Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-019 Inf Sh 2000 Freeway Boulevard Application Filed on 10-02-03 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 12-01-03 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2003-019 Applicant: DLR Group Location: Northwest Corner of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment The applicant, Matthew Johnson on behalf of DLR Group, is seeking an amendment to the Planned Unit Development approval for this area to build an approximate 27,000 sq. ft. office/industrial building for Global Industries on a 2.3 acre parcel of land legally described as Tract B, RLS 1690, located at the northwest quadrant of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway. The property is zoned PUD/I-1 (Planned Unit Development/Industrial Park) and is bounded on the north by Parkway Circle, a private access roadway serving various developments to the north and west of this site; on the east by Shingle Creek Parkway with an industrial building on the opposite side of the street; on the south by Freeway Boulevard, with C-2 zoned property containing Chi Chi’s Restaurant on the opposite side of the street; and on the west by the AmericInn Hotel. This site is the same site for which the City Council approved a PUD rezoning and development plan for a Country Harvest Buffet Restaurant (which was never built) under Planning Commission Application No. 94014 on November 28, 1994. This site, with the Country Harvest Buffet development plan, was also acknowledged in a City initiated PUD/I-1 rezoning of a larger area including this property and surrounding property under Planning Commission Application No. 95009 which was approved by the City Council on July 10, 1995. On November 25, 1996, the City Council approved Planning Commission Application No. 96020 which was a request for a Planned Unit Development amendment for a four story AmericInn on the westerly portion of a 4.12 acre parcel which contained the site currently under consideration. This 4.12 acre site was later replatted to create two tracts, one for the AmericInn (Tract A, RLS 1690), the other a site for future development (Tract B, RLS 1690) containing a storm water management basin serving the immediate area. A condition of the approval of the PUD under Application No 96020 was that the area for future development was subject to an amendment to the Planned Unit Development and that the City would not allow this area to be developed as a fast food/convenience food restaurant or a gasoline service station. The applicant’s proposal for the 27,000 Global Industries office/industrial building is the amendment being sought to finalize development in this PUD. Global is a wholesale furniture distribution operation with a showroom and office component. As the Commission is aware, the PUD process involves a rezoning of land to the PUD designation followed by an Alpha numeric designation of the underlying zoning district. This underlying zoning district provides the regulations governing uses and structures within the Planned Unit Development. The rules and regulations governing that district (in this case I-1) would apply to the development proposal unless the City were to determine that another standard or use would be appropriate given mitigating circumstances that are offset by the plans submitted by the developer. One of the purposes of the PUD district is to give the City Council the needed flexibility in addressing development and redevelopment problems. Regulations governing uses and structures may be modified by conditions ultimately imposed by the City Council on the development plans. The PUD process involves a rezoning of land and, therefore, is subject to meeting the City’s Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines that are contained in Section 35-208 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Also, proposals must be consistent with Section 35-355 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which addresses Planned Unit Developments. Attached for the Commission’s review are copies of Section of 35-208 and 35-355 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The rezoning of the property to the Planned Unit Development designation was accomplished with the November 27, 1994 approval for the Country Harvest Buffet Restaurant and the July 10, 1995 Planned Unit Development approval that accommodated appropriate common parking areas for the properties located in this general area. The approval of the AmericInn development was an amendment to the previously approved PUD proposals. The applicant in this case is not seeking any modifications in terms of the rules governing uses and structures in the underlying I-1 zoning district. The proposed office/industrial building for a wholesale furniture operation is considered a permitted use in the I-1 zoning district. As will be shown in the subsequent review of the development plan, no requests for modifications for such things as building setbacks, parking requirements, landscape and other standard requirements for developments are being sought by the applicant in this case. Findings as to the appropriateness of such a development consistent with the I-1 underlying zoning designation have been made generally for the parcel of land under consideration. Approval of the development plan, however, should acknowledge compatibility with the Policy and Review Guidelines of Section 35-208 and the provisions of Section 35-355 of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has submitted written comments as to how they believe their proposal meets the guidelines established in Section 35-208. This letter is attached for the Commission’s review. The applicant indicates that he believes the proposed project can be considered a public benefit by bringing a positive exposure of an international company to the City of Brooklyn Center. He adds that the proposal is compatible with surrounding land use classifications and that the development is financially sound and will provide greater employment diversity to the community. The development plan will bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for this particular zoning district and comply with the applicable regulations. The staff believes that the proposed use of the property will be, as shown later in the report, consistent and compatible with the immediate area surrounding the property as well as those in the general vicinity. The proposal appears to be a good use of the property in the context of overall development in this area and will be a good long range use and can be considered to be in the best interests of the community. SITE AND BUILDING PLAN PROPOSAL The proposal, calls for an approximate 27,000 sq. ft. office/industrial building for Global Industries which is a wholesale furniture distribution use. The building will contain a showroom and office component but will be primarily a warehousing and storage facility. The building will be located in the approximate center of the 2.3 acre site immediately east of the AmericInn. The building has a curved footprint following the contour of Shingle Creek Parkway by maintaining at least a 50 ft. building setback from the street right of way line. ACCESS/PARKING Access to the property is gained via shared accesses along Freeway Boulevard and Parkway Circle. The shared accesses are with the AmericInn and were established at the time that development was approved. No direct access from Shingle Creek Parkway will be granted to this site. The access from Freeway Boulevard will require vehicles to enter the AmericInn site before accessing the Global Industry property. The access to the north is divided by the property line separating the two sites. Appropriate cross access and parking agreements were established with the development of the AmericInn, however, the developer should assure that these documents have been properly filed. Parking for the proposed building will be on the north and west sides. Parking calculations indicate 6,747 sq. ft. of office space and 20,091 sq. ft. of industrial space. At one parking space per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area of office, 34 parking spaces are required; at one space per 800 sq. ft. of gross floor area for the industrial/warehouse component, 25 parking spaces are required for a total of 59 spaces. A loading area will be provided at the northwest corner of the site where four loading docks are proposed. It is recommended that a masonry wall be extended along the north side of the loading area to screen this area from abutting uses to the north. DRAINAGE/GRADING/UTILITIES The applicant has provided grading, drainage and utility plans which have been reviewed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The Commission’s attention is directed to his October 6, 2003 memorandum regarding his review of the plans. He notes that based on the survey data submitted, it appears that the majority of an existing water main was constructed outside of an existing utility easement. The water main will be relocated within the easement as proposed by the development plans. He indicates also that storm water run off from this site, the AmericInn and the Minnesota State High School League offices currently flows to an existing storm water management basin located at the southeast corner of the site. This basin was originally planned during preparation of storm water management feasibility for this Shingle Creek Business Center in 1986. He makes comments as to the fact that the applicant will need to revise plans to show the existing 27 inch diameter storm sewer extending across the southern portion of the site; field locate the existing catch basin structure near the westerly property line, verify structural condition and replace casting as necessary; revise the drainage plan to show the invert, pipe size, pipe grade and material of the existing outlet pipe for the detention basin; install rip rap material at the inlet and outlet pipes of the detention basin; provide an earthwork calculation showing that the proposed grading within the drainage easement will not result in a net decrease in the storage capacity of the storm water detention facility; and provide storm water drainage calculations to the Engineering Department for review. He also notes that an erosion control plan shall be developed for the proposed site work; an NPDES construction site erosion control permit must be obtained from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; and the grading plan shall be revised to show side slopes along the detention facility at a maximum of 1 to 4 or flatter. LANDSCAPING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan in response to the landscape point system used to evaluate such plans. They have not provided particular species of landscaping but rather provided points based on shade trees, coniferous trees, and decorative trees. We assume there will be a variety of each of the types of trees provided. Their plan is to provide nine shade trees, primarily along the Shingle Creek green strip and Freeway Boulevard green strip. Thirteen coniferous trees will be interspersed amongst the shade trees in these same areas. Twenty decorative trees are proposed with 17 being located along the west side of the building and three at the northeast corner of the site. The amount of landscape points proposed for the property is 198, which is what is required for an office/industrial use with over 25 percent office in the industrial zone. The point system they have used is based on 2.25 acres, however, the topographical survey submitted with the plans indicates that the total acreage for this site is 2.3030 acres. This would require a slight increase in the number of points required to 201. There should not be a problem adjusting the landscape plan to rectify this inconsistency. BUILDING The building elevations show two options for the exterior building treatment. Both options show two types of masonry finish and metal wall panels. In Option One there would be a smooth masonry finish with a half inch recess finish. Option Two has a raked finish and a broomed finish. The various finishes provide different looks to the building, both of which appear to be attractive. Hopefully a decision can be made as to which exterior treatment the applicant proposes to provide. LIGHTING/TRASH The applicant has submitted a lighting plan indicating the locations for various exterior lighting. Seven light poles will be installed to service the area, five of which will be basically along the property line separating the AmericInn with this site. Two will be located in the north parking lot. Also, building mounted lights will be provided around the exterior of the building. The type of fixture for the parking lot lights is not shown but should be a cut off type, which will direct light downward on the site and should not create glare. The lighting plan indicates the foot candles at various locations which are consistent with the ordinance requirements. The site plan does not indicate a trash enclosure area, and it is my understanding that trash will be located within the loading dock area inside the building. PROCEDURE As pointed out previously, this proposal is an amendment to the Planned Unit Development proposal for this area. As such, it is required to follow the procedures contained in Section 35-355 regarding Planned Unit Developments. This requires a public hearing which has been scheduled. Notices have been sent and a notice has been published in the Brooklyn Center Sun/Post. Normally with rezonings or Planned Unit Developments, the affected Neighborhood Advisory Group is contacted to seek review and comment. The Planning Commission itself serves as the Advisory Group for development proposals within the industrial park area. Therefore, no notices beyond that required for the public hearing have been sent. All in all, we believe the plans to be in order and, therefore, would recommend approval of the amendment for the development of the Global Industries office/industrial building. Approval of this application should acknowledge findings, considerations and conditions that are comparable to those made in previous City Council resolutions. A draft Planning Commission resolution is offered for the Commission’s consideration. This resolution outlines the Commission’s consideration of this matter and also recommended considerations and conditions for approval. 10-30-03 Page 5