Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout[04] Public Hearing, CSBCITY OF ST. JOSEPH V'V'V. cityof stjoseph.com The request has been submitted by the College of St. Benedict, 37 College Avenue North, St. Joseph MN 56374. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: July 21, 2011 Development Site 2.5 College Avenue North • PO Box 668 . Saint loseph. Minnesota 56374 Phone 3Zo.363.7ZOi Fax 3ZO.363.034Z City of St. Joseph Public Hearing College of St. Benedict Administrator Judy Weyrens The St. Joseph Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on Monday, August 1, 2011 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall, 25 College Avenue North to consider a development request of the College of St. Benedict. The public hearing will consider an Meyor amendment to the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan to allow for the Zoning Classification of E Rick Schultz & E in planning district 12, subsequent rezoning to E & E, and preliminary plat entitled College 2nd Addition or in the alternative consider a request to rezone the property Councilors described below from the current agricultural to R4, issue a special use permit to allow for Steve Frank development of the property as a planned unit development (PUD) allowing for residential Bob loso living quarters, recreation fields, a College Welcome Center and preliminary plat entitled Renee Symcnietz College 2"d Addition. Dele Wick The property is located east of College Avenue /CR 121, south of Callaway Street and north of the northern gas substation, legally described as: Section 10, Township 127, Range 29; 20.23A SE4SW4 S of Rd and Section 15 Township 124, Range 29; 30.83 A. NE4NW4 Less 4.55 AC S of N ROW Rd Also Less PT platted as College Addition. The request has been submitted by the College of St. Benedict, 37 College Avenue North, St. Joseph MN 56374. Judy Weyrens Administrator Publish: July 21, 2011 Development Site 2.5 College Avenue North • PO Box 668 . Saint loseph. Minnesota 56374 Phone 3Zo.363.7ZOi Fax 3ZO.363.034Z L4M1VhA MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC. To: Planning Commission Members City Administrator Weyrens From: Cynthia Smith - Strack, Municipal Development Group, Inc. Date: July 28, 2011 Re: College 2nd Addition preliminary plat review, preliminary PUD review with special use permit, rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment APPLICATION DATA Hearing Date: The Planning Commission will conduct public hearings on Monday, August 1, 2011 in regards to a request to rezone property from (A) Agricultural to (EE) Education and Ecclesiastical; a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the future land use of the property from Medium Density Residential to EE; for a preliminary plat know as College 2nd Addition; and a preliminary residential PUD which requires a special use permit. If the City denies the request to rezone the property to (EE) Educational and Ecclesiastical, the applicant requests that the property be rezoned to (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District instead. If the property is rezoned (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District, the special use permit for the residential preliminary PUD will also allow for a Welcome Center, athletic fields, and recreational facilities. Under this scenario, a comprehensive plan amendment will not be needed. It is noted the original submittal included a retail element within the Welcome Center. Applicant(s): John L. Greer on behalf of the College of St. Benedict 37 College Avenue South Address /Location: East of College Avenue South (CR 121) and south of Callaway Street Adjacent Property: Graceview residential development to the east, agricultural fields and Presidential Residences to the south, College Avenue South (CR 121) to the west and the College of St. Benedict west of the street and Callaway Street to the north and residential property north of the street. Property: Parcel 1 - P I D 84.53430. 0100 Parcel 2 - PID 84.53433.0060 Background: The applicant has requested action on the above mentioned items to allow for the development and construction of a Welcome Center for the College that includes an admissions office, conference rooms, and visitor's center (it is noted the original submittal for rezoning /comprehensive plan amendment contemplated a retail College 2nd Addition Review Page 1 component within the Welcome Center), College owned student housing with a commons building and athletic fields and recreational facilities with a restroom facility and storage area. These uses together are consistent with the definition of mixed -use development which may be accommodated under a PUD. Proposed uses are those allowed within the underlying zoning classifications with an allowance for flexibility as authorized by the City Council. The Welcome Center will be located in the northwest corner of the property on Lot 1 of the preliminary plat directly south of the old Kennedy school building. Tentative plans include an admissions office, conference rooms, a visitor's center and a coffee shop. The College owned student housing will serve a total of 128 students and will be located on Lot 2 directly south of the Welcome Center. Proposed student housing will consist of four two -story buildings, each containing eight dwelling units for a total of 32 dwelling units. A fifth building will serve as a common area for the student housing. Each dwelling unit will consist of four bedrooms, two bathrooms, a living room, a kitchen and laundry facilities. Each unit will have a separate entrance in the front of the unit. The units are designed exclusively for use by students enrolled at the College of St. Benedict and not for occupancy by the general public or non - students. Athletic fields and recreational facilities are to be relocated from the existing location and developed on Lot 3 north and east of the existing President's Residence. The proposed facilities are to include softball fields, tennis courts, soccer fields and a running track as well as parking lots for those facilities. Athletic facilities are initially not intended for use during non - daylight hours; however, future plans include lighting of the athletic fields and facilities. At this time it is not known whether or not a public address system will be installed. A restroom facility with a storage area is also proposed. The recreational facilities /athletic fields are proposed for use by the College; limited public use is a possibility. Clarification on what other events (e.g. tournaments, special events, concerts, art/craft/specialty shows, farmer's market, etc.) may occur at the recreational facilities /athletic fields is needed. The Applicant anticipates vehicle counts would be low for the athletic events held at these facilities. The Applicant opines a gathering of 200 people at an event such as a soccer or softball game would be an unusually large crowd and would probably only be seen during a playoff game. The Applicant further opines that of the estimated 200 persons attending an event, at least half would be College students. The Applicant acknowledges that outside organizations could rent the facilities for tournaments where multiple teams could be playing and presumably there could be approximately 500 people attending. The Applicant notes these events would typically be scheduled during the weekends. Outlot A, as shown on the preliminary plat, is the subject parcel for which Collegeville Companies has developed conceptual plans for senior housing. Said plans have not been offered for approval and are not included in this review. Any future development or use of any Outlot requires approval by the City. Outlots B, C and D are proposed to be storm water retention areas to control the runoff from the remainder of the site. College 2nd Addition Review Page 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Action Requested: To change the future land use designation on the future land use map in the Comprehensive Plan from Medium Density Residential to Educational. Background Information: The applicant has requested the future land use map contained in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan be amended to 'educational' from medium density mixed use to educational. The Comprehensive Plan may be amended if /when unforeseen events occur or when conditions on which the plan is based change. Any proposed amendment is not to be impulsive, erratic, or to the benefit of a specific property owner (Chapter 1, Subs. Il, B. If the City denies the request to = m ORS w� LGE rezone the property to (EE) M M Educational and Ecclesiastical and " o rezones the property (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District instead, the future land use designation of Medium Density Residential would be consistent with the (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District zoning classification and no comprehensive plan amendment would be needed. Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan requires a super- majority vote (4/5`h) Findings: When considering the request, the Planning Commission should consider possible effects of the proposed amendment. Its judgment shall be based upon, but not limited to, the following factors: 1. Response to changing conditions and community attitudes. Whether there is a public need for the change and the change being proposed is the best means of meeting the identified public need. 3. Whether there is a net benefit to the community that will result from the change. College 2nd Addition Review Page 3 REZONING Action Requested: The applicant has requested a rezoning of property east of College Avenue South (CR 121) and south of Callaway Street. Current Zoning: (A) Agricultural District with a small portion zoned (R -3) Multiple Family Residence District in the northwest corner of the property. Proposed Zoning: (EE) Education and Ecclesiastical Preferred Zoning: (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District Background Information: The Applicant has requested the rezoning to (EE) Educational and Ecclesiastical for Lots 1 -3 and Outlots B, C and D of the proposes College 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat. Outlot A is to be retained as (A) Agricultural District. Rezoning is requested in order to facilitate the development of the previously described uses. To avoid the comprehensive plan amendment and promote consistency with the future land use map, a zoning classification of (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District is preferred. Within the R -4 district, all development shall be developed under a planned unit development (PUD), which would allow student housing as a permitted use and the Welcome Center and athletic facilities as a special use. A simple majority vote is sufficient for rezoning to E /E. R -4 Lot Standards: Lot requirements for the (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District follow: Townhouse Group Lot Area: (R1) (B) General Business 75 feet Rimide,,"l 120 feet Il�(R2) Two Famly Resldeneal (1) Industrial I I- - (13)e31U I�le FWAY (R4)TOwMrwrse -Paco Home Revolerroal IRK Mob, H— ResMenbal (P) Public (FP) Future Public (A)Agricultural (EE) Educational and (HS) Highway Business Ecclesiastical Townhouse Group Lot Area: 12,000 square feet Townhouse Group Lot Width: 75 feet Townhouse Group Lot Depth: 120 feet Public Buildings Lot Area: 40,000 square feet Public Buildings Lot Width: 100 feet All proposed lots meet the standards of the R -4 district. College 2nd Addition Review Page 4 Findings: The following findings of fact shall be considered in the rezoning of the property. 1. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the Official City Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed request is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. 3. The proposed request conforms to performance standards in the Code. 4. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. 5. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. Proposed Conditions: If the City finds rezoning to E/E is acceptable, the following conditions are recommended: Uses allowed to be specifically defined and limited: The uses permitted in the E/E district were designed, as indicated in the intent statement (Section 52.35, Subd. 1), to provide for areas occupied by the institutions of the Order of the Sisters of Saint Benedict and the College of Saint Benedict which predated zoning ordinance approval. In addition, the intent of the district is to prohibit use of land by the aforementioned institutions and other facilities which would be incompatible with or detrimental to the essential character of land adjoining the E/E district. The uses allowed under Section 52.35 are wide - ranging and vague allowing for broad application and inconsistent interpretation. The uses contemplated in the application are also vague. To provide clarity, promote common understanding, and protect the Applicant and City's interests, it is highly recommended that the uses allowed be specifically defined and limited to those specific defined within a development agreement. Said use definition should include (a) density (i.e. units /acre for residential or square footage /acre for institutional uses); (b) type of use (e.g. residential, recreational, commercial retail, commercial service, gathering space, office space, etc); (c) intensity of use (e.g. Welcome Center square footage devoted to each type of use allowed); and method of addressing uses which are not specifically defined (e.g. amendment of development agreement, when public hearing needed /not needed). 2. Parking study: Section 52.35, Subd. 9,d(ii) allows for variation from parking standards contained in Section 52.10 of the Zoning Ordinance thru a parking study. What parking standards are applicable should be clarified with the rezoning approval (e.g. parking calculations in 52,10 or a parking study. 3. Subsequent approvals: All appropriate building permits are issued and zoning reviews (i.e. site plans) approved in relation to the proposed uses prior to any building construction. College 2 "d Addition Review Page 5 PRELIMINARY PLAT Action Requested: Preliminary plat approval for College 2nd Addition. Background Information: The applicant has requested approval of a preliminary plat know as College 2nd Addition. It is a three lot subdivision that contains four outlots. The proposed plat would meet all the minimum lot size standards such as area, width and depth whether the property was zoned, (EE) Educational and Ecclesiastical or (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District. The Welcome Center is proposed to be constructed on Lot 1, College owned residential housing on Lot 2 and the athletic fields and recreational facilities on Lot 3. Outlots B, C and D will be utilized for ponding. Outlot A will remain vacant at this time and remain zoned (A) Agricultural. It would be expected that Outlot A would continue to be farmed until development would occur. Proposed Lot Sizes: Parcel Area Lot 1 119,461 sq ft or 2.742 acres Lot 2 244,006 sq ft or 5.602 acres Lot 3 1,150,508 sq ft or 26.412 acres Outlot A 407,806 sq ft or 9.362 acres Outlot B 188,560 sq ft or 4.329 acres Outlot C 46,621 sq ft or 1.070 acres Outlot D 49,630 sq ft or 1.139 acres Right -of -way 148,308 sq ft or 3.404 acres Totals 2,354,900 sq ft or 54.06 acres Right -of -way: As part of the plat right -of -way is proposed to be dedicated along College Avenue South and Callaway Street. It should be verified that the proposed right -of -way meets all the requirements of the City and Stearns County. Street Improvements & Access: Two access points are proposed for the development. One is from Callaway Street on the north end of the property and will act as the main entrance for the Welcome Center and also provide access to the College owned student housing. The second access point is located on College Avenue South (CR 121) on the west side of the property and will serve as the main access point to the athletic fields and also provide access to the College owned student housing. Since one of the access points is located on a County Road, the applicant shall be required to apply for and receive any access related permits from the County prior to construction of the access. At this time no comments have been received from Stearns County. The access point located on Callaway Street shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. Other transportation modes shall also be considered when reviewing the plat, specifically pedestrians, bicyclists, and mass transit options. Connection to /with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and bussing facilities are to be reviewed by the City. Public Utilities: Comments or questions in regards to public utilities should be directed to City Engineer. Park Dedication: Section 54.18 of the City code requires reasonable portions of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public for park purposes or for a cash contribution in lieu of land. In the event the City approves a fee in lieu of land dedication the applicable fee shall be calculated by the City. College 2 I Addition Review Page 6 Erosion & Sediment: Control: Comments or questions regarding erosion and sediment control should be directed to City Engineer Final Plat: Following approval of a preliminary plat the applicant must submit the final plat within 120 days of the preliminary plat approval unless otherwise specified as part of a development agreement. Engineers Comments: The Applicant shall be responsible for addressing all comments from the City Engineer. Proposed Conditions: The following conditions are recommended to be included with the approval of the preliminary plat. 1. Engineer's comments. The applicant shall satisfactorily address any issues raised by the City Engineer in relation to the preliminary plat and related plans. 2. County Road Access. The applicant shall be responsible for any Stearns County access related permits for the proposed access to CR 121 prior to construction. Other transportation modes shall also be considered when reviewing the plat, specifically pedestrians, bicyclists, and mass transit options. Connection to /with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and bussing facilities are to be reviewed by the City. 3. Park Dedication. Park dedication shall be in the form of cash in lieu of land and shall be calculated by the City Engineer. 4. Final Plat. Following approval of the preliminary plat the applicant must submit the final plat within 120 days of the preliminary plat approval unless otherwise specified as part of a development agreement. College 2nd Addition Review Page 7 Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Action Requested: Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) development plan approval request for College 2nd Addition. The preliminary planned unit residential development will be processed as a special use as required in the (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District. The PUD process allows for design and development flexibility in return for a public benefit. The proposed PUD is comprised of residential and non - residential uses as provided in Section 52.09, Subd. 3, Subp. a).3). Background Information: The applicant has requested a PUD to allow for a mix of uses on property to be zoned (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District. The proposed mixed uses include: residential housing (a permitted use in the R -4 District), a Welcome Center (proposed as a special use in R -4), and athletic and recreational facilities (proposed as a special use in R -4). The purpose and intent of a PUD is to provide for the modification of certain regulations when it can be demonstrated that such modification would result in development, which would not increase the density and intensity of land use beyond that which would be allowed if no regulations were modified, would preserve or create features or facilities of benefit to the community such as, but not limited to open space or active recreational facilities, which features or facilities would not have been provided if not regulations were modified, would be compatible with surrounding development, and would conform to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Under the PUD regulations in the zoning ordinance, residential PUD's requires a minimum of twenty acres and is to be governed by the underlying zoning district. This review will be based on the R -4 zoning district with an aggregate area of 54.06 acres. PUD designs must take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the PUD must be so designed as to minimize undesirable impact of the PUD on adjacent properties and, conversely, to minimize undesirable impact of adjacent land use and development characteristics on the PUD The following items were reviewed as part of the PUD review General Standards: The City may authorize modifications in the regulations, requirements, and the standards of the zone in which the project is located, and in the subdivision ordinance through the PUD process. The applicant bears the burden of supporting any change in requirements. The City may increase any requirement necessary to make the project conform to the purposes of this section. Proposed Uses: All permitted, permitted accessory and /or special uses contained in the R -4 district shall be treated as permitted, permitted accessory and special uses in the PUD overlay district. Uses not listed as permitted or special uses in the district shall not be allowed in a PUD unless the City Council finds the use 'complimentary to the functionality of the development and the other uses found therein.' The College owned student housing is proposed on Lot 2 and in the R -4 district the student housing would be classified under the townhouse definition: "A single family dwelling in a row of at least three (3) such units in which each unit has its own front and rear access to the outside, no unit is located over another unit, and each unit is separated from any other unit by one or more common fire resistant walls." The applicant, as part of the PUD has requested a modification of this definition to allow for each unit to only have one entrance. The buildings would be constructed with College 2nd Addition Review Page 8 four units backing up to four other units with one entrance for each unit. The proposed use can be approved by the City under the 'complimentary to the functionality of the development and the other uses found therein' clause contained in the PUD standards. The applicant has also requested a commons building for the student housing is constructed on Lot 2 as well. This proposed use would be an accessory use to the student owned housing and would be complimentary to the functionality of the development and therefore should be allowed as an accessory use. An accessory use is defined as a use naturally and normally incidental to, subordinate to, and auxiliary to the principal permitted use of the premises while a principal use is defined as the main use of the land or buildings as distinguished from subordinate or accessory uses. No elevations or plans of the commons building have been submitted for review and the setback of the building, as shown on the site plan should be verified to determine if it meets the setback requirements from College Avenue South and the distances between the buildings. The Welcome Center and athletic fields and recreational facilities are not specifically listed as a permitted uses or special uses in the R -4 district but would be allowed as a special use under uses which in the judgment of the Planning Commission and City Council are similar to those listed in the zoning district. The Welcome Center is to be located on Lot 1 while the athletic fields and recreational facilities are to be located on Lot 3. An accessory use is also proposed on Lot 3 which is a restroom facilities with storage area for the athletic fields and recreational facilities. Once again this facility is not listed as an accessory use in the R -4 district but once again is complimentary to the functionality of the development and therefore should be allowed under the PUD. Common Space: Under Section 52.30, Subd. 14 all common areas in a R -4 development, including open space, wetlands, greenways, drainage ponds, driveway, parking areas shall be owned and maintained by a condominium, association, cooperative, or other common interest community created pursuant to state statutes. There will also be common areas within Lot 2 where the College owned student housing is located. The applicant has stated that the common areas will not be owned by a common interest community but rather by the College. Setbacks: The front yard setback of the underlying zoning district shall apply to all exterior boundary lines of the site. The applicant has stated that all setbacks will meet a minimum of fifty feet which would be allowed in the R -4 district. Building Elevations: PUD standards require all buildings are designed to prevent the appearance of straight, unbroken lines in their horizontal and vertical surfaces. In addition, under Section 52.09 (PUD) the ordinance, no residential building shall have a single exterior wall longer than forty feet without an offset in the external wall. Offsets between walls shall be at least thirty -two inches and shall not exceed ten feet. Building elevations have been provided for the proposed student housing which illustrate appropriate offsets for those buildings; however, no elevations have been submitted for any other structures on the property. Building Height: Building height is to be governed by the underlying R -4 district which allows for a maximum height of 2 stories or 35 feet. The Applicant has stated that the buildings are proposed to be 36.6 feet. Under the PUD this would need to be allowed. College 2 "d Addition Review Page 9 Density: The R -4 district allows for up to six units per acre. There are thirty -two units proposed on Lot 2 which is 5.602 acres for a density of 5.71 units per acre which meets the density requirements of the R -4 district. Off - street Parking: Off - street parking requirements have been calculated as follows: Lot 2 (student housing) shall have four (4) stalls for every three (3) bedrooms per unit plus an additional 1.25 stalls for each additional bedroom (i.e. 5.25 stalls /unit). The total number of parking stalls needed for Lot 2 is 168. The landscape plan submitted by the Applicant illustrates 168 stalls, meeting the off - street parking requirements for Lot 2. Off - street parking is required for Lot 1 (welcome center); the Applicant proposes 44 off - street parking stalls. At this time it is difficult to calculate the number of parking stalls required for the Lot 1 as the proposed square footage of individual uses is not provided. Presumably the parking stall calculation would be based on requirements for similar types of uses, such as: office building and professional offices, other than medical, chiropractic, dental or hospital out - patient clinics which require one space for each 250 square feet, plus an allowance for a proposed coffee shop which could be considered a retail establishment requiring one space per 300 square feet of floor area. At this time no square footages are given for the building or how the building is going to be utilized. The Applicant has provided 181 stalls of off - street parking for the athletic fields and the recreational facilities on Lot 3. There are no off - street parking requirements for facilities similar to these in the Section 52.10 (off street parking) of the zoning ordinance. The minimum number of parking spaces needed for Lot 3 shall be defined within the PUD agreement. Other off - street parking requirements that may apply are as follows: A. Whenever a parking lot boundary adjoins property zoned for residential use, a setback of fifteen feet from said lot line shall be required and maintained. Therefore, all parking must be setback at least 15 feet from the PUD boundary. Based on the current plans it is unclear if this setback is met. B. All parking lots shall be screened and landscaped from abutting residential uses or districts by a wall, fence or densely planted compact hedge or tree cover not less than four feet nor more than eight feet in height. Proposed parking areas abut Outlot A which could be developed as residential senior housing in the future as indicated by the Applicant. C. All lighting used to illuminate an off - street parking areas shall be shaded or diffused so as to reflect the light away from the adjoining property and away from abutting traffic flow. A detailed lighting plan has not been submitted at this time. D. All other off - street parking requirement of section 52.10, subd. 5 shall be met as well. Signage: At this time no signage has been proposed. Screening and Landscaping: In all zoning districts the lot area remaining after providing for parking, driveways, sidewalks, or other requirements shall be planted and maintained in grass, sodding, shrubs or other acceptable vegetation or landscaping techniques. In commercial and industrial districts adjacent to residential districts and not divided by streets College 2nd Addition Review Page 10 there shall be provided along the property line a 15 foot wide plating strip composed of grass, trees, and shrubs. The Applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan which illustrates proposed landscaping along the eastern property line adjacent to the existing residential development (Graceview). A detailed landscape plan is required to determine whether or not the proposed landscaping meets ordinance requirements. Final PUD Approval: Each PUD shall require preliminary and final approval. If platting is requested in conjunction with the PUD plan, both preliminary and final PUD approvals shall be processed concurrently with the platting procedures set forth in the City's Subdivision ordinance. Within twelve months of approval of the preliminary PUD, the applicant shall file with the City a final PUD conforming to the preliminary PUD. Once a final PUD is approved a developers agreement will be required. College 2nd Addition Review Page 11 Special Use Review Criteria The following standards are to be utilized in the granting of a special use permit. These standards should be applied to all three of the special uses being reviewed: A. The proposed use must not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. The proposed use must be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the comprehensive plan of the City and this Ordinance. C. The proposed use must be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential I. The proposed use must have adequate facilities to provide sufficient off - street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. The proposed use must not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. College 2nd Addition Review Page 12 character of that area. Q D. The proposed use must not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future Hneighboring areas. FE V E. The proposed use must be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, W refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools. ItF. The proposed use must not create excessive additional requirements at public W cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. J Q G. The proposed use must not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, U equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, W property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, d N noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. H. The proposed use must have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. I. The proposed use must have adequate facilities to provide sufficient off - street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use. The proposed use must not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. College 2nd Addition Review Page 12 Criteria for PUD Approval: Preliminary PUD approval shall be granted by the City only if the applicant demonstrates the following: A. The proposed project shall not be detrimental to present and potential surrounding land use. B. Land surrounding the proposed development can be planned in coordination with the proposed development and can be developed so as to be mutually Q compatible WC. Streets and sidewalks, existing and proposed, are suitable and adequate to H carry anticipated traffic within the proposed project and in the vicinity of the Vproposed project, in light of the criteria set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance and the comprehensive plan. W D. Services including portable water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage are W available or can be provided by the development prior to occupancy. p E. Each phase of the proposed development, as it is planned to be completed, contains the required parking spaces, recreation spaces, landscape and utility a areas necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment. F. The project conforms with the purposes and standards prescribed in this chapter. G. The project conforms with the comprehensive plan. College 2nd Addition Review Page 13 Proposed Conditions: The following conditions are recommended for inclusion with PUD approval. 1. The PUD shall be integrated with the surrounding area though the provision of (insert conditions such as pedestrian connections, building orientation, visual means, etc. to connect the PUD to adjacent residential areas, uses west of CR 121, and the Downtown). As a means to providing clarity, promoting common understanding, and protecting the Applicant and City's interests, it is highly recommended that the uses allowed be precisely detailed and limited to those specific defined within a PUD agreement. Said use definition may include (a) density (i.e. units /acre for residential or square footage /acre for institutional uses); (b) type of use (e.g. residential, recreational, commercial retail, commercial service, gathering space, office space, etc); (c) intensity of use (e.g. Welcome Center square footage devoted to each type of use allowed); and method of addressing uses which are not specifically defined (e.g. amendment of development agreement, when public hearing needed /not needed). 3. Precise definition and description of the College owned student housing, such as: number of structures, number of dwelling units, and approved use for occupancy by students enrolled at the College of St. Benedict and not for occupancy by the general public or non - students. N 4. Precise definition and description of the recreational facilities /athletic fields, Z including clarification of what other events (e.g. tournaments, special events, p concerts, art/craft/specialty shows, farmer's market, etc.) may occur at the F= recreational facilities /athletic fields. D Z 5. Specification as to whether storm water ponds contained in outlots will be 0 dedicated to the City (City has right to accept or deny this dedication) or held in V private ownership. D W O 6. Acknowledgment that a condominium, association, cooperative, or other d common interest is not proposed and that the College shall be responsible for p maintaining all open areas and common buildings. M CL 7. The Applicant shall ensure all setbacks from the exterior boundary lines of the PUD are a minimum of 50' on all sides. 8. The minimum distance between structures shall be (insert number, R4 requires 40 feet), as assigned by the Planning Commission so as to assure adequate sunlight and open space; and provided that minimum distances required by the building and fire codes shall be met. 9. All proposed structures shall be designed to prevent the appearance of straight, unbroken lines in vertical and horizontal surfaces. No exterior wall shall have a single exterior wall longer than forty (40) feet without an offset in the vertical or horizontal surface. 10. Structures within the PUD shall not exceed (insert number feet in height. 11. Prior to approval of the final PUD plan, the Applicant shall provide the City a final building plan for the Welcome Center proposed for Lot 1 including the square footages of each use within the structure so that the number of off - street parking stalls required can be determined. Alternately, the Applicant could `ghost plat' Lot 1 illustrating the intended future use but plat the parcel as an outlot which would postpone site plan review to an undetermined future date. College 2 "° Addition Review Page 14 Under this scenario site plan review would occur if /when additional specific information is available. 12. The Applicant shall provide the City with objective scientific data used to calculate the number of parking stalls needed for the recreational facilities /athletic fields proposed for Lot 3. Said objective, scientific data shall be reviewed by the City Council which shall then specifically define the minimum number of parking spaces needed. College 2nd Addition Review Page 15 13. All off - street parking must be setback at least 15 feet from the PUD boundary and from Outlot A. Z14. The parking lot on Lot 2 shall be screened or landscaped along the shared O boundary with Outlot A as provided for under Section 52.10. H p 15. Off - street parking lot lighting shall reflect lighting away from adjoining properties Z and away from traffic flows abutting the off - street parking lot. O U G 16. Any /all signage require the issuance of a sign permit from the City of St. w Joseph. N IL 17. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted by the Applicant and accepted by O the City Council or its designee. W a 18. A phasing plan illustrating when each phase of the PUD is to be completed is submitted and approved by the City Council or its designee. 19. Buffering of the uses proposed for Lot 3 (athletic fields /recreational facilities) from adjoining residential uses east of said Lot 3 shall be provided. Said buffering shall be illustrated within a detailed landscape plan submitted to the City for approval by the City Council or its designee. 20. Outdoor lighting and /or public address systems associated with the athletic fields /recreational facilities shall be designed and operated so as to minimize impacts on adjacent residential areas as defined by the City Council (insert specifics: when lights must be turned off, orientation of public address system /speakers, light trespass, etc). College 2nd Addition Review Page 15 Rezoning: After the public hearing and discussion by the members of the Planning Commission, a motion is in order to recommend to the City Council approval or denial of the rezoning from (A) Agricultural District and R -3 Multiple Family Residential District to (EE) Educational and Ecclesiastical District or (R -4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District for lots 1 -3 block 1 and outlots B, C and D of the proposed plat known as College 2nd Addition. Outlot A of the plat is proposed to be zoned (A) Agricultural District. Comprehensive Plan Amendment: If the rezoning to (EE) Educational and Ecclesiastical District is approved, and after the public hearing and discussion by the members of the Planning Commission, a motion is in order to recommend approval or denial to the City Council the comprehensive plan amendment changing the future land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Education. If the rezoning is approved for (R-4) Townhouse /Patio Home Residential District the existing future land use designation of medium density residential is consistent with the rezoning and no comprehensive plan amendment is required. Preliminary Plat: After the public hearing and discussion by the members of the Planning Commission, a motion is in order to recommend approval or denial of the preliminary plat of College 2nd Addition to the City Council. Preliminary Planned Unit Development: After the public hearing and discussion by the members of the Planning Commission, a motion is in order to recommend approval or denial to the City council, for the preliminary planned unit residential development (PUD) for property to be platted as College 2nd Addition. College 2 "d Addition Review Page 16 Site Plan North Half College 2nd Addition Review Page 17 Site Plan South Half College 2nd Addition Review Page 18 -A SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Judy Weyrens City Administrator FROM: Randy Sabart, PE April Ryan, PE DATE: July 25, 2011 RE: St. Joseph, Minnesota 2011 College of St. Benedict Student Housing/Athletic Complex Preliminary Plan Review SEH No. STJOE GEN D119 I reviewed the preliminary site and utility plans dated July 11, 2011, and have the following comments: Site, Grading and Drainage Plan 1. The inslopes of the private entrance road that connects to CR 121 are graded down into the pond without much of a street boulevard or bench to accomodate a sidewalk. Given the potential for pedestrian traffic into the athletic complex from the campus on the west side of CR 121, the need for a flatter boulevard (and sidewalk) may need to be reconsidered. 2. Though it is not explicitly labelled as such on the grading plan, parking and drive areas shall be constructed with concrete curb and gutter per Ordinance 84. 3. Run -off concentrated in the proposed Swale between the ball diamonds should be intercepted and not directed across the plat line. Similarly, run -off from the south ball field should be intercepted and not directed across the plat line. 4. It would appear two low points are created at the south corners of the play field at the southeast end of the site. Clarify how the drainage in this area will be managed. 5. The play fields on each side of CSB's Renner House are in fill with respect to the house site and the adjacent slopes are graded to drain in the direction of the house site. While areas of the existing field appear to drain in the direction of the house site, the proposed improvements appear to land -lock more of the drainage on the house site. 6. Per ordinance 54.16, Subd. 3j, the easement width dedication for the proposed trail at the south end of the site should be 16 feet wide. 7. Per ordinance 54.16, Subd 3y, sidewalks shall be required on collector and minor arterial streets, in this case along CR 121. It is noted there is limited internal sidewalk connectivity between the play fields and the student housing or intersection with CR 121. Preliminary Hydrology/Drainage Calculations 8. It is our understanding the proposed ponds will be privately owned (not public) and, therefore, compliance with the maintenance access shelf requirements around the pond perimeters is voluntary. That said, the grading of a bench on the east side of the large pond across Outlot B is encouraged to accommodate maintenance vehicles /equipment. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302 -1717 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 1 320.229.4300 1 600.572.0617 1 320.229.4301 fax 2011 CSB Student Housing /Athletic Complex July 25, 2011 Page 2 9. We were unable to complete the hydrology/hydraulics review for the following reasons: • Not all areas are included in the proposed HydroCAD model. • Proposed drainage area map does not correspond with HydroCAD drainage areas. 10. Drainage Calculations a. Include calculations with the final design submittal of the Time of Concentration (TC) calculations. b. Proposed Pond 2P should be modeled with an initial starting elevation which corresponds with the pond outlet and Normal Water Level (NWL) as it could potentially affect the pond's High Water Levels (HWL). c. Sub - catchment 12S, which drains to Proposed Pond 2P, includes the pond area at the NWL, but does not include the surrounding area which drains overland into the pond. The sub - catchment will need to be updated to accurately represent the drainage area. d. The proposed HydroCAD model only includes the areas that drain to the proposed ponds. All areas will need to be modeled to ensure peak discharge rates off the site are equal to or less than pre - development rates. e. The storm sewer was designed for a 2 -year return period. Storm sewer will need to be designed for a 10 -year return period. f. A number of storm sewer sections are undersized for a 2 -year return period. Storm sewer will need to be adequately sized to meet a 10 -yr return period. g. The entire Outlot A is modeled in HydroCAD to drain into proposed pond 1 P. However, the storm sewer calculations only account for approximately one half of Outlot A. The design calculation(s) will need to be updated, depending on what portion of Outlot A is truly draining to pond 1 P. Additionally, the storm sewer and/or pond sizes must also account for the drainage from Callaway Street and contributing areas to the existing pond south of Callaway Street. 11. Existing/Proposed Design a. The inlet to proposed pond 1 P should be constructed in the lowest tier of the pond to minimize potential side slope erosion. Final design will either need to lower the inlet to approximately 2 feet above the pond bottom or protect the pond side slope from erosion. (see City Pond Design Standards). b. Include in final design trash guards for all aprons 15- inches or larger. c. Include with final design stabilization measures necessary to properly protect areas of channelized overland flow from erosion. d. Include in the final design a 2 percent slope on the proposed pond 3P bottom, per City Design Standards. e. Final plans and specification will need to require verification of infiltration rates for proposed pond 3P with field tests after construction is completed. Site Utility Plan 12. The proposed sanitary sewer and water main to serve the site originates in the northeast corner of Outlot A and parallels the south right -of -way line of Callaway Street. Given the proposed depth 2011 CSB Student Housing /Athletic Complex July 25, 2011 Page 3 of the sanitary sewer, the existing bituminous trail on Callaway Street will likely be disturbed by construction, and it will likely be a challenge to protect the south edge of the pavement. While there are other examples of municipal utilities located outside of the street, placement of utilities at this location is not ideal and may likely complicate future replacement and maintenance activities given the anticipated residential construction along the south side of Callaway Street. 13. It is understood only the sanitary sewer and water main along Callaway Street is intended to be dedicated as public utilities and any interior sanitary sewer and water main will be private. It is also noted the sanitary sewer and water main encroach on Outlot A on the northwest side of the outlot. If the City accepts the proposed sanitary sewer and water main alignment along Callaway Street, a minimum 40- to 45 -foot wide drainage and utility easement must be dedicated. a. The request to construct the utilities along Callaway Street for CSB complicates the construction as the building service locations for the proposed Villages at CSB development are not fully known. It would not be in the City's interest to see sanitary sewer services cut -in to the sewer main after the initial construction or to re- disturb /patch the bituminous trail because of building service construction at mutiple locations along Callaway Street. b. Hydrants shall be added and spaced between 400 to 500 feet apart. 14. The proposed sanitary sewer and water main will be constructed through the temporary stormwater pond serving Callaway Street and accelerate the need to relocate the pond and/or make alternative stormwater ponding provisions in advance of the development of Outlot A. 15. An 8 -inch water main is proposed to connect to the water main on CR 121 approximately 160 feet north of the entrance road from CR 121. While a new connection to the water main and pavement disturbance will likely not be permissible by Stearns County, a 10 -inch water main stub is available approximately 185 feet to the south. Additionally, the applicant should determine the adequacy of an 8 -inch water main through the campus to meet potential building sprinkling needs at the student housing and welcome center. 16. While input from the building official and fire department should also be sought on the matter, it would appear the proposed hydrants on the east side of the student housing buildings may be too close (30 feet offset) to the structures. Consider locating the hydrants in the parking lot islands to mimize lead length and improve separation from the buildings. 17. A hydrant should be added near the street intersection at the southeast corner and northeast corner of Lot 1. 18. It's noted that municipal utilities are not proposed in the vicinity of the athletic fields. Is a short- term utility need envisioned for concession buildings, bleacher restrooms, or field locker facilities? Will new wells irrigate the play fields? c: Terry Thene, City of St. Joseph Ron Wasmund, Inspectron, Inc. p:\pt\s\sooekommon\dl 19 2011 csb student housing athl lields\conAm city prelim plan rev 072511.doc MITCHELL A. ANDERSON, P.E. Highway Engineer JEFF MILLER, P.E. Asst. Highway Engineer JODI TEICH, P.E. Asst. Highway Engineer COUNTY OF STEARNS Department of Highways PO Box 246 • St Cloud, MN 56302 (320) 255 -6180 • FAX (320) 255 -6186 June 30, 2011 STEARNS COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT COUNTY PLAT REVIEW PLAT: COLLEGE 2"D ADDITION The basic criterion for this plat review is provided for in the Stearns County Comprehensive Plan. This Road Certificate shall be recorded with the Final Plat. Location The general location of the plat is east of County Road 121 within the City of St. Joseph. C.R. 121 is classified as a minor collector in the area of the plat. The 2009 traffic volume on C.R. 121 in this area is 4500 ADT. Right of Wgy Adequate right of way exists along CR 121 via Stearns County Right of Way Plat 19. No additional right of way is required. Generally, all private facilities such as signs, entrance medians (divided entrances), fencing, etc. shall be placed/constructed outside of the permanent county right of way. Access Management: There is one proposed access location to this plat. Only one access will be permitted as previously agreed to per the July 9, 2004 Stearns County Highway letter. The access location is acceptable. All other field entrances/curb cut accesses shall be removed by the developer. No additional accesses will be permitted. The owner confers all "rights of access" to Stearns County for the property frontage along and adjacent to the County right of way upon the recording of this document with the final plat. Drainage Facilities: ®879 -8896 "Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer" Storm water drainage facilities should be designed in such a manner as to not exceed the current (before development condition) maximum storm water runoff flow onto county right of way. The analysis should be based on a minimum 100 -year design storm. The design/analysis of storm water runoff effects on the existing drainage system should be based on both the proposed development and planned future development impacts. Culverts constructed /placed within the county right of way as part of this project should be specified as a minimum of 15 inches in diameter. Any culverts crossing under existing or proposed county roads and /or municipal streets should be specified as reinforced concrete pipe and should be a minimum of 24 inches in diameter. Reinforced concrete pipe shall be tied /secured together with appropriate steel fasteners. A determination will be made at the time of application for Approach Permit as to the need and size of culvert required under the approach. Traffic and Public Safety: Sight distance is adequate. A utility permit will be required if utility construction activities are within the county right -of -way. All street and private entrances should be graded in such a manner as not to drain onto the existing county roadway. Mailbox supports installed within the County right -of -way shall conform to the latest Stearns County Mailbox Support Policy. I have reviewed the above plat at the request of the municipality, for concerns relating to standard engineering practice and policies as commonly applied to County Roads and Rights -of -Way. \�LVLA --- - Assistaof Oounty Engineer - Maintenance /Operations I concur in the above review and recommendations. �a, Stearns County Engineer Distribution: City of St. Joseph (orig.) Sunde Land Surveying (copy) '7 Z Date 7 2�11 l Date Northern Natural Gas May 13, 2011 Re: College of St. Ben's Athletic Complex St. Joseph, MN To Whom It May Concern: td it',,ir, ras oD:r< anti t,, hard ,;120 On Thursday, March 17, 2011 a meeting was held at our office, located at 1120 Centre Pointe Drive, Suite 400, Mendota Heights, MN. We met with Daniel Johnson, P.E., representing Anderson - Johnson Associates and James Schumann, representing the College of St. Benedict to discuss concerns regarding two high pressure gas mains (3" and 8 ") which cross campus property. Our primary concern is to maintain direct and easy access to the two high pressure gas mains for the purpose of regular and frequent testing which is mandated for these lines. The representatives for the College agreed to provide gates at each location the gas mains cross proposed fencing. Placement of a proposed running track and or bleachers over the gas mains is not a concern as they are narrow enough to not provide an issue with regard to our testing. However, it was explained that access to the gas mains has to be continually maintained and, in the event of a required excavation to repair a main, the College will be responsible for restoration of any surface or site improvement (i.e. fencing, curbing, etc.) that might be impacted by such excavation. It was also explained that we will allow fill to be placed over the subject lines (not to exceed 15' above existing grade), however will not allow any cutting (removal of soil) over the subject gas mains. Sincerely, Suzanne Wilsie Right of Way Agent O w a u u 3 e O = O m u Q c p N Oi i Of c E i 4 M O LD M 4* 0 M O O N u1 O N N lOD 00 Q7 N N O O Lr m rn !� M M tR to t/) V} t/> th t4 Or O i * mo o @O C ; N C N N N N N M C M M C m C m C f0 C f0 C 1� LD 'tt N Ln l0 0) r-I ri L N u Q � O O Ln 000 Lmn W LMD O o T-4-i '-V m 0 0000 � � O ri N ri 19t r-I H O O O 1.0 Ln o Ln. M °O a ri 41 r-1 c E Q. O OJ 0J O Y to tio C C D aO+ 3 C U O O Q E O u C L u Oi N 0) � }; O � C O Q J 41 Ln iL O a Q +' 0\l a !Z o u m �, a Q m U D ++ O , �e LL 0 0 o 0 0 01 v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V a g cn MEMO To: Planning Commission From: Gary Utsch CC: Judy Wyrens Date: August 1, 2011 Re: St Benedict Student Housing My concerns: 1. The Student Housing Buildings are planned to be two stories, in R -4 Zoning the shall not be higher than 35 ft. I have not received a detailed plan showing the height from grade to peak. 2. These units do meet R -4 zoning as to eight units per building. 3. Each unit is constructed with separate entrances to the exterior. This building will be constructed under IBC R -2, which allows for one means of egress if occupant load is 16 or less and building has sprinkler system. 4. Each building shall have minimum roof pitch of 4/12; I have not seen a detailed plan showing this. 5. All units need frost free foundation [Need detailed foundation plan] 6. Need detailed plan on building design and facades. Buildings should have a design that prevents appearance of straight unbroken lines. 7. Buildings on same site shall be separated with a minimum distance of 40 feet, I scaled the buildings on a drawing I have and they seem to be 55-60 feet apart. 8. They do meet R -4 zoning minimum floor area of 676 Sq Ft 9. Need a detailed plan on provisions for shelter in event of severe weather. 10. Need sign plan if they are to have one at entrance? 11. Need landscaping plan [dumpster locations and enclosures] etc. 12. Need infor mation on fire issues from Jeff Taufen [getting trucks in and around buildings] 13. M y understanding parking previsions have been met. 14. No co mbination of structures can occupy more than 50 percent of lot area. Need detailed plan to verify this.