Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3B, Arden Plaza Concept PUD Discussion 3B Request for Council Review Prepared By:Meagan Beekman, City PlannerWorksessionDate: May 16, 2011 Arden Plaza Concept PUD Discussion Discussion Topic: Arden Plaza and CVS Pharmacy are requesting a concept review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for the approved Arden Plaza Master PUD. The applicants are proposing several changes to the original plan, and are requesting feedback from the Council as they move forward with the PUD Amendment process. Supporting Documents: 1.Memorandum datedMay 16, 2011,fromMeagan Beekman, City Planner. 2.Project Description. 3.Master Development Plan and Phase I Development Plan. 4.Proposed Site Plan. 5.Photographs of other CVS Pharmacies. MEMORANDUM DATE: May 16, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Patrick Klaers, City Administrator FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case #11-007 Arden Plaza, LLC 3585 Lexington Avenue North Southwest corner of County Road E and Lexington Avenue PUD Amendment Concept Review Requested Action Arden Plaza and CVS Pharmacy are requesting a concept review of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for the approved Arden Plaza Master PUD. The applicants are proposing several changes to the original plan, and are requesting feedback from the Council as they move forward with the PUD Amendment process. Concept PUD Review Process The concept review process is an opportunity for the City Council to provide comments, questions, concerns, and suggestions regarding the proposed development options. A concept review is considered advisory and is nonbinding to the City and applicant (Section 1320.14 Subd 4 of the Zoning Code). No formal action can be taken at a work session. A formal application will be subject to the full review process, including a public hearing with Planning Commission and City Council review. Project Background In June 2009, the Planning Commission and City Council approved a redevelopment application for the Arden Plaza retail center. The approved Master PUD included the demolition of the City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 16, 2011 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-008 - Arden Plaza Concept Review (Pending)\05-16-11 - Arden Plaza Concept Review - Memo.doc Page 1 of 4 existing office pod buildings, subdivision of the parcel into four lots, and the construction of four new buildings. As the project was approved, Building 1 (Walgreen’s) would have been 14,600 square feet. Building 3 would have been attached to Building 1 and was anticipated to be a retail and/or restaurant use of 4,700 square feet. Building 2 would have been a 6,000 square foot single restaurant user, and Building 4 would have been 18,000 square feet with a user that had yet to be determined. The entire project would have been completed in three phases. The approved Master Development Plan is included as Attachment B. As part of the original application, the developer also received approval for a Final PUD for Phase I of the development. The first phase was for Buildings 1 and 3. The applicant included a Phase I Development Plan (Attachment B) which details what aspects of the project would be constructed with Phase I. While the Final PUD for Phase I has been approved, future approvals for Phase II and III would require review before both the Planning Commission and City Council. Since the approval of the Master and Final PUD for Phase I the developer’s negotiations with Walgreen’s have stalled. The developer has since started negotiating with CVS Pharmacy, which has prepared a revised site plan that has received preliminary approval from their corporate offices. Project Proposal The applicants would like to move forward with a PUD Amendment to allow for certain revisions to the project layout and timeline. The changes to the project are summarized in detail in Attachment A. The applicants have also provided a proposed site layout that is included as Attachment C. In sum, the proposed Building 1 would now be a CVS Pharmacy, instead of a Walgreens, and would be reoriented to have the entrance to the southeast. Building 1 has been moved to the east, closer to Lexington Avenue, allowing a row of parking to be removed between the building and the road. Building 3 has been eliminated from the plan; however, Building 2 has been moved up in the construction schedule and is now included in Phase 1. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 16, 2011 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-008 - Arden Plaza Concept Review (Pending)\05-16-11 - Arden Plaza Concept Review - Memo.doc Page 2 of 4 Pedestrian access to the site and parking layout has been modified to accommodate the revised building orientation. The existing parking area would be redone during Phase 1 and landscaping over the entire site installed. The existing retail building itself is not proposed to be altered as part of this development plan; however, it does appear to be in need of updating. Additional discussion to identify a timeline for façade improvements to the existing building would be appropriate at this time. Discussion At this time, the Council is being asked to review and provide feedback on the proposed site plan revisions. As the applicant moves forward with a formal application for a PUD Amendment certain aspects of the project will be reviewed in more detail, such as landscaping and signage; however, those items have not yet been finalized for the purpose of this meeting. Staff has met with the developer and CVS Pharmacy several times over the last few months. The proposed site plan has been altered since our earliest meetings to be more in line with the City’s Guiding Plan for the B2 District. There are aspects of this plan that are improvements over the original Master Plan. The reorientation of the building to the south is a positive change that allows for better pedestrian movements into and through the site, and creates an improved relationship between the buildings and the parking on site. The drive-thru and loading areas have remained on the west side of the building and are screened by Building 2, which will be constructed as part of Phase 1, rather than at a later unknown date, as was the case with the original Master Plan. The movement of the building towards Lexington Avenue and the subsequent removal of one row of parking is also an improvement to the overall look of the project from the street. The height of the building has also been increased, which was a concern with the original plan because the grade of the site is below County Road E. The proposed plan also has some drawbacks that have been identified by Staff. The drive-aisle between Building 1 and County Road E has been widened, increasing the amount of pavement visible from County Road E. Additional landscaping may be necessary to properly soften this edge of the site and improve the appearance from County Road E. Similar to the PUD Amendment proposal the Council reviewed and tabled last summer, this proposal does not include the 4,700 square foot retail building, which was to be attached to the pharmacy. According to the developer, there is concern about their ability to fill these spaces if they are City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 16, 2011 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-008 - Arden Plaza Concept Review (Pending)\05-16-11 - Arden Plaza Concept Review - Memo.doc Page 3 of 4 built, and the pharmacy was not open to having this building attached. In addition, the reorientation of the building to the south makes finding a way to incorporate the additional retail square footage difficult. The building itself represents a fairly typical CVS franchise design. An EFIS arcade would wrap around three sides of the building, and the brick face on the building is shown as a veneer. There is a minimal amount of transparent glass, and the applicant would likely be seeking flexibility from this aspect of the Code. There are examples of CVS Pharmacies that contain considerably more brick and glass (Attachment D). Because the desire for more glass and façade interest is common in many communities, CVS has incorporated on other projects building graphics in the form of unique murals that take the place of transparent windows. The Council may want to consider if there is an interest in learning more about this design technique used by CVS. It is unclear from this application what aspects of the Code would be exceeded in exchange for other flexibilities being requested, such as lesser building materials and transparent glass. Overall, this proposal is substantially similar to the Master Plan, which was approved in 2009; however, aspects of the site layout have been revised in a manner that the developer believes will help the project move forward to construction. The Council is being asked to review the attached site plan, discuss the proposed changes to the layout, and provide feedback to the developer as they move forward with a formal application for a PUD Amendment. Deadline for Agency Actions There are no review deadlines associated with concept review applications. Attachments A.Project Description B.Master Development Plan and Phase I Development Plan C.Proposed Site Plan D.Photographs of other CVS Pharmacies City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for May 16, 2011 \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-008 - Arden Plaza Concept Review (Pending)\05-16-11 - Arden Plaza Concept Review - Memo.doc Page 4 of 4 A Attachment Project Description May 16, 2011, City Council Meeting Ю±¶»½¬Ü»­½®·°¬·±² ̸»®»ª·­»¼°´¿²º±®¬¸»°®±°±­»¼º·®­¬°¸¿­»®»¼»ª»´±°³»²¬±ºß®¼»²Ð´¿¦¿½±²­·­¬±º¬©±¾«·´¼·²¹­æ ßïíôððð­òºòÝÊÍи¿®³¿½§å ßêôððð­òºò®»¬¿·´ñ®»­¬¿«®¿²¬¾«·´¼·²¹ò ̸»°®±°±­»¼êôððð­òºò®»¬¿·´ñ®»­¬¿«®¿²¬¾«·´¼·²¹·­·¼»²¬·½¿´¬±¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹·²¬¸»°´¿²¿°°®±ª»¼¾§¬¸» Ý·¬§Ý±«²½·´·²Ó¿§±ºîððçò ̸»°®±°±­»¼ÝÊÍ°¸¿®³¿½§¾«·´¼·²¹¼±»­²±¬·²½´«¼»¬¸»ìôéðð­òºò¿¬¬¿½¸»¼®»¬¿·´¾«·´¼·²¹·²½´«¼»¼·² ¬¸»±®·¹·²¿´°¸¿®³¿½§°´¿²¿°°®±ª»¼·²îððçòر©»ª»®ô­»ª»®¿´¿¼¶«­¬³»²¬­¸¿ª»¾»»²³¿¼»·²¬¸» °®±°±­»¼ÝÊÍ°¸¿®³¿½§ô©¸·½¸·³°®±ª»¬¸»±ª»®¿´´¼»­·¹²ò̸»­»·²½´«¼»æ ̸»»²¬®§¼±±®·­²±©´±½¿¬»¼±²¬¸»ÍÛ½±®²»®±º¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹ò̸·­³»¿²­¬¸¿¬¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹ º¿9¿¼»º¿½·²¹­±«¬¸·­³±®»©»´½±³·²¹¿²¼¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»ò̸·­¸»´°­¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹®»´¿¬»³±®» »ºº»½¬·ª»´§¬±¬¸»®»­¬±º¬¸»®»¬¿·´½»²¬»®ò ̸»¾«·´¼·²¹¸¿­¾»»²­¸·º¬»¼¬±¬¸»»¿­¬¬±©¿®¼­Ô»¨·²¹¬±²ò̸·­­¸·º¬¸¿­¼·³·²·­¸»¼¬¸» ²«³¾»®±º­«®º¿½»°¿®µ·²¹­¬¿´´­»¿­¬±º¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹¾§±²»º«´´®±©ò̸»»¿­¬°¿®µ·²¹´±¬²±© ¸¿­¬¸®»»®±©­±º°¿®µ·²¹·²­¬»¿¼±ºº±«®ò ̸»¾«·´¼·²¹¸¿­ª»®§¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´º»¿¬«®»­±²¬¸»²±®¬¸ô»¿­¬¿²¼­±«¬¸ò̸»­»®ª·½» °±®¬·±²­±º¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹ô©¸·½¸¿®»¾§²»½»­­·¬§­±³»©¸¿¬´»­­¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»ô¿®»´±½¿¬»¼±²¬¸» ©»­¬­·¼»±º¬¸»°®±°±­»¼°¸¿®³¿½§ò̸»­»©·´´¾»°¿®¬·¿´´§­½®»»²»¼¾§¬¸»°®±°±­»¼êôððð­òºò ®»¬¿·´ñ®»­¬¿«®¿²¬¾«·´¼·²¹ò ̸»°®±°±­»¼ÝÊ;«·´¼·²¹¿¬í»¬©·´´¾»¸·¹¸»®¬¸¿²¬¸»°®»ª·±«­´§°®±°±­»¼É¿´¹®»»²­ ¾«·´¼·²¹ò̸·­©·´´»²­«®»¿³±®»¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´­¬¿¬»³»²¬±²¬¸·­·³°±®¬¿²¬½±®²»®´±¬ò Í·²½»¬¸»´¿²¼·­èï𺻻¬¾»´±©¹®¿¼»ô¬¸·­¬¿´´»®¾«·´¼·²¹©·´´·³°®±ª»¬¸»±ª»®¿´´¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´ ¼»­·¹²ò ÝÊÍ©·´´·²½´«¼»¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´º»¿¬«®»­±²¬¸»ÒÛ½±®²»®±º¬¸»¾«·´¼·²¹¿­©»´´¿­¬¸» ݱ«²¬§Î±¿¼Ûº®±²¬¿¹»ò̸»­»¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´º»¿¬«®»­©·´´¾»½±²­·­¬»²¬©·¬¸¬¸»®»¯«·®»³»²¬­ »­¬¿¾´·­¸»¼·²¬¸»ÆYŐ½±«²¬§®±¿¼Û°´¿²ò ̸»±®·¹·²¿´É¿´¹®»»²°´¿²·²½´«¼»¼¿ìôéðð­òºò¿¬¬¿½¸»¼®»¬¿·´¾«·´¼·²¹±²¬¸»­±«¬¸­·¼»±º¬¸» °®±°±­»¼°¸¿®³¿½§¾«·´¼·²¹ò̸·­¼»­·¹²©¿­½¸±­»²°®·²½·°¿´´§¾»½¿«­»¬¸»É¿´¹®»»²°´¿²¸¿¼ ¬¸»½«­¬±³»®»²¬®§±²¬¸»ÒÛ½±®²»®ò̸·­³»¿²¬¬¸¿¬¬¸»­±«¬¸­·¼»±º¬¸»°¸¿®³¿½§©¿­ ­»®ª·½»±®·»²¬»¼¿²¼ô¿­¿®»­«´¬ô«²¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»ò̸»¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ìôéðð­òºò®»¬¿·´©¿­¿¼¼»¼¬± ¿½½±³°´·­¸¬¸»¹±¿´±º¬¸®»»­·¼»¼¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®»òÍ·²½»¬¸»°®±°±­»¼ÝÊ͸¿­¬¸»·®½«­¬±³»® ¼±±®±²¬¸»ÍÛ½±®²»®ô¬¸»¿¼¼·¬·±²¿´ìôéðð­òºò®»¬¿·´¾«·´¼·²¹·­²±¬²»½»­­¿®§­·²½»¬¸»ÝÊÍ »´»ª¿¬·±²¬±¬¸»­±«¬¸©·´´¸¿ª»¿²¿¬¬®¿½¬·ª»»²¬®¿²½»¿²¼½±²­·¼»®¿¾´»°»¼»­¬®·¿²¿½¬·ª·¬§ò ß´´±º¬¸»¿³»²·¬·»­¿²¼­·¬»·³°®±ª»³»²¬­·²½´«¼»¼·²¬¸»±®·¹·²¿´°´¿²©·´´¿´­±¾»·²½´«¼»¼·² ¬¸»®»ª·­»¼ÝÊÍ°´¿²ò B Attachment Master Development Plan and Phase I Development Plan May 16, 2011, City Council Meeting C Attachment Proposed Site Plan May 16, 2011, City Council Meeting D Attachment Photographs of other CVS Pharmacies May 16, 2011, City Council Meeting