HomeMy Public PortalAbout12-2006 Full PacketCITY OF MEDINA
2052 COUNTY ROAD 24
MEDINA, MN 55340
AGENDA
MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY December 12, 2006
7:00 P.M.
MEDINA CITY HALL
1. Call to Order
2. Public Comments
3. Update from City Council proceedings
4. City Planner's Report
5. Approval of October 10, 2006 Planning Commission minutes
6. Rising Sun Memorial Park — Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review for
creation of a cemetery in the Rural Residential (RR) district — 3365 Highway
55 (PID 05-118-23-11-0003). (Continued Public Hearing)
7. Ryan Companies — PUD Amendment for Medina Clydesdale Marketplace, Lot
2, Block 2, for the construction of a multi -tenant retail building. (Public
Hearing Closed)
8. Ebert Construction, Harry Schleeter — Conditional Use Permit for an
accessory structure over 3000 sq. ft. in the Rural Residential (RR) zoning
district — 1585 Medina Road (PID 23-118-23-22-0004). (Public Hearing)
9. RJ Ryan Company, Peter Hasselquist — Conditional Use Permit for an
accessory structure over 3000 sq. ft. in the Rural Residential (RR) zoning
district — 2705 Willow Drive (PID 16-118-23-41-0004). (Public Hearing)
10. Adjourn
Posted in City Hall December 7, 2006
Agenda Item No.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PLANNING REPORT
Medina Planning Commission
Jennifer Haskamp, Landform through Rose Lorsung, City Planner
December 6, 2006 for the December 12, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting
Ryan Companies US Inc. Request for approval of a PUD Amendment for
Medina Clydesdale Marketplace for a multi -tenant retail building Landform
Project # MED06017
REVIEW DEADLINE: January 30, 2007
1. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD amendment to allow the construction of a multi -
tenant building with a drive -through. The Applicant made their first submittal to the Planning
Commission on September 13, 2006 at which time it was recommended that they revise their
plan. This submission attempts to respond to some of their recommendations and concerns. In
the Applicant's first submission, they had requested a re -plat of the property; however, given the
new concept, the Applicant has retracted this request as the proposed plan adheres to the
approved final plat described in Resolution Number 2005-54. The proposed plan includes 6,000
square feet of retail and will require a PUD Amendment due to the proposed drive -through
associated with the coffee shop. The original agreement for Medina Clydesdale Marketplace
project allowed for up to a 6,300-square foot retail building and no drive -through uses except for
the bank site. The drive -through has resulted in the need for a PUD amendment which, requires
a review process similar to that of a PUD concept plan. The proposed development plans and
elevations also show a bagel shop, which according to the original PUD agreement would also
require an amendment because such a use would not have table service as required per the
original agreement. The proposed businesses and tenants are not specifically identified in the
proposed plan; however, this should be noted to the Applicant for future planning on the project
site.
2. CONTEXT:
A. Level of City Discretion in Decision -Making
The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a Planned Unit
Development amendment. A PUD amendment must be similar with the objectives of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the approved PUD final plan. The City may impose reasonable
requirements upon a PUD amendment not otherwise required if the City deems it necessary to
promote the general health, safety and welfare of the community and surrounding area.
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 2 November 30, 2006
B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
The proposed development is located in the Medina Marketplace development which was
rezoned in 2005 to PUD-UC (Planned Unit Development Urban Commercial). This designation
allows commercial development and promotes a comprehensive development approach to the
entire Clydesdale Marketplace area to ensure an integrated and cohesive development.
The property to the north of Clydesdale Marketplace is zoned UR (Urban Residential) and
developed as single-family homes (Cherry Hill Farms). There are a number of properties which
abut the site to the east. A couple of the properties to the east are zoned UC (Urban Commercial)
and consist of auto related developments such as a gas station and oil change businesses. The
Ace Phase II multi -tenant retail development abuts the property to the easy and also has shared
access with the Clydesdale Marketplace development. To the east, across County Road 101, the
property is zoned MR (Multi -Family Residential) and is developed as a high -density senior
living facility (Gramercy). The property to the west of Clydesdale Marketplace is zoned UC
(Urban Commercial) and is developed as a dance hall (Medina Ballroom). The property to the
southwest, across Highway 55, is zoned UC (Urban Commercial) and the property to the
southeast is zoned UP (Uptown Hamel). Both are developed with a mix of retail type uses.
C. Natural Characteristics of the Site
The subject property is vacant and has been cleared for development.
3. BACKGROUND:
Ryan Companies received final plat and PUD final plan approval on September 20, 2005 for the
Medina Clydesdale Marketplace development. Target is part of this development and opened in
the fall of 2006. Per the original PUD and Plat agreement, the Medina Retail Clydesdale
Marketplace Lot 2, Block 2 was originally planned for a single tenant and user. As proposed, the
property will include a multi -tenant structure developed at approximately the same scale as the
original plan and will not be required to re -plat. The Applicant is required to obtain a PUD
amendment due to the proposed drive -through associated with a proposed coffee shop.
4. ANALYSIS: Consistency with Ordinance Standards
PUD Amendment
The PUD Amendment is reviewed under the same ordinance as a PUD concept plan. The
purpose for the PUD Amendment is due to the Applicant's desire to add a drive -through for the
coffee shop. Per Resolution Number 2005-55 condition 5, which approved the PUD final plan
for Medina Clydesdale Marketplace, the only drive -through allowed was for the bank site.
Because the proposed development is part of a larger concept for the Clydesdale Marketplace, it
is important to review the proposed amendments and associated users for consistency with the
existing development and the overall vision for the area. Staff notes that while the Applicant
has proposed the drive -through for the coffee shop, once the building is constructed, staff will
not be able to control the use of the space. Meaning, if the coffee shop closes, a fast food
restaurant could take over the space. It is staff s opinion that a fast food user would not be
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 3 November 30, 2006
desirable because it would not contribute to the overall vision for the development which
includes the desire to create a walkable and pedestrian friendly environment. The goal for the
overall Clydesdale Marketplace is to attract a variety of users which ultimately would integrate
destination locations (restaurants and coffee shops) and convenience retail (Target, etc.) so that
residents have community gathering spaces as well and retail and shopping opportunities.
In the Applicant's first submittal, the plan included a drive lane that provided access to the rear
of the building. At the time of first submittal it was recommended to the Applicant to increase
the relationship of the building with the core of the development and Clydesdale Trail to create a
more pedestrian friendly and walkable environment. In response to this request, the Applicant
removed the service road and has provided an outdoor patio for the coffee shop. Such changes
have created some issues with respect to the internal organization of the structure, the external
accessibility to mechanical and garbage facilities, and location of such uses to the outdoor
gathering spaces. Such issues will be discussed further in subsequent sections of this review.
Staff has reviewed the plans and also found an elevation which shows a bagel shop as part of the
multi -tenant building. Staff notes that such uses are not permitted as part of the original PUD
agreement and, depending on the desires of the Planning Commission and City council, could
require a PUD plan amendment if the Applicant pursues such users as a part of the development.
The original PUD agreement states that restaurants with table service are permitted, however,
does not allow such users without table service. As such, a bagel shop, fast food, sandwich shop
without table services, etc., would not be permitted without an amendment to the original PUD.
Staff has reviewed the plans and has the following comments:
Lighting
1. The outdoor lighting ordinance states a maximum illumination level of 1.5 foot candles at the
property line. The Site Lighting Plan shows three areas in excess of 1.5 foot candles, all of
which occur along the west access road to the property. The plan should be revised along
this access road to be compliant with the regulations as stated in the ordinance. These
requirements are based on the Zoning Classification E4 which allows for high ambient
brightness in a development. The illumination post -curfew should adhere to a maximum of
0.6 foot candles at the property line.
2. The Applicant was asked during the last review to specify if the signage on the structure
would be lit. This information was not provided in this submission, and should be provided
to staff for analysis and comment. If the signs are to be lit, they will need to meet the
requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance.
3. The lighting fixture schedule does not specify the color of the poles. The color should be
similar to others in the development, and a color, detail of the fixture should be provided.
4. The elevations show light fixtures attached to the facades of the structure. The Applicant
should provide a detail of the proposed fixture for comment. The fixtures should be
consistent with the architectural style of the proposed building.
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 4 November 30, 2006
Landscaping
1. The Applicant has proposed a four -foot fence along the trail on the northeast side of the site,
and a fence along the rear fa9ade of portions of the structure. A colored rendering and an
architectural detail of each fence must be submitted as this is adjacent to the heart of the
development and such an architectural element may create a literal and perceived barrier
between the structure and the rest of the development. Staff is concerned that such an
element may be contrary to the vision for the development.
Parking
The parking meets the requirements of the overall PUD. As demonstrated on the submitted Site
Plan, the drive -through aisle will accommodate stacking fo 5 cars. This is a reasonable amount
of area allocated to stacking and is consistent with the recommendations made at the September
13th meeting. Staff has some concerns regarding the proposed location of the drive -through
including proximity to the intersection and the visibility of the drive -through from Clydesdale
Trail. The intent of the original PUD agreement was to encourage users and building
orientations that would promote a walkable development at the core. The location of the drive -
through is extremely visible from the core of the development which is contrary to the goals of
the development. In addition, the proposed site plan shows the drive -through adjacent to the
outdoor seating area. This appears to be a conflict of uses, as outdoor patrons are not likely to
enjoy the noise or exhaust that might result from waiting cars. The drive -through location should
be redesigned to respond to these issues.
Signage
1. Based on the elevations provided, the average building height is 22', this number is based on
the definition provided in the ordinance. As stated in the previous review, the original PUD
agreement limited the stand alone retail buildings to a maximum of three signs. Since the
PUD agreement, the Applicant has changed the use of the proposed structure to include
multiple tenants in lieu of a single user. Based on this change, it would be reasonable for the
Planning Commission to utilize the sign standards outline in the UC Zoning district to
accommodate additional tenants. The UC zoning district allows 8% of the area of the wall
on which the sign is located to be covered. Based on the elevations provided, on the primary
facades (front and back) the proposed signage would comprise approximately 6% of the
surface area, and on the sides approximately 2.5% of the surface area would be allocated to
signage. If the Planning Commission utilizes the standards of the UC district, the proposed
signage would meet those requirements. However, the Planning Commission may
recommend or suggest an alteration to the UC district standards due to the change in use of
the building.
2. As stated earlier, the Applicant must identify if the signs are to be lit. Based on the elevations
it is assumed that the signs will be lit. The lit color and font should be consistent for each
tenant and if the signs are lit they must meet the lighting ordinance requirements.
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 5 November 30, 2006
3. If the Applicant is proposing a menu board at the drive -through, a detail of the sign including
the lighting should be provided.
Architectural and Design Standards
1. There is no rooftop equipment identified on the plans. It assumed that all mechanicals will
be located within the structure, if this is not true, the Applicant should provide a plan which
identifies the location of all rooftop equipment. In addition, it should be noted that screening
for such equipment is limited to a maximum of 8 feet in height.
2. The building materials must be provided in a percentage calculation. A minimum of 30% of
the building must contain brick, natural stone, granite or stucco. The elevations appear to
meet this requirement, but the percentages will confirm whether the requirement has been
met.
3. The revised elevations are an improvement from the original submission; however, staff still
has an issue with the elevation which faces Clydesdale Trail. Although the primary facade is
proposed to face Highway 55, there remains the issue of promoting a walkable environment
at the core of the Clydesdale Marketplace development. Staff understands the issues and
complexity of having 2 primary entrances, particularly for some users who may require
storage and or `behind closed doors' areas. However, it would be reasonable for some of the
users to have to access doors on both facades, for example, a salon or coffee shop. Staff feels
that a better job to promote a front facade on Clydesdale is necessary for this building to have
the proper orientation within the development. Such improvements could include entrances
on both facades, increased attention to architectural detail including more interesting doors,
increased fenestration (regardless if literal or suggestive) and increased pedestrian scale
elements on the Clydesdale Trail side. The Applicant shall revise the elevations, specifically
the Clydesdale elevation to respond to these recommendations.
4. Staff is also concerned about the location of the trash and mechanical rooms located on the
Clydesdale Trail side of the building. The trash and mechanical rooms are shown as hard -
walled on the Concept Design with access only to the outside. This presents an issue for both
accessibility of trash collectors and tenants of the structure. First and foremost, there is not
an access drive for a trash collector and; therefore, an explanation of how the trash would be
collected is necessary. In the opinion of staff, the location of the trash is not reasonable for
trash collection as the only potential pick-up space would be in the drive -through lane which
would be unsafe and a potential nuisance for those patrons utilizing the outdoor patio.
In addition, the proximity of the trash to the outdoor patio area is incompatible and should be
revised. Although the trash is in an enclosed hard -walled area according to the plan, it would
still be likely that the area would constantly be accessed and would also require tenants to
cross the patio area to access the trash room. This area should be revised and the trash and
mechanical access reconsidered. The Applicant should provide a description as to how these
areas would be used by all of the tenants in the structure and where trash collection would
occur.
5. Staff recommends that the drive -through either be eliminated or relocated so as not to be
visible from the primary intersection of the Clydesdale Marketplace development. In the
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 6 November 30, 2006
opinion of staff, the drive -through does not meet the original intent of the PUD agreement,
specifically the proposed drive -through does not support the idea of a walkable development.
If the Planning Commission is inclined to recommend approval of the drive -through, staff
recommends the drive -through be located on the east side or south (rear) side of the building
to be less obtrusive to the development. If the Planning Commission is satisfied with the
location of the drive -through, at a minimum heavy landscaping and interesting signage
should be encouraged to promote a more architecturally interesting view from the
intersection. Further, the development guidelines, created by the Applicant for the overall
PUD, support a walkable and pedestrian friendly environment.
5. CONCLUSION:
The Applicant has proposed a drive -through lane for a coffee shop located on the west side of the
building. While the Applicant has met some of the PUD concept plan criteria for the
amendment, the location of the drive -through, site and architectural design does not meet the
intent of the PUD. The space program is not functional, specifically the trash room is
inaccessible to trash collectors due to the elimination of an access road. Due to the flexibility of
the PUD, staff has identified areas of interest and concern throughout this report and has
provided conditions of approval. The City is not under obligation to approve the PUD
amendment.
6. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the PUD amendment for the drive -through based upon the site
design and interior space program. The site layout with the rear of the building on Clydesdale
and the drive -through on the west elevation goes against the intent of the entire walkable,
pedestrian -friendly concept of the development. The space program is also unreasonable due to
the inaccessibility of the trash for collection. Relocation of this space will also require added
thought and consideration to the tenants within the structure.
If the PUD amendment is denied, the Applicant will have to redesign the site to meet the original
PUD approvals and receive a site plan approval. Or, the Planning Commission may approve the
PUD amendment.
If the Planning Commission were to approve the PUD amendment, staff recommends that the
approval be subject to the following conditions:
Lighting:
1. The parking lot lights must meet the City's lighting ordinance, including curfew limitations.
2. The lighting plan shall be revised so that any light or combinations of lights do not exceed
the pre -curfew maximum illumination level of 1.5 foot candles and the post -curfew
maximum of 0.6 foot candle.
3. The Applicant shall specify if the proposed signage is to be lit. The signage must follow the
lighting ordinance.
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 7 November 30, 2006
4. The lighting fixture schedule does not specify the color of the poles. The color should be
similar to others in the development and shall be identified on the plan.
5. The Applicant shall provide details on any proposed building mounted lights and canopy
lights.
Landscaping:
6. A colored rendering and architectural detail of each fence must be submitted for review and
approval by City staff.
Architectural and Design Standards:
7. The elevations must be revised to identify the percentage of building materials used.
8. The building shall be comprised only of the materials permitted by the UC zoning ordinance.
9. Rooftop equipment, if applicable, shall be shown on the plans and shall be screened.
Screening is limited to a maximum of 8 feet in height.
10. The Applicant shall revise the site plan to provide a layout that meets the intent of the PUD
by providing at least two tenant spaces with an entrance on Clydesdale Trail. In addition, the
fa9ade facing Clydesdale Trail shall include fenestration on all tenant spaces and doors
should be designed to be architecturally significant so as to suggest that the fa9ade on
Clydesdale is the front of building, even if the true front is on the Highway 55 side.
11. The site plan should be revised so that the drive -through is not visibly prominent at the
intersection. This intersection is at the heart of the development, and the visibility of the
drive -through is contrary to the vision for the development which includes a walkable and
pedestrian friendly environment. The drive -through should be either removed or moved to
the south or east side of the building.
Signage:
12. All signs shall be in compliance with the sign matrix approved by staff dated June 20, 2005.
13. There shall be a maximum of _ signs allowed on the building.
14. There shall be a maximum of square feet of sign area allowed on the building.
15. The Applicant shall provide details for the menu board sign and directional signage for the
drive -through.
Other:
16. No construction work of any kind may take place within the Development except Monday
through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
17. The Applicant shall comply with the engineer memo dated November 21, 2006.
18. The Applicant shall comply with the building inspector/fire marshal memo dated August 30,
2006.
Ryan Companies US Inc. Re: Medina Clydesdale Marketplace 3rd Addition
Page 8 November 30, 2006
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Applicant's Narrative dated November 13, 2006
3. Site Graphics dated November 13, 2006
4. Engineer's Memo, dated November 21, 2006
;t WV:RYANLO (P.aN❑i.C6a
November 13, 2006
Ms. Rose Lorsung
Medina City Planner
2025 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
Re: 1s` Addition Retail Outlot
Clydesdale Marketplace
Lot 2, Block 2
Rose,
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 South Tenth Street, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55403-2012
612-492-4000 tel
612-492-3000 fine
Submitted for PUD Amendment of the retail outlot building in the V Addition of Clydesdale Marketplace
(previously called the 3td addition ). These plans have been modified based on staff & planning commissions
comments. The following is changes to that plan set:
• A one way entrance to the site from the northwest entry by the Ornamental Concrete four — way
stop has been added. This will allow for a five car stacking ratio while still providing lccess to both
the future proposed restaurant to the west and the proposed retail building.
• A pedestrian plaza space has been created on the north side of the building. This is meant to
continue to emphasize a strong pedestrian presence to the development. An ornamental fence and
landscaping will be tied in to this area.
a Glass has been wrapped around the comers of the north side of the building while breaking up the
massing with a mix of building material and building height.
O A design limitation has been maintaining proper stacking distance for pick up window on the west
side of the building. This prevented us from rotating the building more towards the street.
Ryan Companies is withdrawing the replat application that was originally submitted called 3rd
Addition Clydesdale Marketplace Lot 1, Block 1 & 2. The new design works within the original plated
boundaries of the site established within the Pt Addition Clydesdale Marketplace Plat.
Should you have any questions please call me at 612-492-4435.
Sincerely,
Peter W. McEnery; RLA, ASLA
Site Development Team Leader
Senior Landscape Architect
AZ LICENSE R0093146. CA LICENSE Spud , nR LCENSE CCR155932
CLYDESDALE MARKETPLACE - LOT 2, BLOCK 2
MEDINA, MINNESOTA 55340
PUD AMMENDMENT
PROJECT CONTACTS
OWNER
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 SOUTH TENTH STREET SUITE 300
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403
MARK KAMPMEYER
612.492-4297
612-492-3297 (FAX)
main korromeyer(tryancamrarres tam
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 SOUTH TENTH STREET SUITE 300
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403
PETER MC ENERY
612.4924468
612.492.348E (FAX)
Wet mceneryQryuamoaneccom
ARCHITECT
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 SOUTH TENTH STREET SUITE 300
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403
NATE ENGER
612.492.4245
612-492-3245 (FAX)
mak en4ereryencen ores*am
CIVIL ENGINEER
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 SOUTH TENTH STREET SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS,
MN 55403
CHRIS BRINK
612.492.4244
612-492.3244 (FAX)
sins eAnkety ncollwares tam
- `6s cc^d':S`i``'..."'.S .. riifr�'i[.. °r•. —... r...._ ., .
CYAN'
BUILDING LASTING RELATIONSHIPS
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 South Tenth Street, Suite 100
Minneapolis, MN 55403.2012
612492.4000 tel
612492-3000 fax
W W W.RYANCOMPANIEiS.COM
PROJECT ME
MEDINA RETAIL
CLYDESDALE
MARKETPLACE
LOT 2 BLOCK 2
LOCATION
MEDINA
MINNESOTA
SHEET TITLE
SITE PLAN
REVISIONS
/ hereby certify- that 11113 plan, Sloccif cation,
or report Was prepared by me or under my
direct Super/Minn and that 1 am a duly
'Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
WAYNE T. SICORA
REGISTRATION NO- DATE.
42676 11113 ! 2006
elms rteaN COaWaUESUS. NC
JOB NUMBER HISTORY
SHEET NUMBER
CO
DRAWN BY CHECKED BY
JOB NUMBER DATE
1541-ACE2 11 1131 2006
J
"
\ \ \ ��\ \ \ >