Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 05-17 PCP Revised 5-15-12 XBROOKL YN TER PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER MAY 17,2012 REGULAR SESSION 1. Call to Order: 7:00 PM 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes—April 26, 2012 Regular Meeting 4. Chairperson's Explanation The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 6. Planning Application Items (with Public Hearing) a) City of Brooklyn Center,Minnesota Planning App. No. 2012-004 PUBLIC HEARING — proposed amendment to the City of Brooklyn Center's 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update by changing an "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use designation to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)" for the property located at 5401 —69th Avenue North(Maranatha Homes Care Center property). [This Item was TABLED from the April 12, 2012 meeting] b) Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. Planning App. No. 2012-003 PUBLIC HEARING — Consideration of a proposed rezoning of property located at 5401-5415 69th Avenue North, from R6 Multiple Family Residence and RI One Family Residence to new PUD-MIXED R5/R6 (Multiple Family Residence), along with a proposed site and building development plan for a new four story, 97 bed nursing care center (Phase I) and a future development plan (Phase II) of a 29-38 unit senior independent living facility. [This Item was TABLED from the April 12, 2012 meeting] C) Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home,Inc. Planning App. No. 2012-007 PUBLIC HEARING — Consideration of a proposed Preliminary Plat of Maranatha 2nd Addition, for property located at 5401-5415 69th Avenue North. C'itr of BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER MAY 17,2012 REGULAR SESSION Page 2 of 2 d) Loren Van Der Slik/Gatlin Development Planning App. No. 2012-006 Consideration of a proposed Preliminary Plat of Shingle Creek Crossing 2nd Addition and Site and Building plan approval related to the former Brookdale Mall Food Court building, now part of the new Shingle Creek Crossing PUD, located at 1300 Shingle Creek Crossing. [This item was TABLED from the April 26, 2012 meeting] [Applicant has requested that the application be withdrawn.] 7. Other Business—Shingle Creek Crossing Update 8. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION APRIL 26, 2012 ROLL CALL Chair Pro Tem Kara Kuykendall, Commissioners Scott Burfeind, Stan Leino, and Stephen Schonning were present. Also present were Councilmember Carol Kleven, Bud Sorenson and Gail Ebert, Park & Recreation Commission, Secretary to the Planning Commission Tim Benetti, Director of Business & Development, Gary Eitel, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. Carlos Morgan, Michael Parks and Sean Rahn were absent and excused. PRESENTATION—SHINGLE CREEK/WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED DISTRICT Mr. Benetti introduced Steve Lillehaug, Public Works Director, who provided a presentation on the upcoming 3`d Generation Plan. He explained that watersheds are drainage areas that have an impact on other bodies of water downstream. He added that waters are managed to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's water ways and the adoption of the Clean Water Act assures waters are clean enough to swim and fish safely. Mr. Lillehaug described the watershed districts and the areas they cover and how they operate. He explained that the Shingle Creek /West Mississippi Watershed District is comprised of ten cities and the two Watersheds choose to be a joint powers form to retain local control governed by citizens and not create a new layer of government with taxing authority. • 1St generation plan focused on controlling amount of storm water run-off(1990-2002) • 2nd generation plan focused on water quality, education and outreach (2003-2012) • 3`d generation plan will focus on implementation and achieving desired outcomes to a higher level than we already have (2013-2022) Mr. Lillehaug stated that after studies on the water quality, many of the waters and streams in the area are impaired with various pollutants. He added that the Watershed has received grant money to improve issues identified to improve the water quality and maintain water resources and they are inviting input from the Commission members and residents who have volunteered to serve as the City's Citizen Advisory Committee to the Watersheds. Mr. Lillehaug pointed out some of the goals the Watershed Commission has identified are continue to control the amount of runoff to prevent flooding, increase summer flows in Shingle and Bass Creeks, improve water clarity in lakes, complete stream improvements on 30% of the length of Shingle Creek, increase infiltration to restore groundwater, protect existing wetlands, improve functions and values of wetlands where possible. Mr. Lillehaug pointed out steps to implementation: Decrease stormwater runoff and improve water quality by adding more stormwater 4-26-12 Page 1 ponds, rain gardens, swales, native vegetation and other practices. • Restore the banks and channel of Shingle Creek and other small streams to make them more stable and natural. • Continue to monitor our water resources to see if they are getting better and make sure they are not getting worse. • Continue providing education and outreach to school groups, associations, city councils and commissions, residents and developers. • Continue to research ways to improve water quality and aquatic life. • Where possible, improve wetlands and increase infiltration to replenish groundwater. Ms. Ebert stated she has noticed that the water level of Palmer Lake has dropped and there is less water and more marshy areas. Mr. Lillehaug replied that they don't plan on adjusting the level of water in Palmer Lake and it may be caused by natural changes. Stan Leino arrived at 7:57 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Pro Tem Kuykendall at 7:58 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—APRIL 12, 2012 There was a motion by Commissioner Burfeind, seconded by Chair Pro Tem Kuykendall, to approve the minutes of the April 12, 2012 meeting as submitted. The motion passed. Commissioners Leino and Schonning abstained since they were not at the meeting. CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Pro Tem Kuykendall explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATION NO. 2012-006 LOREN VAN DER SLIK/GATLIN DEVELOPMENT Chair Pro Tem Kuykendall introduced Application No. 2012-006, a request for preliminary plat and site and building plan approval related to the former Brookdale Mall Food Court building, now part of the new Shingle Creek Crossing PUD, located at 1300 Shingle Creek Crossing. (See Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 4-26-12 for Application No. 2012-006.) Mr. Benetti explained that this application is an updated PUD Amendment for a proposed Preliminary Plat for "Shingle Creek Crossing 2nd Additions" as well as Site and Building plans for the remodeling and separation of the former Brookdale Mall's food court building from the Sear's store. He further summarized that this Amendment was reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 14, 2011 and tabled until the August 25, 2011 meeting when it was considered and approved for recommendation to the City Council. The City Council adopted 4-26-12 Page 2 Resolution No. 2011-127 on September 12, 2011 which approved the application. He added that Gatlin Development is now proceeding with plans to modify and improve the food court building under this PUD redevelopment. Mr. Benetti then explained to the Commission that the tight time line for notices and mailings, did not allow adequate time for all the necessary reviews and staff is , therefore, recommending that the Commission open the public hearing and then table this item until May 17, 2012. Commissioner Leino inquired about the separation between the Sears building. Mr. Benetti responded that the area is city street width and length and will accommodate two-way traffic. He added that the developer anticipates this to be low traffic area but will allow people a second way to move around on the site. PUBLIC HEARING—APPLICATION NO. 2012-006 There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Burfeind, to open the public hearing on Application No. 2012-006, at 8:12 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Pro Tern Kuykendall called for comments from the public. Mr. Luke Payne of Kimley-Horn and Associates stated that they are looking for approval of the preliminary plat and site and building plan approval, and as staff indicated, the plan is in order according to the Master Plan PUD previously approved. Commissioner Burfeind asked Mr. Payne about the possibility of establishing ADA compliant handicap ramp on the side walk area. Mr. Payne responded that the plan will show appropriate handicap parking spaces and a ramp along the sidewalk. Commissioner Burfeind asked for clarification on the history of the drive areas onto the site. Mr. Payne replied that the change occurred to attain enhancements in the park and drive area. CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Burfeind, to continue the public hearing on Application No. 2012-006, until May 17, 2012. The motion passed unanimously. The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners. ACTION TO RECOMMEND TABLING OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2012-006 SUBMITTED BY LOREN VAN DER SLIK FOR GATLIN DEVELOPMENT FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Schonning, to table Planning Commission Application No. 2012-006. Voting in favor: Chair Pro Tern Kuykendall, Commissioners Burfeind, Leino, and Schonning 4-26-12 Page 3 And the following voted against the same: None The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission will continue the public hearing for Planning Commission Application No. 2012-006 at their May 17, 2012 meeting. APPLICATION NO. 2012-002 PAUL HYDE (REAL ESTATE RECYCLING) Chair Pro Tem Kuykendall introduced Application No. 2012-002, a request for site and building/development plan approval for a new 90,000 sq. ft. office/manufacturing/warehouse facility located at 4001 Lakebreeze Avenue North. Mr. Benetti presented the staff report describing the location of the property and the proposal. (See Planning Commission Information Sheet dated 4-26-12 for Application No. 2012-002.) Mr. Benetti reviewed that the rezoning of this PUD application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their April 12, 2012 meeting has been forwarded to the City Council for a first reading and to set a second public hearing/second reading for May 14, 2012. Mr. Benetti described the layout of the new site which will include two new driveways with one serving the large truck court to the west and the other serving as a main entry to the east. He added that the access point off Lakebreeze Avenue will be closed and Azelia Avenue will not be used to provide any access to the site. Commissioner Leino asked about the presence of petroleum pipelines in the site. Mr. Hyde replied that pollution on the site is a result of filling from highway construction and there are petroleum impacts from old pieces of highway/roadways left on the site. Mr. Hyde also responded to earlier comments regarding who takes ownership of clean up on the site due to the pollutants and contaminants found on the site. Mr. Hyde stated that when a grant for clean-up is applied for, paperwork is also filed with the Attorney General who can legally pursue the previous owner for financial responsibility to clean-up the site. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-08 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2012-002 SUBMITTED BY PAUL HYDE OF REAL ESTATE RECYCLING, LLC, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT/SITE AND BUILDING PLAN IN RELATION TO THE NEW PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SUBJECT SITE IDENTIFIED AS 4001 LAKEBREEZE AVENUE NORTH. There was a motion by Commissioner Burfeind, seconded by Commissioner Schonning, to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012-08. Voting in favor: Chair Pro Tern Kuykendall, Commissioners Burfeind, Leino, and Schonning And the following voted against the same: None The motion passed unanimously. 4-26-12 Page 4 The Council will consider the application at its May 14, 2012 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. DISCUSSION ITEM There were no discussion items. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Benetti announced to the Commission that Maranatha is having a second open house with the surrounding property owners on May 3, 2012 to discuss or help plan-out the revisions to the Site Plan, initially reviewed and tabled at the April 12th meeting, and the Commission is invited to attend. He also stated that the minutes from the previous Planning Commission meeting indicated that the previous public hearing was closed rather than continued. He explained that if they wish to open the meeting back up for a public hearing, a motion should be made at the May 17, 2012 meeting to continue the public hearing for additional comments. There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Burfeind, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass 4-26-12 Page 5 City of Business and Development X-BrooHyv Center Department www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway,Brooklyn Center,Minnesota 55430-2199 Phone 763.569.3300 TTY/Voice 711 Fax 763.569.3494 MEMORANDUM TO: Chair Sean Rahn and Planning Commissioners FROM: Gary Eitel, Business & Development Director Tim Benetti, Planning & Zoning Specialist CC: Steve Lillehaug, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: May 11, 2012 RE: Loren Van Der Slik/Gatlin Development - Planning App. No. 2012-006 May 17, 2012 Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 6.a Please note that the Planning report for this item is absent on purpose. Planning staff will be conducting a phone conference call with Mr. Frank Gatlin of Gatlin Development Company next Monday morning, May 14th to discuss and address some of the site issues related to this Site and Building Plan Application. Our report needs to address or have Mr. Gatlin respond to some of our preliminary recommendations before we present it to the Planning Commission. We anticipate a final report will be mailed out by Monday afternoon. You should also be aware that Gatlin has elected to withdraw their Preliminary Plat request of Shingle Creek Crossing 2nd Addition until such time as they work out some related site issues with the City Engineers. Staff will provide a verbal update at the May 17th meeting. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Gary or Tim at our offices. Thank you. XBROTER Planning Commission Report Application Filed on 04/09/12 j Meeting Date: May 17, 2012 City Council action should be taken by 06/08/12 (60 Days) Application No. 2012-007 Applicant: Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. Location: 5401& 5415 -69,h Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat for Maranatha 2nd Addition INTRODUCTION Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. (PHS), acting on behalf of Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc., is seeking Preliminary Plat approval to replat two existing lots into one, large single lot for their Maranatha Homes senior apartment and nursing care campus, located at 5401 and 5415 69th Avenue North. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices to surrounding property owners have been sent. ANALYSIS The Maranatha campus consists of two separate lots. The nursing home parcel (addressed as 5401 — 691h Ave.) is 3.78 acres in size and is situated in the R1 district. The existing 64-unit senior assisted living facility (5415 — 69th Ave.) is 3.28 acres in size and situated in the R6 district. The combined area of these sites is 7.06 acres. These two centers are owned and operated jointly by PHS. The senior assisted living apartments were created in 1987 by the filing of a new plat (Maranatha Addition) and rezoning from R1 (One Family) to R6 (Multiple Family Residence). The four- story, 65 unit apartment was completed in 1988. The subject site is surrounded by R3-Multiple Family Residence to the north, known as The Ponds/Mallard Creek Townhome development; R1-One Family Residence to the northeast, east and south; and a large, multi-family apartment complex to the west, which is located in the City of Brooklyn Park. Sewer and water are both available from 691h Avenue. The proposed new nursing home facility will have separate water and sewer line connections made if the PUD Rezoning and future Site Plan are approved for this improvement. The preliminary plat illustrates a number of perimeter drainage and utility easements, which are typical of these types of replats. Other existing easements are scheduled to be vacated or released on this site, but not until all other easements necessary for the is overall PUD site improvements have been determined. PC 05-17-12 Page 1 off 2 3 C'i"'Z rBRO A I:V CEfVr ER At this time, the City Engineer has recommended to Planning Staff to table this item until PHS/Maranatha has provided for his full and complete review a version of the preliminary plat that reflects the overall PUD site improvements planned under this preliminary plat. Due to the delays caused by the Applicants to refine the Phase II portion of their proposed Development / Site and Building Plans under their requested PUD application, Planning Staff is amendable and supports this request to table this item to a future Planning Commission meeting date. Because this item was published for a public hearing at this May 17th meeting, the Commission must initially act on this item; open the public hearing; take any comments; and table the hearing. RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission offer this Planning Application No. 2012- 007 item for preliminary review; open the public hearing; consider or record any comments; and make a motion to table the public hearing to the May 31, 2012 meeting. PC 05-17-12 Page 2 of 2 II 6 ]VYIN0US / OF SEC.JJ• 7WP. l/9,RCC.21 I ^"� •. ... nw "' e a n mnCNE]E cvNaE]E oalae,E • f 1 PR- DRAINAGE k UTILITY EASEMENT=' c, I jig 61]UMIM OUS 15 EGMOEIE i I I61TUYINOV4 I � I ' ° I A A 'n n T n- > I of RI C �s .SRl1✓6u[dlc' eKrow AIt:a UCnxrly mvltn Aw /f '�° \' �`1 xia s� ❑ V V r V O I 0 I> 1 f 1 n11 1 e I I I BIiUYIN OUS , , ♦ I 1 \ I I 1 i I I - , i I i 61TUYINOU4 ?� I OMOC]F I F-1 F-) n / R 15 I I g i I I c i '^ PRGPOSED DRAINAGE&UTILITY EASEMENT '^ - N89 5725"W 501.0/ 9 i 5 (N89'54'05NW] "a nnA/A A�i^ pin/�� / yin/ /-NA r-n ^ � � Ann/ I-IA/ \VV/\ L.l]v V/_II\UL-/V/,.� -���� /-I L/L1///Vlv AST IRpY MONIMENTJ 2623/t --------- n ____________, LV NGIPTH LINE OF THE NE//t-_ / n IC /r I f //1-1 r� l Np4THEg5T CORNER CK 0f SEC JJ• TWP. 119,RCE.21 L:V /- n I l7 /�V L/YVL /vVl\I/) SEC.3J, rop.119.RCE21 a (FOIMO IN MANHOLE COVER) S89°53'50 E 499.80 STATE OF MINNESOTA — _— T_——_—— COUNTY OF ___________ DRAINAGE&UTILITY EASEMENT" IS I I The foregoing—instrument w ___ I I I A A A L) A A A T / / A a v r 7 -i I, Mark S. Hanson, do herel > Minnesota; that this plot h I r I �> monuments depicted on th, c� 1� Section 505.01, Subd. 3, a: RI $ I i Dated this _____day of ; I I y I STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was ackno, LOT I Iw BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNE� I This plat of MARANATHA 2 ru I 14 _ ___ day of-------- Highway Engineer have beep provided by Minn. Statutes, BLOCK , I a1 t CITY COUNCIL OF BROOKLY I A I l I �'•� TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPAI I hereby certify that taxes Al Mark V. Chapin, Hennepin I SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin 4^ I r J t J I ] Pursuant to Minnesota Sta I C7 William P. Brown, Hennepin COUNTY RECORDER, Hennel a� I hereby certify that the w M. IIMartin McCormick. County I I I I 15 I I • DENOTES IRON MON WITH RLS 15480, UI SHOWN. �NOJ°21't6°W I FOR THE PURPOSES L— —————————— — 1503 NORTH LINE OF THI ——————————— _ DRAINAGE k UTILITY EASEMENT _ --_ 107./2 - ROE. 21 IS ASSUMEI OF S89°53'50"E. N89 54 05"W 501.01 . . f"1/l.A./.n../A I,- , . . . _. EXHIBIT OF EASEMENTS TO BE VACATEE A.// / C- s� /V//L.L.L n A I /9 v IA/// / n1A/ / A A/C / f7 G �'J v /v L" rr/L.c.l/rr Lan/vL_ L/VL/ n[/[J///V/Y NONTN Or 1/�CORNER gc u Twr.ua ROE 21 $ 2 $ (FMM 14004M Ca CAST IM n A.H. ".'v^^. :Jv^ Pii,r ./ NORTH LRE ar TIE NE 1/t c NORTH 1/4 COIOE7t a Or 9OOTION 33•T.I Ia R.21 J�T(J I 1.�A/,,C' A//T�T(J SM 33,YNT Ila RQ.YI ..I n Y L,r lJt,. ,rV I OUM NEON CO.CAST $ IS89 5J'S0 EJ g �aN S8957'09"E 499.80 STORM SEWER EASEMENT PER DOC NO 3211239 DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PER MARANATHA ADDITION DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT AND DONNAYS BROOK LYN PER MARANATHA ADDITION GARDENS 5TH ADDITION h A A A LJ A A / A T / / A C� /V/ /-1 / I /-1 / V /-1 / r 7 /-1 Vj v >j U REVIEW COPYv Dabs Ps.- 03/19/2012 0, of h Obi AI (D �✓ r 1 LL_ o UTILITY EASEMENT PER DOC. NO. 3472646 II 6zz o>-z S r�0 U oYOo C lama �iato Vj A n /1 / T / n A / �c�zz J rl L/ LJ l / / l/ / v � 0 Qom Q nOAlAlear A, a K 0 In 3 rBROOKfYN I'ER Planning Commission Report Application Filed on 03/15/12 Meeting Date: May 17, 2012 City Council action should be (APPENDED REPORT) taken by 05/14/12(60 Days) REVIEW EXTENDED to 07/13/12 Application No. 2012-003 & 2012-004 Applicant: Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. Location: 5401& 5415 —691h Avenue North Request: Rezoning to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Multiple Family Residence) and Development/Site Plan Approval -&- Request for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)" INTRODUCTION Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. (PHS), acting on behalf of Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc., is requesting rezoning from R1 (One Family Residence) and R6 (Multiple Family Residence) to a new PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development- Mixed-Multiple Family Residence) district. Along with this zoning request is the consideration of a related Development/Site Plan of a new three-story, 97-bed skilled nursing care facility. This PUD is planned for the redevelopment to the exiting Maranatha Nursing Home and Senior Apartments campus, located at 5401& 5415 - 69th Avenue North. In conjunction with this Application, the City of Brooklyn Center is undertaking an amendment to the City of Brooklyn Center's 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update by changing the subject site's land use designation from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)". This change will help facilitate a separate request for rezoning of the subject site by PHS/Maranatha. The previous Planning Reports (Information Sheets) for the PUD and Land Use Amendments are attached to this report for your continued consideration, and should be referenced for any previous analysis, findings, and/or conditions. CONTINUATION of ANALYSIS As the Commission is aware, both of these items were tabled at the April 12, 2012 meeting, in order to give Maranatha representatives an opportunity to meet with the residential neighbors and discuss or determine a future plan of the proposed Phase II of this PUD plan. This Phase II would replace the old nursing home facility once it is demolished and all nursing care clients are safely in the new facility. On May 3, 2012 Maranatha conducted another open house at their care facility campus, which was intended to provide a design "charrette" with the neighbors. The following day, Deb Zarbok emailed city staff the attached proposed Phase II (concept) site plan. The Plan still maintains the PC 05/17/12 Page 1 of 4 3 rBROOKI o,f YN SER 97 bed skilled nursing facility in the same location, and readjusts the original submitted Phase I1 layout (April 12th submittals) of a 38-unit 4-story to a 38-unit, 2.5 story independent senior housing facility. The Developer was encouraged to maintain as much a setback from the east property line as possible. Staff suggested that a 100-foot setback be attempted, even though a 48-50 setback would be required (setback must equal twice the height of the building). Maranatha has shown that a majority of the new building would meet this 100-ft. setback. The Plan also shows the southerly portion of the building footprint impacting or affecting the proposed pond area. We assume that this pond (and other drainage facilities) would need to be adjusted or redesigned to accommodate such improvements. The plan illustrates 104 parking spaces, with 44 additional spaces under a "proof-of-parking" arrangement. It is anticipated that at least 38 parking spaces will be provided under the proposed 2.5 story independent living facility, providing up to 186 spaces (assuming all spaces shown installed). PHS has met with City Staff on a number of occasions and is attempting to provide a set of updated Plans on this site, including site and building plans, grading and drainage plans, landscaping plans and others. Also, the preliminary plat needed to be adjusted accordingly. Other supporting documents are also being finalized, including a traffic report and parking study for this PUD site. At our meeting with PHS on Friday, May 11 th, the City was instructed that a new Development/Site Plan was still being worked on, which is included as part of this updated packet), and the parking study was just received by them and required their own review and consideration before they shared it with the City. The City was also pleased to know that PHS has shifted the Phase II portion of the site to meet a 100-foot setback standard, and will also comply with a requested 25-foot clear zone buffer as part of this updated plan. The 100-foot buffer would be absent of any building additions, but the fire/access road and any parking areas (both surface and future proof-of-parking" would be permitted. The 25 foot buffer would forever be left as a"green-space" area, with grass or rain gardens as allowable improvements. The City also suggested as part of a condition of PHS' commitment to leaving this 100-foot buffer relatively alone or absent of any development that the 100-ft. separation area be left in the R1 Residence One zoning district, whereby the remaining developable areas would be rezoned to the originally requested PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-Multiple Family Residence). The proposed Phase II area continues to illustrate a 38-unit, 2.5 story senior apartment center. The half story would allow for the partial underground installation of resident parking (possibly 38 or more) and the building would not exceed 2 stores above for the 38, single-room senior independent residential units. City Staff suggested that in order to allow or provide for this future Phase Il, the City would need to ensure the site layout and all civil engineering items, PC 05/17/12 Page 2 of 4 C'i v a BROOKLYN CENTER improvements and site impacts created by such a development (such as on-site storm-water drainage, treatment, parking, etc.) could be attained or maintained on the site. Due to the late submittal of this updated Development Plan, the City suggested (and the Applicant agreed) to postpone the final review and consideration of this Development/Site and Building Plan until the May 31St Planing Commission Meeting. CONCLUSIONS In order to maintain a schedule and keep this Application within the review periods provided under State Statutes, and if the Planning Commission wished to do so, the rezoning element of this PUD application can move forward or a recommendation formulated for City Council's consideration. This rezoning request should now include a recommendation to keep an R1 segment, or PUD-Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence) district, which provides for the R1 buffer strip and the remaining area to be developed under the mixed R5/R6 zoning. The findings which support this rezoning were noted in the April 12, 2012 planning report, and in the attached Resolution No. 2012-06. The Land Use Amendment should also be revised to include the R1 element into the proposed land use change; therefore, amended from "PS-Public/Semi-Public" to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density) Residential" and SF-Single Family. The findings which support this amendment were noted in the April 12, 2012 planning report, and in the attached Resolution No. 2012-05. Finally, the Development/Site and Building Plan review and consideration under this PUD Application must be tabled or postponed to the May 31, 2011 meeting. RECOMMENDATIONS I. Staff recommends the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council to approve a land use amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, specifically that the subject site described herein, is amended from "PS-Public/Semi-Public" to "MF- Multi-Family (High Density) Residential" and "SF-Single Family" land use designation, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public" to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density) Residential" and "SF-Single Family" land use designation. 2. The land use shall be become valid only if the City Council accepts the separate rezoning of the overall site from R1 One Family Residence and R6 Multiple Family Residence to PUD-Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed of One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence). PC 05/17/12 Page 3 of 4 X"f KLY,N�EH II. Staff recommends the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to rezone the subject site from R1-One Family Residence and R6-Multiple Family Residence to a new PUD-Mixed RI/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed of One Family Residence and Mixed Multiple Family Residence) district, based on the following findings: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public" to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density) Residential" designation. 2. The rezoning shall become valid only if the City Council adopts the proposed land use amendment change (under separate consideration), and accepts and approves the final development/site and building plans for this Planned Unit Development. 3. All conditions noted in the City Engineer's Review Memorandum (dated 04/06/12) and all other subsequent or updated conditions required by the City Engineer are submitted and/or fulfilled. 4. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 5. The Final Development and Site and Building Plan shall be tabled and approved separately by the Planning Commission at a future meeting date. PC 05/17/12 Page 4 of 4 69TH AVENUE NORTH 1 I I Yup II lwl _ --- - --- , + Q 1zI d \ �1� R �. _ — — Z lv ` >/ - -- I O 1Y1 ,i ---- r-- O O _ / 81 PARKING m 1001 -� STALLS yi icol O lu-I } Ill L-- 1 J r-- U 1>_1 EXISTING 64 UNIT E ,: ,_ 1vl ASSISTED LIVING I TO REMAIN ,. r-- -- I. I '7 11c �t SED SERVICE € ' ` RAMP um Fw II / \ / \ TOTAL PROOF OF l < PARKING I (B7 STALK) _ l 1 FUTURE 2 1/2 STORY 38 UNIT l I--- INDEPENDENT MEMM FACILITY l 23 PARKING ' I I r l I STALLS NEW 97 BED SKILLED l NURSING - FACILITY-TCU LTC/MC PROPOSED i POND I l 23 _-) F Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-05 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM "PS-PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC" TO "SF- SINGLE FAMILY" AND "MF-MULTI-FAMILY (HIGH DENSITY)", RELATIVE TO THE R1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONED LAND GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY, ADDRESSED AS 5401 —69"AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, on March 11, 2010, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010-01, a resolution recommending that the Brooklyn Center City Council adopt the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update; and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2010, the City Council unanimously approved the adoption of Resolution No. 2010-65, a resolution adopting the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update; and WHEREAS, Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. (Maranatha), is proposing a redevelopment plan on the subject site, which contains an obsolete 97-bed skilled care nursing home facility, to be replaced with a new 29-38 unit senior independent living apartment facility, which requires rezoning, site and building plan and platting to complete; and WHEREAS, the current zoning of R1 One Family Residence district and underlying land use PS-Public and Semi-Public as identified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan would not allow the redevelopment of this site as planned by Maranatha under such zoning and land use category; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center initiated this land use amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan in order to change the current land use designation from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)"; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the land use amendment request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating and determining the land use amendment as contained in the April 12, 2012 planning staff report, and the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and after initial consideration of this matter, tabled this item to the May 17, 2012 meeting; and PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-05 WHEREAS, upon development plan revisions of a proposed planned unit development by the land owners of the subject site, the City of Brooklyn Center amended this land use amendment request in order to change the current land use designation from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "SF-Single Family" and"MF-Multi-Family (High Density)"; and WHEREAS, subject to a successful outcome of this land use amendment action,the City will recommend Maranatha consider a new planned unit development under a new PUD- Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed of One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence) on the Subject Site, to be considered under separate action and public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an additional duly called public hearing on May 17, 2012, whereby an updated planning staff report was presented and public testimony regarding the rezoning and development plan were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the land use amendment request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating and determining the land use amendment as contained in the April 12, 2012 and May 17, 2012 planning staff report, and the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that the land use amendment to change the current land use designation of from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "SF- Single Family" and "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)" be approved based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed land use amendment will improve the appearance of the city and enhance the quality of life, property values and civic pride in this Southwest neighborhood area; 2. The proposed land use amendment will reduce the geographic over- concentration of particular types of land development when that pattern has become a negative influence on the community. 3. The proposed land use amendment will provide an opportunity to provide an ideal redevelopment of a targeted area for the community's commercial and industrial sectors; eliminates an obsolescent or deteriorating land use; and stimulates new investment in the neighborhood and community. 4. The proposed land use amendment will enhance and strengthen City Center's economic viability and status in the regional market place by the following supporting statements: 2 of 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-05 i. helps to increase employment opportunities, possible retail sales, rental occupancy and tax base; ii. provides for the redevelopment of an obsolete and underutilized site into a use(s)that address needs in the marketplace, especially for senior housing and life-cycle housing needs. iii. the new site will use shared parking as a means of potentially increasing density and diversity of uses. 5. The proposed land use amendment will provide an opportunity to create a new zoning district provides for a more flexible mix of land uses and to n encourage good design g BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that the land use amendment to change the current land use designation of from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "SF-Single Family" and "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)" be a pp roved based upon the following conditions: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public"to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density) Residential" designation. 2. The land use shall be become valid only if the City Council accepts the planned rezoning of the overall site from R1 One Family Residence and R6 Multiple Family Residence to PUD-Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed of One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence) district, which shall be reviewed under separate application and consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. May 17, 2012 Date Chair ATTEST: Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member 3 of 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-05 and upon vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: Chair , Commissioners, and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 of 4 Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2012-003 SUBMITTED BY MARANATHA CONSERVATIVE BAPTIST HOME, INC., TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5401-5415 — 69TH AVENUE NORTH FROM R1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND RI-MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO A NEW PUD-MIXED R5/R6 (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-MIXED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE) DISTRICT WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2012-003 submitted by Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. originally proposed a rezoning from R1 (One Family Residence) and R6 (Multiple Family Residence) to a new PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed-Multiple Family Residence) district, for the properties located at 5401 and 5415 69th Avenue North; and WHEREAS, the proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property to facilitate the planned and future redevelopment of the site with a proposed three-story, 97 bed skilled nursing care facility and a future 29-38 unit senior independent living apartment facility on said properties; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 12, 2012, whereby a planning report was presented and public testimony regarding the rezoning and development plan were received, and the action item was tabled; and WHEREAS, the current zoning of R1 (One Family Residence) district and underlying land use PS-Public and Semi-Public as identified in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan would not allow the redevelopment of this site as planned by Maranatha under such zoning and land use category; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is reviewing under separate application and public hearing process a land use amendment to the current 2030 Comprehensive Plan in order to change the current land use designation from "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use to "SF- Single Family" and"MF-Multi-Family (High Density)"; and WHEREAS, subject to a successful outcome of this land use amendment action,the City may further recommend Maranatha be allowed to have a new planned unit development under this proposed new zoning district of PUD-Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development— Mixed One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence)on the Subject Site, and PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an additional duly called public hearing on May 17, 2012, whereby an updated planning report was presented and public testimony regarding the rezoning and development plan were received, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the rezoning request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezoning contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, along with the provisions and standards of the R5 (Multiple Family Residence) district contained in Section 35-314, along with the provisions and standards of the R6 (Multiple Family Residence) district contained in Section 35-314, and the provisions and standards of the Planned Unit Development district contained in Section 35-355 of the City's Zoning Ordinance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 2012-003 submitted by Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. be approved based upon the following findings: 1. The planned rezoning is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the City's Zoning Ordinance; 2. The rezoning, which will facilitate the redevelopment and improvement of this site, will allow for the utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land; 3. The rezoning and utilization of the property as proposed under the planned redevelopment of this site is considered a reasonable use of the property and will conform with ordinance standards, in particular the incorporation of buffer requirements where more intensive residential uses abut single- family residential zoned properties; 4. The rezoning and land use amendment proposal would be considered consistent with the recommendations of the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city; 5. The rezoning proposal appears to be a good long range use of the existing land and this proposed development can be considered an asset to the community; and 6. Based upon the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezoning's as contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and the proposal is, therefore, in the best interest of the community. 2 of 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 2012-003, which comprehends the rezoning of the subject site from PUD-Mixed R1/R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development — Mixed of One Family Residence and Multiple Family Residence subject to the p Y p Y )� J following conditions and considerations: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public" to "SF-Single Family" and "MF- Multi-Family(High Density) Residential" designation. 2. The rezoning shall become valid only if the City Council adopts the proposed land use amendment change (under separate consideration), and accepts and approves the final development/site and building plans for this Planned Unit Development. 3. The rezoning is subject to the successful acceptance and approval by the City Council of the final development/site plan proposed for the subject site. 4. All conditions noted in the City Engineer's Review Memorandum (dated 04/06/12) and all other subsequent or updated conditions required by the City Engineer are submitted and/or fulfilled. 5. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 6. The Final Development and Site and Building Plan shall be tabled and approved separately by the Planning Commission at a future meeting date. May 17, 2012 Date Chair ATTEST: Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: 3 of 4 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 Chair , Commissioners, and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 of 4 City n! BROOA lw CENTER Planning Commission Information Sheet Meeting Date: April 12,2012 Application No. 2012-004 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center Location: 5401 —Wh Avenue North Request: Request for Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment from"PS-Public and Semi- Public" land use to "MF-Multi-Family(High Density)" INTRODUCTION The City of Brooklyn Center is proposing an amendment to the City of Brooklyn Center's 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update by changing an "PS-Public and Semi-Public" land use designation to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)" for the property located at 5401 — Wh Avenue North (Maranatha Homes Care Center property). This change will help facilitate a separate request for rezoning of the subject site by Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc., the owners of the subject site. Should the Planning Commission provide a favorable recommendation and City Council accepts the amendment, Staff will request authorization to submit an official application of said amendment to the Metropolitan Council, as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act. This report will provide background information, an analysis, and suggested recommendations to this land use amendment request. This item is being presented under a public hearing, with proper notice published in the local newspaper and mailed to the surrounding (350+ feet) property owners. BACKGROUND The Maranatha Nursing Care Center is located at 5401 —691h Avenue N. and is located in the R1 One Family Residence district. The nursing facility was originally built in 1959 and expanded in 1994. It is believed that this use was approved as a special use under the R1 district regulations at that time, under the provision of Sect. 35-310, Sect. 2.g. to-wit "Other, non-commercial uses required for the public welfare in an R1 district as determined by the City Council". The Maranatha Senior Apartments are located immediately to the west at 5415 - 69th Avenue N. and is located in the R6 Multiple Family Residence district. The senior apartment development site was created by the filing of a new plat (Maranatha Addition) and rezoning from RI (One Family) to R6 (Multiple Family Residence) in 1987. The existing 4-story, 65 unit apartment was completed in 1988. The nursing care (Rl) parcel is 3.78 acres in size, and the senior apartment (R6) parcel is 3.28 acres in size. The combined area of these sites is 7.06 acres. These two centers are owned and operated jointly by Maranatha Inc., but are considered independent facilities on separate parcels. PC 04-12-12 Page 1 of 8 XBROUNTER The subject site is surrounded by R3—Multiple Family Residence to the north, known as The Ponds/Mallard Creek Townhome development; R1-One Family Residence to the northeast, east and south; and a large, multi-family apartment complex to the west, which is actually located in the City of Brooklyn Park. it �-71St lPA \�TJ 71ST A` 7131 AI N = =2 1 HO11711ATdL uNe I 1 Y I AVEN? C1 02 R2 co C11R1 -PUD/C1A R3 2 I I II ETTN AVEN nA EN �� C11R51R4-PUD/C2 O R4 wTEns*ATrsl - - - C1A -PU0117 -RS C2 -PUD/Rt -R6 E11 -PUDIR3R7 ' 1 I Wilt 1/ I Y I I �!�� ©12 -PUDMIXED I I � u { 1 J cn1�. E E 01 Rt ' 11 L�(T11T 1111 , 11 ' I , I_ E 1 The proposed land use change presented by the City will assist the landowner's separate request for rezoning these two parcels into a new overall PUD-Mixed R5/R6 — Multiple Family Residence district. This new PUD will provide the ability for Maranatha to continue to operate a nursing care facility on the site, with the original (existing) special use to effectively remain in place. Whereupon completion of this nursing care addition, Maranatha will proceed to Phase II of this redevelopment project, which consists of adding 29-38 new senior assisted/independent living units in place of the old 1959 era nursing home center, soon to be demolished. LAND USE & ZONING HISTORY The combined subject property was originally zoned RI from 1961 to 1987 (per earliest recoverable zoning map records). As also noted previously, the subject site was replatted into two separate lots under the Maranatha Addition, with the westerly parcel (Lot 2) rezoned in 1987 from R1 to R6 Multiple Family Residence District. The easterly parcel (Lot 1) remains under the R1 zoning district. In November 1966, the City adopted its first comprehensive plan. The land use plan map identified the city's 20-year planned land use designations from 1965 to 1985. The subject site PC 04-12-12 Page 2 of 8 X I STER was identified under this future land use plan as "Other Public Facilities" and identified with an "NH"notation, representing a nursing home. LAND USE COMMUNITY FACILITIES RESIDENCE KINOERC,urFN KS nE"FNURV SCHOOI Lr 11, pEIfCXEO cs iAnOCb>f ftFfn@lia¢v SJIOOI .NNIItf,AA¢I, n NiGX.SLXOOI NH O 1«(.F 6ROEN MfNfN: " .uNICWAI RVRWNG 4\NWY'N . NE SWiION -: :.Si lGW•vD INOH RIEf w l6RARv COMMERCE w*fRV•ofls 1 J { I � A¢FlAll-SERVICE-OIfIG( fw NJRSING XOIAf INDUSTRY C.GII CCIVff I 1 +{ qt PUBLIC FACILITIES C, • -+- j'I, _ ��5 PARK RfC[F4fION Al.O>F"SaACF �r IIIVAfF Uiy iv `' �� !R�OlHER IWIIC fAClnlrt3 I K .w"f0 CEVFE01IAfNi AREA L 3 L. In 1982 the City p p p updated and adopted the 2000 Comprehensive Plan. Under this plan, the subject site was identified under the existing land use map as"Semi-Public". I Residential Non-Residents SINGLE FaE.11LY DET:CHED .CCMMEPC'; TO—CUSES INOUSTRIAL LJ DUPLEKES E)PUELICNd SCHOCL.- ® MULTI PAIA'LV ■SEMI PUBLIC PAWS OPEN SPACE _ ■UTILITIES •— _v��;_ 110EVELOPED PC 04-12-12 Page 3 of 8 3 rIVRO ljvd 3'N TBR In 1998, the City again adopted its 2020 Comprehensive Plan update, and under that plan, the subject site was revised to the High Density Residential" on the westerly parcel and "Public & Semi-Public"on the easterly parcel. P =1 — = LEGEND: = Singlefamily Residential Office/Service Business —i —E = Two-Family Residenlial O Parks and Open Space )� r F_ = Medium-Density Residential 0 Industrial = High-Density Residential Public and Semi Public Retail Business Undeveloped Lake/Creek r— Finally, in 2010, the City adopted its 2030 Comprehensive Plan update, which reaffirmed the previous comprehensive plan's designation of the subject site with MF-Multi-Family (High Density) and PS-Public& Semi-Public land uses. Le6end OS/F; Single Family SF Two or Three Family TF Townhome(Medium Density) TH Multi Family(H..igh Density) MF s OfhcefService 9—ness OS IM Retail Business Re D Industrial t - Railroad or Utility RU - Pablic and Semi-Public PS Schoois S I— Parks.Recreation.-Op— PRO PC 04-12-12 Page 4 of 8 XCFNBR SL TER The MF-Multi-Family land use category defines these uses as: "Residential purposes, including apartments and condominiums", while the PS —Public/Semi-Public land uses defines these uses as "primarily religious,governmental, social or healthcare facilities(excluding clinics)." ANALYSIS The following analysis will be based on revising the existing Public /Semi-Public land use with an overall MF Multi-Family land use category. This change would facilitate the requested rezoning of this site under a new mixed PUD of the site. Zoning Ordinance requires that all individually zoned properties or areas of zoning throughout the city must comply with the underlying land use plan within the City's Comprehensive Plan. This mixed zoning of R5 and R6 (under an approved PUD plan) will allow the ability to keep the nursing care facility on the site with the existing special use permit remaining in places; and allow for the redevelopment of the former nursing home site to be redeveloped with new, senior independent housing. If the Planning Commission and City Council accept this land use amendment, the subject site will be presented under future (and separate) consideration of a rezoning from R6 Multiple /R6 (Multiple Family Residence Family and Rl One Family Residential, to PUD-Mixed RS ( p y ) district. The analysis contained in this report does not include any findings or supporting statement related to this proposed PUD rezoning. This analysis will only provide justification and reasoning to support this comprehensive plan land use amendment. The City Code does not provide a set of criteria or means of determining a land use amendment of this nature; therefore, Planning Staff is electing to utilize those criteria listed under the City's "Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines" contained in Section 35-208 (revised for the purposes of this analysis section)to determine the merits of this land use change. a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit [for this land use amendment l? It is staff's opinion that this redevelopment proposal can be seen as meeting a clear and public need or benefit as it is consistent with the redevelopment criteria established by the City. The redevelopment and planned improvements on the site will help remove an outdated and obsolete nursing care facility and provide a new, state of the art nursing home care facility. The site will also provide an excellent opportunity to providing additional housing options for retired or independent seniors in the community. The redevelopment will provide an increase to the tax base in the community and may provide additional full-time employment opportunities. b. Is the proposed land use amendment consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications? It is staff's belief that the proposed land use amendment would be consistent, as the existing uses (nursing care homes and senior housing elements) will remain even with the new planned site improvements. The development site is subject to added setbacks and buffering requirements under this mixed R5/R6 zoning, particularly from the adjacent PC 04-12-12 Page 5 of 8 City id BROOti L l'N CENTER single-family residential uses to the east and south. These increased setbacks, screening and landscaping measures will reduce the impacts to the residential areas. c. Can all proposed uses in the proposed land use amendment area be contemplated for development of the subject property? Under a future planned unit development, the City will identify and provide under a planned unit development agreement those approved uses and control the amount of density allowed under the overall PUD site. By changing this land use to the Multi- Family and allowing a new PUD-Mixed R5/R6 zoning, the City can designate specific or allowable uses and specify special requirements as necessary. d. Have there been substantial physical or land use changes in this area since the subject property was improved? It does not appear this site or the surrounding areas have seen any substantial physical land use or zoning changes in the last 50+ years. The most obvious change is the former golf course property to the north now converted into the Mallard Creek Townhome Association, which developed in the late 1970's. For the most part, the underlying land use has kept pace with the higher density allowances provided for under the existing R6 zoning district. e. In the case of City initiated land use amendment proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? The land use amendment will provide an opportunity to redevelop a site that has become functionally obsolete and in need of physical upgrades. The broad public purpose to initiating this land use amendment was created due to the personal desire of the senior housing/nursing centers to expand and redevelop this site with newer and upgraded nursing care center, and provide an opportunity for more housing opportunities for the regions seniors. f. Will the land use amendment result in an expansion of a zoning district warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, or; 3. The best interest of the community? The overall (combined)uses of this development site has served as a form of multi- family residential for a number of years. The 97-bed nursing home facility essentially serves as a senior housing facility with around-the clock medical services, while the nearby 64-unit senior assisted living apartment provides independent housing needs for seniors. The replacement of the multi-family land use on the Public/Semi-Public.area of this site, along with the expected PUD-Mixed R5/R/6 Zone, does not significantly increase or creates a negative expansion of the multi-family land use and/or zoning of this existing multi-residential site. It is staff's belief that this land use amendment is in the best interest of the community, as it provides a real and possible immediate opportunity to redevelop an underutilized site. PC 04-12-12 Page 6 of 8 lily n! anool+L f N CENTER The amendment is supported by the goals and objectives of the city's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Staff further believes this amendment appears to have merit beyond just the particular interests of the Applicant/Developer and should lead to a redevelopment that should be considered consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. g. Does the land use amendment proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? Staff believes that the land use amendment has merit beyond just the particular interests of the City and/or the developer(s), in that it provides an ideal opportunity for a planned unit development which provides for additional senior housing needs and health care services. This amendment will assist in the redevelopment and transformation of this site that can be consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. The amendment would provide a an opportunity for quality development that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and be considered in the general best interests of the community. RECOMMENDATION Staff believes this recommendation and requested amendment can be supported based on the following objectives and goals listed in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan(which are also memorialized in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012-004: A. The proposed land use amendment will improve the appearance of the city and enhance the quality of life, property values and civic pride in this northwest neighborhood area; B. The proposed land use amendment will reduce the geographic over-concentration of particular types of land development when that pattern has become a negative influence on the community. C. The proposed land use amendment will provide an opportunity to provide an ideal redevelopment of a targeted area for the community's commercial and industrial sectors; eliminates an obsolescent or deteriorating land use; and stimulates new investment in the neighborhood and community. D. The proposed land use amendment will enhance and strengthen City Center's economic viability and status in the regional market place by the following supporting statements: L helps to increase employment opportunities,possible retail sales,rental occupancy and tax base; ii. provides for the redevelopment of an obsolete and underutilized site into a use(s) that address needs in the marketplace, especially for senior housing and life-cycle housing needs. M. the new site will use shared parking as a means of potentially increasing density and PC 04-12-12 Page 7 of 8 Cayr BR006L YYV CENTER diversity of uses. E. The proposed land use amendment will provide an opportunity to create a new zoning district provides for a more flexible mix of land uses and to encourage good design. With these suggested finding, Staff therefore recommends the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council to approve a land use amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, specifically that the subject site described herein, is amended from"PS- Public/Semi-Public"to "MF-Multi-Family(High Density) Residential"land use designation, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public"to "MF-Multi-Family (High Density)Residential"designation. 2. The land use shall be become valid only if the City Council accepts the planned (separate)rezoning of the overall site from R1 One Family Residence and R6 Multiple Family Residence to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 Multiple Family Residence district. PC 04-12-12 Page 8 of 8 City o! 6ROOKLr.v CCNTM Planning Commission Information Sheet Application Filed on 3-15-12 Meeting Date: April 12,2012 City Council action should be taken by 5-14-12 (60 Days) Application No. 2012-003 Applicant: Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc. Location: 5401& 5415 —691h Avenue North Request: Rezoning to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Multiple Family Residence) and Development/Site Plan approvals INTRODUCTION Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. (PHS), acting on behalf of Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home, Inc., is requesting rezoning from RI (One Family Residence) and R6 (Multiple Family Residence) to a new PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development- Mixed-Multiple Family Residence) district. Along with this zoning request is the consideration of a related Development/Site Plan of a new three-story, 97-bed skilled nursing care facility. This PUD is planned for the redevelopment to the exiting Maranatha Nursing Home and Senior Apartments campus, located at 5401& 5415 - 69th Avenue North. As the Commission is aware, a Planned Unit Development proposal involves the rezoning of land to the PUD designation followed by an alpha-numeric designation of the underlying zoning district; or in this case the R5 and R6 respectively. These underlying zoning districts provide the regulations governing uses and structures within the new PUD. The rules and regulations governing these districts would apply to the development proposal. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed flexibility in addressing development and redevelopment issues. Regulations governing uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by the City Council on the development plans. The Planning Commission's attention is directed to Section 35-355 of the city's zoning ordinance, which addresses Planned Unit Developments (copy attached). This report will provide background information, an analysis, and suggested recommendations to this rezoning and development/site plan request. This item is being presented under a public hearing, with proper notice published in the local newspaper and mailed to the surrounding(350- feet)property owners. BACKGROUND The Maranatha campus consists of two separate lots. The nursing home parcel (addressed as 5401 — 69th Ave.) is 3.78 acres in size and is situated in the RI district. The existing 64-unit senior assisted living facility (5415 — 69th Ave.) is 3.28 acres in size and situated in the R6 district. The combined area of these sites is 7.06 acres. These two centers are owned and operated jointly by PHS. PC 04-12-12 Page 1 of 14 BROOKE S'Y CEA'TER The nursing home facility was built in 1959 and expanded in 1994. It is understood that this nursing home use was approved as a special use under the R1 district regulations at that time, under provisions set-forth in Sect. 35-310, Sect. 2.g. to-wit "Other, non-commercial uses required for the public welfare in an RI district as determined by the City Council". The senior assisted living apartments were created in 1987 by the filing of a new plat (Maranatha Addition) and rezoning from RI (One Family) to R6 (Multiple Family Residence). The four-story, 65 unit apartment was completed in 1988. The subject site is surrounded by R3—Multiple Family Residence to the north, known as The Ponds/Mallard Creek Townhome development; R1-One Family Residence to the northeast, east and south; and a large, multi-family apartment complex to the west, which is actually located in the City of Brooklyn Park. r — z tr 1 'W _ o,; roc 1{}7. C1 M02 R2 C1/R1 -PUD/CIA ®R3 C1/R51R4-PUD/C2 R4 C2 -PUD/R1 -R6 P ° 11 -PUD/R3 '��.. R 12 PUDMIXED 2 - 7amn-w L_ 07 Ri C I I 1111111 1 H I I I I 1 C I II II I",�II' I The current land use designation of this site is under the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan is MF- Multi-Family Residence and PS—Public/Semi-Public. Related to this PUD application, but completely independent, is the separate land use amendment being processed by the City of Brooklyn Center and on behalf of PHS/Maranatha. The proposed land use amendment is to change the PS-Public Semi/Public portion of the property to MF-Multi-Family. If the Planning Commission and City Council accept this land use amendment, the requested change of zoning to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 would be consistent with this new underlying land use category. This new PUD will provide the ability for Maranatha to continue to operate a nursing care facility on the site, with the original (existing) special use to effectively remain in place. Whereupon completion of this nursing care addition, Maranatha will proceed to Phase II of this redevelopment project, which consists of adding 29-38 new senior assisted/independent living units in place of the old 1959 era nursing home center, which would be demolished once the new 97-bed unit facility is constructed. PC 04-12-12 Page 2 of 14 3 rBRO n„r 'MYN TER Also not considered under this PUD application is the replatting of these two properties. As evident on the aerial map (attached), the shared lot line between Lots 1 and 2 appears to cross over the connection point between the senior apartment building and the nursing home facility. Under Phase I of this PUD plan, PHS will enlarge this connector and complete the new 97-bed nursing care building to the south of the apartments, but primarily contained within Lot 2. Since the existing senior apartments, new nursing care center, and future independent living building will be operated and connected together as one large, multi-use facility, PHS has agreed to re- combine the two lots into a single unified parcel once again by means of a new plat. This plat will be considered (under separate public hearing) in the near future. A condition to this action will be made part of the PUD agreement between PHS and the City. Zoning Sect. 35-314 — R5 Multiple family Residence allows for multiple family residential uses up to 2.5 to 3 stories in height, with a minimum 2,700 sf or land area per unit. Section 35-315 — R6 Multiple Family Residence allows for multiple family dwellings up to 4 to 5 stories in height, with a minimum of 2,200 sf. of land per unit. These standards will be addressed later in this report as they pertain to the amount of density to be allowed under this PUD plan. REZONING ANALYSIS The mixed zoning offered under this application is to provide for the continuation of the mixed use nature of these two facilities on this campus. The continuation of the nursing home facility is affected by a current State of Minnesota moratorium on such uses; however, PHS is allowed to make this change or proceed with this redevelopment plan under an exception granted by the State. The original special use permit (to allow nursing homes in the R1 zone) was granted on the site when it consisted only of one single parcel. That changed when in 1987 the site was split into two lots under the Maranatha Addition, and the west lot was rezoned from Rl to R6 to provide for the 64-unit senior apartment center. The new PUD Mixed R5/R6 district will allow for the continuation of these senior apartments, along with the relocation of the nursing care facilities to the new 3-story building. The PUD process involves a rezoning of land and, therefore, is subject to the rezoning procedures outlined in Section 35-210 of the zoning ordinance as well as being consistent with the City's Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in Section 35-208. The Policy and Review Guidelines are attached for the Commission's review. The applicant has submitted a written narrative describing their proposal along with written comments relating to Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines (attached). As with all rezoning requests, the Planning Commission must review the proposal based on the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in the zoning ordinance. The policy states that rezoning classifications must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and must not constitute "spot zoning", which is defined as a zoning decision which discriminates in favor of a particular land owner and does not relate to the Comprehensive Plan or accepted planning principals. Each rezoning proposal must be considered on its merits and measured against the City's policy and against the various guidelines, which have been established for PC 04-12-12 Page 3 of 14 X y KLYN TER rezoning review. The following is a review of the rezoning guidelines contained in the zoning ordinance as we believe they relate to the applicant's comments and their proposal: a. Is there a clear and public need or benefit? It is staff's opinion that this redevelopment proposal can be seen as meeting a clear and public need or benefit as it is consistent with the redevelopment criteria established by the City and also consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The redevelopment and planned improvements on the site will help remove an outdated and obsolete nursing care facility and provide a new, state of the art nursing home care facility. The site will also provide an excellent opportunity to providing additional housing options for retired or independent seniors in the community. The redevelopment will provide an increase to the tax base in the community and may provide additional full-time employment opportunities. Staff believes this development proposal will not be a detriment to the neighborhood, and should provide a positive effect on the community. The uses proposed by PHS in their narrative and the development/site plans are certainly are consistent with what is acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan. The combination of the two parcels under a unified (new) Planned Unit Development designation rather than using the standard zoning, provides the flexibility the Applicants' seek in continuing this nursing care/senior housing center, and gives the City the ability to regulate, add (if needed) and ensure proper development measures are met, such as screening, landscaping and buffering standards. Overall, this redevelopment plan is compatible with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and underlying land use plan. b. Is the proposed zoning consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications? It is staff's belief that the proposed zoning would be consistent, as the existing uses (nursing care homes and senior housing elements) will remain even with the new planned site improvements. The site's existing uses will remain and unchanged as for the number of nursing beds to serve their clientele. The development site is subject to added setbacks and buffering requirements under this mixed R5/R6 zoning, particularly from the adjacent single- family residential uses to the east and south. These increased setbacks, screening and landscaping measures will reduce the impacts to the residential areas. c. Can all proposed uses in the proposed zoning district be contemplated for development of the subject property? Under this proposed planned unit development and its related development/site plan, the City will identify and provide under a future PUD agreement only those uses allowed or approved for this site; identify and provide for needed standards or requirements as the development dictates or as the Planning Commission and City Council require; and ultimately control the amount of density allowed under the overall PUD site. By changing and appending to this property's existing zoning with a Mixed Multi-Family (R5/R6) and allowing a new PUD- Mixed R5/R6 zoning, the City can designate specific or allowable uses and specify special PC 04-12-12 Page 4 of 14 X n of hr"rrR requirements as necessary. d. Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in this area since the subject property was zoned? It does not appear this site or the surrounding areas have seen any substantial physical land use or zoning changes in the last 50+ years. The most obvious change is the former golf course property to the north now converted into the Mallard Creek Townhome Association, which developed in the late 1970's. For the most part, the underlying land use has kept pace with the higher density allowances provided for under the existing R6 zoning district. e. In the case of City initiated rezoning proposals, is there a broad public purpose evident? This evaluation criterion is not applicable in this case because it is not a City initiated rezoning proposal, but rather a developer initiated proposal. f. Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district? We believe that, the proposal will bear fully the development restrictions for this Planned Unit Development without any deviations or modifications from the standard ordinance requirements. The property line abutments will have sufficient buffer, setback and screening as called for in the ordinance. g. Is the subject property generally unsuited for uses permitted in the present zoning district with respect to size, configuration, topography or location? As noted previously, the two existing residential zoning districts (R1 and R6) have provided an ideal opportunity for both the senior apartments and nursing home facilities to operate successfully throughout the last 50+ years, without any reported problems or negative impacts upon the surrounding neighborhoods. The new PUD-Mixed R5/R6 would allow the continuation of these uses at this site, and offers another ideal opportunity to the Developers to provide additional senior housing component (and numbers) to the community. The overall density allowances afforded to this site under the R5/R6 districts will be adhered to, and all parking needs, buffering and landscaping will be provided for in this development plan and future agreements. The Developers have made careful decisions in building designs and siting which should allow the expanded nursing home use to fit in nicely with the site, and still allows for the replacement of the old nursing home area with needed senior, independent living units. For all intents and purposes, it seems appropriate to move ahead with the planned unit development proposal at hand. h. Will the rezoning result in an expansion of a zoning district warranted by: 1. Comprehensive Planning; 2. Lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district, or; 3. The best interest of the community? The existing R1/R6 zoning complies with the current 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and the new PC 04-12-12 Page 5 of 14 C'i,„✓ BRO-';L 3 N CENTER PUD-Mixed R5/R6 should comply with the current 2030 Plan once the plan amendment takes effect. Staff can only safely assume that the Met Council will accept this land use change, as it will provide for additional housing needs and it meets the true spirit and intent of our Comprehensive Plans as far as the redevelopment goals and policies established by said Plan. It appears that the proposal has merit beyond just the particular interests of the developer and should be a development that can be considered compatible with surrounding land uses. As far as new developable land or similar high-density residential opportunity sites in Brooklyn Center, there is little or none available. All progress and development in the future will basically be as expansion and redevelopment such as proposed by this applicant. The proposed 3-story nursing care facility, in proximity to the 4-story senior apartment complex, along with the future 3 or 4 story independent living center to the east, is an appropriate mix of uses generally envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Brooklyn Center's population, like that of many first ring suburbs, is aging and there is a need for this type of senior or assisted living housing. Staff believes that a senior and nursing care facility typically provides for a specific populace or age demographic in our community and the metro-wide area, and remains in the best interests of the community to permit such expansion and redevelopment of this site as proposed. i. Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an owner or owners of an individual parcel? Staff believes that the new zoning has merit beyond just the particular interests of the City and/or the developer(s), in that it provides an ideal opportunity for a planned unit development which provides for additional senior housing needs and health care services. This new PUD-Mixed zoning will assist in the redevelopment and transformation of this site that can be consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. The zoning would provide a an opportunity for quality development that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and be considered in the general best interests of the community. The final consideration under this rezoning portion is the allowance of density to be given on this site. Density is calculated based on the following ratios: Land Area District/Use SF/Unit Density R5 (See Sec. 35-410) 2,700/unit 19.8 units/acre* R6 (See Sec. 35-410) 2,200/unit 16.13 units/acre* Nursing Care Homes 50 beds/acre *calculated at 43,560 sf.(1 acre)divided by 2,700 sf.or 2,200 sf.,respectively The total site is 7.06 acres in size. The 97-bed nursing care requires 1.94 acres of area(97/50 = 1.94). The remaining 5.12 acres is left to accommodate the existing senior assisted living and future independent living centers, which is calculated as follows: • R5: 5.12 ac. x 16.13 units/ac. = 83 allowable units • R6: 5.12 ac. x 19.8 units/ac. = 102 allowable units PC 04-12-12 Page 6 of 14 11R006LYA CENTER Deducting out the existing 64 units leaves 19 to 38 available units for the Phase II portion of this PUD site. The Planning Commission will need to determine whether or not to allow or grant the Applicants the higher density allotment afforded under the R6 zoning district versus the lower R5 district density standards. Although the Applicants indicated 29-38 units, this may be a reflection of the unknown building height of this proposed independent living center. By holding Maranatha to the higher R6 density standards, the site may need to comply with the 4-5 stories in height standard set forth under Zoning Code Section 35-315. DEVELOPMENT PLAN/SITE & BUILDING PLAN REVIEW Phase I this PUD plan calls for the construction of a three-story, 97-bed, 84-unit skilled nursing care facility. These units consists of 71 private/single client rooms (an increase of 30 over the existing 40 private rooms) and 13 double client rooms. The first floor dimension of the building measures 118-ft. by 286-ft., for an approximate footprint of 33,748 sq. ft. The upper two floors are dimensioned as 117-ft. by 256-ft. or 29,952 sq. ft. each. These floors are identified by the types of care to be provided in each unit (i.e. transitional; long-term; memory care, etc.) and identify the common areas such as kitchen and dining areas; living/congregation areas; conference rooms; exam rooms; activity and therapy rooms; utility rooms; and offices. A small basement area for staff, storage and laundry is also provided. As evident on the current survey plan and aerial photo mapping of the subject site, the existing site contains 97 parking spaces, plus 12 additional spaces in the detached garage structure to the rear. The new nursing care facility will replace and be constructed over the existing 54 stall parking lot located to the south of the assisted living apartments. The detached garage structure will be removed as part of this improvement. The surface parking located to the north of the nursing care buildings consists of 34 spaces and only 9 spaces on the north side of the senior apartments. Plans call for the installation of 81 parking stalls to the north of the site, with 26 stalls to the west of the new nursing care center. PHS indicated up to 65 employees on the largest shift would be using this site on a daily basis. These parking areas will need to accommodate these employees, along with residents and visitors to the site. ❖ BUILDING The building elevations and floor plans for the proposed building addition are attached to this report. The first floor square footage is 31,592 sf.; 2nd-floor is 24,693 sf.; 3`d floor is 24,614 sf.; and the basement is 8,720 sf. or total GFA of 89,619 sf. The building's exterior will be comparable on each of the three buildings on the site, with decorative face brick on the lower elements and entries; rock-faced CMU wainscoting or banding along the lower window levels; vertical fiber cement board and battens around the doorway entries and end corridor window PC 04-12-12 Page 7 of 14 X IiL 3'N TER banks; vinyl horizontal siding along the first two levels; and vinyl shake-style siding on the upper floor. The building will be topped off with pre-finished metal fascia's and typical, earth- tone colored asphalt shingles. The building's floors will be divided into different levels of nursing or resident assistance, such as transitional, long-term care and memory care. All three floors have nice-sized dining and living room areas, and other congregate or common areas such as exercise and therapy rooms, spas, and various activity rooms. The first floor is planned to have a "Community/Chapel" room, along with a kitchen and small deli. Assuming the kitchen and deli will only serve the on- site residents, staff and visitors, and not necessarily the general public, Staff does not have any objections to these uses. The chapel however, may require acknowledgment and tacit approval under the PUD, as "chapels, churches, temples and synagogues" are considered a special use in the Rl, R2 and R5 residential districts. Staff assumes this chapel would be available to the residents and their visitors only and not necessarily open to the general public. The chapel space appears small enough not to cause concerns to Staff, or create any need for increased parking needs on the site. The Applicant's architects indicated the building height as 45-feet from grade to roof peak. The mean height (mid-point between peak to bottom of roof/soffit line) is 38.5 feet. The Zoning Ordinance is silent on how to determine or measure the height of buildings, nor maximum height (in measured feet) of buildings in the R5 or R6 districts; however, multiple family (residential) buildings are limited to 2.5 to 3 stories in the R5 and 4 to 5 stories in the R6 district. A common dimension for story height is 12-13 feet, with a typical or standard pitched roof space consisting of approximately 6-9 feet. Many communities recognize the mean height of a building as the measured(max.)height of buildings. Under the R5 and R6 zoning district, new residential buildings must comply with the following standards: Land Area Width Front Rear Side Corner District SF/Unit)(1) Feet 2 (5)(6) (3)(5) (2) R5(See Sec.35-410) 2,700/unit 100 35(4) 40(4) 15(4) 25(4) R6(See Sec.35-410) 2,200/unit 100 50(4) 40(4) 20(4) 50(4 4. When a building of 2-1/2 stories or more in an R5,R6,R7,CIA or C2 zone abuts an RI or R2 zone,the setback of this building from the RI or R2 property shall be no less than twice the height of the building. The setbacks indicted on the site plan reveals the new nursing care building would be setback 76'-10" from the side yard, and 64'-8" from the rear. The rear line abuts an Rl zone, and therefore the setback standard of"twice the height of the building" comes into play. Adhering to these standards, the 45-ft. overall height would require a 90-foot rear yard setback, while the 38.5-ft. would require a 77-ft. setback. The PUD site plan also identifies the future 4-story, 38 unit independent living facility, which would replace the old nursing home buildings once they are demolished. This residential PC 04-12-12 Page 8 of 14 i 3 Cig»! BROOKLYN CENTER building is identified as the Phase II of this PUD and is slated to be constructed within 3-5 years. The narrative identifies this building as a "29-38 unit" apartment, on account of the unknown allowed density the City will provide under this PUD. Under the R5, the density allotment would only permit 19 new units. A concession to be considered under this PUD plan is to allow the higher density afforded under the R6 zoning, but hold the building to the R5 standard of 3 stories (instead of the 4-5 stories under R6). This lower building height would hopefully lessen the impact upon the RI neighborhood to the east, and lessen the setback encroachment in this area. These standards can easily be provided for under the proposed PUD Plan and agreements Under the PUD process, a reduction of setbacks may be considered, if certain provisions or conditions are offered into the plans, such as buffering or screening measures, which may help reduce the massiveness of the buildings into this encroachment area, and those measures that may alleviate any negative impacts upon the neighboring single-family residential district. The plans call for some landscaping and screening along the south edge, which will be addressed in the "Landscape/Screening" section of this report. ❖ ACCESS/PARKING The subject site is accessed from 69th Avenue North by means of two separate driveways. The westerly drive lines up with Unity Avenue to the north, and immediately splits off into two directions once you enter the site. The westerly drive leads to the rear parking, loading and garage areas, while the easterly leads to a smaller parking and drive-aisle area along the north side of the senior apartments, and eventually runs over to the covered entry to the nursing home. The easterly drive does not line up with any cross streets, and provides secondary access to the parking area for the nursing care facility and loading area. These access points are scheduled to remain in place, with the westerly drive continuing to split into two directions, but instead of continuing southerly along the front part of the apartment building, the easterly leg continues along a drive parallel with 69th Avenue to serve as mini- frontage road or drive-aisle to the expanded parking lot. The westerly leg continues as it did before along he west edge of the existing and new buildings, and serves as the entry into the new 26 stall parking lot. The parking is reduces on the south area and expanded on the north area, to accommodate 107 total parking stalls. The old configuration had 97 open stall spaces and 12 garage spaces (note: the Applicant did indicate that most of these garage units were used for personal or Maranatha storage and not used for any vehicle parking). Pursuant to Zoning Code Section 35-704 [MINIMUM PARKING SPACES REQUIRED], the following spaces are required for each type of use: 1. Residence a. Two spaces per dwelling unit 4. Miscellaneous b. Rest homes, nursing homes, sanitariums, and homes for the aged and for children: One space for every four beds plus one space for every two PC 04-12-12 Page 9 of 14 X"a/ h L 3'N TER employees and one space for each staff doctor. Holding PHS/Maranatha to these standards, and based on the existing and new buildings proposed,the site would need to accommodate the following number of parking spaces: • 64-units (Senior Apts.): 64 x 2 = 128 stalls • 97 beds (nursing home): [1 per 4 beds = 24 stalls] + [1 per 2 emp. @ 65 = 33 stalls], or 57 stalls . • COMBINED USES: 128 + 57= 185 required parking spaces In 1987, when the 64-unit senior apartment building was approved on Lot 2 (originally approved as 65-units), the Staff Report indicated 130 spaces would be needed (65 @ 2 spaces); however, the approved site plan allowed for only 95 spaces, with up to 35 spaces to be held in a proof—of- parking arrangement. The Staff report from the 1987 application indicated: "Staff sees_no problem with a deferral of 35 spaces in as much as the project is geared toward elderly residents. A proof-of-parking covenant, however, will need to be filed with the plat at the County. " This agreement was actually provided for under separate Declaration of Covenants Agreement between Maranatha and the City, which is held on file with the City. Interestingly, the 1987 file is unclear on why the site remains deficient on parking, especially the south parking area, nor building permit records which indicate an approved reduction was allowed. Nevertheless, under the PUD review process, a reduction in parking may be granted, subject to the Applicant demonstrating a real need for reducing said numbers or providing suitable alternatives. The narrative submitted by PHS indicates that once Phase II is completed, parking needs will be satisfied with a combination of surface parking and below grade parking under the new 29-38 unit independent living facility. A statement or argument Staff commonly receives is that residential care centers such as these, which cater to a certain demographic group (i.e. elderly, memory care, assisted living), do not require a lot of resident or client parking needs, since most of these individuals no longer drive or require the use of personal vehicles. A similar statement or argument was made when the City approved the Prairie Lodge Assisted Living Center, located at 6001 Earle Brown Drive in 1992, whereas the City approved 59 stalls for 45-units (up to 90 residents). While Staff does not subscribe to this argument, nor any evidence to support or corroborate this statement been submitted, and without making hasty statements that could be mistaken as discriminatory or derogatory upon a certain populace, we are unable to make any recommendation on this reduced level of parking based on this perception. For the sake of this report, and with the personal understanding that this Maranatha Center serves primarily elderly or those requiring special nursing care needs, it may be safe to assume that not many of these residents drive or have a need for personal vehicles. Accepting this statement, it again may be argued that a reasonable reduction in parking is warranted, such as 0.75 or 1 per senior unit, but PC 04-12-12 Page 10 of 14 Ciryv/ BROOtiLYN CENTER maintaining the 1 per 4 beds and employee ratios intact for the nursing care. Based on this formula,parking could be recalculated as follows: • 64 x 0.75 spaces/unit=48 stalls 0 97 beds (nursing home): [1 per 4 beds = 24 stalls] + [1 per 2 emp. @ 65 = 33 stalls], or 57 stalls . • COMBINED USES: 48 + 57 = 105 required parking spaces The Planning Commission should consider this reduced parking plan as an important element of this site/development plan within this PUD. If you feel this amount of parking provided for under this plan is adequate, then you may favorably recommend. If however, you feel the site is or remains deficient of parking needs, you may request the Applicants submit a revised plan that best meets the overall needs of the residents, staff and visitors to this site. ❖ GRADING/DRAINAGE/UTILITIES The applicant has provided preliminary grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans which are being reviewed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. His written comments will be attached for the Commission's review. Sanitary sewer and water main are located within the 69a' Avenue right of way, and should accommodate this new addition. An existing drainage easement for ponding purposes will need to be vacated as part of the PUD and future platting of this property. Sanitary sewer utility connections between the mains and the buildings would be from the north of the building, while water will be brought in from the west edge of the site. The applicant proposes to provide four ponding areas, located at the four corners of the development site. Storm water would be conveyed to these facilities before being discharged into the storm sewer system. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer is reviewing the plan and the Commission's attention is directed to his comments. B-612 curb and gutter is to be provided around all driving and parking areas in accordance with city ordinances. ❖ LANDSCAPING/SCREENING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan as part of this PUD. All new landscape plans must comply with the City's "Landscape Point System" policy, which is evaluated and determined by the LPS worksheet. This 7.06 acre site requires a total of 559.5 landscape points. The current plan submitted by Pope/Louck's Associates illustrates only 12 new deciduous; 17 new coniferous; and 4 decorative/ornamental trees, along with 165 shrubs. The preliminary point total awarded to these new plantings is 310.5 pts. The plans indicate the removal of approximately 54 trees on the site, but the saving of 7 deciduous, 10 coniferous, and 4 ornamentals. The points tally on these trees to be saved equals 136 points. Adding these points into the new planning points equates to 446.5 total points, which is 113 points short of the PC 04-12-12 Page 11 of 14 BROOFLS'N CENTER minimum required plantings. The landscape plan appears to have some problems and does match-up with the proposed grading and drainage plans for this PUD site. The coniferous trees on the south side of the building are being placed in a ponding area, and the shade/deciduous trees on the far west edge along the new parking lot area are proposed in the existing (and to remain) drainage ditch. It is also not clear if the remaining trees on the south edge of the site and identified on the Demolition and Erosion Control Plan (Sheet C1.0) will be removed to accommodate the new coniferous plantings and screening proposed under this plan. There also appears to be large, open areas absent of plantings, such as the southeast quadrant, easterly edge, and along 69th Avenue North, and Staff is unable to explain in this report the failure to provide plantings in these important areas. The basis of landscaping is to provide a dense, natural and environmental friendly screening, especially the neighboring single family residences to the south and east of this site. The PUD process may permit reduction of required setbacks (as we detailed in the previous "Building" section of this report), but typically the development and/or Developer must provide suitable and acceptable buffers or screening measures (such as landscaping, fencing, berming or a combination of all) to lessen these impacts upon the adjacent properties. City Code Section 35- 410 (Special Requirements in R3-R7 Districts), Subpart 8 states: Nursing Homes shall provide one six inch diameter tree (long-lived hardwood species only) per 14 beds. At 97 beds, this equates to 7 six-inch trees. However, Staff noted that existing trees saved on the site may be credited towards this requirement. Again, it is not known or identified on these plans what hardwood species trees would be saved or accounted for to meet this requirement. Staff also informed the Applicants that if this requirement could not be met, that a suitable alternative or slightly smaller diameter tree could be offered in the plan. Apparently that was never indicated or provided for Staff review. The Applicants were made aware of these landscaping and screening concerns in previous pre- development review meetings with City Staff, and we are not satisfied this landscape plan properly addresses these concerns or provides adequate screening measures this PUD demands. The Planning Commission should make a determination as to the adequacy of the screening plan and provide recommendations on this plan at the public hearing. It should be noted that composite type fences have been provided in other Planned Unit Developments. ❖ LIGHTING/TRASH The applicant has not submitted a lighting plan for this site. All new lighting would need to meet or exceed those requirements established under Section 35-712 of the city ordinances. City q t ordinance require that all exterior lighting be provided with lenses, reflectors or down-cast shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property. Illumination is not permitted at an intensity level greater than 3 foot candles measured at property lines abutting residentially zoned property. A submittal and review of a photometric plan indicating all new and existing lighting PC 04-12-12 Page 12 of 14 3 City iA BROOKLYN CF.NTFR must be submitted prior to any issuance of building permits. There appears to be a new trash compactor/enclosure area located between the existing senior apartments and new nursing care buildings on this site. The plans are absent of any details and we would require these to be submitted as part of any review prior to final site plan and or building permit approvals. The enclosures should be constructed of materials similar to or those that closely match the exterior of the buildings. RECOMMENDATION For all intents and purposes, the rezoning element of this combined PUD application (rezoning and site plan) can be given a favorable recommendation by City Staff, since we believe the rezoning portion meets the criterion used to evaluate such change, and the proposed concept plan associated with this PUD would be an acceptable means of achieving what the Applicants seek in the redevelopment of this site. It is however, the findings by Staff that the Site and Building Plan element to this PUD is in need of some modifications and requires additional information to fully complete a review and provide supportable findings, and therefore should be tabled. Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider the zoning change of this site from R1- One Family Residence and R6-Multiple Family Residence to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed Multiple Family Residence) district,based on the following findings (which are also memorialized in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012-005: A. The proposed rezoning appears to demonstrate a clear and public need or benefit to the community and regional area, as it will improve the appearance of the city and enhance the quality of life,property values and civic pride in this neighborhood area; B. The rezoning and its related development proposal will not be a detriment to the neighborhood, and should provide a positive effect on the community; subject to the site plan issues being fully resolved by the City and Applicants; C. The rezoning will facilitate the redevelopment plan of this site, which will be compatible with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and underlying land use plan. D. The proposed zoning is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land use classifications; E. The proposed rezoning will provide an opportunity to provide an ideal redevelopment of a targeted area for the community's senior residential and health care sectors; eliminates an obsolescent or deteriorating nursing home facility; and will stimulate new investment in the neighborhood and community. F. The proposed rezoning will enhance and strengthen City Center's economic viability and PC 04-12-12 Page 13 of 14 a�i,f JIROOhLY',v CENTER status in the regional market place by the following supporting statements: i. helps to increase employment o pp ortunities rental occupancy and tax base; ii. provides for the redevelopment of an obsolete and underutilized site into a use(s) that address needs in the marketplace, especially for senior housing and life-cycle housing needs. iii. the new site will use shared parking as a means of potentially increasing density and diversity of uses. iv. The proposed land use amendment will provide an opportunity to create a new zoning district provides for a more flexible mix of land uses and to encourage good design. With these recommended findings, Staff recommends the Planning Commission provide a recommendation to the City Council to authorize the change of zoning of the subject site from Rl-One Family Residence and R6-Multiple Family Residence to PUD-Mixed R5/R6 (Planned Unit Development-Mixed Multiple Family Residence) district, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Metropolitan Council approval of the land use amendment change of this site from PS-Public/Semi-Public"to"MF-Multi-Family (High Density)Residential" designation. 2. The rezoning shall become valid only if the City Council adopts the proposed land use amendment change (under separate consideration), and accepts and approves the final development/site and building plans for this Planned Unit Development. 3. All conditions noted in the City Engineer's Review Memorandum (dated 04/06/12) and all other subsequent or updated conditions required by the City Engineer are submitted and/or fulfilled. 4. Execution of a PUD development agreement as prepared by the City Attorney. 5. The Final Development and Site and Building Plan shall be tabled and approved separately by the Planning Commission at a future meeting date. PC 04-12-12 Page 14 of 14 Innovations in Senior Living Communities yY . G S OR HOUSING LsP_��-T�`�T�J I��i March 15, 2012 Mr. Gary Eitel Director of Business and Development City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 Re: Maranatha Care Center Redevelopment Rezoning and PUD Submittal- March 15, 2012 Dear Mr. Eitel, Presbyterian Homes Housing and Assisted Living, Inc. (PHS) is seeking approval from the City of Brooklyn Center for the redevelopment of the current 97 bed Maranatha Care Center located at 5401 69th Avenue N., Brooklyn Center, MN. PHS has been awarded an Exception to the Nursing Home Moratorium from the Minnesota Department of Health to redevelop the current facility. Currently the Maranatha site consist of a 97 bed Care Center and a 64 unit Assisted Living Building situated on two parcels, Lot 1 & Lot 2, Block 1 of Maranatha Addition. PHS is in the process of obtaining a preliminary plat combining the two parcels and applying for Rezoning and a PUD to best accommodate the uses and structures of the project. The project will be developed in different phases allowing for the current Care Center to remain in place while the new Care Center is constructed. Phase I of the project will consist of the 97 bed Care Center and will be constructed in phases as follows: ® I(a)—Expand parking on the north side of the site along 69th Avenue I(b)—Demolish existing garages in the south parking lot * I(c)—Construct new 97 bed Care Center C. I(d)—Demolish existing Care Center I(e) —Construct new entrance into the Care Center off of the north parking lot In addition to the construction of the new Care Center we are proposing a future Phase 11 consisting of 29—38 units of Independent Living apartments. With the addition of Independent Apartments the Maranatha site will provide a full continuum of care for the senior residents of Brooklyn Center. Phase II is anticipated to be constructed within 3 —5 years. The expansion of the north parking lot along 69th Avenue along with the new parking stalls on the west side of the site will replace the existing south parking lot and will create 107 total parking stalls. This is an increase of 10 stalls from the current 97 stalls. When Phase II is constructed parking needs will be satisfied with a combination of additional surface parking and below grade parking under the building. 2845 North Ilamline Ave. o- Suite 100: Roseville, Minnesota•: _S's 113 : w�avw.seniorparinci�s.com )651) 631-6300 Fax (03 1) 631-6301 : 800-891-9126 As Phase I is a Redevelopment of the current facility and maintaining the same services, number of units and staff,traffic flows and patterns will remain the same. A Landscape Architect has been commissioned by POPE Architects and is in the process of working with the Architect and Civil Engineer to develop a Landscape Plan. The following are responses to guideline questions outlined in the Rezoning Application: A. There is a clear public need to replace the current 50+year old facility as it is functionally and conditionally obsolete. The new PUD would allow for a new up-to-date Care Center serving the older adults of Brooklyn Center. Twenty nine (29) - thirty eight (38) units of Independent Housing in a future phase are also planned for in the PUD allowing for a full continuum of older adult housing and care in one setting. B. The current and proposed zoning is consistent with and compatible with surrounding land use classification. C. All permitted uses in the proposed zoning district can be contemplated for development of the subject property. D. There have not been substantial physical or zoning classification changes in the area since the property was zoned. E. The redevelopment of Marantha Care Center fits within the city-initiated rezoning proposals as it revitalizes a current site and maintains 97 beds of existing Senior Care within Brooklyn Center along with a proposed future phase of 29- 38 units of Independent Senior housing. F. Rezoned parcel will fully bear the ordinance development restrictions under the approved PUD. G. The subject property is currently suited for the present zoning district. H. The approved Zoning/PUD will allow for the flexibility of multiple types of senior housing within one parcel creating a full continuum of care setting for Brooklyn Center senior residents. I. The redevelopment of Maranatha Care Center is in the interest of older adult population of Brooklyn Center. The new facility will provide an up-to-date living environment along with the latest technology, nursing and physical therapy and spiritual care. PHS looks forward to the opportunity of revitalizing an aging care center and serving the older adults of Brooklyn Center. The development of the new facility will provide 71 private rooms (an increase of 30 over the exiting 40 private rooms) and 13 double rooms. The Resident rooms will be enhanced with private bathrooms including showers and also include a kitchenette with a fridge and sink. In addition to the enhanced resident rooms, community spaces will be added including a Chapel/Community Room, Deli, Large Activity Room, and enlarged PT/OT areas. All of these enhancements will improve the ADA Compliancy, Nurse Call System and Technology of what currently exists within the Maranatha facility. Thank you for your consideration and partnership in this exciting project. Sincerely, 11 11 /l t Deb Zarbok/Project Developer Senior Housing Partners/Presbyterian Homes Cc: e Tim Benetti/Planning and Zoning Specialist Greg Woollums/POPE Architects