2023 4. Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District Memorandum – June 23, 2023 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 26OFJEFFERS LODGE PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 05-22-2023 NAP/BNM PDS/MSN Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 47504 05-22-2023 Brian N. Molinaro JEFFERS FOUNDATION 901 TWELVE OAKS CENTER DRIVE #914 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 00-ENG-123043-SHEET-SITE 2.2SITE PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 26OFJEFFERS LODGE PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 05-22-2023 NAP/BNM PDS/MSN Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 47504 05-22-2023 Brian N. Molinaro JEFFERS FOUNDATION 901 TWELVE OAKS CENTER DRIVE #914 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 00-ENG-123043-SHEET-GRAD 4.1GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 26OFJEFFERS LODGE PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 05-22-2023 NAP/BNM PDS/MSN Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 47504 05-22-2023 Brian N. Molinaro JEFFERS FOUNDATION 901 TWELVE OAKS CENTER DRIVE #914 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 00-ENG-123043-SHEET-GRAD 4.2GRADING PLAN c 1OFJLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L1LANDSCAPE PLAN c OFJEFFERS LODGE PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 05-19-2023Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 05-19-2023 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson JEFFERS FOUNDATION 901 TWELVE OAKS CENTER DRIVE #914 WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 [Phone] 952-447-9800 | [Fax] 952-447-4245 | cityofpriorlake.com 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 Memorandum To: Jeff Matzke, Planner From: Nick Monserud, Assistant City Engineer Kris Keller, Consulting Engineer Date: June 15, 2023 Re: Jeffers Lodge – Site Plan Review We have reviewed the revised Civil Plans submitted for Jeffers Lodge site dated May 22, 2023 as prepared by Pioneer Engineering. The following documents were received:  Submitted Plans - 00-ENG-123043-PUD Ammendment Plans - Rev 00 5-22-23.pdf  Stormwater Management Report - 123043 Stormwater Management Plan 5-12-2023.pdf  Final Plat - 123043- JEFFERS LODGE.pdf We have the following comments with regards to stormwater management and engineering: General 1. Submit for and provide copies to the City of all required permits from regulatory agencies (MCES, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Health, NPDES, etc.) 2. Provide the access agreement with the adjacent property to the east to verify any language that may limit expansion due to traffic volumes and use of the shared access 3. Provide a ghost plat and/or overall plan of the remaining proposed commercial/residential areas of the Jeffers Pond 1st Outlot. a. Provide anticipated vehicle and pedestrian access, sanitary sewer and water services, as well as stormwater management needs to serve the remaining areas within the outlot. 4. Provide sanitary sewer service and water service maintenance agreements that outline the limits and future responsibilities for the property owners maintaining the sanitary sewer and water utilities serving the commercial/residential properties including the current lot. 5. Additional comments may be generated by PLSLWD’s review of the revised plans 6. Additional comments may be generated by Scott County’s review of the revised plans 7. Address all comments in the following memo and on the redline plan set and provide responses Plat 1. Clarify extents of public and private utilities. a. Provide drainage and utility easements for all public utilities. Site Plan 8. Provide a ghost plat and/or overall plan of the remaining proposed commercial/residential areas of the Jeffers Pond 1st Outlot. 9. Provide turning movements for all vehicle types (garbage, delivery, emergency, etc.) a. An additional turnaround may be required 10. Provide type 3 barricades at the end of the entrance road Grading 2. Provide a ghost plat and/or overall plan of the remaining proposed commercial/residential areas of the Jeffers Pond 1st Outlot. 3. Add the 100-year HWL of the temporary treatment swale to the plans. 4. There is a minimum 2’ freeboard requirement between the EOFs of the adjacent low areas (CBs, etc.) and the LOE /FFE elevation of the building. 5. Verify that the EOF for the temporary treatment swale will go to the location indicated on the plans based on the proposed contours shown. Revise proposed contours as necessary. 6. Minimum of 2% slopes are required for greenspace areas. 7. The drainage swale to the east of the road and parking lot does not meet the maximum drainage swale length of 300-feet. Utilities 8. Storm Sewer a. Modify the invert elevation of the pond inlet flared end section to match the outlet elevation of the pond. b. Submit drainage calculations for the storm sewer. The storm sewer shall be designed for a 10-year 24-hour event. c. Add the MnDOT riprap detail to the plans. 9. Watermain a. Extend 8” watermain past the last service connection (6” cross becomes 8” cross) b. Provide a Ford A1 casting for curb stops in impervious surfaces Streets/Trails 10. Provide anticipated traffic/trip generation a. Additional discussions will be needed to determine the impact on the surrounding intersections and whether there would be a need for improvements. 11. Provide proposed design tonnage of roads with supporting information from the geotechnical report. Stormwater Management 12. Drainage Areas a. Modify the existing drainage area map per the existing contours. The south portion of DA 1 will not reach the north pond. The water discharges directly to the creek. Cut DA 2 along the high points on the west side of the drainage area. The majority of DA 2 will drain directly to the creek via a swale. The remainder of DA 2 flows to the basins on the development to the southwest of the site. b. Split the proposed drainage area by what is routed to the basin and what is directed offsite. The area west of the road and the open space south of the road will drain offsite and not to the pond (apply changes to HydroCAD model and MIDS model). 13. Provide a table in the stormwater management plan that specifies how much of the 3.21 acres of impervious will be constructed with this project and how much will be future construction on Outlot A. 14. HydroCAD Model a. The orifice out of Pond 100P is 5-inches in the model and 4.5-inches on the detail. Modify for consistency. b. The primary outlet out of the pond is a 12-inch pipe on the plans and a 15-inch pipe in the model and on the detail. Modify for consistency. 15. Rate Control a. The total disturbed area is larger than what is included in the prescriptive rate control calculation. Will the land cover of the disturbed areas that are outside of the area accounted for in the rate control calculation be modified in any way? 16. Volume Control a. Please provide a tabular output from HydroCAD for the cumulative storage at each stage elevation (particularly at 869 and 870.2). b. Document the basis of the infeasibility of infiltration. 17. Filtration Basin a. The minimum allowable draintile slope is 0.5%. b. Add a knife gate valve to the draintile system. c. A clay core shall be designed in the berm in consideration of groundwater flow. d. Because the head difference between the pond outlet elevation and the downstream land exceeds 3-feet, soils data are required in the area and the berm design must address maintenance of pond water level and berm stability. e. Provide whether the basin will be publicly or privately owned i. A publicly owned/maintained structure is required to be a 66-inch minimum diameter outlet control structure when having a weir wall. 18. Freeboard a. Provide 2-feet of freeboard between the catch basin EOF elevations and the low opening of the building. b. Provide additional information that the temporary swale and ultimate buildout of the parking area will not present a flood risk to the proposed building. 19. Water Quality a. Pond 100P is labeled as an infiltration basin in the MIDS model. Please provide a screenshot of the MIDS inputs for the basin to verify that filtration was used. SWPPP 20. Provide a note on the plans specifying that sediment control BMPs shall be installed by the contractor and inspected by the City before any land disturbing activities can occur. 21. Define who will have long term responsibility for the maintenance of the permanent stormwater feature. 22. Provide details for inlet protection and straw bioroll. Wetlands 23. A wetland delineation was submitted to the city for review through the Wetland Conservation Act. If the wetland boundary is revised during the review, the plans should be updated with the revised boundary. 24. Existing vegetation within the wetland buffer that will not be disturbed by grading should be reviewed to determine if it meets the standards of the PLSLWD buffer rule. VIA EMAIL To: Nick Monserud, Assistant City Engineer Casey McCabe, Community Development Director Jeff Matzke, Community Development Planner Kris Keller, WSB Project Engineer From: Joe Hale, SWCD Permitting Specialist Cc: Joni Giese, PLSLWD Administrator Date: June 23, 2023 Subject: Jeffers Lodge – Site Plan Review PID 255590020 Thank you for the opportunity to provide review comments for the Site Plan Review of Jeffers Lodge located at PID 255590020. Staff have reviewed the materials supplied to the Prior Lake- Spring Lake Watershed District from the City of Prior Lake and have the following comments to offer: Rule D – Stormwater Management 1. The NRCS soils report indicates some areas of HSG B soils onsite which could accommodate infiltration practices. Soil borings consistent with Rule D.3(i) should be required to assess infiltration feasibility. 2. The “wet volume” (filtration volume) of 0.295 ac-ft listed on Sheet 6.1 is inconsistent with the filtration volume of 0.422 ac-ft reported in the Storm Water Management Plan (Page 8). The later value complies with volume control requirements. Filtration basin stage-storage should be required to confirm compliance with volume control criteria. 3. The proposed filtration basin does not appear to comply with water quality criteria per Rule D.3(e)(i). The filtration basin should either filter the 2-yr storm without surface overflow (or water quality modeling must demonstrate 60% TP and 90% TSS removal). As designed the peak 2-year elevation is 870.5, which is above the lowest surface (orifice) outlet elevation of 870.2 indicating that not all of the 2-year runoff volume is treated via filtration. In addition, the water quality modeling (MIDS calculator output) indicates infiltration is the mechanism of treatment which overestimates the water quality performance of a filtration basin. 4. Modeled curve numbers are not consistent with Rule D.3(g). Existing condition CN assumptions should be adjusted for green space to be 30, 55, 71 and 77 for HSG A, B, C & D, respectively. In addition, the proposed condition CNs for green space should be adjusted to account for grading impacts to soil structure per Rule D.3(g). 5. The filtration media depths are inconsistent on Sheet 4.7 details. As shown, the Stormwater Basin detail is 24-inches, whereas the Filtration Basin indicates 18-inches. 6. The proposed HydroCAD model pond outlet orifice size is not consistent with the Pond Outlet Structure Detail OCS-100 on Sheet 4.7. Rule E – Erosion & Sediment Control 1. The SWPPP (Sheet S1) should be revised to include construction sequencing to protect the filtration basin from siltation and clogging during construction. 2. Sheet 4.3 should include bio-roll around the entire perimeter of the filtration basin surface until surrounding slopes are stabilized. 3. Sheet 4.3 must specify plastic-free or natural net erosion control blanket for all required buffer and Prior Lake Outlet Channel (PLOC) easement areas. Rule J – Buffer Strips 1. The delineated wetland onsite is classified by the District as Basic Protection wetland requiring a minimum of 15-ft and average of 30-ft buffer strip. The Prior Lake Outlet Channel requires the same buffer strip minimum and average from the OWHL (read top of bank). Sheet 2.2 indicates a uniform 30-ft buffer from the delineated wetland and PLOC top of bank that is monumented. The applicant must coordinate with the District, enter into a development agreement to establish, and record a conservation easement against the property for these required buffer areas. 2. Sheet 1.1 indicates tree removal within buffer areas and Sheets 4.1 and 4.2 indicate grading (fill) for creation of the filtration pond berm, upland around the proposed building, and swale leading to the filtration pond. Rule J.5(f) prohibits fill within buffer areas. Revised grading is required to comply with Rule J.5(f). 3. Buffer areas proposed to remain undisturbed will be required to be assessed to determine if acceptable natural vegetation exists (per Rule 8(a)). If acceptable natural vegetation does not exist, additional planting/seeding will be required per Rule 8(c). PLOC Easements 1. Several drainage and utility easements and Prior Lake Outlet Channel (PLOC) easements are mapped on the property. Upon initial review, it appears that the physical alignment of the PLOC in the central portion of the site may constrain the District’s ability to work within permanent easement to maintain and improve the PLOC. The PLOC top of bank is as close as 10-feet from the eastern boundary of the existing easement (per Document 500075). Further coordination between the applicant and District is required to assess and potentially amend the easement(s) for the PLOC.