Loading...
CR 2012-087 PUD Overlay Rezoning - Gallery Flats Apartments• August 1, 2012 Council Report 12-87 PUD OVERLAY REZONING — GALLERY FLATS APARTMENTS Proposed Action Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 12-56 approving Ordinance 12-1054, placing an overlgy zoning of Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Gallery Flats gpartments for first reading. At the Zoning and Planning meeting, Mr. Kerrsen moved and Mr. Datta seconded a motion to adopt Resolution 12-11, recommending approval of Ordinance 12-1054, placing an overlay zoning of Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Gallery Flats apartments. The motion was was approved unanimously. Overview In 2010 the City had a purchase agreement for the former Park Nicollet site at 815 First Street South. The City closed on the property in 2011. Also in 2010 the City put out a request for proposals (RFP) to redevelop the site, and three companies responded. Klodt Development, LLC was the City Council's choice to redevelop the site. Klodt has also secured the former Lutheran • Digest building property to add to the development. Klodt Development, LLC is proposing to construct two apartment buildings. The first building will be constructed along Eighth Avenue and have 73 units. The second building will be constructed along First Street and Ninth Avenue and have 90 units. The site will be rezoned with an overlay zoning of Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD zoning allows flexibility with the underlying zoning of mixed use. Along with the overlay zoning to PUD, there will be an agreement with specific parameters on how the site will be developed. Primary Issues to Consider • What is the underlying zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? • Why place an overlay zone of PUD on this property? • What are the areas that would be included in the overlay zone? • What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Supporting Documents • Analysis of issues • Resolution 12-56 Ordinance 12-1054 • Nancy 0 Anderson, AICP City Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N Source: Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: • CR12-87 Page 2 Primary Issues to Consider • What is the underlying zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? The property will be rezoned to mixed use. For this development to occur as proposed the property will have a PUD overlay; this would allow flexibility in site development. The Comprehensive Plan has designated this site as mixed use. With the rezoning to mixed use the Comprehensive Plan designation will be consistent. • Why place an overlay zone of PUD on this property? The Planned Unit Development allows a site-specific development with the underlying zoning remaining. This type of development allows for a departure from the strict application of the zoning standards. The applicant and the City enter into an agreement defining the specific allowed uses and performance standards for each PUD, and these are delineated in the agreement. In this case the underlying zoning of mixed use will remain. In the proposed • development the FAR is less than the required, the setbacks are larger than allowed, stucco as a primary exterior treatment and the parking spaces dimensions are smaller than required. • What are the areas that would be included in the overlay zone? The entire site will be included in the overlay zone. • What would staff recommend for the PUD agreement? The following is the staff's recommendations: • Art dedication fee • Future areas for public art either on the buildings or the site • What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Ms. Anderson stated that the PUD overlay was to add flexibility to this development and the Mixed Use zoning. No one appeared at the public hearing regarding this item. Alternatives 1. Recommend approval of the overlay zoning of PUD. By recommending approval, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval. 2. Deny the overlay zoning of PUD. By denying the PUD, the apartment development cannot be constructed as proposed. If the overlay zoning is not approved, the Mixed Use • CR12-87 Page 3 zoning will remain and any redevelopment of this site will have to be consistent with the existing zoning. 3. Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates that further information is needed, the item should be continued. • 0 • CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO: 12-56 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE FORMER PARK NICOLLET AND LUTHERAN DIGEST SITES WITH AN OVERLAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) WHEREAS, an application for Zoning Amendment ZN 12-4 has been made by Klodt Development LLC; WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for zoning amendment was made by Klodt Development, LLC; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission published notice, held 40a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on July 31, 2012: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered. 4. The legal description of the property is as follows: Parcel 1: The South 36 feet of Lot 13, and all of Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with the East half of the vacated alley in said Block 4, lying between the westerly extension of the North line of the South 36 feet of said Lot 13, and the westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 14, and including that part of the vacated alley in said Block 4 lying between the westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 15 and the Westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 17, all in "West Minneapolis," except those portions embraced within the following -described two tracts: Exception Tract A: Lot 13, except the North 14 feet thereof, and the North 18 feet of Lot 14, Block 4, together with the easterly half of the vacated alley in said Block 4, lying between the Westerly • extension of the South line of the North 14 feet of said Lot 13, and the westerly extension of the South line of the North 18 feet of said Lot 14" all in "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," Hennepin County, Minnesota. • Exception Tract B: That part of Lots 15 and 16, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 15; thence Southerly along the East line of said Lot 16 a distance of 8.49 feet; thence Westerly, deflecting 89 degrees 42 minutes 54 seconds to the right a distance of 127.44 feet; thence Northerly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 50.00 feet; thence Easterly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 127.69 feet to the East line of said Lot 15; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: Tract A: Lot 13, except the North 14 feet thereof, and the North 18 feet of Lot 14, Block 4, together with the easterly half of the vacated alley in said Block 4, lying between the Westerly extension of the South line of the North 14 feet of said Lot 13, and the westerly extension of the South line of the North 18 feet of said Lot 14, all in "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," Hennepin County, Minnesota. • Tract B: That part of Lots 15 and 16, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 15; thence Southerly along the East line of said Lot 16 a distance of 8.49 feet; thence Westerly, deflecting 89 degrees 42 minutes 54 seconds to the right a distance of 127.44 feet; thence Northerly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 50.00 feet; thence Easterly, deflecting 90 degrees to the right a distance of 127.69 feet to the East line of said Lot 15; thence South along said East line to the point of beginning. Tract C: Non-exclusive easement for driveway and access purposes over, across and upon the North 14 feet of Lot 13, Block 4, "WEST MINNEAPOLIS," Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Easement in Gross) Lots 21, 22, 23 and 24, Block 4, West Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with that part of the vacated alley adjoining Lots 21 and 22 accruing thereto. 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Zoning Amendment ZN 12-4 is hereby approved based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. That the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed development. 2. That the proposed development use is consistent with mixed use zoning 3. That the overlay district is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. That the underlying zoning of Mixed Use remains. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Zoning Amendment ZN12-4 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Applicant and the City enter into an agreement that satisfies all the conditions and requirements for this PUD development. 2. That the Applicant reimburses the City for Attorney's fees associated with the PUD agreement. Adopted this 6th day of August 2012 ATTEST: Kristine A. Luedke , City Clerk C] Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor • CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 12-1054 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: All of the land described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein is hereby established and zoned as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District. The existing Mixed Use zoning classification for the land included in the PUD Overlay District shall remain in effect as the underlying zoning classification with an overlay zoning classification of Planned Unit Development or PUD. The design standards permitted in the PUD overlay district shall be those described in Exhibit B as well as the requirements governing or applicable within the PUD Overlay District as set forth in the PUD agreement. First Reading: Second Reading: is Date of Publication: Date Ordinance Takes Effect: ATTEST: Kristine Luedke, City Clerk August 6, 2012 August 21, 2012 August 30, 2012 August 30, 2012 Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Signature Date i EXHIBIT B • Minimum floor area ratio (FAR) in Mixed Use districts is 4. An FAR of 2.203 will be permitted in the PUD overlay zone. • The maximum front yard setback in the Mixed Use districts is five feet. A front yard setback of six feet will be permitted in the PUD overlay zone. • Stucco will be permitted as a primary exterior treatment in the PUD overlay zone. • Parking spaces dimensions of 9' x 18' will be permitted in the PUD overlay zone rather than the required 9' x 20'. • r1 U