CR 91-83 CUP - TownhomesJuly 9, 1991
\ t Y O
G
ti 5
O P
Council Report: 91 -83
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - TOWNHOMES
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 91 -7
approving the conditional use permit to construct 12 townhomes on the
corner of Hiawatha and Cambridge.
Approval of this motion will allow the applicant to construct 12
townhomes.
overview.
The applicant is proposing to construct 12 rental townhomes on the
east side of Ramsgate along Hiawatha Avenue. These townhomes will be
two story, three bedrooms with a 2 car tuck -under garage. Access will
be from Cambridge. There is no car access from Hiawatha to the
townhomes.
A ponding area will be located on the north end of the site. The
south end of the site will be a parking area for Ramsgate Apartments
and the townhomes.
As This conditional use permit was referred back to the Planning
Commission because of a change in the site plan. The site plan was
changed to accommodate a larger holding pond which resulted in
removing one unit. The Council referred this back to the Commission
and asked the Commission only to review the site plan for land use and
design issues. Other issues involving the past actions by the City
will be reviewed the City Council.
See the attached "Notes from the Zoning & Planning Meeting."
An EAW was ordered to be prepared by the City Council,for this project
on April 2, 1991. Action on the C.U.P. and other applications were
continued until the E.A.W. process had been completed.
Primary Iss ues to Consider.
• Does the proposal meet the zoning requirements?
• What is'the impact of this project on the surrounding area?
• Should Hiawatha be widened?
• What are the changes detailed on the revised plan?
Su pportinq Documents.
• Detailed Background
• Analysis of Issues
• Alternatives
• Site Plans
• Resolution No: 91 -7
1l !,1 110!J�]
MMMM - 'An
CR: 91 -83
Page 2
D tailed Background.
Zoning and Comprehensive Plan.
The zoning of the subject parcel is R -2, Low Density Multiple Family.
The Comprehensive Plan has designated this parcel as high density
residential. The applicant has requested an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan from high density residential to medium density
residential.
Exterior materials.
The exterior of the townhomes is masonite siding. The color will be
earth tones.
Parking. '
The proposed plan has a two -stall garage for every unit, plus a
driveway long enough for two more spaces. The Ordinance requires 2
parking spaces per unit. The proposed plan complies with this
requirement.
The parking area on the south side of the site can be used by both the
townhomes and Ramsgate. If the Commission is concerned about enough
parking for the townhomes, parking spaces can be designated for
additional spaces for the townhomes. The applicant would be willing
to designate spaces for the townhomes.
Engineering Considerations. '
At the March 5, 1991 City Council meeting the City Council ordered a
feasibility study for the Hiawatha sanitary sewer. This study was
ordered as a result the City's consulting engineer reviewing the sewer
system in Hiawatha with the new information regarding sewer problems.
The City is prepared to correct the sewer problems in Hiawatha.
The site plan has been revised to accommodate a larger ponding area on
the north side of the property. The City's consulting engineer has
approved the revised plan. The applicant will have to get permission
from the Minnehaha Watershed District for this development. Any
approval should be contingent on their approval and the City's
consulting engineer.
Landscaping.
The Ordinance requires one 'tree per 2000 square feet of open space.
The Ordinance requires 16 trees for this site. The landscape plan
details 23 new plantings which meet or exceed the Ordinance
requirements. There are also 106 other plantings of trees and shrubs
that will be added to the site. 18 existing trees will also be
retained on the townhome site if possible.
Trash Handling.
There will not be community trash area. Each unit will have their own
trash container.
CR: 91 -83
Page 3
Access.
Access to the site will be from Cambridge. The townhomes and the
apartments will share a 24 foot driveway easement. This easement will
have a bituminous surface. 12 feet is an existing bituminous surface.
Lighting.
The site will have individual lights on the front and rear of the
buildings. The road to the garages and parking area will also be lit.
The lights for the access road are pole lights, with a height of 12
feet.
Fire Marshal Consideration.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed the preliminary plans and found no
problems at this time. He also noted that this area has been a
problem with grass fires.
screening.
The parking area on the south end of site will be recessed. A
retaining wall'with a guard rail will be .constructed on the east part
of this site. The east part of the parking area abutting the
residential area will remain as a buffer to the parking area.
Primary Issues to consider.
o What are the changes detailed on the revised plan?
The major change to the site plan was changing number of buildings to
two from three and removing one unit on the north side the site.
There is 10 feet separating the buildings to allow for drainage.
The plat has changes slightly. The north lot line of Lot 2 has been
moved approximately 27 feet to the south.
o Do s the proposal meet the zoning requirements?
The following are the zoning requirements for the R -2 district and the
proposed development:
R -2
front yard: 35 feet
rear yard: 35 feet
side yard east: 12 feet
side yard west: 12 feet
height 35 feet
open space 1:1.5
proposed townhomes
110 feet
35 feet
25 'feet (with new
ROW)
29.5 feet
31 feet
1:1.88
This is a corner lot. The front yard is Cambridge. (Attached is a
letter from Jerre Miller regarding the front yard for this project.)
CR: 91 -83
Page 4
o What is the impact of this project on the surrounding area?
Any development will have an impact on the surrounding area since the
lot is vacant at this time. However, because of the way the access
has been designed the impact should be quite minimized for the single
family homes to the east and south. Much of the activity will be from
the west side of the townhomes. The townhomes, with the proposed
density, will provide a good transition from single family to the
higher density of the Ramsgate apartments.
The apartments to the east should not have any impact. The townhomes
will abut parking and garages on the apartment site. The new parking
area for the apartments should be an improvement to the apartments and
the current parking situation.
o Should Hiawatha be widened?
Hiawatha has a 40 foot right -of -way with a 22 foot bituminous surface.
If the road were to be reconstructed the current roadway policy
requires a minimum right -of -way of 50 -60 feet with a 26 foot roadway.
The staff is recommending that 10 feet be taken from the applicant's
property for right -of -way. The additional 10 feet will give Hiawatha
a 50 foot right -of -way. Also, the applicant should be required to
widen Hiawatha by 4 feet to the west. The extra right -of -way and the
widening of the road will meet the minimum roadway requirements
established in the roadway policy. The applicant has agreed to give
the additional right -of -way and to widen Hiawatha by 4 feet.
Alternatives
1. Approve the conditional use permit. By approving the
conditional use permit the applicant will be able to construct
12 townhomes.
2. Deny the conditional use permit. By denying the conditional
use permit, the applicant will not be able to construct 12
townhomes. The City Council will have to state findings of
fact which support the denial of the conditional use permit.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council
indicates that further information is needed, the item should
be continued.
r�
CR: 91 -83
Page 5
Notes from Zoning & ,Planning Meeting
Staffing explained the change from 13 units to 12 units. Arlene Dixson
representing the applicant appeared before the Commission and also
explained the changes.
Joey Carlson appeared before the Commission. Mr. Carlson expressed a
concern about the preserving of the trees on the site.
The Commission discussed corner lots and if the setback on Hiawatha should
be greater. The City Attorney advised the Commission that if they added a
condition requiring a greater setback on Hiawatha, they would be imposing a
requirement that was not enforceable.
Several other residents appeared before the Commission and spoke about the
trees on the site.
The Commission discussed adding the following conditions to the resolution.
13. Require that the front yard setback be from Hiawatha.
14. That no grading or removal of trees occur until approval by the
Environmental Quality Board.
Mr. Pavella moved to approve resolution RZ91 -1 with the two added
conditions. The motion failed on a.1 - vote.
After a considerable discussion on what to do, another motion was made.
Mr. Maxwell moved to approve resolution RZ91 - 1 with the two added
conditions. The motion passed on a 3 -1 vote, Mrs. Reuter voting nay.
The Hiawatha residents submitted a petition to the Environmental Quality
Board requesting an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The current
proposal does not meet the mandatory threshold for a EAW. The proposal may
meet the minimum requirements for a discretionary EAW. Staff is studying
this issue further and will provide additional information to the City
Council during the meeting. If the proposal meets the minimum requirements
for a discretionary EAW, the City Council will need to undertake a process
of determining whether it wishes to require a discretionary EAW.
Also attached is the memo from Jerre Miller regarding the condition from
the CUP when Ramsgate was approved regarding access to the Ramsgate Site.
•
1..
• W
W
K
r
N
W
U
O
K
0]
t
U
APT.
BLDG.
KEY
N :1_ 0 20 so so eo 100
EXIST. TREES (RETAIN IF POSSIBLE) ( o
EXIST. TREEIST. TREE REMOVED X
\J ` ¢G � N � oG � S �� JO
PROPOSED PLANTING
0 !nv Q
S C
P L A N T 1 N
TREES (DEC)
e - A
eREO, ASH
x ,/2 .
S — e
CANADA RED CHERRY
: 1/2
x - e
Urnz lEW UNM
r
S - o
SUNBURST LOCUST
y
+ - E
sueAR MAPL(
x 1
x — r
AW R MAPLE
r
POT
TREES, EVERGREEN
k e
9 - 0
COLORADO SPRUCE
0•.4•
- N
COLORADO eLUE SPRUCE
S
h d
BLACK ML LS SPRUCE
e•
S C
H E D U L E
SHRUBS /EYE ?;, =EEN & DEC
e k 9
11 - M
Pfr2G JUMPER
x CAL
PM
e k e
S- P
Pi1,x:ER J-%mm
PURPLE
x CAL
POT
RAMS GA TE
e
IEW SOO --{wry
xCAL
POT
k e
-0
6ANn 0047000
x r,,L,
POT
e t e
7- R
V19URNUN. AMERICA%
x GLL.
POT
9 k e
RAMSCATE TOWNHOUSES
I'OPK'NS. MINNESOTA
HEDGE
v07
- s
0= rtAME S+
x W-
s,� PLAN
P!A%nNC
e t e
or-ar O.C. _
PLAN
9 k e
100 IF REO D
'• -
rrp, ,y 1H1
_
•
r•
t
RAMSGATE
RAMSGATE TOWNHOUSES
HOPKINS. MINNESOTA
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
CROSS SECTION
Vu_ r
wq -7
W
- ---------
...................
- 7
7
Ramsgate Townhouses
wNA AA .N
VIM— ft.. L STMY Onk N"
:7
C I T Y O F H O P K I N S
MEMO
:7
Date: February 15, 1991
To: Nancy Anderson
From: Jerre Miller
Re: Ramsgate Townhomes
You have asked that I commit and furnish my interpretation of
a condition pertaining to Ramsgate contained in Council
minutes of March 18, 1969.
The precise condition attached to the permit for Ramsgate is
as follows:
11 5. That no access to the site shall be permitted
from Hiawatha Avenue except to service the proposed
townhouses on the east side of the site."
At the time, the Council was considering the grant of a
Conditional Use Permit for the Ramsgate site. The site also
included property abutting Hiawatha Avenue which was to be
used for the development of certain townhomes.
The purpose of the condition is to make sure the Ramsgate
site was not accessed through to Hiawatha Avenue and that
Hiawatha Avenue access would be limited to the townhomes
which at the time were purposed to be constructed.
I don't know how it can be interpreted any other way.
I don't think it has anything to do with a sidewalk being
considered as access because the ncern was vehicular
traffic to and from Ram at to Hiawatha which the
neighborhood opposed at the ime.
1010 First Street South, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 612/935 -8474
An Equal Opportunity Employer
�J
1 5
C I T Y O F H O P K I P�_ S
Date: April 2," 1991
To: Nancy Anderson
From: Jerre Miller
Re: Hiawatha Avenue Project
MEMO
You have asked me to review Ordinance 530.05 and Ordinance
560.03 because of an assertion by the homeowners as to the
appropriate application of the front yard setback measurement
with respect to the Hiawatha townhome project.
Section 530.05 requires a minimum front yard setback of 35
feet in R -1 -D, R -1 -E, R -2, R -3 and R -6 zoning districts.
Section 560 contains additional requirements and benefits.
Section 560.03 provides for a variance in any R district.
Wherever a subdivided area has dwellings on 50% or more of
the parcels, front yard setback lines can be reduced below
the minimum of 35 feet but in no case less than either the
average front setback lines which are already established by
existing dwellings or 15 feet whichever is greater.
In applying the two Ordinances to the Hiawatha project, it is
obvious to see that Section 560 is inapplicable because there
are no existing dwellings on 50% or more of the land to be
developed. The only ordinance applicable to the Hiawatha
project to determine the front setback measurement is Section
530.05.
I have already furnished
interpretation of where
measurement.
you a memorandum concerning the
s determined for such a
I trust this answers yo
1010 First Street South, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 612/935 -8474
An Equal Opportunity Employer
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota `
RESOLUTION NO: 91 -7
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING
AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP:91 -1
WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit entitled CUP91 -1
submitted by Mark Z. Jones to construct 12 townhomes at
Cambridge & Hiawatha Avenues is hereby approved.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That an application for Conditional Use Permit CUP 91-
1 was filed with the City of Hopkins on December 31,
1990.
2. That the Hopkins Planning Commission reviewed such
application on January 29, 1991.
3. That the Hopkins Planning Commission,' pursuant to
published and mailed notices, held a hearing on January
29, 1991 and February 26, 1991, and March 26, 1991: all
persons present at the hearing were given an
opportunity to be heard.
4. That the application for CUP91 -1 was referred back to
the Planning Commission on March 5, 1991.
4. That the written comments and analysis of the City
Staff and the Planning Commission were considered.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that application for Conditional Use
Permit CUP:91 -1 is hereby approved subject to the following
Findings of Fact:
1. The townhomes are a permitted use within the R -2 district.
2. That the proposed development complies with the zoning
requirements for the district.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that application for CUP:91 -1'is hereby
approved subject to the following Conditions:
1. That the Watershed District approves the drainage plan for
the site.
2. That the final plat reflects an additional 10 feet of right -
of -way on the west side of Hiawatha.
3. That the applicant widens Hiawatha by four (4) feet to the
west pursuant to City specifications.
4. That the Metropolitan Council approves the Comprehensive
Plan.change.
5. That the final plat is approved.
6. That Lot 2 is platted as an outlot.,
7. That the parking area be allowed to be used by the townhomes
for overflow parking.
8. That the developer is responsible for the maintenance of
ponding area.
9. That approval is conditioned on final approval of the
grading, and utility plans for the project.
10. That the applicant provide erosion control measures
approved by the Staff.
11. That the townhomes are not occupied until the sanitary
sewer problems are resolved and the applicant has granted
an easement through his property for the rerouting of the
sanitary sewer.
12. That the applicant provide copies of private easements for
storm water, driveway, water mains and sanitary sewer.
Adopted this 16th day of July, 1991.
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
Attest:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
..
•