Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20070702 - VIII-B-2Memo ""' ~' To: Mayor Hicks and City Council From: Justin Fortney, Associate Planner Date: July 2, 2007 Subject: Resolution -Site Plan #2007-27- 36 Unit Building - W 31St Street and County Road 47 - Siewert Construction. REQUEST Siewert Construction seeks site plan approval to build a 36 unit apartment building at the southwest corner of West 31 St Street and County Road 46/47 on Lot 1, Block 7, Riverwood 7tn addition. The property is 2.87 acres in size. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the request at the June 25, 2007, Planning Commission meeting subject to the conditions of the attached resolution. Commissioners discussed the height of the building, underground parking, appearance, and traffic. Please see attached minutes for further information. PUBLIC COMMENTS Approximately 25-30 residents attended the June 25t" meeting. The following comments were received: • Land use in the area has changed; apartment doesn't fit • Increased traffic and difficult access to County Road 46/47 • Loss of open space and sightlines • Apartments would have a negative affect on property values ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Location Map • Aerial Photograph • Previously approved site plan and elevation from 2004 • Proposed Site Plans and elevation drawings • Planning Commission Minutes ~ June 25, 2007 • Andrew Jensen email - 3528 Greten Lane ~ June 26, 2007 • Coring Bauer email - 729 Bolhken Drive -June 26, 2007 Site Plan #07-27 - Riverwood Bldg City Council Memo -July 2, 2007 Page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicants applied for and were granted site plan approval to construct a 36 unit condominium building on this site in 2004. The current submittal differs from the previous approval as faloows: • Apartment building rather than a condominium • Half of the parking will be inside the building as opposed to in separate garages • The architecture and quality of building materials has increased Comprehensive Plan Classification The 2020 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as U-II -Urban Residential, which allows 4 to 8 units per acre. The overall density of the entire Riverwood 7th area is within this limit. Zoning Classification The subject property is zoned R-3 -Medium- high Density Residence/ Planned Residential Development. Multiple Family Dwellings are a Planned Residential Development permitted use. Planned Residential Development The landuse was approved as a planned residential development, allowing deviations from specific zoning provisions (setbacks, lot size, etc). A PRD also allows the ability to cluster units on a portion of a property at a density equivalent to what would normally be allowed on the entire parcel, in exchange for a higher level of design. The Master Plan designated the site as a 36 unit building site. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abut the property: Direction Existing• Use Zoning Comp Plan North County Road 46 Sin le-Family Res. R-1 -Low Dens. Res. U-I - 1-3 units East 31 S Street Future apt/condo Bldg R-3 PRD -Med-High Dens. Res. U-II - 4-8 units South Future apt/condo Bld R-3 PRD -Med-Hi h Dens. Res. U-II - 4-8 units West Townhome/ Condo R-3 PRD -Med-High Dens. Res. U-II - 4-8 units Existing Condition The site is vacant and open with minimal topographical variation. Proposed Improvements A 36 unit, four story apartment building with internal parking on the first floor is being proposed as part of this site plan. Site Plan #07-27 - Riverwood Bldg City Council Memo -July 2, 2007 Page 3 SITE PLAN REVIEW Proposed Building Setbacks Proposed setbacks are acceptable and are as follows: * Project was approved as part of a Planned Residential Development allowing for devastations from minimum setback requirements. Vehicular Access and Circulation Vehicular access and circulation is acceptable. Only one access is proposed to 31St Street. The entrance is far enough from the 31St and County Road 46 intersection to allow for adequate separation. No vehicular access is proposed or is allowed along County Road 46/ 47. Pedestrian Access and Circulation Pedestrian access and circulation is acceptable, except a sidewalk should be added to connect the building with the County Road 46/ 47 trail. Parking Parking is acceptable and is as follows: Site Re uired Spaces Proposed Spaces 36 Unit Apartment 72 (2 spaces per unit. 74 spaces 36 arage/ 38 parking lot Parking Lot Setback The parking lot setback meets the minimum 10-foot requirement along the perimeter of the property. Landscaping The Landscape Plan provides for a variety of tree and shrub plantings along the building, roadways, and parking lot. However, the following additions are needed to comply with minimum landscaping requirements of the Zoning Ordinance: 1) Boulevard trees must be planted at spacings of no less than 50 feet along all public right-of-ways. One boulevard tree must be added south of the culvert on 31 Sc Street. R-3 District Requirements* Proposal North 20 feet 52 feet South 7 feet 106 feet West 20 feet 55 feet East 20 feet 160 feet 2) An opaque landscaping feature a minimum of 30 inches or berm 36 inches in height is required between the parking lot and 31St Street. Site Plan #07-27 - Riverwood Bldg City Council Memo -July 2, 2007 Paae 4 3) The hedges proposed along the west property line should beset back at least 5' to reduce possible encroachment onto the neighboring properties at maturity. Fencing and Walls The architectural elevations show raised double planting levels along the east (front) elevation, constructed with split faced landscape blocks. To reduce the overwhelming mass of the walls, the following condition is recommended: • Each front planting wall level must be no higher than 4' in height. Architectural Elevations The primary exterior material is vinyl siding. Split face block and brick veneer are incorporated along the bottom third of the building and along the center entrance. Colored vinyl trim has been added to segment the vertical elevation of the building. The building has been broken horizontally through offsets and decks. The east (front) elevation utilizes 1,352 Sq Ft more class 1 materials than is required by the Architectural Standards of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the sides and rear are under the minimal requirements of these premium materials. The following additions are needed to comply with minimum requirements: 1. The north and south (Sides) elevations require and additional 275 Sq Ft of class 1 building materials. 2. The east (back) elevation requires and additional 425 Sq Ft of class 1 building materials. A waste enclosure is proposed south of the building and to be constructed with a 6' high split faced block wall. All waste refuse facilities shall be contained in this structure. Photometric Plan A photometric plan must be submitted to ensure the following: • One foot candle illumination within the parking lot • Two foot candle illumination at the 31St Street entrance • No more than 0.5 foot candle illumination at the property lines Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan The City's consultant engineer has reviewed the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans. Approval of the Site Plan is subject to approval of the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Utility Plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees involved in plan review. HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF W 31sT STREET AND COUNTY ROAD 46-47 ON LOT 1, BLOCK 7, RIVERWOOD 7TH ADDITION Council member introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, Siewert Construction has petitioned for site plan approval to construct a 36 unit apartment building generally located at the southwest corner of W 31 S` Street and County Road 46- 47, legally described as Lot 1, Block 7, RIVERWOOD 7Tr~ ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2007, the Site Plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of Hastings, as required by state law, city charter and city ordinance; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request to the City Council subject to the conditions contained herein; and WHEREAS The City Council has reviewed the request and concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council hereby approves the Site Plan as presented to the City Council subject to the following conditions: 1) Conformance with the City Council Staff Report and plans dated July 2, 2007. 2) Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. 3) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 4) Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees incurred in review of the development. The owner assumes all risks associated with the grading and utility placement prior to formal approvals. 5) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. 6) All exterior lighting is required to be shielded down and away from adj acent properties and right-of--ways. 7) Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed for prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 8) Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to submittal of a building permit. 9) Construction of a sidewalk connecting the building to the County Road 46/ 47 trail. 10) Driveway access to County Road 46/ 47 shall be prohibited. 11) Each front planting wall level must be no higher than 4' in height. 12) Boulevard trees must be planted at spacings of no less than 50 feet along all public right-of- ways. One boulevard tree must be added south of the culvert on 31S` Street. 13) An opaque landscaping feahire a minimum of 30 inches or bei-~n 36 inches in height is required between the parking lot and 31 S` Street. 14) The hedges proposed along the west property line must be setback at least 5' to reduce possible encroachment onto the neighboring property at maturity. 15) The north and south (Sides) elevations require and additiona1275 Sq Ft of class 1 building materials. 16) The east (back) elevation requires and additiona1425 Sq Ft of class 1 building materials. Council member _ vote adopted by Ayes: Nays: _ Absent: present. moved a second to this resolution and upon being put to a ATTEST: Paul J. Hicks Mayor Melanie Mesko Lee City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the 2°d of July, 2007, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (JJF) 101 4th St. East Hastings, MN 55033 ~--~ Location 21ST 5k T W -©` 19TH ST-V'J ~_ 22ND ST W -~.u vs r'- ~ rq u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ z 23R€}ST-W-~ ~-T1 ST ST-W-vs ~ U~. ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~:~ ~ a aST~ sT-'w,y ~~~~V~~.w ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~.s~~ \b~ r "i 969TH STYE-'-~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -A U ~ rg _+y ~ ~ 7 ~~_ `t F° H N-tom ~, +~ i- ~ ~ r Q ~~ ~~-21ST-ST-E ~ ~.~~ , ~~ 4~'~ ~~ ~~ " o 2 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ Sfl~4~~~ ~ ~,~~ z U 31 ST-ST-W t 33RD 5T-tI~! Y -35TH ST W DSTE~ ~C L~ ~..~J_ ~ ' ~ --~ 4 _ - ~~ CARk PARK LN~ ~ ~~~c~ ~- 3~fiTH ST1 E~ I --_~ ~ _-' l~ TIFFANY DR-' -1- `~I ~'"^ ~iq~~~ ~~ .s„~' an i* dTL' ~ .., ~',~~' C s~ °~.~ ..~l+{,~ ~~ .t<+... ~ frC,1 ~ , ~~ ~ ,d~ ~ ~_ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ` ~r a $t ~a. =tr ~ i '~ N. . +~~,,~` ~ ~' ~'~ "~ ~ i~F"~.,1L, ~ 4.: ~, ~ A ' ..t ,Lyta~ .y 4~ J K ri . '\ ~ ~ .r,.~~ '4c i ~' ~ r + 4 ?I~S.~ y k ~ s ~ ~, ~ ~'1 ~ 3~~T '~ ~.. ~\ 1 r4 5 ~.t~v 7 ~' ', ~~ ~r..~ ~.~` <i , 5 ~` .ill ~~ ~~ y4 ra~ 'Ytl ~~ }t,.. a4 a~ ~i ~` 33rr L.. i , . ~i yCi c 111 . ~ .... t. ~ {' .~ ~1 ~ _'~: 'yg l ~ 1 # ~^ } '~ w }4 r' Ii ~ ~.~ ~ ~. i,~}_'. ~~3 `';~ M1 i. '4.yt ~ t:~ ~i S - Y.. ~ l 1 'A ~~~S~SI d :fa 3 ~ l _._1c; }c'c=_rx-S~ S. -. `~'., 1 ,.: y Site plan approved in 2004 31ST STREET 0 Elevation plan approved in 2004 KtC:UMMtNUA I IUN ~L~vATI©N ~ 31s~. 5T, ~~ _ ~€ ~~~3 N ~ ®~ 3~-a w ~ ~~" ~~~ ~s~ ~~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ s~~@ ~ »~ g o U ~ ~p ~~~~ yy 0- fx s ..8 ~~~~ Fj W Jo~ ~ cf ~g~ i W ~ a ~ z 2 Z ~ ~ ~ HsJ ~ V1 oo~ U ~ ~B~~G~I wav~i O ~W~~~~~ ~ J o w Pik&~ O WZ~° tS~i~lr~a€~ Q ~ <a~ meF5 ~=~~° Q Z ash ~~g~~~~~ ~ ~ -a< W c~~3~;yFi z ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ Z O ~ ~~~-~ dad Q (n ~ _Nn ~ ~~~~~~~~ Q O ~ $~mgb~~& O LLJ a ~~7~7..4~€<3 ~1 ~dts Ki'd u3 ml I I :'~i~j I I ~ C \\. I I I I o ~ ' ~ J r°n 08 ~ _ _.,~ ~ a~ I w ~ rn ~ U T / C O - G {`_ /L4 Z ++ ~ ~ ~ I~ _. U O U ' I ~~\ ~_. ~~ w w r'~ae... .__ p ------ D I _ -~ a I r 0. rest ~ ~ ~ ~ s l W s'seL W g a P m I ~ ~ ~ ~' ,I~ I _o I I 'S6L I B'SBL $~ I ~ r m I 0'L6 0 • I' f ~ I ~ ~ ,~ ~ I II ~ ~.. II Z ~ -~~ o M o'ae< I o I •~ _ e ~ ~ b~ II W s i*?~ / Asa O I ~ ~ ~ t' L-~ s h ~ I \\ ~ ~ .LS SS 't ~g~g ~~ ~ I xl ~ p ~~ ~e;g3' •.-sue aIz \ si hL ,6l $ ~ _~s3 e a IW \ n ~ .o 0 o•cs ~ I L~ ~ g I~ ` B56C I Icn ~ I p o ~I ~ w i ~n I m J _ ~~r `` N "~ o. a _ T I '~ ~" .J o I ~ \ / ssaz. qo~ < s N m ~ ~ i ,~ o'sec .............. ~ .. _ . .. ....,. 3~ . ONLLSIX3 -` ,y . ;....._. p ___. i Hl yd - ~ -G a YI8 '1SIX3 ~ - "' ~ H1Vd SfIONIWf1118 L~ _... ._.. ~ ...... ~~ .~ B sL'saL• ~ - on a1 ~ ~8 C fl. ~3~ _ _ Lb 'ON 'H'V'S'0 ~ ,y ~ La C R£ ...~......_.. 'm ~ W ~{ 'ci n3 °3 u ~ \' z~ ^3 °3 w^ ~~ d \a Nr 3 . g ~ ~~-a W w ~~~ ~ ~~ 6Em~ N e ~~~gs ~~~t 3~3~ r~ ~ ~`c° ~ „~ m o $€+~~ _ e 0 ~n qoq~~ ~Z ~~~ N ~ . m~.. _t $gi ~d Z F- w w U ~~yy ~~ Oa~~~ 6 J N a a ~ a y €~N~m ~ Q F o a U ~i~3 Z~ g o " o ~ m W e ~ ~asw~m ' Z m ~ ~~ o ~ 0 0 ~ o 0 0 ~ ~ o 0 0 0 sam~~ ~ ~~ a o a ~ ~ a ~ 8 $ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~`~ ~~ U ~ N O NNNN ttVV NVI ~'~ NVf old o din NN ~Y.-^ N '- NNN~ NY)cl' • ~ o ~'I~<n ~ Z ~ ~nn~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~ > m2>~ v~i °d? U¢?N ~nnl ~nn~ N ~J` n 4J Z>a ~>N ~¢? arc? a ~nn~ ~nnl ~nnl ~nn~ O m i ~ n ~ °~ Z 3>n Z>N ~3>~ ~Z>~o ?`r s °d ~rc3 H S ~ z a,~i-?~ ~ ry' _ ~ Cjo4 • 11 Q ~- ~ Z ~?^ _ rc ¢ ~ ~nm~ J O .:Nrf~ ~ ~: ~ ~ i.. / r' ~ ~ \ I I I I / I FI ~ ~ ~I I I rl '~ JI Q I w II I I ~I , ' ---- -~ ~ ~I ~ ' ~ of ~ ~ N i \ I I ~ I i~ m ~m I I ~ ~ ~' I I Zl ~ a ~ ~ DD I \ \ I ''~ w ' w F F - ~- U p_ ~c~~ F - I w`O ~ I ~iDw Zw z I I ~ I ° _ QQw ~ U wwa .- N fn I -- - J ~-- ~ ~ ~ \ „ /\\ ~'~ I ~3l0 ~, I ~ ~d I ~~ I I - \ - ~ - nbp\ 0 paa / / / C~\ Q \3b\ S\~ ~ ~ f I \~ \ f ~ ~ _ fn w\ ~ ~ \ ° >; _ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ o \ - ~ U O O I l# N02Jdb' I \ ~ ~ r-I-~ ~ ------- \ I ~ , ~ ~--- ---1 '~ ' I _ ------ -- - -~ - I _____ l#80 _~ - _ ~ - ~ I N I ~ I ~ m ~ I z#a~ ~ e~ I ~ II II / I I I S~,od~ ~ ~ o I ~~ ~ ~ ~J I O~~j I I ~ ~ / / / ~ '~ ~ Asa Z N ~ ~ / k b ~ bb j V n c ~ 1 ~ . ~ ~3~ ° 4 ~ . a ~ ^ / I ~ s ~~ ~ , \/ ~ ~ \\• / Egtl ~ \ O J \ ~ I ~ ~#43 ~3 _~6_6b e d . / / ~~ I o ~% / /~ ~ o _ \ _ / I N " L~ ~ ~ ~C m I Z p ~ u i ~; I ~g - ~ a I I I / ~ os m= ~ n - ~ I ~ ~ _ --- -~ I I I ~~ ~ ~ m V~ ~ ~ I --= -- ~ , ~ m ~~ _ Hl yd '118 '1SIX3 3o ON11~ H1Vd Sf10NIWf1118 ~ q A ~a W Z# N021dV o c ~ o ~~ . o \ 5 U a L4 'ON 'H'V'S'0 /W ~ \ j { ~ di G ^ Sfi ~~ ~ I ~y ~~ ~ ~ W O ~ ~ _ ` ~ A o n ~ , ,,~, V ~ __ _ bC7 ° ~ W ¢¢ b~^a w ' e3~$ A$ m ms x ~ ~ ~~gge~s ~~+~,:~ ~ mmmmm., cid ~~,~~ ~~~~ r7 mmmmmo- oo ~ ~~~ N g~5_ ~ s w _ ~ o w ~, °}~ ~~~ Z Z a a i to _° ~~~ z =~N m ~ . _~ ~ Nay c~ J ~o ~a~°io U ~$ z~ ;W E "O 2''LL~i ~ Eg a~ ~°wm~a Q Z R 0 _ aox~~ms ~9a v ~ ~~ z~a Q ~ 8 E 'E~z „z =wXmS °s F~~ ova U Yi o E'n~o~°-5.°sa° io ~c>3 ~~ Lit ~ v i°n dF Eima..w`i>d ^a~ w°d ~ ~ ~ ~ v cn a ~ x ° F nmr°w .on Om 0 O ° n3 Z U ac+~~°1 ~. ox a~ J J oaa z~m I ~ I 0 O I ~~ N N I I ^ ~ C \ C ~ 08 ~ ~ _ .~ Z ~ ~ g b g I ~ o w z ~, I T U °o ~ U o O ~0 1 N ~ T z +/ ~3 ~a ~ I ~i a'6 ~OZ ~ I I 0. g I H ~ a W o ~ s W " W `~ I ~ ~ ~ I to ~ ~ ~ Fa < q 5 0 ~i O . p I ~ ~~ W b !n ~ ~ ~ ~ z f ~ ff ~ 3 f ~ ~ ~ ~a~ ~3~~~g ~ ~a J ~~~~~r I ~ .LS SS ~#~~~p€ I z _l633b 3 0 o ~ d ~ ,6l ,YL ,61 0 U ~ F _ I ~ bW ~~ °) ~,°~ ~_ Y UQ fr m m ~ ~' 8 = = a I ~°~ ~ I ~ .~ ~;~ - ~ ~ m A ~~ ~ ~ y ~? H1Nd 'lIB '1SIX3 ~ ONI151X3 ~ ~ ti _ H1Vd S(IONIW(1118 ~ ~ O ~~ f1. ~ ~ ~~S ~{5 .OD `~ Rfi L4 'ON 'H'V'S'0 w ~ b ~ ~ ~~x~ ~ ~~ C7 ~ s Z Z $ 3.,Z0,90~L9N ~ z ¢ a °~°o --- - --- O L4 'ON ~ s; ~a o ~ ~ ^~~ ~~w~ ~IVMH`JIH 01~/ 31V1S J~1Nf1O0 O g _ ¢ o O ~ - - u~i J ~ ~ a J z w ~~~a ~ '^" k-~ ~ ~ oN -~ ~ ~aaz ~ ~ ~o~}'z a~i = w da ul g~ _ - N~wz .Zti fib (~ U~88~~ F- i~u (~ w V - ~ _„ e„e to - a cn hh g<a< -----------~ a r I ez esi ~ i I I I N ~ L_________ -~ ~ ObIOb I ~~ _ I I ~ _ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O I ~ z I I \~ I I ~ I -- - I '' ~~~ ~ I ~ .. I ~ I I i ~ I \ I ~ I ;.\ .. ~ I ~ I - ~ I I ~f ~ - ~ I ~ ~ I~,l - ~~ I ~ ~~ I ~ ~ I I ;~ IF ~ - ~ i W I 'I ~ ~ rr I I I ~-~.. ° I I ~ ~~,.:- - I ~p°n `~~ ~~ -_ I I rn I,6, ~ ° I I I j ~ < I I f ® I I I I I ~ ~~ I I ! I \ h~.. I I ~I~. \ILI I I i I~j _ I I I I I ~ A~~ _ - I I I I I i \ I i I I ~ I I ,~__ i, , I I I I I - I I I `._' I I == I I -ss4 I ~~~ b I = I L___-----' I I I I Alllllfl9 3~JtlNIVtlO I . I---_-______ .8917. I _ _ I I. ________________ I ~ ~ ~ 9l I ~~ I ~~ I `~~ I ~l ~ I 4 I j rou~ _ ~ O SIdIEH-.7 P~~~~'Q ~ a~:.• ~,.e~s,o, ,, o, oe a, b LOOZ NVf SNVId AliHNIWIl3Hd 1N3W1k1VdV 1ki3M31S Y ~ '- a U ~.. _ a.e~~~.a ,~w,,,9 «~.,,~m~ .~~„~a n..~ ~~.~o~tl sro~~,a~.ro .,o~~.~.n say o m ~ _ _ ~ O SI]IeH-~~ ~1iS~'.Q ~' a ,:v. .s.Nn~:ro v~.ov~o a.~roam~. [OOZ'Ntlf SN'did AliVNIWll3ad 1N3WliJVdtl l1i3M31S Y ~ N a U w O O C7 w ~ ~ Zw Q Y W W W 3 O awww N d J J J 1 0 .,A.~ _/ O \ ~ w U~ ¢~ w Uh w w p ___________O r ~ r ~+ ' m w an m > O o > ~g w w g w H - w C7 a O N 3 1 _ 411Ie}j ?7 ~~~71e~( `' - .. s ~s.~..~~.a, ~n,es:,o.n..~ssN..o.~~. a<.unwa:,. - ..o=~.u„=~._~ ~ o LOOZ'NVf SNVId AIitlNIWIl3FJd 1N3W1FitldV 11i3M31S g ~ M ~ U -- m~ ~ - '~ _ I I I I I I I ~ I o - I __ ~~ i ~ m~ to ~~ ~ ty ~ o _ ;_ ~ .,., M o i ~m i I ~ o I i -- o m „, o ~$ m. o o - I i - O a - - ~~ O i i - -- ------- - i i i Y - --- - _ _ i i ~ _ - _- a _ _° - -- o ., ---- - --- I I ~ I - o -- o m - o o ~ I - o V~ o -_ - I ~ m L ~ a = e m ^ _ i i _ i i i i - mt -N x ~ m~ m~ I - 'g gq t~ ~~ _ - _~ s~ziel-F::i:~l 1'mizQ r ~!!'~ m~ 8~ $~ LLh gl° a ' LL ~ Qi~ _ .-i u ~~ ~ --- fr a ~ y _ O ~m _-_ O I I o i ,"II _ I I I I~ _ I I I ~' o ~ o = I I I `~~' .I ~4 li =~ -- ~ w :~ o I ~I °Im ul i'~ ~_ - - I I I I o = ,. o ~ -- ~ ~ ,:: ~. ,.,= o~ ~. e ~ o e m - r 0 0 --- o __ ~. p i I I I ~ ~ i i I I I I i' i i i i I I I I II J f sb ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~0 .,.a >.0.~.~3»~ro~~ au.a .,osMVn:au o m u o ~ ~ m O r„:N..o~a,.,,~ax~n.:,o,.,.~du~, ~..~,me y.~.wa:a~. LOOZ'Ntlf SNtlld AFJtlNIWIl3Hd 1N3WliJtldtl 1Fi3M31S ? ~ `f a U ~~,a <.~ . «..~mwf r~~~..9 u.~ ~~M o~ o~:~n.,~-aura ..o~.~~~ ~a s °o co ;~a;nay ~t,h~ I Xe ~~ ~ <o O ~dl?H::7 E~~'S~Q ( >„:N. ,a,,,,d,sio~,,,,~ ~ ~ LOOZ'Ntlf SNtlld AlitlNlWll3kid 1N3W1kitldV 1Fi3M31S ° U u7 vxrw+ vnvarvr re~.a.~ ~a~.,:~N ~.0 3,.0 ~aa~~.o~~ro~ o.p .ros~.~,.~~au ~ o ~ O LL uxin mnnnwv.nr.-.a - m.wn nu .nnxi+~w viuase.a~ea ~areuna _ sine ue -.._ ~.o>n>~ ~, ~~-7 P~- ~ I .. vs~~.~w as 3~,n~°o,.,.~tluv..oN~o~~o~9 LOOZ"Ntlf SNVId AHVNIWIl3FJd 1N3W1Fitldtl lkJ3M31S :. a U ~ 8~ 81~ 8r~ 8Ie 'ill Im =~ olP al I° =1~ ~~ ~I ¢~ =1~ ol=' I ~I yl 1 11I I yl I ..app 1 nl ml I ~ }} ~ ~ , - ~ I~ ~, _„'1 ,~ ~ ~ ~~, ,,I ~~ :~. I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:. 1 Y ~ ~ ~ ~ _ { ~ ~ ~ I 3 3k a ~~ ~ /I '' ~~ ,~ ~_ a 7 ~ _ __ x ~s i ,, ~:~ fl I ~~ r a Ili I f '.: ~It~yMl~~~ ~ ~.~1 2 .____~ ~~ _._ ~3 ~ I 1 I ' 4r I I I V 5 ~ p~ I~_ `p'i I ~ kf 1 i l I,( - ~~ ,~ L i ~ 11' ,:~ ,~. ICI I- i t,„ _ ,~ _, ,~ v. rl I `-J. Ita~k ~ F~: ~LL ¢~ o ~,.. LL ~~- ~ _~ ~' I I I I :_ I 1 ~' s ,: .~ i ~ ~. .I~ I I ~ a ~ ~~ ~~ [ , ~.; ~, ~_ 11 ~=~: I ~~ ~` ,, ~. ,:~: i - ~-~ F ~ ,a~ ' I~..e.e ~ ,, - I i- ~E~ ~~ ~ r ~;- ~ ~, a.~ ~-~~~~~ I I I I _ Ir I~ r-~ I 1 I I `~. ~ - I I I I I _ I I ~1 o° I >4 I 1 I I 0- Lnn' 1 1 1 W I I m. I '1 ~` - I I 1 3` ~ ~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 25, 2007 5. Siewert Construction -Site Plan Review #2007-27 -Apartment Building - 31St Street & County Road 47. Planning Director Hinzman gave a staff report. Acting Chair Schmitt opened the floor to the public at 7:16. Approximately 25-30 people were in attendance. Tom Cherney, 3532 Greten Lane, spoke to the issue. His concerns included the plans for an apartment building were approved in the early 1990's and that times have changed. These changes include a large amount of existing townhomes. Cherney requested that the density be re-approved with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. He stated his desire was balanced housing within the community. In addition, Cherney expressed concern over traffic levels. Acting Chair Schmitt emphasized that the issue before the Planning Commission was the Site Plan, not the zoning or density of the site. Commissioner Stevens asked if there were any height restrictions in reference to the previously approved building being three-stories and the new building four-stories. Planning Director Hinzman stated that increased meets setback requirements. Commissioner Stevens stated it was unusual to see parking at-grade. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the parking level was due to water table issues. Commissioner Stevens inquired if the road into the parking lot interfered with drainage. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the road into the parking lot was reviewed by City Engineers and was the best location as it provided adequate stacking distance from 47. The preference was to focus on stacking distance over drainage issues. Acting Chair Schmitt asked how much taller the current building was than the previous building. Dave Hams, representative of the developer, stated it was one story higher or about ten feet due to the parking garage. Acting Chair Schmitt asked for clarification on what side of the building was considered the front. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the way the ordinance read all four sides were considered the front of the building. Commissioner Zeyen inquired if there was public parking on 31St Street. Members of the audience confirmed there was not parking_on 31St Street. Commissioner Zeyen asked if there was overflow parking for guests. Planning Director stated that the parking requirement was 2 stalls per unit, which the developer met. Any additional stalls would not be required by the city. Shelley Hughes, 918 36th Street W, asked if any additional traffic studies had been completed. She stated that the current levels of traffic were busy. In addition, she stated it was already difficult getting on and off 47. Hughes also inquired about open space and sightline issues in reference to the height of the building. Tony Trezza, 902 36th Street W, stated his two issues. The first issue was declining property values. He stated that the townhomes were already an issue and the apartments would also have a negative affect on properly values. Trezza's second issue was the excessive speeds on roads in the area. Kerry Iliff, 3577 Greten Lane, stated that condos are different than apartments. She further stated that the buildings may look pretty today, but that they would not in ten years. Iliff stated that rental properties bring forth different issues as they are rental properties. Commissioner Stevens asked about any proposed traffic lights. Planning Director Hinzman stated that he was not aware of any and that the roads were considered collector roads. Commissioner Peine inquired if the developer could alter the plans from condos to apartments without any additional steps. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the City can regulate land use, but cannot regulate ownership. Commissioner Zeyen questioned if the road could handle the traffic. Planning Director Hinzman confirmed it was designed as a collector road. Commissioner Hiedeman asked why there was only one access to the apartment building. Planning Director Hinzman stated it was due to the proximity to 47. Commissioner Schmitt questioned if the 28 foot entrance was wide enough for emergency vehicles. This was confirmed as adequate by Planning Director Hinzman. Todd Siewert, developer, also spoke to the issue. Siewert stated he designed a building to make people proud and stressed he lived in Hastings. He further stated that there was a need for affordable, quality housing in Hastings as the last apartments were built in the late 1970's. Siewert stated that the apartments would be property managed with on-site management. He also stated that if the market warranted, the units could be converted back to condos as they will be built with similar amenities as condos. Commissioner Hiedeman inquired if Siewert would maintain ownership. Siewert confirmed he would. Action by Planning Commission: Motion by Heideman to approve the Site Plan Review for Siewert Construction. Seconded by Stevens. Upon vote taken, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Motion passed unanimously. Page 1 of 1 John Hinzman From: Jensen,Andrew [AJENSEN1@travelers.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 1:22 PM To: paullisah@yahoo.com; alongihastings@comcast.net; turneyhazlet@comcast.net; emrivy1@msn.com; dannaelling@hotmail.com; mikeslavik@comcast.net; Barb- Hollenbeck@comcast.net Cc: John Hinzman; Jensen,Andrew Subject: Apartments Dear Mayor Hicks and City Council Members, A few weeks to a month ago a sign was put in my neighborhood by the city stating a proposed land use change on the corner of 31St street and hwy 47. When I called the number on the sign (please call and listen 480-2390) it informed me that Siewert Construction is proposing to build a 36 unit apartment building and the proposal will be heard at the June 25th Planning Commission meeting. I decided to attend the meeting as did many of my neighbors and when we got to this item on the agenda we were told that this "proposed" land use change had already been approved and the meeting was about how the building would look. Needless to say we were all very disappointed and upset that we did not have a voice in this "proposed" land use change. We then were shown a picture of the three and a half to four story building and honestly I was shocked that such a building would be built at this location. If I understood correctly the discussion at the meeting I learned that this site was first approved around 1987 for apartments. Twenty years ago land was approved to be built on and no one built. Since then many things have changed in Hastings but yet this property was not built on (and I am sure there are more than just this one) in a timely manner after their approval process. Yet now they can just decide that it is time to build. Around 2004 there was some sort of re-approval to make this site condos (another "proposed" land use change?) which some neighbors remember was a big deal in 2004, but now it seems the site can just flip back to apartments in the blink of an eye. In the end the commission approved the design of the building, but I don't think it was easy for them given the absolute silence when asked if there is a motion to pass. After the meeting there was a lot of confusion as to why put up a sign indicating a proposed land use change when the change was already finalized. There was increased discussion about traffic (which many in the neighborhood have brought up our concerns before to city officials) and if there were plans to improve traffic safety in our neighborhood and along hwy 47 which is very congested already. Also the usual discussion about how many multi-family dwellings will be allowed to be built when so many are vacant and available. At the end of the meeting we were told that this would come before the city council at the July 2 meeting. Before that time, please think about the comprehensive plan and what needs to be done to update it and how do we move on until it is updated. Please come out to our neighborhood and look at the site. Walk the trail along the Vermillion River and imagine a four story building there. Stand on the trail behind the houses on Olson Drive looking down on the "proposed" new building. While you are in the area watch the traffic on Hwy 47 and 31st streets and check out 36th street and Village Trail. Feel free to stop by and talk to myself or my neighbors, we would be happy to share our thoughts and concerns. Thank you for your time. Andy Jensen 3525 Greten Lane Hasfings MN This communication, together with any attachments hereto or links contained herein, The Travelers e-mail system made this annotation on 06/26/07, 14:22:10. 6/28/2007 John Hinzman From: Danna Elling [dannaelling@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:47 AM To: John Hinzman Subject: FW: Land Use Proposal at 31st and Cty Rd 47 John, Thought you should see this. Was she at the meeting last night? Danna >From: "Corina Bauer" <corina@metroclassichomes.com> >To: <dannaelling@hotmail.com> >Subject: Land Use Proposal at 31st and Cty Rd 47 >Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:10:44 -0500 >Hello Danna, >I presume you are my council member representing the 4th ward. (if you >are >not I would greatly appreciate your forwarding this to the appropriate >party). >I live on Bohlken Drive and have major concerns as do a allot of people >in >our area concerning the proposed apartment building by Siewart >Constructions. >I attended the planning meeting last evening and to no avail they approved >the plan....and there is so much missing. >I do realize that this was approved for condo's on 2004 and he did not >build...BUT....now the entire building design has changed "4-Stories Tall". > This just does not fit the neighborhood at all. I also realize this was >approved in the "1980" City comprehensive plan....give me a break....give >us all a break. Does the City not realize this needs to be >re-evaluated???? Or is this going to be just like the 3 story building >built by all those nice homes up by the government center. That the City >did not have the back bone to stop....because it was approved 20 years >ago??? >Please help stop this atrocity from being built. Here are several >items >and issues that need answers: > Is this in a flood plane? > Where is the water run-off going to go? into the Vermillion River? > PARKING? Only one entrance into the location...and what will happen >with the overflow parking? > TRAFFIC STUDIES? Per John Hinzman last evening "NONE" > It is hard enough now trying to get onto Cty Rd 47.... > SPEEDING? Ever since the road was reconstructed 36th, 31st and >Bohlken Drive have become a race way....there is no deterrence for >speeding and there are_KIDS EVERYWHERE....will it take a tragedy to rectify - >this situation? - > The Apartment Building itself.....will this have low income housing? >And who is to guarantee that it will be kept up. This is located >at a key entry into our city and what an eye sore...... > Why has the building design changed from 3-story to 4-story. Why >would the city allow such a "Tall" building.... >Mr. Siewart thinks he is filling in a niche that needs to be addressed >in >the city. He stated this is the first apartment building to be constructed >in over 20 years....do you not wonder why? He stated these will be upper >class apartments....with upper bracket rent costs. There is no guarantee in >that statement. >I am entrusting you do speak up for your ward and the people of >Hastings. >We simply do not need this housing. > This needs to be stopped....it is clearly that simple. >Corina Bauer >729 Bohlken Drive >Hastings, Minnesota 55033 Hotmail to go? Get your Hotmail, news, sports and much more! http://mobile.msn.com 2 3uly 2, 2007 To the Hastings City Council: Hi, my name is Brad 3ohnson and m}~ wife, Kim, who couldn't be here with us tonight. We are from the Century South area. We couldn't get a sign language interpreter due to a short notice however Mike SIavik will be voicing our opinion in regards to the new apartment development. Mike, thank you. We object to the development. First point, let's imagine, if you (the rest of city council) reside in the Century South area and a proud homeowner where you put your hard earned money into your beautiful home. Would you allow that new apartment development in that area? Second point, let's suppose, if all of us "prospective" Century South homeowners knew about the apartment development on the southwest corner of County Road 47 and 31 ~` Street. Will we sign with the builders to build our beautiful home? We honestly do not think so. We personally wouldn't want to sign with the Century South builders to build our house_ There would be no 139 houses being built. There would be no 417,000 dollars in property tax revenue annually (based on 3,000 dollars a year each house). There would be just a prairie. We would be living somewhere else. Final point, have you thought about having a new apartment development in I-castings Downtown instead? We think that would be really good for Hastings Downtown to bring new traffic that would benefit small stores and restaurants. There are so many failed projects for the last 30 years in Hastings Downtown. We hope that you take this into your serious consideration and do this for the best interest of proud Century South homeowners. T1-~ank you. Again, thank you Mike. Brad Kim .Iohnson