Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
7A, Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Proposal
EN HILLS Request for Council Action 7 A Prepared By: Meagan Beekman, City Planner Council Meeting Date: November 29, 2010 Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Proposal Budgeted Amount: NA Actual Amount: NA Funding Source: NA Recommendation: 1. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -064 for the Rezoning of the Presbyterian Homes Addition of Arden Hills from R -2 to R -4. 2. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -065 for the Presbyterian Homes Addition of Arden Hills Preliminary and Final Plat. 3. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -066 for Amendments to existing Conditional Use Permits at 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard. 4. Motion to approve Resolution 2010- 067for the Presbyterian Homes Master and Final Planned Unit Development. 5. Motion to approve the Development Agreement between the City of Arden Hills and Presbyterian Homes outlining the conditions of approval for Planning Case 10 -012. Supporting Documents: 1. November 29, 2010, Report to the City Council 2. October 6, 2010, and November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes 3. Letter from the City of Roseville 4. Public Comment Received Since the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Meeting 5. Resolutions 2010 -064, 2010 -065, 2010 -066, and 2010 -067 for a Preliminary and Final Plat, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Master and Final Planned Unit Development 6. Development Agreement 7. Partial Site Plan at Sandeen Road 8. Revised Development Plan Narrative dated November 23, 2010, and Traffic Per Entry Analysis 9. Revised Site Rendering and Zoning District Plan dated November 24, 2010 10. November 3, 2010, Report to the Planning Commission DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Background November 29, 2010 Meagan Beekman, City Planner City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 EN HILLS MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and City Council Patrick Klaers, City Administrator Planning Case #10 -012 Applicant: Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills Property Location: 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard Request: Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment, and Master and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) Presbyterian Homes has been operating independent and assisted senior housing at this location since 1954. They operate under two Conditional Use Permits (CUP), previously called Special Use Permits (SUP), which were approved and amended over the course of the past several decades. The City does not have a record of the earliest approvals; however, the following proposals are known to have been reviewed by the City: 70 -052 73 -010 75 -017 78 -031 82 -025 89 -001 93 -022 Conditional Use Permit 72 unit addition to the existing Lakeview Residence building Conditional Use Permit Addition of a sound 14 Amendment and Variance foot barrier fence Conditional Use Permit Amendment McKnight Care Center and Parking Lot Expansion Conditional Use Permit Sutton Place Apartments Conditional Use Permit Amendment Cluster Housing Development on Sutton Place Property Sign Variance Front Yard Sign Encroachment Conditional Use Permit Amendment Site Plan Review Addition and reconfiguration of Lakeview Residence Building 4/14/71 Approved 4/9/1973 Approved Date Unknown Approved 11/27/1978 Approved 1/11/1983 Tabled 2/13/1989 Approved 11/30/1993 Approved C: IDOCIME—I \MEAGAN 4.BEEILOCALS 11 Temp \ELF20101124_ _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 1 of 10 04 -015 Rezoning, Comp Plan Amendment, and Preliminary Plat Redevelopment of Triangle Properties 7/7/2004 PC Recommended Denial 7/16/2004 Withdrawn No Council Action Taken 05 -017 Conditional Use Permit Amendment Addition to McKnight Care Center 7/11/2005 Approved Presently Presbyterian Homes has 396 units between the Lakeview Residence, the McKnight Care Center, and the Sutton Place apartments. The McKnight Care Center contains 208 units and Sutton Place has 19 independent senior units. The Lakeview Residence has 169 units; 136 of which are assisted living and 33 exclusively for memory care. The applicant is requesting approval of a major redevelopment of their care facility. Presbyterian Homes is proposing to demolish the Lakeview Residence and Sutton Place Apartment buildings located at 3120 and 3 220 Lake Johanna Boulevard, and construct a three to four -story senior housing building and two brownstone style two -story apartment buildings in their place. The existing McKnight Care Center would remain in its current location and would not be altered as part of this application. Included in the proposal, the applicant is requesting a CUP amendment that would consolidate the existing approvals for the properties under a single PUD, a preliminary and final plat that would consolidate the two parcels into one, and rezoning from R -2 to R -4 to bring the mix of uses currently on site into compliance with the Zoning Code. Presbyterian Homes has submitted a redevelopment application, project narrative, development plan documents, and trip generation analysis describing their request which were presented to the Planning Commission on November 3, 2010 (Attachment I). Additionally, they have submitted a revised project narrative and detailed traffic count analysis (Attachment G), and revised Site Rendering and Zoning District Plan (Attachment H). Project Proposal and Process 1. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Process: The PUD process is an overlay zoning technique, whereby the basic underlying zoning district establishes the allowable uses and general standards for development and the approved PUD plan takes precedence over the underlying zoning regulations. It is a tool that provides additional flexibility for developments that an underlying zoning district would not otherwise allow. For example, a PUD may alter the setbacks, lot coverage, density, parking requirements, building height, landscaping requirements, etc. The flexibility from the minimum requirements in the underlying district may reduce a specific requirement, or it may increase it. Additionally, the PUD process allows the City to negotiate certain aspects of the development to help achieve City goals. The intent is to provide flexibility to a project in exchange for improvements or amenities that a City could not otherwise require. With any development, the conditions imposed on the project must have a rational basis related to the impacts of the development. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: I DOCUME -1 I MEAGAN 1. BEET LOCALS 11 Temp I ELF20101124 _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 2 of 10 The PUD process is an alternative to the variance process and requires distinct findings separate from the undue hardship criteria in State Statutes. The process is meant to create a better development than the strict adherence to the standard regulations might otherwise allow. The PUD process is a common planning tool used by many cities. It cannot be used to permit uses that would not otherwise be permitted in the underlying zone. 2. Project Description Redevelopment Request The project area encompasses two parcels (3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard) that would be consolidated into a single 22.5 acre parcel. All of the buildings in the project area would be demolished with the exception of the McKnight Care Center, which would remain as is. A CUP amendment is also required to consolidate all past approvals within a single PUD approval. Previously the proposal included a redevelopment of the three parcels of land located on the triangle on the west side of Lake Johanna Boulevard. Presbyterian Homes has since removed these parcels from their redevelopment area. The proposal includes the construction of an 83,184 square foot three to four -story primary facility which would contain 166 units. The units would be comprised of 54 independent senior apartments, 72 assisted living units, 36 memory care units, and four hospice units. The proposal also includes two brownstone -style two -story apartments that would house a total of 36 independent senior units. The total square footage of both brownstones would be 31,706. The McKnight Care Center would continue to have 208 units. The number of units on the site would increase from 396 to 410. The proposal also includes significant storm water collection and treatment ponding, a trail system, raised gardens and planting beds for residents of the facility, and a comprehensive long term landscape management plan. Presbyterian Homes has also proposed to keep their trails and gardens open to the general public. Rezoning Request Presbyterian Homes initially approached the City with a proposal for only a re- platting of the property and a Master and Final PUD. Upon review by Staff it was determined that the Presbyterian Homes property should be rezoned to better reflect the mix of uses that exist on the site. The properties are currently zoned R -2. Institutional housing, which is how assisted living and nursing home facilities are defined in the Zoning Code, is a conditionally permitted use in the R -2 District. This means that a CUP is required in order to operate them. At the time the Sutton Place Apartments CUP was approved it was determined, by the City, that the independent senior units that would be located there were defined as institutional housing units just like the other housing units operated by Presbyterian Homes. Since that time, the City Attorney and Staff have reviewed the mix of uses on the site as part of this City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: IDOCUMEE1IMEAGAN—I.BEEILOCALS 11 Temp \ELF20101124_ _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 3 of 10 application, and have determined that independent senior units do not fit the definition of institutional housing, but rather, better fit the definition of multiple- family dwellings. Multiple- family dwellings are not permitted uses in the R -2 District. Regardless of the outcome of the Master and Final PUD application, Staff believes that the rezoning is appropriate given the existing conditions on the site, and the fact that this property diverged from the underlying R -2 zoning regulations decades ago. Traffic Study An increase in 14 residential units does not trigger a traffic study; however the City did ask Presbyterian Homes to provide existing and anticipated traffic counts for the site. The information submitted was based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers traffic count manual, and Presbyterian Homes' experience of other senior housing facilities with a similar number and mix of units. This information was included in the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission packet and can be found in Attachment I of this report. The traffic count figures represent overall trips to and from the site and indicate that the redevelopment will result in an increase in 52 daily trips. Both Roseville and Arden Hills engineers have reviewed this information, as well as the Ramsey County traffic engineer. The opinion of the engineers is that the numbers presented by Presbyterian Homes are consistent with their assumptions about the traffic impacts of the development and that an increase of 52 daily trips will not create a significant impact on the existing transportation system. Additionally, the Roseville City Council has requested that the Arden Hills City Council ask Presbyterian Homes to provide more details trip data indicating the number of trips anticipated per entrance. The letter from the City of Roseville is included as Attachment B. In anticipation of this request, Presbyterian Homes has provided this information (Attachment G) along with a letter summarizing the result. The analysis found that the redevelopment would likely generate 292 trips per day at the County Road D entrance (30 percent), 643 trips at the Lake Johanna Boulevard Entrance (62 percent), and 95 trips at the Sandeen Road entrance (8 percent). County Road D Entrance The proposed redevelopment calls for the reduction of one curb cut on Lake Johanna Boulevard and the relocation of the County Road D curb cut to align with Wheeler Avenue. These two driveway access locations will be the only means of ingress and egress for the two brownstone buildings and the entrance of the primary facility. A third drive access off of Sandeen Road will primarily serve the delivery and service needs of the facility. At the November 3 Planning Commission meeting, residents of Roseville from Wheeler Avenue and Shorewood Lane expressed concerns over the alignment of the access drive with Wheeler. Letters from the City of Roseville (Attachment B), as well as the public received since the November 3 meeting (Attachment C), detail the nature of their concern. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C.• IDOCUMEEI IMEAGANNI.BEEILOCALS 11 Temp \ELF20101124_ _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 4 of 10 Staff has been working with Presbyterian Homes to find solutions that would mitigate Roseville's concerns and minimize traffic impacts on Wheeler Avenue from the redevelopment. Presbyterian Homes has offered two site revisions that they hope will achieve these goals. As indicated above the detailed traffic analysis found that 292 trips both in and out of the site would likely be generated at the County Road D entrance. The first revision Presbyterian Homes has proposed is a right out only from their site at this entrance that would eliminate half of all trips (exiting trips) from entering Wheeler Avenue. Of the 146 entering trips drivers would be entering from either County Road D or Wheeler Avenue. If half of all vehicles entering the site from this location use Wheeler Avenue, that would equate to 73 daily trips, or 6 trips per hour over a 12 hour period. It is unknown how many trips per day are currently generated on Wheeler from the Presbyterian Homes property; however, it should also be noted that any trips currently generated from the use of the soccer field will be eliminated after the project is completed. The second revision Presbyterian Homes has made changes the interior of their parking layout to encourage vehicles within the site to exit using the main entrance /exit at Lake Johanna Boulevard. Presbyterian Homes has also proposed to meet with residents on County Road D individually at the time landscaping is installed to work with them on the location and species of planting materials. This is the same arrangement Presbyterian Homes made with adjacent residents on Shorewood Drive. Sandeen Road Entrance Several residents from Sandeen Road expressed concern at the public hearing regarding traffic exiting the Presbyterian Homes site onto Sandeen Road, turning right, and driving through their street. A reduction in available parking in this area will help this issue; however, the Planning Commission also expressed a desire to physically eliminate right turns leaving the Presbyterian Homes site from this driveway. One resident suggested closing Sandeen Road at the dog -leg; however, this creates turn around issues for larger vehicles at what would become two new dead ends. Staff has been working with Presbyterian Homes, as well as the fire department and the City's recycling and refuse haulers, to find a workable solution. Presbyterian Homes has offered to construct a bump out to the east of their driveway entrance that would narrow Sandeen Road to one driving lane just in that area. Vehicles would still be able to enter Sandeen Road at Beckman going south. Vehicles would be able to leave Sandeen Road going west or north, but would not be able to turn right out of the Presbyterian Homes facility or continue past the Presbyterian Homes facility going east. Attachment F includes a close up of that portion of the site plan indicating the restricted access to Sandeen Road. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 IlMetro- inet. uslardenhills\PlanninglPlanning Cases120101PC 10 -012 Pres Homes PUDI11 -29 -10 Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 5 of 10 The Fire Department has reviewed this proposal and has no issues with it. Additionally, Staff has talked with the City's recycling and waste haulers who feel that their vehicle access and pick -up needs can be accommodated by this road configuration. Amended Conditions of Approval Since the November 3 meeting, Staff has reviewed the conditions of approval with the City Y Attorney and is recommending the addition of conditions 12 -14 of approval to those recommended by the Planning Commission. Additionally, Staff is recommending the revision of three other conditions. These revisions are indicated in the conditions of approval as underlined text. Findings of Fact: This project includes the following requests: amendments to CUP 70 -052, 78 -031, and all subsequent amendments; a preliminary and final Plat combining the two parcels; a rezoning of the property from R -2 to R -4; a Master PUD; and a Final PUD. The Planning Commission offers the following thirty -two findings of fact for this proposal: General Findings: 1. The Presbyterian Homes property is a combined total of 22.5 acres in size. 2. The Presbyterian Homes property is currently in the R -2 District. 3. The Presbyterian Homes property currently has a future land use designation of Public and Institutional in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 4. The applicant is proposing to re -plat the properties into one parcel; Lot 1, Block 1. 5. The applicant is proposing to demolish 188 independent and assisted living housing units and construct 202 independent and assisted living units in their place. 6. The applicant is proposing to maintain 208 skilled nursing units as they are currently configured on the site. 7. The applicant is proposing to maintain the current uses of independent living, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing care; however, the proportion of uses is proposed to be altered. 8. The proposed development does not require park dedication. 9. The applicant is requesting tax increment financing as part of the redevelopment application. Rezoning Findings: 10. The property is currently zoned R -2. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: I DOCUMEE11 MEAGAN I. BEET LOCALNI I Temp I ELF20101124 _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 6of10 11. Independent, assisted, and skilled nursing care is currently provided on site, as approved by the City. 12. Independent senior housing, once defined as Institutional housing, is now better defined as a multiple family use, which is not permitted in the R -2 District. 13. The application is proposing to rezone the property to R -4 Multiple Dwelling District. 14. The proposed redevelopment, and mix of uses, is a permitted use in the R -4 District with an approved PUD. 15. Rezoning the property to R -4 would bring it into conformance with the Zoning Code. 16. The R -2 and R -4 Districts are substantially similar in terms of development standards. 17. The rezoning will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods or the community as a whole and is in keeping with the intent of the Zoning Code, because the use, previously approved by the City, has existed on the property for several decades with no negative effects. 18. The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the future land use designation of the property. 19. The proposed rezoning and use would not be incompatible with the adjacent land uses because the traffic and parking impacts of a senior housing facility are substantially less than that of a non -age restricted housing facility, and the facility has existed for decades at its current intensity of use with no ill effects on the surrounding community. Preliminary and Final Plat Findings: 20. The application conforms to all requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. PUD Review Findings: 21. While the City's design standards for the B2 District do not apply to this development, given that this project is a PUD Staff has reviewed the proposal against the design standards and found that they are substantially met or exceeded by this application. 22. The application is in conformance with the sign regulations within the City Code. 23. The application is in substantial conformance with the requirements of the City's Zoning Code for the proposed R -4 District, except where indicated in this report. 24. The applicant is requesting flexibility from the Zoning Code through the PUD process on building height and density. 25. The height of the primary building would be 52 feet. The roof line variegates and the height of the building nearest to adjacent properties would be 36 feet. 26. The existing density on site is 17.6 units per acre; the proposed density would be 18.2 units per acre. 27. In exchange for zoning flexibility, the applicant is proposing a number of items in excess of the Zoning Code requirements; such as, excess open space, tree and perennial plantings, storm water treatment and management, increased setbacks, enhanced design elements and building material quality. 28. The application will not create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole because the facility has operated on the site since 1955; the land use of the site City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: IDOCUME -1I MEAGAN I.BEEILOCALS- 11Temp1ELF20101124 083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 7 of 10 is not proposed to change; the quality of the development and site design features are anticipated to generally enhance the aesthetics of the site and surrounding area; the impacts on Lake Johanna and water quality will be improved by increased storm water management and setbacks to the lake; and the quality of building materials, setbacks to property lines, and quantities of landscaping materials exceed the requirements of the Zoning Code. 29. The application is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan because the future land use designation and past City approvals have all guided the site towards assisted and independent senior housing. 30. The Master PUD and Final PUD advance the City's goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan by promoting the development of a variety of housing options; preserving and increasing high quality housing opportunities that are suitable for a mix of ages, incomes and household types; encouraging the incorporation of affordable, life cycle, and work- force housing into new development and redevelopment where feasible; and promoting the protection of lakes and the natural environment. 31. The proposed development furthers the Metropolitan Council's target of 285 -800 new life -cycle housing units for Arden Hills by 2020. 32. The proposed redevelopment of the Property will not have a significant impact on traffic because the site does not currently negatively impact traffic, and the increase in 14 units would not have a noticeable effect on the immediate road system. Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case 10 -012 and recommends (6 -1) approval of the Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Plat, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Master and Final Planned Unit Development of the Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Proposal based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the following fourteen conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. A development agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City Council approval. The development agreement shall be executed prior to execution of the Final Plat, the issuance of any permits, or site preparation. 3. The applicant shall file the Final Plat with Ramsey County within 180 days of the approval from the City. 4. The final plans shall be subject to Fire Marshal approval prior to the issuance of any building permits. The applicant shall abide by all conditions listed in the September 13, 2010, Fire Marshal memo, or other solutions as agreed to by the Fire Marshal. 5. Final grading, drainage, and utility plans shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director and City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building permits. The City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: IDOCUMEE1IMEAGAN I.BEEILOCALN11Temp \ELF20101124_ _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 8 of 10 applicant shall abide by all conditions listed in the October 28, 2010, Public Works Department memo. 6. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District and all other applicable permitting agencies prior to the issuance of any permits. Copies of such permits shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any permits. 7. The applicant shall submit a financial surety, in a form subject to the approval of the City Attorney, in the amount of 125 percent of the cost of the landscaping improvements prior to the issuance of any building permits. The financial surety shall be held by the City for two years from the completion of the landscaping plan and shall be released in accordance with the City's regulations. 8. The applicant shall provide a construction phasing plan that includes plans for fire and police access throughout construction, subject to the approval of the Fire Marshall, Public Works Director, and Ramsey County Sheriff prior to the issuance of any building permits. 9. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of the Master and Final PUD approval or the approval shall expire unless extended by the City Council prior to the approval's expiration date. Extension requests must be submitted in writing to the City at least 45 days prior to the expiration date. 10. The applicant shall work with adjacent property owners along Shorewood Drive and County Road D to determine exact location and species of landscaping materials to be planted along the east property line. 11. It is the policy of Presbyterian Homes to allow public use of the trail systems which are developed on its properties so long as the public does not abuse the privilege or create an adverse affect on the property. The policy of Presbyterian Homes will be applied to the trail system shown on the site plan. Presbyterian Homes will notify the City thirty (30) days in advance of a change to its policy and of the reasons for the change. 12. Garbage and recycling containers shall be fully screened from view of residential properties and shall be located in the lower level of the loading and service area designated on the rendered site plan. 13. If a warrant analysis indicates that a four -way or a three -way stop is necessary at the intersection of the entrance to the Property on County Road D and Wheeler Avenue, Developer, at its sole expense, shall construct such four -way or three -way stop according to plans and specifications approved by the City Engineers for the City of Roseville and the City of Arden Hills. 14. Traffic leaving the site onto County Road D shall be prohibited from continuing directly down Wheeler Avenue with a right out only barrier curb median, subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. Requested Action 1. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -064 for the Rezoning of the Presbyterian Homes Addition of Arden Hills from R -2 to R -4. City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: IDOCUME -11 MEAGAN I.BEEILOCALN11TemplELF20101124 083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 9 of 10 2. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -065 for the Presbyterian Homes Addition of Arden Hills Preliminary and Final Plat. 3. Motion to approve Resolution 2010 -066 for Amendments to existing Conditional Use Permits at 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard. 4. Motion to approve Resolution 2010- 067for the Presbyterian Homes Master and Final Planned Unit Development. 5. Motion to approve the Development Agreement between the City of Arden Hills and Presbyterian Homes outlining the conditions of approval for Planning Case 10 -012. A Planned Unit Development approval requires a 4/5 majority vote, all other requests require a 3/5 majority vote. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on September 7, 2010. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City has extended its review deadline by an additional 60 days, beyond the initial 60 day review. The City must act on this request by January 4, 2011 (120 days). The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A. October 6, 2010, and November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes B. Letter from the City of Roseville C. Public Comment Received Since the November 3, 2010 Planning Commission Meeting D. Resolutions 2010 -064, 2010 -065, 2010 -066, and 2010 -067 for a Preliminary and Final Plat, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Master and Final Planned Unit Development E. Development Agreement F. Partial Site Plan at Sandeen Road G. Revised Development Plan Narrative dated November 23, 2010, and Traffic Per Entry Analysis H. Revised Site Rendering and Zoning District Plan dated November 24, 2010 I. November 3, 2010, Report to the Planning Commission City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 C: IDOCUME —II MEAGAN— LBEEILOCALS11Temp \ELF20101124_ _083818111 -29 -10 Regular Meeting Pres Homes Memo.doc Page 10 of 10 City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment A October 6, 2010, and November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes The Planning Commission voted 6 -1 (Scott Dissenting) to approve the application. October 6, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes Planning Case 10 -012; Rezoning, Master and Final PUD, and Preliminary and Final Plat; Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills Public Hearing City Planner Beekman stated the applicant has requested approval of a Preliminary and Final Plat, Rezoning, and Master and Final PUD to allow for a major redevelopment of their existing campus, including the Sutton Place Apartments at 3120 and the three triangle parcels located at 3151, 3152, and 3163 Lake Johanna Boulevard. This proposal technically includes seven requests: rezoning to R -4 on the four properties currently zoned R -2, rezoning to R -4 on the property currently zoned N -B, preliminary plat, final plat, master planned unit development, final planned unit development, additionally, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. City Planner Beekman provided additional background information. She stated Staff will prepare full findings of fact regarding this proposal for the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission meeting. A full analysis of the project is not possible based on the fact that plans may still be adjusted in order to mitigate concerns raised by neighbors in the community. Staff has had discussion with Presbyterian Homes, and has mutually agreed that a motion to table this planning case to the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission meeting is appropriate. Staff is also recommending that the Planning Commission hold the public hearing to hear all of the concerns, questions, and comments from the community so that they can be fully addressed in the coming weeks. Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commission questions and requested Presbyterian Homes review the project with the Planning Commission. Mr. John Mehrkens, Presbyterian Homes, explained the project and requested the Planning Commission hold the public hearing at this time so that Presbyterian Homes could hear the concerns of the residents and work on resolving any issues that are brought up. Ms. Pamela Belz, Presbyterian Homes, reviewed the results of the neighborhood meetings that Presbyterian Homes has had to date. She also reviewed the changes that Presbyterian Homes had made to their design to resolve the concerns that were brought up at these meetings. Commissioner Zimmerman asked what the maximum height of the facility would be and if the new proposal had the space that had been allotted for the library removed. Ms. Belz stated the space for the library has been removed from the design and the maximum height for the facility is 54 feet. She also stated the meeting rooms that were being shared with the library had also been removed. Commissioner Holewa asked if the Fire Department had reviewed the new proposal with the changes to the access. Ms. Belz stated the Fire Department has not reviewed the new access that is being proposed. Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Chair Thompson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make a comment. Ms. Pearl Grayam, 3220 Lake Johanna Blvd., Arden Hills, stated she is a resident of Presbyterian Homes and she likes the location of the facility. The building does have problems that need to be resolved including the heating and air conditioning system, the dishwashers in the kitchen, the residents could use more bathroom space, the elevators are not dependable, and the plumbing needs to be modernized. She requested Presbyterian Homes consider using the space they would have used for the library for an inside Chapel. She asked that the Commission consider approving this project. The Planning Commission recessed due to technical problems at 7:10. The Planning Commission reconvened at 7:13. Mr. Milo Lokken, 3220 Lake Johanna Blvd., Arden Hills, stated he is a resident of Presbyterian Homes' assisted living program. He has excellent care at this facility and would not be where he is today if it had not been for the help he has received at Presbyterian Homes. Anything that can be done to improve this facility would be a p lus and provide more opportunities for other people who need assistance. Mr. David Millett, director of Environmental Services /Engineering, Presbyterian Homes, stated he is in support of this redevelopment project. It will provide Presbyterian Homes the opportunity to improve the facility for current and future residents and better support the challenges that residents face. Ms. Vicky Henkel, 1882 Glenpaul Avenue, Arden Hills, stated her appreciation of what Presbyterian Homes has done to be sensitive to the needs and desires of the neighborhood. Ms. Lisa Ambi, Presbyterian Homes, shared a letter from a family member of Bill Ostlund. Bill is a current resident of Presbyterian Homes. The letter is in support of the proposed project. Mr. Jim Day, 3242 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated concerns about the loading area. Currently the residents on Sandeen Road hear all the noise of the trucks loading and unloading and coming and going from the facility. These noises can be a nuisance. He asked if Presbyterian Homes could make the distance the trucks needed to backup to make deliveries and pick ups shorter or install a circular driveway to eliminate the need to backup. He also stated Presbyterian Homes has not maintained the vegetation currently on the grounds and he asked that they do a better job as proposed in the new project. Ms. Susan Ellen Campbell, 3248 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated she is in support of this proposal but does have concerns about the noise. This is a narrow road and there is a fair amount of traffic on this road already. She is concerned about the safety of children on this street. She suggested the City look into turning a portion of Sandeen into a service road and the other part into a cul -de -sac. This would maintain Sandeen as a residential road. Ms. Jennifer Marrone, 3156 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated she likes the design of the project but there is an overwhelming sense of the design being out of proportion with the neighborhood. This structure is intimidating and too massive for this area. Chair Thompson asked if Ms. Marrone had participated in the neighborhood meetings with Presbyterian Homes and if they had been able to respond to her concerns. Ms. Marrone stated she has attended the neighborhood meetings and Presbyterian Homes has been responsive to the concerns of the neighbors. She is questioning if Presbyterian Homes really needs the large amount of space they are proposing to construct or if the facility can be scaled down to better fit the neighborhood. She also stated the history of this property and the City Codes pertaining to this property are confusing. It appears there is additional square footage and height added where it may not be needed. Mr. Fredrick Fox, 3168 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, gave documents to City Planner Beekman last week expressing concerns about the "massiveness" of the proposed building. He also stated that one letter sent to the City was signed by most of the residents in the Shorewood neighborhood. He presented documents to the Planning Commission outlining an analysis he had done in regards to the Presbyterian Homes proposed project in Arden Hills compared to other Presbyterian Homes locations in Minnesota. He stated the Arden Hills location is the only location in Minnesota that is surrounded on all four sides by residential single family homes and a building of this size would be too large for this area. The size of this building alters the nature of this neighborhood. Ms. Azela Giese, 3096 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, expressed concerns about the traffic patterns on Wheeler. There are already problems in this location with speeding traffic and accidents with people using this as an access to Lydia. She stated something needed to be done in this area to slow the traffic down and make the road safer for residents. Mr. Joe Bungert, 3175 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated the neighborhood is not opposed to Presbyterian Homes redeveloping their campus but they do have concerns about the size and mass of the redevelopment and the negative impacts this will have on the property values in this neighborhood. Mr. Al Mason, 3208 Shorewood Drive, stated he thanked the Planning Commission for taking on a difficult project like Presbyterian Homes. He supports his neighbors and their concerns with this redevelopment project. Mr. Erick Bothun, 3185 Lake Johanna Blvd., Arden Hills, applauded Presbyterian Homes for supporting the community and the neighborhood. He stated he appreciated the changes they have made in their design. He also stated he would like to see further studies on the traffic in this area. Ms. Bernadine Syverson, 3087 Shorewood Lane, Arden Hills, stated the safety of the children and buses needs to be considered. Mr. Dave Sieberg, formerly on 3167 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated Presbyterian Homes does a good job for the people who live there. Presbyterian Homes is a corporation and act like a corporation. County Road D has been a problem and the additional load Presbyterian Homes will be putting on this road is something that will need to be looked at because something will need to be done. Mr. David Short, 3156 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated the size and magnitude of the building and the height of this structure in a residential area is concerning to the neighborhood. He expressed concerns about the increased density as well. He asked if this would be the last development of this property because history shows there have been 9 proposals for this property brought to the City for development of this property. The residents are concerned about what the future holds for this property if this proposal is approved. He stated approving this proposal would have an impact on future development proposals that are brought forward. Commissioner Thompson asked if the neighborhood has discussed the trees and walking paths that will be available to the neighborhood and how these things will fit into the neighborhood. Mr. Short stated that the trees will look nice in 10 to 15 years but until that time the neighborhood will have a full view of the building. He agrees that the overall project is necessary and he is not opposed to this but the overall size of the facility is too much for the neighborhood. Mr. Peter Dybvad, 3151 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated concerns about the shift in the zoning for this property from R1/R2 to R4. He also asked how the Conditional Use Permit for one property could be used for another property. He stated concerns that Presbyterian Homes was simply shifting conditional use permits around to different properties to suit their needs. He also asked if the proposed building size would triple or quadruple the square footage of Presbyterian Homes. Ms. Michelle Lacy, 3167 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills stated this project affects her home due to the proximity to her property. She had an informal assessment done and this showed that the value of her property would decrease once this project is complete. She does not object to the project but does object to the size of the building being proposed. The adjustments that Presbyterian Homes has made helps, but the proposed structure is only 100 -feet from her home. Her property is at the same elevation as Presbyterian Homes so she will be looking right at the facility. Mr. Day, stated with the construction there will be additional construction vehicles and trucks in his neighborhood. These vehicles will do more damage to the roads and this will require the roads to require repair. He asked who will be responsible for the costs of these repairs. Mr. Mehrkens stated that the challenge Presbyterian Homes is facing is what worked 50 years ago does not work today. The rooms are small and this will not work moving into the future and the current building is not able to accommodate this type of change. The size of the building being proposed at this time is adequate to serve the residents and works well with the size of the property. The design of the building is meant to give the facility a residential feel but it is not meant to hide the fact that this is a large facility. This proposal is a change and a challenge but Presbyterian Homes is looking to serve their residents and the changes made have been in response to the residents. Presbyterian Homes is doing what they can to meet the needs of their residents and the surrounding neighborhoods. Commissioner Holewa stated Presbyterian Homes is doing more than most other commercial business would do and the City appreciates this. He asked Presbyterian Homes to look at the loading dock configuration to see if there was more that could be done to shorten the distance trucks are required to backup. Ms. Lacy stated the shade from the building would also affect her property. She requested a shade study be done to determine the impacts to her property. Mr. Sieberg stated the entry triangle of the property should remain residential and this corner shields the neighboring properties. Ms. Julianne Seiber, 3200 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, stated 100 square feet is an inadequate size for residents at Presbyterian Homes. She asked what the range of sizes for units would be for the proposed redevelopment. Mr. Mehrkens explained the sizes are based on future expectations and market studies. He explained the different sizes of units available for each of the different types of facilities available. Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Commissioner Zimmerman applauded what Presbyterian Homes has done but he agrees with residents that a 54 -foot tall building is high. He asked if it would be possible to remove some of the parking areas in order to "flatten" the building or spread it out over a greater area. This would make the building less obtrusive to neighbors. Commissioner Hames stated Arden Hills' residents have roots in their community and this is evident in what residents say. She stated this proposed project is on 22 acres and this is a large parcel to accommodate this type of project. She stated as the community moves into the future it can be expected that the surrounding homes will be reconstructed. As these homes are reconstructed they will be made larger and this is similar to what is happening with Presbyterian Homes. She stated the idea of turning a portion of Sandeen Road into a cul -de -sac and the other portion a service road was a good suggestion and the City could look into this. She also stated the proposed project will not have a negative impact on the value of the neighboring homes. This type of development will be seen as a positive. Commissioner Scott stated he would like to see the new proposed unit amount by the next meeting. He also requested Presbyterian Homes look into possibly shortening the distance for trucks to backup. Chair Thompson stated the City and Presbyterian Homes should look at the situation on Sandeen Road including the need for signs, construction vehicles, and the landscaping. She stated the redevelopment provides more sophisticated grounds with nice walking paths. The green space and ponds are exciting additions. Commissioner Reiff moved and Commissioner Scott seconded a motion to Table Planning Case 10 -012; for Rezoning, Master and Final PUD, and Preliminary and Final Plat at Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills to the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission meeting based on the following reasons: the need for proper notification for a hearing regarding a comprehensive plan amendment for Block 2, give Presbyterian Homes an opportunity to address concerns raised by neighbors and give Staff additional time to review the implications of any possible changes to the project. The motion carried unanimously (6 -0). DRAFT November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Minutes Planning Case 10 -012; Preliminary and Final Plat; CUP Amendment, Rezoning, and Master and Final PUD; Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills Public Hearing City Planner Meagan Beekman stated Presbyterian Homes is requesting approval of a Preliminary and Final Plat, Rezoning, CUP Amendment, and Master and Final PUD to allow for a redevelopment of their existing facilities located at 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard. She provided background information, a summary of the changes made to the plan after the meeting on October 6, 2010. She stated the Planning Commission is being asked to hold a second public hearing on the revised redevelopment proposal and make a recommendation to the City Council. Staff offers the following thirty -two findings of fact for this proposal: General Findings: 1. The Presbyterian Homes property s a combined total of 22.5 acres in size. 2. The Presbyterian Homes property is currently in the R -2 District. 3. The Presbyterian Homes property has a future land use designation of Public and Institutional in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 4. The applicant is proposing to re -plat the properties into one parcel; Lot 1, Block 1. 5. The applicant is proposing to demolish 188 independent and assisted living housing units and construct 202 independent and assisted living units in their place. 6. The applicant is proposing to maintain 208 skilled nursing units as they are currently configured on the site. 7. The applicant is proposing to maintain the current uses of independent living, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing care; however, the mix of uses is proposed to be altered. 8. The proposed development does not require park dedication. 9. The applicant is requesting TIF as part of the redevelopment application. Preliminary and Final Plat Findings: 10. The application conforms to all requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Rezoning Findings: 11. The property is currently zoned R -2. 12. Independent, assisted, and skilled nursing care is currently provided on site, as approved by the City. 13. Independent senior housing, once defined as Institutional housing, is now better defined as a multiple family use, which is not permitted in the R -2 District. 14. The application is proposing to rezone the property to R -4 Multiple Dwelling District. 15. The proposed redevelopment, and mix of uses, is a permitted use in the R -4 District with an approved PUD. 16. Rezoning the property to R -4 would bring it into conformance with the Zoning Code. 17. The R -2 and R -4 Districts are substantially similar in terms of development standards. 18. The rezoning will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods or the community as a whole and is in keeping with the intent of the Zoning Code, because the use, previously approved by the City, has existed on the property for several decades with no negative effects. 19. The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the future land use designation of the property. 20. The proposed rezoning and use would not be incompatible with the adjacent land uses because the traffic and parking impacts of a senior housing facility are substantially less than that of a non -age restricted housing facility, and the facility has existed for decades at its current intensity of use with no ill effects on the surrounding community. PUD Review Findings. 21. The application exceeds the requirements of the City's Design Standards for the B2 District. 22. The application is in conformance with the Sign Ordinance within the City Code. 23. The application is in substantial conformance with the requirements of the City's Zoning Code for the proposed R -4 District. 24. The applicant is requesting flexibility from the zoning Code through the PUD process on building height and density. 25. The height of the primary building would be 52 feet. The roofline variegates and the height of the building nearest to adjacent properties would be 36 feet. 26. The existing density on site is 17.6 units per acre; the proposed density would be 18.2 units per acre. 27. In exchange for zoning flexibility, the applicant is proposing a number of items in excess of the Zoning Code requirements; such as, excess open space, tree and perennial plantings, storm water treatment and management, increased setbacks, enhanced design elements and building material quality. 28. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole because, the facility has operated on the site since 1955, the land use of the site is not proposed to change, the quality of the development and site design features are anticipated to generally enhance the aesthetics of the site and surrounding area, the impacts on Lake Johanna and water quality will be improved by increased storm water management and setbacks to the lake. 29. The application is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. 30. The Master PUD and Final PUD advance the City's goal outlined in the Comprehensive Plan by promoting the development of a variety of housing options by preserving and increasing high quality housing opportunities that are suitable for a mix of ages, incomes, and household types; encourages the incorporation of affordable, life cycle, and work force housing into new development and redevelopment where feasible; and promotes the protection of lakes and the natural environment. 31. The proposed development forwards the Metropolitan Council's target of 285 -800 new life -cycle housing units by 2020 in Arden Hills. 32. The proposed development is not anticipated to have a significant impact on traffic because the site does not currently negatively impact traffic, and the increase in 14 units would not have a noticeable affect on the immediate road system. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated upon review, Staff is recommending approval of Planning Case 10 -012 based on the findings of fact subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. A development agreement shall be prepared by the City Attorney and subject to City Council approval. The development agreement shall be expected prior to execution of the Final Plat, the issuance of any permits, or site preparation. 3. The applicant shall file the Final Plat with Ramsey County within 180 days of the approval from the City. 4. The final plans shall be subject to Fire Marshal approval prior to the issuance of any building permits. The applicant shall file abide by all conditions listed in the September 13, 2010, Fire Marshall memo. 5. Final grading, drainage, and utility plans shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director and City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building permits. The applicant shall abide by all conditions listed in the October 28, 2010, Public Works Department memo. 6. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District and all other applicable permitting agencies prior to the issuance of any permits. Copies of such permits shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any permits. 7. The applicant shall submit a financial surety, in a form subject to the approval of the City Attorney, in the amount of 125 percent of the cost of the landscaping improvements prior to the issuance of any building permits. The City shall hold the financial surety for two years from the completion of the landscaping plan. 8. The applicant shall provide a construction phasing plan that includes plans for fire and police access throughout construction, subject to the approval of the Fire Marshal, Public Works Director, and Ramsey County Sheriff prior to the issuance of any building permits. 9. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of the Master and Final PUD approval or the approval shall expire unless extended by the City Council prior to the approval's expiration date. Extension requests must be submitted in writing to the City at least 45 days prior to the expiration date. 10. The applicant shall work with adjacent property owners along Shorewood Drive to determine exact location and species of landscaping materials to be planted along the east property line. 11. It is the policy of Presbyterian Homes to allow public use of the trail systems, which are developed on its property; so long as the public does not abuse the privilege. The policy of Presbyterian Homes will be applied to the trail system shown on the site plan. Presbyterian Homes will notify the City thirty (30) days in advance of a change to its Trail Use Policy and the reasons for the change. City Planner Beekman pointed out that the wording for Condition 5 and Condition 11 were different than what was in the Planning Case Report and Staff was recommending the changes presented at this time. Ms. Pamela Belz, Presbyterian Homes, updated the Planning Commission on the revisions that have taken place to the plan since the public hearing that was held on October 6. These changes include moving the access point on Shorewood Drive, the removal and relocation of parking spots, the removal of the "triangle" property from the plan, the elimination of one load /unloading dock area, and the adjustment to the building shape. She stated the adjustment to the building shape did change the programs that Presbyterian Homes would be able to offer because these units were relocated to a different section of the building. She also stated the sidewalk along Shorewood Drive will be removed but the sidewalk along County Road D will remain in the plan. Presbyterian Homes and City Staff are still working on a solution for the traffic concerns on Sandeen Road. The solution for this section has not been defined yet. Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commission questions. Commissioner Zimmerman asked what the age of the trees were in the project drawings being presented. Ms. Belz clarified that the drawings were generated from a program and showed an approximate view of what the coverage would like with the existing trees and the new trees that will be planted seven years into the future. Commissioner Thompson asked for clarification regarding the landscape plan. Ms. Belz reviewed the landscaping that would be done with each phase on the project and she pointed out that landscaping would be done as the project progresses. Commissioner Scott asked if the "triangle" would be donated to the City for green space as part of the phases. Ms. Belz stated the development of the "triangle" into green space is not currently part of the redevelopment plan being presented. This parcel is being negotiated with the City at this time. Commissioner Holewa asked how many residents were currently on the property and how many were being proposed. He asked if there would be an increase in traffic. Ms. Belz stated currently there are 396 residents and the proposal would increase this to 410 residents. She explained that based on the traffic modeling and the types of facilities being proposed this would only increase traffic by an average of 52 trips per day and this was not considered a significant amount. Commissioner Holewa stated that there were residents that are not happy about this application but Presbyterian Homes has done a lot to meet the needs of the people and he thanked them for this. Commissioner Modesette stated the Planning Commission had received several letters and e -mails concerning food preparation and Meals -On- Wheels at this location. She asked if this was part of this proposal. Mr. John Mehrkens, Presbyterian Homes, stated there were no intentions of having food prepared at this site and transported to other sites. The intent was to have this facility provide service for this facility only. City Planner Beekman clarified there were no conditions in place to limit food preparation to on site. Chair Thompson recessed the Planning Commission at 7:10 p.m. to allow Commissioners time to read e -mails received at the bench. Chair Thompson reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 7:13 p.m. Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. Chair Thompson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make comment. Mr. Jim Day, 3242 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, requested the parking space or lot next to the loading dock be removed because of safety and noise issues. This parking lot is used for dumpsters and employee cars and is a pick up and drops off area for employees. The people that use this area are those that are speeding through the Sandeen neighborhood. Mr. Paul Wallin, 3254 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated he enjoys the trails at Presbyterian Homes and on the campus but he is concerned about the safety of children in this neighborhood. There are several incidences where employees are observed not stopping at stop signs and speeding through the neighborhood. Mr. Mark Momtillon, 3249 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, expressed concerns about the speed of Presbyterian Homes' employees going through the Sandeen neighborhood. He stated there are burn out marks showing how fast some of these employees are going Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the Ramsey County Sheriff had been contacted regarding the problems with speeders and people not stopping at stop signs. Mr. Momtillon stated he had not contacted the Sheriff regarding the issues. Ms. Sue Ellen Campbell, 3248 Sandeen Road stated she had concerns about the traffic and she would be in support of the City doing a cul -de -sac or some sort of bump out in the road that would change the traffic patterns is this area. She stated she did not believe a sign would be enough to prevent drivers from taking a right onto Sandeen and speeding through the neighborhood. She stated that the elimination of the parking lot would reduce the number of people leaving the facility from this location. Commissioner Hames asked if the road could be marked as "Local Traffic Only City Planner Beekman stated this is something Staff could look into. Mr. Mehrkens stated Presbyterian Homes is supportive of making adjustments to the intersection. Currently they are looking for the best solution from an engineering standpoint. He stated Presbyterian Homes was already reducing the number of parking spaces available. Mr. Steve Nelson 3475 Siems Court, Arden Hills, stated he also owns 3280 Sandeen Road and he has concerns about the street. The residents have not seen the contours or grading of this property and he would like to know what the effects of water runoff will be to the neighborhood. He stated he would like to see the building stay at two stories in height as well. Ms. Candace McCloskey, 3290 Lake Johanna Boulevard, Arden Hills, stated she is concerned about the proposed height of the building. She asked if it would be possible for Presbyterian Homes to bring in equipment that could show residents what the proposed height will look like. She stated the proposed increase in density is fourteen people but there is no indication what the increase in square footage will be with this proposal. Mr. Joe Rivard, 3083 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated the proposed plans by Presbyterian Homes are too big for this particular parcel. The intersection at Fairview and County Road D is already a busy intersection and this project will increase the dangers of this intersection. He stated Presbyterian Homes is disregarding the dangerous erous g propensities of this project. This is the wrong place for this type of development and it is too ambitious. Ms. Annette Phillips, 3084 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated Roseville residents were not made aware of this project until recently. She expressed concerns about keeping the area south of Presbyterian Homes as a residential area. She also expressed concerns about the increased traffic on Wheeler. She requested that the alignment of the entrance to Presbyterian Homes and Wheeler be evaluated. Ms. Kris Cuffman, 727 New Levy Lane, Chaska, stated her mother lives at 3122 Shorewood Drive and she has not received notification regarding community meetings for this project. She asked shat the impact of this project was, what the expense was to the City, what is the proposal going to do to this community and these residents. She also asked what would happen to the property values and if the watershed had been addressed. She asked what is being done to protect Little Lake Johanna property. She stated Presbyterian Homes will have underground parking but it is not clear where this will be and where the entrance will be for this. She asked how the underground parking would affect the water flow for Little Lake Johanna and Lake Johanna. She stated there are a number of commercial properties available and asked why Presbyterian Homes was not looking into these for this project. She asked what the impact of the zoning changes would be to the neighboring properties and the property value. She asked if the roads that were being used for the construction route would be repaired. This is the wrong location for this project and this is a neighborhood that is being destroyed. Mr. Dave Westlund, 3261 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated he was opposed to a one way street in this location. He stated there needs to be signs for children and crossings and reduced speeds. He expressed concerns about the safety of the children in this neighborhood. Ms. Lisa Ambli, Presbyterian Homes, read a letter from Harvey McNair who is a resident of Presbyterian Homes. He outlined the challenges that residents have and how the construction of a new facility will make it easier to live at the facility Ms. Sandy Lenarz, 9061 159 Lane NW, Ramsey, read a letter from Mariam Sullivan, who is a resident of Presbyterian Homes. She expressed her excitement about having a facility that met the needs of its residents and did not have the obstacles that the current facility did. Ms. Michelle Anderson, 1769 Shorewood Curve, Arden Hills, stated she had just received notice about this project. She stated over the last couple of years there has been significant traffic increases coming down Lydia and Weaver. This is mostly from the expansion at Northwestern College. This project will increase issues in this area. She stated she is concerned about the safety of children in this area because of the amount of people speeding through the area. She also asked the City to review Condition 5 further to ensure proper drainage and grading of this project. Ms. Kim Klawiter, 3262 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated Presbyterian Homes has stated in the past that they would take care of the grounds and landscaping and this has not happened. The landscaping along Sandeen Road is not well maintained. She stated she is concerned that this will continue to be a problem Ms. Nadine Bondhus, 3100 Shorewood Lane, Arden Hills, stated based on the proposed alignment of the entrance to Presbyterian Homes and Wheeler would turn this area into a racetrack. There are currently problems in this area and she asked that Presbyterian Homes reconsider the location of this access. Mr. Paul Rolvaag, 3260 Sandeen Road, stated Presbyterian Homes may be able to provide some property that would make a cul -de -sac more feasible on Sandeen Road and this would eliminate the traffic issues that the neighborhood is concerned about. Mr. John Bell, 3 065 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated he was concerned about the building being compatible with the area. He stated Presbyterian Homes owns other land in the area and he recommended they consider moving this project to one of those properties. Mr. Thomas Lundberg, 3025 Wheeler Drive N., expressed concerns about traffic in this area. He also stated that the soccer field was something the neighborhood enjoyed and did not want to see removed. He asked if the entrance to Presbyterian Homes from Wheeler could be designated as an emergency route only. Chair Thompson asked if the City of Roseville had been asked about the amount of traffic in the Wheeler area. She stated the traffic problems they are experiencing predate the application being considered at this time. Mr. Bill Brennom, 1776 Shorewood Curve, Roseville, stated he was concerned about the children in the neighborhood and all the children in the surrounding neighborhoods because he believes this project will increase the safety risks for these areas. Ms. Anjali Srinand, 3101 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated this project directly affects residents with driveways on Wheeler and increased traffic means increased crime. Mr. Tim Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated Presbyterian Homes had not included his neighborhood in any of the neighborhood meetings. He stated connecting the main part of Presbyterian Homes to Wheeler would increase traffic. He would like to see the soccer field remain. He also stated the view from Shorewood Lane was not shown. Ms. Wendy Kingbay, Presbyterian Homes, read a letter from Gary Morin, a resident of Presbyterian Homes, which outlined why he is in support of the project. Ms. Julie Spiers, Presbyterian Homes, read a letter from Evelyn Strom, a resident of Presbyterian Homes, which outlined why she supported the proposed project. Mr. Bob Espeset, 3056 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated the neighborhood would like to have been notified of the meetings. He recommended Presbyterian Homes reconfigure the parking lot to allow for a flow of traffic that did not provide access to Wheeler. He asked that the Planning Commission postpone making any decisions until the residents had a chance to review the project and he encouraged the members of the Planning Commission to visit the site before a vote was taken. Mr. Ken Besnechek, 3356 Lake Johanna Boulevard, Arden Hills, expressed concerns about public safety on the streets and the problems with traffic. He recommended the commission defer any decision until the traffic has been evaluated. Mr. Dan Cooke, 3070 Shorewood Lane, Roseville, stated the whole proposal was outrageous because it does not meet the requirements of a planned unit development. The height of the proposed building is excessive and should not be allowed. He stated he did not see a benefit to the community with this proposal. Ms. Bernadine Syverson, 3087 Shorewood Lane, Arden Hills, stated she has worked in nursing homes and understands the needs of patients but she did not agree that Presbyterian Homes' staff should be reading letters from residents about how bad things are there and why they would like to see a new facility constructed. She stated this was not the point of the public hearing. The point was to discuss how this would affect the residents and their communities. Mr. Jim Day, 3242 Sandeen Road, Arden Hills, stated he did not see a need for Presbyterian Homes to maintain a parking lot on the side of the property next to Sandee Road and he recommended if this parking lot was kept, Presbyterian Homes should restrict the use of this lot and not allow employees to be picked up or dropped off at this location. Mr. Peter Dybvad, 3151 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, he appreciated the dialog that Presbyterian Homes has had with the residents but he expressed concerns about the rezoning of the property from R2 to R4. He also asked how the Conditional Use Permit for one property could be used for another property. He stated concerns that Presbyterian Homes was simply shifting conditional use permits around to different properties to suit their needs. He explained that he had talked with several realtors regarding the sale of his home and the impact the proposed project would have on the value of his home. These realtors informed him that he would expect to see an 8% to 15% reduction in the value of his home. He stated that it was dubious to say this project would not have a negative impact on the residents. Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 8:28 p.m. Chair Thompson opened the floor to additional comments or questions from Commissioners. Commissioner Scott asked where the main parking area was for employees. Mr. Mehrkens, stated there was no designated employee parking. Employees were asked to park in the spaces furthest from the building but they could park in the lot that was closer to where they worked. The intent was to utilize the parking on the entire sit. Commissioner Scott asked if there has been traffic counts done. City Planner Beekman stated Arden Hills and Roseville Public Works Departments and engineers have reviewed these. She clarified that the proposed increase of 14 residents did not require a traffic study to be done. Commissioner Modesette asked if construction traffic could be restricted from County Road D and if traffic could be limited on Sandeen Road. Mr. Mehrkens, stated that during the multiple phases of the project there will be times when the access point at County Road D will need to be utilized. He also stated that if the City was requesting property for the use of a cul -de -sac on Sandeen Road this would need to be negotiated. City Planner Beekman clarified as part of the review process the Public Works Department and City Engineers looked at the construction phases and the potential impacts of construction equipment of the roads. As part of the TIF request, parts of County Road D will be reconstructed at the expense of Presbyterian Homes. Also any damage to Sandeen Road and Lake Johanna Boulevard will also be repaired. Commissioner Reiff moved, seconded by Commissioner Hames to recommend approval of Planning Case 10 -012 for a Preliminary and Final Plat, consolidating 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard into a single parcel based on the findings of fact, submitted plans, and amended conditions in the November 3, 2010, Planning Case Report. The motion carried unanimously (7 -0). Commissioner Modesette moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa to recommend approval of Planning Case 10 -012 for a Rezoning from R -2 to R -4, at 3120 and 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard based on the findings of fact, submitted plans, and the amended conditions in the November 3, 2010, Planning Case Report. The motion carried (6 -1). Ayes: Chair Thompson, Commissioners Modesette, Zimmerman, Holewa, Reiff, and Hames Nays: Commissioner Scott Commissioner Hames moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa to recommend approval of Planning Case 10 -012 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Master and Final PUD, for the Presbyterian Homes redevelopment proposal based on the findings of fact, submitted plans, and the amended conditions in the November 3, 2010, Planning Case Report. Commissioner Modesette thanked all residents who spoke during the public hearing. She stated she respected and empathized with these residents but there will be benefits for the community with the approval of this PUD. She stated that it was not common for a corporation to consider the public's input to the extent that Presbyterian Homes has and to make the modifications it has. She also stated that there were other options for the residents to take to address the traffic problems in their neighborhoods. She clarified there would be changes to the neighborhoods but this planning case warranted approval. Chair Thompson stated this project has been in front of the commission for many months. She stated the Planning Commission is not aware of the meetings or conversations that may have occurred in Roseville but does know there have been many meetings in Arden Hills. After audience interruptions, Chair Thompson reminded the audience the public hearing had been closed and no additional public comment would be accepted. Chair Thompson stated the Commissioners have walked the neighborhoods and can appreciate the changes these residents will have. The proposed project addressed the water runoff before it gets to Lake Johanna and this is an improvement and even though the taller buildings will be visible these buildings will be attractive and the changes in the design have allowed for less of a footprint than was originally proposed. This project will be a benefit for the community. Commissioner Hames stated there are 396 residents that will benefit immediately from the project and these people are also residents whose input needs to be considered. Commissioner Holewa stated the Planning Commission has listened to the residents and respect the information and concerns they have presented. This project provides benefits to the community that need to be considered as well. After audience interruptions, Chair Thompson again reminded the audience the public hearing had been closed and no additional public comment would be accepted. Commissioner Zimmerman stated he concurred with the other commissioners. He clarified Presbyterian Homes has been sensitive to neighborhoods and they should not be penalized for traffic problems that preexist this application. The motion was called to a vote. The motion carried (6 -1). Ayes: Chair Thompson, Commissioners Modesette, Zimmerman, Holewa, Reiff, and Hames Nays: Commissioner Scott City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment B Letter from the City of Roseville Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Arden Hills 1245 W. Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 -5743 Rip" Dear Mayor Harpstead and City Councilmembers: At its November 8, 2010, City Council meeting, the Roseville City Council received feedback from many residents that live in the neighborhood south of the Presbyterian Homes site. The residents had come to the meeting to express their concerns about the proposed new Presbyterian Homes project that we understand will be before the Arden Hills City Council for project consideration. The City Council discussed the feedback received, and would like your help to address the concerns that were brought up. The most significant concern of the residents in the area was the change in traffic patterns. Currently, the area along County Road D is not internally connected to the majority of the Presbyterian Homes site. The vast majority of traffic from the site has its main access to Lake Johanna Blvd. The proposed new access to County Road D at the south end of the project site is aligned with Wheeler Avenue in a four way stop configuration. Residents strongly believe that this configuration will create an attractive alternative to using Fairview Avenue for residents and employees on the site. This will cause a significant increase in the volume of traffic through their quiet residential neighborhood from drivers headed to Lydia Avenue, and a resulting decrease in the safety of that street for the residents. The residents and City Council discussed several alternatives to this configuration, and ask that you consider these as a means of reducing the potential traffic impacts to that neighborhood: 1. Disconnecting the internal road that leads from County Road D to the northeastern portion of the site. 2. Moving the proposed County Road D access to the west (preferably to the west end of the proposed parking lot) so it does not directly line up with Wheeler Avenue. 3. If the access remains at its current proposed location, consider design alternatives for the proposed County Road D access that would discourage traffic exiting the Presbyterian Homes site from using Wheeler to access Lydia Avenue. Prior to approving this new access as a part of the project, the Roseville City Council respectfully requests that a traffic study of this proposed new ingress /egress to the Presbyterian Homes property be conducted. We would like to know more about how this connection will impact the Roseville neighborhood to the south. This can be accomplished through the development of a traffic model to provide more information about the routes vehicles will take to leave and enter the site. We are interested in finding out how many vehicles will be using Wheeler Ave., Shorewood Lane or Shorewood 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville, Minnesota 55113 651- 792 -ROSE TDD 651- 792 -7399 wwvv.ci.roseville.mn.us Recycled paper 30 °i° post- consumer content a Curve to cut through to Lydia Avenue. Also, we would like to know how the additional traffic will impact the Lydia /Wheeler and Lydia /Shorewood intersections. In addition, it is our understanding that the parking lot on the north side of County Road D is currently being used by Cox Insurance. This parking is being eliminated as a part of the redevelopment. We would like to understand how this parking will be accommodated in the future. Lastly, the Roseville neighborhood is disappointed that they have not been included in neighborhood meetings that have been held regarding this proposed expansion. We would like your help in facilitating communication between Presbyterian Homes, the City of Arden Hills, and the Roseville residents regarding the expansion plan. We would ask that any future mailings and notices include Roseville residents specifically the property owners south of County Road D, east of Fairview, north of Lydia and west of Northwestern College. While we appreciate the significant reinvestment by Presbyterian Homes into this project and the economic impact that it will have for Arden Hills, we are hopeful that you will likewise recognize the significant traffic impact that the project will have on its residential neighbors, and that you will seriously consider altering the current plans to safeguard their quiet, tranquil neighborhood. Sincerely, William J. Malinen City Manager CC: Roseville City Council Pat Klaers, Arden Hills City Administrator Deb Bloom, Roseville City Engineer Kris Giga, Arden Hills Civil Engineer City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment C Public Comment Received Since the November 3, 2010, Planning Commission Meeting Meagan Beekman From: holdenbj24 @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 12:00 PM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: Fwd: Pres Homes design Original Message From: Mary Lou Lundberg <Iundberg1 @comcast.net> To: sjharpsteadcomcast.net; david .grant hills.mn.us; holdenbj24 FranH116 davemcclung@comcast.net Sent: Mon, Nov 15, 2010 9:10 pm Subject: Pres Homes design Council, As a Roseville resident living on Wheeler street, I just want to encourage you with your vote on November 29 to pass the site plan with the limit to emergency vehicle only and Brownstone parking at the south entrance onto County Rd D and Wheeler. A gate inside their development with fire access would be a way to limit the traffic from the entire complex being able to feed right on to Wheeler. As our neighborhood is experiencing increased traffic from all of Northwestern College entrances being in Roseville, it feels double whammy getting potential 50% of the traffic coming into and out of the planned new expansion in Arden Hills using our residential street to avoid the increased congestion on Fairview. Even with a concession to have the south exit right turn only, we still have all traffic coming from major shopping, dining, entertainment and bussing finding the shortest route home on our residential street. Thank you for your time and consideration from your neighbors to the south. Mary Lou and Tom Lundberg Frederick V. Fox November 19, 2010 Arden:.H111Si M and Council •City 12415 West Highway Arden Hills; MN :55112 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: On August 26, 2010, Presbyterian Homes met with the homeowners on Shorewood Drive to discuss the proposed redevelopment of the PHS Campus on Lake Johanna. Pamela Betz and John Merkins were in attendance for PHS. Present from Shorewood Drive were, Joe Bungert, Karla Bungert, Frederick Fox, Michele Lacy, and David Natale. That plan included an access road off Shorewood Drive. When asked, we were told, more than once, that they did not anticipate the access road would get much use. It was not intended for employees, nor residents. Rather it was required for emergency vehicles by Arden Hills. We were told employees would be asked to use the Lake Johanna Blvd access. We understand the revised redevelopment plan moved the Shorewood .Drive access to the corner of County D.and Wheeler. We have never been told by anyone from Arden Hills nor PHS that has been repurposed as an employee access.. :3168 ShdteWtjdd Drive, Arden HIUs Minnesota 55112 :(651.):633-5683 ffox@visi.com Frederick V. Fox 3168 Shorewood Drive J416, Michele Lacy 3167 Shorewood Drive scs7-4 David 'Natale 3159 Shorewood Drive The Wheeler/Shorewood Lane, Shomwood Drive Neghwrhood Preservation Coalition proposes the following changes to the Preby.erian Homes PUD. We respectfully request that the Arden Hills City Coundl approve the following changes to the Fresh erian Homes proposed development. 1 Ei.. 11flmate the southeast driveway and its exit onto Wheeler/ ay D— This will assure that the additional new tra r :the development is .not encouraged to use residential streets but instead follows the sites existing tra 14: flow pattern. In addition the proposal assures that the employee traffic (approximately 310 daytime workers) will not be using Wheeler/County D as their primary ingress, egress to the property. 'We hope that this also discourages their trips through the neighborhood We believe these changes will help 'minimize the additional new tra- c burden on Wheeler St and Shorewood La.ne and Shorewood Drive and help to preserve the residential nature of the neighborhood immediate(y -adjacent to the proposed development 2. Move the parking lot for the east brownstone building to the north side of the building to preserve greenspace on the south side adjacent to the neighborhood. Add a berm to the south. side of the east brownstone with several large pine trees. The driveway forte building should also use the existing driveway onto County D opposite Cox insurance. This change results in a triple benefit to the prop osed projed and the adjacent residential neighborhood. L Residential neighb orho od traffic effects are minimized b. Surface Parking Lot runnoff water is drained through the planned holding ponds rather than directly to the storm s.ewers. c The green Sp ace interface with the southern neighborhood is more welcoming and consistent with the abutting residential use d. Proxnnityto parking is maintained for Cox insurance customer/ employees. NOTE—It should b noted that .althou .11 the southern boundary of the proposed development is named "county Road a This is sornew.hat of -a misnomer, the section of the road at the southern boundary ofthe project is in effect a residential street that serves as the Arden Hills/Roseville .boundary and actually turns into Shorewood .Drive and deadends in an Arden Hills neighborhood a just east -of the property. The real Ramsey County D virtually ends at the Fairview Intersection at the southwestern Meagan Beekman From: Holmes Frances H [Frances. H. Holmes @irscounsel.treas.gov] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:54 AM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: FW: Requested changes to Presbyterian Homes Development Proposal Attachments: Proposall to Arden Hills from neighbors -1.doc FYI Original Message From: Jeanne Ayers <ayers002 @umn.edu> To: sjharpstead <sjharpstead(a�comcast.net david.grant david .grant(ci.arden- hills.mn.us holdenbj24 <holdenbj24Cc�aol.com FranH116 <FranH116(a�aol.com davemcclung <davemcclungcomcast.net> Sent: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 2:05 pm Subject: Requested changes to Presbyterian Homes Development Proposal Greetings Mayor and Council Members, My name is Jeanne Ayers, I live just south of the proposed Presbyterian Homes development on Shorewood Lane in Roseville. Attached is a copy of a proposal from the Wheeler- Shorewood Neighbors to the Arden Hills City Council that we are respectfully requesting that you review and consider prior to voting on the proposal on November 29th. Some background may be helpful. Our neighborhood which is on the southern boundary of the proposed Presbyterian Homes project is late to the process because we were not informed, perhaps because we are in Roseville. When we heard about the project we were obviously concerned about the impact the project will have on our residential area. When we attended the Planning Commission's hearing we heard Pres Homes testify that their traffic study showed a projected increase of only 52 car trips a day from the project. This was reassuring to all of us. However on closer examination of the changes in traffic patterns encouraged by their design, it became clear that these total numbers dramatically minimize the real impact on our residential neighborhood. They have added a new driveway to the southeast side of the property directly emptying onto Wheeler Avenue, a residential street. Pres Homes did not discuss how their design was changing existing traffic flow. For example at the Planning Commission meeting when discussing staffing numbers for daytime hours -310 workers -(150+ 120 +40) they did not talk about how many of these workers, in addition to residents, will now likely be using the new southeast driveway/Wheeler as an ingress /egress. Many of these 500 -600 daily trips by workers will be on Wheeler and Shorewood Lane during peak hour,s 7 -9 am and 3 -5 pm when school children and residents are most active on our streets. We heard that Pres Homes held neighborhood meetings with the northern and eastern neighbor's to address their concerns and that the planning commission and city staff were impressed with their cooperation. However the southern neighbors were not informed and this fact in combination with the failure to honestly address or remediate the very real negative effect of the proposed Southeast driveway is a significant concern. If Pres Home's traffic study addressed the traffic impact on our neighborhood they did not share this analysis at the Planning Commission Meeting or in the subsequent meeting they held with us on November 15. It is tempting to paint the neighbors who are trying to effectively address these very real negative impacts as people who are just against change but I think that is not a fair or accurate depiction. It is only reasonable and expected that the projected traffic flow be assessed and all efforts to minimize negative impacts on residential neighbors be adopted. We believe our attached proposal does just that. Thank you for your consideration of our proposal. Jeanne Ayers 3030 Shorewood Lane 612 385 -4039 cell Meagan Beekman From: Holmes Frances H Frances .H.Holmes @irscounsel.treas.gov] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:53 AM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: FW: Statement of fact Attachments: letter to AH council 10 11 19 PHS.pdf F YI Original Message From: Fred Fox <ffox©visi.com> To: sjharpstead <sjharpstead @comcast.net david.grant <david .grant @ci.arden- hills.mn.us holdenbj24 <holdenbj24 @aol.com FranH116 <FranH116 @aol.com davemcclung <davemcclung @comcast.net> Sent: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 6:00 pm Subject: Statement of fact The attached statement of fact is sent to you in support of the Wheeler /Shorewood Lane neighborhood generally and specifically in support of Annette and Patrick Phillip's letter. The Shorewood Drive neighborhood continues to oppose the PHS development, and resents the disrespect and condescension shown to us by the Planning Commission (reasoned and reasonable arguments were never addressed; we were told "it's like having an oversized house built in the neighborhood," and "you're just resistant to change." Absurd statements.). This development, and in particular the main building, is profoundly out of scale with the surrounding single family homes and unquestionably will adversely affect our properties and the open, park -like feel of the area. This is the wrong sort of development for the area. Nowhere else in Minnesota has PHS built one of these 3- or 4 -story facilities in a location that is surrounded on all four sides by single family homes. With the exception of the Lake Johanna campus, they always have green space or similarly -sized commercial buildings adjacent to their buildings. Simply put, it's the wrong building for this site. The question has been asked, but so far we have not received an answer: What is the City of Arden Hill's responsibility to us the homeowners from financial, lifestyle and other damages? We understand the invocation of a PUD allows negotiations and the relaxation of zoning codes, for example. But Where do you drawn line? How far beyond the code limits can you go? How much do we have to be hurt before you decide it's too much? What criteria do you apply? What policies are you following? How can we know when you are not meeting your responsibility to us? Frederick V. Fox 3168 Shorewood Drive Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 ffox @visi.com 651- 633 -5683 1 Meagan Beekman From: sjharpstead@comcast.net Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:56 AM To: Patrick Klaers; Jill Hutmacher; Meagan Beekman Subject: Fwd: Safety First Attachments: Wheeler.png FYI Stan Forwarded Message From: "Bill Brennom" <williambrennom@gmail.com> To: "Brenda Holden" <holdenbj24@aol.com "David Grant" <david .grant @ci.arden- hills.mn.us "David McClung" <davemcclung @comcast.net "Fran Holmes" <FranH116 @aol.com "Mayor Stan Harpstead" <sjharpstead@comcast. net> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 9:59:19 PM Subject: Safety First Dear Mayor Harpstead and Council Members; I am a resident of Wheeler /Shorewood, neighborhood, and suddenly discovered Presbyterian Homes was planning a large expansion across the street. As you probably know, injuries and trauma are the NUMBER ONE KILLER in children and young adults, from the age of 12 months to 22 years. Many of these deaths are accidents and particularly motor vehicle accidents. We, and most people would agree that prevention of these accidents is the best way to deaths and injuries before they occur. Our neighborhood with many young families are particularly concerned about the Presbyterian Homes plan that would add a BACK ENTRANCE Straight Into Wheeler and into the neighborhood. This is dangerous! In support of these children and their families of the neighborhood, please consider protecting them! Please help before it is too late and after the first accident! Thankyou, William S. Brennom,M.D. please read the attachment 1 Meagan Beekman From: Holmes Frances H [Frances. H. Holmes @irscounsel.treas.gov] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:54 AM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: FW: Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Plan Attachments: letter to AH_council_10_11_19_PHS.pdf FYI Original Message From: Amp3084 <amp3084 @aol.com> To: sjharpstead <sjharpstead @comcast.net david.grant <david .grant @ci.arden- hills.mn.us holdenbj24 <holdenbj24 @aol.com FranH116 <FranH116 @aol.com davemcclung <davemcclung @comcast.net> Sent: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 6:07 pm Subject: Presbyterian Homes Redevelopment Plan Dear Arden Hills City Council: We are residents of the neighborhood directly adjacent to the south border of the proposed redevelopment of the Presbyterian Homes Lake Johanna site. As a neighborhood, we were not aware of this project until a few weeks ago, just prior to the November 3, 2010 Arden Hills Planning commission meeting. At that meeting, we spoke to the Planning commission regarding the project as g p 1 did many of our neighbors. We were concerned about the density of the project, the proximity of the Brownstone townhouses to County Road D and the access road at County Road D and Wheeler and the affect on our residential neighborhood. None of the items we addressed to the Planning commission were discussed by the commission before they voted for approval of the Presbyterian Homes Plan. On November 8 we brought our concerns to the Roseville City Council who agreed to send the City g y of Arden Hills a letter expressing our concerns. They asked the representative from Presbyterian Homes, who was at the Council meeting, to meet with the residents of our neighborhood to hear our concerns. We did meet with John Mehrkens on November 15 The Presbyterian Homes listened to our concerns and offered to work on landscaping with the neighbors directly adjacent to the project on County Road D and Shorewood Drive to provide a better visual barrier. They also suggested creating a "pork chop" exit to the access road at County Road D and Wheeler. This type of exit would only allow traffic to exit to the right, that is, to the west on County Road D. They positively responded to our suggestions about explicitly looking at ways within their interior design to minimize traffic from and to Wheeler Ave. They agreed that it was worthwhile to do that. We applaud the concessions Presbyterian Homes is offering. Unfortunately, they are not adequate to alleviate the concerns of our neighborhood. Even if the County Road D driveway is changed to a right turn only exit we anticipate hundreds of additional cars each day driving north on Wheeler and Shorewood Lane in order to enter the campus at County Road D. The City of Roseville has requested in their letter to you that a traffic study be done at County Road D and Wheeler. Roseville conducted a preliminary traffic count prior to their November 8th City Council meeting and found that the traffic levels currently where high enough to warrant a traffic study. A more complete proposal for the County Road D access, that would require minimal change to the sight plan, would be use the access road to County Road D only as a one way west exit, as proposed by Presbyterian Homes and prohibit the access road as an entrance. The remainder of the road, 1 linking the Brownstone townhouses to the main building, would remain 2 way for residents to drive to and from the dining hall and other services. The Presbyterian Homes rejected this suggestion because the fire department might object to not having that road. In checking with the Johanna Fire Department, we were told that the fire department will predominately use the Lake Johanna Blvd. entrance to service the site. They said they will need a temporary access from County Road D during the construction phase. If the road exists after construction they would use it if the Lake Johanna Blvd. access is blocked by fallen trees, disabled vehicles, etc. In this proposed solution, the road would still exist and could be used as an entrance for emergency vehicles only. If a traffic study finds that excessive traffic would be directed past County Road D residences, the proposed Wheeler and Country Rd. D driveway should be designated for emergency use only. Since our neighborhood meeting with Presbyterian Homes, we learned that during the Arden Hills Shorewood Drive neighborhood meetings, the residents were told that the proposed road exiting south of the campus would be for emergency use only. Attached is a copy of a letter signed by these Shorewood Drive neighbors. We would like the City of Arden Hills and the Presbyterian Homes to really work with our neighborhood as they did with the other bordering neighbors of the project. Results of those neighborhood meetings which began in August, not in November, were an increase in the setback of the main building to be 100 feet from the adjacent residential property for the Shorewood Dr. area, road modifications to prohibit traffic in the Sandeen residential neighborhood and the actual moving of the Brownstone townhouses across the street to satisfy the concerns of the Lake Johanna Blvd neighbors. However, Presbyterian Homes will need some time to do that and submit any revisions to either the Planning Commission or the Council. We request that at your upcoming council meeting that you do not approve the project in its current form. The ideal would be to have Presbyterian Homes and your Planning Commission complete its job of working with all the neighbors, making revisions acceptable to all parties. If that is not feasible, we request that there be stipulations to your approval. Stipulations would seem to be difficult as we are sure that you would want to have your Planning Commission be aware of and agree to any modifications. Patrick Annette Phillips 3084 Shorewood Lane Roseville, Mn. 55113 651- 633 -9532 2 Meagan Beekman From: Sherri Eisenbraun Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 6:57 AM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: FW: Presbyterian Homes FYI Thank you and Have a great day! Sherri Eisenbraun Office Support Specialist City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 6 5 1 792 -7800 (651) 792 -7812 direct (651) 634-5137 fax sherri.eisenbraun EDci.arden- hills.mn.us Original Message From: Tim Quesnell jmailto:TQuesne11(hmr.net] Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 6:06 PM To: AHlnformation Subject: Presbyterian Homes To Whom It May Concern: As a neighbor of Presbyterian Homes, we have just recently become aware of the exciting and massive project they are undertaking. While there are many positive aspects to the project, we would like the Council to consider some changes supported by our. neighborhood. We live on Shorewood Lane just off of Wheeler. Like many of my neighbors, we have young children. As you may be aware, Shorewood Lane has a rather sharp curve that can be dangerous for pedestrians and children on bicycles (or other mode of transportation) when there is fast or increased traffic. Please consider the following changes at your meeting on 11/29: a. Eliminate the upper exit ie: No road connecting the main parking to exit out to Wheeler. b. Shift the parking lot for the SE Brownstones from its current location facing Co Rd D to the North side of the Brownstones. Additionally, the outlet for this new location for the parking lot should off -set to line -up with the commercial property on Co Rd D and not Wheeler, including a "pork- chop" to force traffic to the right. c. Add a berm and additional landscaping between the SE Brownstones and Co Rd D to better integrate the structure into our neighborhood. Thank you for your hard work on this project and your willingness to work with the residents to achieve the best possible outcome. Sincerely, 1 Tim and Jody Quesnell 3092 Shorewood Lane 2 Meagan Beekman From: holdenbj24 @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 201011:31 AM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: Fwd: Presbyterian Homes Expansion Original Message From: Steve Anderson <steve.anderson @acorncv.com> To: holdenbj24 @aol.com <holdenbj24 @aol.com> Sent: Mon, Nov 22, 2010 9:05 pm Subject: Presbyterian Homes Expansion Dear Brenda, I am representing a group of Roseville neighbors who live immediately adjacent to Arden Hills, just on the South side of Co Rd D. Dan Roe, mayor -elect of Roseville, suggested that I contact you directly. You have probably seen the myriad e -mails from our neighborhood to the Arden Hills city council expressing our significant concern with the Presbyterian Homes (PH) plan for a new upper exit to empty onto Co Rd D and Wheeler, essentially turning our neighborhood into the thoroughfare for PH employees. This would be extremely unsafe for our children and be very harmful to the quality of life in our neighborhood. We had a neighborhood meeting with PH last week, and John Merkens (VP of Project Development for PH) strongly implied that the basis for the addition of an upper exit was a requirement from both the fire department and Ramsey County engineering. Further, he stated that he "doubted whether the Arden Hills planning commission or the Arden Hills city council would pass the plan without an upper exit." We investigated these claims and determined the following: The Lake Johanna fire department did not make a request or a requirement for the upper exit. Further they stated that the department would use the Lake Johanna boulevard entrance for emergencies. Ramsey County engineering likewise did not make a request or a requirement for the upper exit. They did not comment on the upper exit at all since it was a city jurisdiction. We could find no evidence that the Arden Hills council requested or required the upper exit. In fact, Fran Holmes stated that the council had suggested making the upper exit emergency use only. John's fallacious claims regarding the basis for the upper exit simply reinforce our belief that PH is not taking the neighborhood concerns seriously or negotiating in good faith. Is there any chance that you could meet with a small group of people (3 -5 persons) representing the neighborhood and discuss this issue in more detail prior to the Arden Hills council meeting on 29 November 2010? Sincerely, Steve Anderson 1 President 1 Acorn Cardiovascular, Inc. 612-327-4795 sanderson@acorncv.com November 22, 2010 To the An Hills City Council That* you for the ::elestIOnt:: pre and am excted :about the possibilfty of a eei Presbyterian Homes has so much to offer and has been an enjoyable experience for me. Some of the :things 1 Ot40,(::::0r0 using the therapy pool and 10441.0g or :part:11).4-00g in the current events discussion group. 1 can see therobund..bein4benofiti41 it would offer thiritlike :•!better layout and more convenient laundry Thank y ou for consderin this project ,and th positive impact it will h4ye:.::or, the re4'4004 living here. Verona Scilmid all Meagan Beekman From: holdenbj24 @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 12:01 PM To: Meagan Beekman Subject: Fwd: Presbyterian Homes Development Original Message From: Chuck Julie Watkin <watkin1 @q.com> To: sjharpstead@comcast.net; david .grant @ci.arden- hills.mn.us; holdenbj24 @aol.com; FranH116 @aol.com; davemcclung@comcast.net Sent: Mon, Nov 22, 2010 7:20 pm Subject: Presbyterian Homes Development Dear Arden Hills City Council Members: We are 15 -year residents of Roseville on Shorewood Lane who will be adversely impacted in our neighborhood quality of life and property value by the PH Development. We simply request that, at a minimum, the plans be changed to reflect the changes proposed below by those in our neighborhood. In our opinion this does not adversely impact the development but rather would demonstrate collaboration and cooperation by PH and the Arden Hills City Council. This has not existed in the planning process to date. We ask that decisionmakers put themselves in our shoes as impacted homeowners in making their decisions on this development. We don't understand why PH would want to charge ahead with a plan that has such negative implications for homeowners (including safety of children) when reasonable alternatives such as those outlined below are available. We want to work with PH and would like to see that organization and the AH City Council demonstrate the same desire. Thank you. Charles and Julie Watkin 3076 Shorewood Lane 612.709.8192 Proposed Changes to Existing Plan The Wheeler /Shorewood Lane, Shorewood Drive Neighborhood Preservation Coalition proposes the following changes to the Presbyterian Homes PUD. We respectfully request that the Arden Hills City Council approve the following changes to the Presbyterian Homes proposed development. 1. Eliminate the southeast driveway and its exit onto Wheeler /Cty D— This will assure that the additional new traffic from the development is not encouraged to use residential streets but instead follows the site's existing traffic flow pattern. In addition the proposal assures that the employee traffic (approximately 310 daytime workers) will not be using Wheeler /County D as their primary ingress /egress to the property. We hope that this also discourages their trips through the neighborhood. We believe these changes will help minimize the additional new traffic burden on Wheeler St. and Shorewood Lane and Shorewood Drive and help to preserve the residential nature of the neighborhood immediately adjacent to the proposed development. 2. Move the parking lot for the east brownstone building to the north side of the building to preserve greenspace on the south side adjacent to the neighborhood. Add a berm to the south side of the east brownstone with several large pine trees. The driveway for the building should also use the existing driveway onto County D opposite Cox Insurance. This change results in a triple benefit to the proposed project and the adjacent residential neighborhood. a. Residential neighborhood traffic effects are minimized 1 b. Surface Parking Lot runnoff water is drained through the planned holding ponds rather than directly to the storm sewers. c. The greenspace interface with the southern neighborhood is more welcoming and consistent with the abutting residential use d. Proximity to parking is maintained for Cox insurance customer /employees. NOTE—It should be noted that although the southern boundary of the proposed development is named "county Road D. This is somewhat of a misnomer, the section of the road at the southern boundary of the project is in effect a residential street that serves as the Arden Hills /Roseville boundary and actually turns into Shorewood Drive and deadends in an Arden Hills neighborhood a just east of the property. The real Ramsey County D virtually ends at the Fairview Intersection at the southwestern corner of the property. 2 ovember 23, 2010 To: Arden Hills City Counsel, Hello my name is Phyllis Paprie and today is my one year anniversary of Iivng here at the Arden .Hills. Presbyterian Homes. I have enjoyed living here and especially appreciate my farnily picking out an apartment that has a patio. My home had a season porch and 1 was afraid I would really miss sitting in that room. But being able to sit outside on warm summer days and enjoy the squirrels, birds and fountain made my transition just a little easier. I'm excited about a redevelopment for two reasons: a targer apartment with more space and either more closets or the space for a larger armoire. 1 Phyllis Paone 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard Apt 77 Arden ills, MN 55112 City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment D Resolutions 2010 -064, 2010-065, 2010 -066, and 2010 -067 for a Preliminary and Final Plat, Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit Amendment, and Master and Final Planned Unit Development CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PRESBYTERIAN HOMES OF ARDEN HILLS, INC. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -064 WHEREAS, Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. "Developer is the owner of the following described real property "Property situated in the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, MN to wit: That part of Government Lot 5 in the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, and Lot 27, Auditor's Subdivision No. 80, Ramsey Co. Minn., according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence South 89 degrees 58 minutes 56 seconds East (assumed bearing based on Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, published December 17, 1991) along the south line of said Southeast Quarter, 630.00 feet to its intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Johanna Narrows, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 19 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds East, along said westerly line extended, 935.39 feet to the northwest corner of said plat of Johanna Narrows; thence North 33 degrees 53 minutes 27 seconds East, along a line drawn to a low point in Lake Johanna as established by the Ramsey County Surveyor from a published DNR Lake Map, Code Number D -0077, said low point having coordinate values of Not 190770 feet and Fasting 554570 feet, said coordinate values are based upon Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, Published December 17, 1991, 30 feet more or less, to the shoreline of Lake Johanna; thence northwesterly along said shoreline to its intersection with a line drawn South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West from said low point, to the point of intersection of the Original Government Survey Meander line and the northwesterly line of said Lot 27; thence South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, along last described line, 15 feet, more or less, to said intersection; thence South 46 degrees 56 minutes 01 seconds West, along the said northwesterly line of Lot 27, 177.10 feet to the north line of said Government Lot 5; thence South 89 degrees 51 minutes 59 seconds West, along said north line, 61149 feet to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 11 seconds East, along said west line, 1313.28 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. The North and East Boundaries of the above described parcel have been determined pursuant to Court File No. C7- 00- 10198, and marked by Judicial Landmarks. (Torrens property, Certificate of Title No. 533995) WHEREAS, the Developer submitted a completed application "Completed Application which included a request that the City Council approve a rezoning of the Property from R -2 (single and two family residential district) to R -4 (multiple dwelling district); WHEREAS, the Completed Application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing conducted on October 6, 2010; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued its review of the Completed Application request to November 3, 2010; WHEREAS, on November 3, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended findings of fact and recommended approval of the Developer's rezoning request; WHEREAS, on November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council reviewed the Completed Application; the comments and reports of the City Staff and its consultants; the comments and reports of the Developer and its consultants; and public comments; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council meeting on November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council made the following specific findings in regard to the Developer's rezoning request: 1. The Property is currently zoned R -2. 2. Independent, assisted, and skilled nursing care is currently provided on site, as approved by the City. 3. Independent senior housing, once defined as institutional housing, is now better defined as a multiple family use, which is not permitted in the R -2 District. 4. The application is proposing to rezone the Property to R -4 Multiple Dwelling District. 5. The proposed redevelopment, and mix of uses, is a permitted use in the R -4 District with the approval of an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit and a Planned Unit Development. 6. Rezoning the Property to R -4 would bring it into conformance with the proposed zoning for the Property on the City's Comprehensive Plan. 7. The R -2 and R-4 Districts are substantially similar in terms of development standards. 8. The rezoning will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods or the community as a whole and is in keeping with the intent of the Zoning Code, because the use, previously approved by the City, has existed on the Property for several decades with no negative effects. 9. The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan or the future land use designation of the Property. 2 10. The proposed rezoning and use would not be incompatible with the adjacent land uses because the traffic and parking impacts of a senior housing facility are substantially less than that of a non -age restricted housing facility, and the facility has existed for decades at its current intensity of use with no ill effects on the surrounding community. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Arden Hills City Council hereby approves the rezoning of the Property from R -2 (single and two family residential district) to R -4 (multiple dwelling district); BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Administrator is directed to record a certified copy of this Resolution with the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles /County Recorder; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Administrator is directed to revise the City Zoning Map accordingly. CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Dated: By: ATTESTED BY: Patrick Klaers City Administrator Arden Hills \Forms\Resolution Rezoning Pres. Homes.v4.doc 3 Stanley D. Harpstead Its: Mayor puu `86101 L3 oN aITd PnoO OI Iuunsind pauau op uaaq anug pared paquosap -anoqu all jo sauupunog Isug pug 1p ON alb a. agl puu 2utuu!2aq jo Iuiod all of laaj 8Z' 1 1 'mil Isom. plus Ouoju `fsug spuoaas j 1 safnu!tu 9Z s33.123p 00 glnos oouagl `.Jal.tuno fsua PPS Jo au!' Isom. otp of pa} 6tb 1 19 'mil lltou plus 2uoju Isar, spuooas 6S Salnuitu lc sa3J23p 68 glnos aouagl Iuotuu.Jano9 plus JO aull glJou oiI oI I33J �J 'LL 1 `LZ 1 Jo autj Ajlmon /k .tou plus agl 2uoju Iso j spuooas j O Salnu!tu 9c s33J53p 917 tpnos aouagl `.uopoasJalui plus of `ssaj .to a.totu `Iaaj S j 'au!' paquosap Isuj uoju Isom spuoaas Z£ salnuim j Z saa.t ap £8 glnos aouagl LZ Iog plus Jo auJj Apalsammpou a4I puu mil Japuuaw iaAJns fuatttuJan0D juUT2T1O all Jo uoTloas.tafui Jo IUTod alp oI `lutod rnoj plus luau IsaAk spuooas Z£ salnuitu j Z soo15op £8 linos um.uJp aU j u glTM uoTloasJalui si! of aupiols plus 2uoju Xpolsarngl1ou aouagl `.uuuugo f a)jug Jo auplogs aql oI `ssaj Jo atotu laaj OE `1661 `L 1 mgtuaooCl pogs!jgnd `£8 UVN `saluu!pJooD ilunop r OSWuZj uodn pasuq a.tu sanjun aluutp.t000 p!Us laaJ OLS1SS 21-Jtlsud puu I33J OLLO6T 2uttjl_loM Jo sanjun altu!p.t000 2uInug luzod MOT plus `LL00-Q i gmnN apo3 `dui alug Imo pagsijgnd u tuotj JoiCauns iclunop AastuuN agf /cq pagsijqulsa su uuuutj0 f alug ul Iuiod MOj u OI um.uJp auTi u &uoju Isug spuooas LZ SainuiW S saai2op gPoN aouall `SMOJJ1 N uuuugor Jo lujd plus Jo iauioo Isam.11JOU alI of I33J 6 S £6 `papualxa mil XIJaisarn plus 5uoju `Isug spuooas c Salnuitu ZO s33.123p 61 mioN aauatp `joa.lagl lujd papiooai aqI oI 2uip.tooau `Srno.u N uuuugo j' Jo aulj AIJalsam. all Jo uoiSUalxa 4IOijTflOS all llTM uotloasJalui sr! oI 133J 00'0£9 `.taltunO Isuaglnos plus Jo au!j limos all 2uoju (1661 'LT .log1113330 pagsijgnd `£S UVN `saluuiptoop rluno3 iastuu>j uo pasug 2ui.tuag patunssu) Isug spu000s 9S sainuRtu 8 S saai2ap 68 glmos aqua p uopas plus Jo iapuno Isua pnos aql jo .tauioa Isarnglnos agI Iu 2u-pui og :srnojloj su paciposap `joa.tagl mid pap.tooai aqi of 2u!pJo3ou 'mum op JastuuN `08 •oN uoisTATpgns moiipn\ `LZ 101 puu IsaR £Z 30UUZj `q.ioN OE d!gsum.o j uotloas Jo Japunb Isuaglnos alp u! S Iog IuatuuJano0 JO l.tud Iug j :itrn of NJA `icluno3 iastuud `s111H uopJV Jo AID 31 11 u! palunl!s (podoJd,,) Apadotd juai paquosap &uIMojjoJ all Jo IMMMO all Si (Jodo1oAoU,,) •ouj `slim uaRry Jo SatuoH trepo gsaJd `SV gHA S90 'ON MOIZIllOS A1IIMdo?Id 9NIAO2IdJV NOIJIlrIOSall '�AII `S�I'IIH I�I�(I?�V d0 STIJOH I�VRI�1AEIS d STIIH N1U MV AO AIID z •uopn1osaJ s!guo IenoJddd s rounop AID alp Jo alup aq Uo step 081 UTtp pn sap!' Jo J2s! a Npap.moa iTuno3 AostueN auk g1TM papiooal ag rid tuutd a n i ii not puoo alp o� joaCgns 4iodoid atp Joj 'auI sII!H Uap.IV Jo sauTOH UCI.131ACISaid JO WId JeuI J pui kieultullaid alp sanoiddn Xga.i q, uounoD uapx 31 11 WIWCIINIOSMI II a8 a2IOd I}I IHJ AWN suopejaa)J uotsTATpgns s,X1ia aq jo sluauiauTnbai aqi po HE o� u OJuoo AzadoJd all Jo TTId Ieu!d PUS kmuIturfa1d pasodoid alp Imp punoj itounoD kuD sIIIH uapJv aqp '01K `6Z .J3g1U AON uo 2uuaauu fOUno3 am Jo uoTsniouoo atp `Sva2IaHm pug `s:.uauuumo otjgnd pug `swiijnsuoo puw JadoIanaQ alp jo sioda.i put siivawuloo aq� `.sluwijnsuoo SI! pum Buis AID alp Jo siodaj puw sluauuuuoo `.uoip oijddv paiaidwoD 3112 pOMOTna.J jTounoD AID BATH UapJ\T alp `OIOZ `6Z J3g11J AO uo `svasaHA `reAwddr I1u!d pur kirupUTIaJd ..10J isanbai madopnaa jo J1noJddt put ioi j �o s5umull papuaunuooaJ uo!ss RUUJOD u!uuuld 31 41 `0I0Z `E .13g1JOAON UO `•0IOZ .13g1U0AON o uogroiiddv papjduuoj aip Jo rnMMnal alp panupuoo uoIss!wuIo3 utuuuTd aq `Sva HHA `•0 i OZ `9 iagop0 uo palonpuoo 5uuiaq oijgnd uo!sstuKIoD OUTUU1id 3141. Aq pannainal SUM uo1TUoiiddIV pa-pi 3111. `Sv HHAN `/Cpadom atp JoJ mud pum''u!ur!P d alp ano.widt llo nop AID alp mil lsanbai 2uipnpoui (uoijioqddy palaldwoD uogeonddd papa Edwoo pautuugns JadojanaU aq1. `sv r n -i (566££S 'oN ap?.L3o aTeoi3plaD `icpadozd suallo,I,) •sxreuzpuel jepipnr icq Jo /l pua z ialuMS STHH NaMIV do AIID aop ,n �u1 �1d 2ulnoJddy uopnlosalEsuuog\sll!H uap qua f\gaissanslasnvd Joluils!u!uupV !3 SJaLI) rpm,' U T1S1.L1V :pa��Q CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PRESBYTERIAN HOMES OF ARDEN HILLS, INC. RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 2010-066 WHEREAS, Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. "Developer is the owner of the following described real property "Property situated in the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, MN to wit: That part of Government Lot 5 in the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, and Lot 27, Auditor's Subdivision No. 80, Ramsey Co. Minn., according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence South 89 degrees 58 minutes 56 seconds East (assumed bearing based on Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, published December 17, 1991) along the south line of said Southeast Quarter, 630.00 feet to its intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Johanna Narrows, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 19 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds East, along said westerly line extended, 935.39 feet to the northwest corner of said plat of Johanna Narrows; thence North 33 degrees 53 minutes 27 seconds East, along a line drawn to a low point in Lake Johanna as established by the Ramsey County Surveyor from a published DNR Lake Map, Code Number D -0077, said low point having coordinate values of Not thing 190770 feet and Fasting 554570 feet, said coordinate values are based upon Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, Published December 17, 1991, 30 feet more or less, to the shoreline of Lake Johanna; thence northwesterly along said shoreline to its intersection with a line drawn South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West from said low point, to the point of intersection of the Original Government Survey Meander line and the northwesterly line of said Lot 27; thence South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, along last described line, 15 feet, more or less, to said intersection; thence South 46 degrees 56 minutes 01 seconds West, along the said northwesterly line of Lot 27, 177.10 feet to the north line of said Government Lot 5; thence South 89 degrees 51 minutes 59 seconds West, along said north line, 61149 feet to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 11 seconds East, along said west line, 1313.28 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. The North and East Boundaries of the above described parcel have been determined pursuant to Court File No. C7- 00- 10198, and marked by Judicial Landmarks. (Torrens property, Certificate of Title No. 533995) WHEREAS, the Property is subject to the conditions of that certain Conditional Use Permit and Conditional Use Permits Amendments as contained in City Planning Case File Nos. 70 -52, 73- 10, 75 -17A, 78 -31, 93 -22, and 05 -017 (all herein "Existing CUP Developer submitted a completed application "Completed Application including a request that the City Council approve the Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan for the Property; WHEREAS, the Developer submitted a Completed Application including a request that the City approve an amendment to the Existing CUP; WHEREAS, the Completed Application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing conducted on October 6, 2010; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued its review of the Completed Application to November 3, 2010; WHEREAS, on November 3, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended findings of fact and recommended approval of Developer's request for an Amendment to the Existing CUP; WHEREAS, on November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council reviewed the Completed Application; the comments and reports of the City Staff and its consultants; the comments and reports of the Developer and its consultants; public comments; and the effect of the proposed project upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of surrounding land, in the community as a whole, including but not limited to, existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; noise; glare; odor; vibration; smoke; dust; air pollution; heat; liquid or solid waste; and other nuisance characteristics; drainage; population density; visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; adjoining land values; and the orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the council meeting, the City Council found that, if the project is constructed in compliance with the terms of the PUD Development Agreement for the Property, there would be no such adverse effects. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Arden Hills City Council hereby approves an Amendment to the Existing CUP to replace all prior site plan approvals with the Redevelopment Plan as defined in the PUD Development Agreement; and directs that if there are any conflict between the terms of the Existing CUP and the terms of this Resolution, the terms of this Resolution shall control. 2 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS Dated: By: ATTESTED BY: Patrick Klaers City Administrator Arden Hills \Forms\Resolution Approving CUP.v4.doc 3 Stanley D. Harpstead Its: Mayor CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PRESBYTERIAN HOMES OF ARDEN HILLS, INC. RESOLUTION APPROVING MASTER AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 2010-067 WHEREAS, Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. "Developer is the owner of the following described real property "Property situated in the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, MN to wit: That part of Government Lot 5 in the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, and Lot 27, Auditor's Subdivision No. 80, Ramsey Co. Minn., according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence South 89 degrees 58 minutes 56 seconds East (assumed bearing based on Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, published December 17, 1991) along the south line of said Southeast Quarter, 630.00 feet to its intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Johanna Narrows, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 19 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds East, along said westerly line extended, 935.39 feet to the northwest corner of said plat of Johanna Narrows; thence North 33 degrees 53 minutes 27 seconds East, along a line drawn to a low point in Lake Johanna as established by the Ramsey County Surveyor from a published DNR Lake Map, Code Number D -0077, said low point having coordinate values of Not 190770 feet and Fasting 554570 feet, said coordinate values are based upon Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, Published December 17, 1991, 30 feet more or less, to the shoreline of Lake Johanna; thence northwesterly along said shoreline to its intersection with a line drawn South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West from said low point, to the point of intersection of the Original Government Survey Meander line and the northwesterly line of said Lot 27; thence South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, along last described line, 15 feet, more or less, to said intersection; thence South 46 degrees 56 minutes 01 seconds West, along the said northwesterly line of Lot 27, 177.10 feet to the north line of said Government Lot 5; thence South 89 degrees 51 minutes 59 seconds West, along said north line, 61149 feet to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 11 seconds East, along said west line, 1313.28 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. The North and East Boundaries of the above described parcel have been determined pursuant to Court File No. C7 -00 -1 0198, and marked by Judicial Landmarks. (Torrens property, Certificate of Title No. 533995) WHEREAS, the Developer submitted a completed application "Completed Application including a request that the City Council approve the Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan for the Property; WHEREAS, the Completed Application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing conducted on October 6, 2010; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued its review of Developer's Completed Application request to November 3, 2010; WHEREAS, on November 3, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended findings of fact and approval of Developer's request for a Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan; WHEREAS, on November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council reviewed the Completed Application; the comments and reports of the City Staff and its consultants; the comments and reports of the Developer and its consultants; and public comments; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council meeting on November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council made the following findings in regard to the Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan: 1. The Completed Application exceeds the requirements of the City's Design Standards for the R -4 District. 2. The Completed Application is in compliance with the City's Sign Regulations. 3. The Completed Application is in substantial conformance with the requirements of the City's Zoning Code for the proposed R -4 District. 4. The Developer is requesting flexibility from Zoning Code regulations relating to building height and density through the Planned Unit Development Process. 5. The height of the primary building would be 52 feet as calculated by City Ordinance. The roof line variegates and the height of the building nearest to adjacent properties would be 36 feet. 6. The existing density on site is 17.6 units per acre; the proposed density would be 18.2 units per acre. 7. In exchange for zoning flexibility, the Developer is proposing a number of items which exceed the Zoning Code requirements, including, excess open space, tree and perennial plantings, storm water treatment and management, increased setbacks, enhanced design elements and building material quality. 2 8. The redevelopment of the Property pursuant to the approved PUD Agreement will not create a negative impact on the immediate area or the community as a whole because, the facility has operated on the site since 1955, the land use of the site is not proposed to change, the quality of the development and site design features will enhance the aesthetics of the site and surrounding area, the impacts on Lake Johanna and water quality will be improved by increased storm water management and setbacks to the lake. 9. The redevelopment of the Property is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. 10. The Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development Plan advance the City's goals outlined in the Comprehensive Plan by promoting the development of a variety of housing options by preserving and increasing high- quality housing opportunities that are suitable for a mix of ages, incomes and household types; by encouraging the incorporation of affordable, life- cycle, and work force housing where feasible; and by promoting the protection of lakes and the natural environment. 11. The proposed redevelopment of the Property furthers the Metropolitan Council's target of 285 -800 new life -cycle housing units by 2020 for the City. 12. The proposed redevelopment of the Property will not have a significant impact on traffic because the site does not currently negatively impact traffic, and the increase in 14 units would not have a noticeable effect on the immediate road system. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Arden Hills City Council hereby approves the Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan for the Property provided that the property is developed in compliance with the terms of the PUD Development Agreement for the Property. 3 Dated: ATTESTED BY: Patrick Klaers City Administrator Arden Hills\Forms\Resolution Approving PUD.v4.doc 4 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By: Stanley D. Harpstead Its: Mayor City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment E Development Agreement CITY OF ARDEN HILLS PRESBYTERIAN HOMES OF ARDEN HILLS, INC. PUD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PLANNING CASE 10 -012 1.0 Parties. This PUD Development Agreement "Agreement is dated the 29 day of November, 2010, and is entered into by the City of Arden Hills, a Minnesota statutory city "City and Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. "Developer 2.0 Recitals. The following recitals are intended to express the intention of the parties and to describe the review process followed by the City. These recitals shall be a part of the Agreement: A. Developer is the fee owner of the following described real property "Property situated in the City of Arden Hills, Ramsey County, MN: That part of Government Lot 5 in the Southeast Quarter of Section 33, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, and Lot 27, Auditor's Subdivision No. 80, Ramsey Co. Minn., according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 33; thence South 89 degrees 58 minutes 56 seconds East (assumed bearing based on Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, published December 17, 1991) along the south line of said Southeast Quarter, 630.00 feet to its intersection with the southerly extension of the westerly line of Johanna Narrows, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 19 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds East, along said westerly line extended, 935.39 feet to the northwest corner of said plat of Johanna Narrows; thence North 33 degrees 53 minutes 27 seconds East, along a line drawn to a low point in Lake Johanna as established by the Ramsey County Surveyor from a published DNR Lake Map, Code Number D -0077, said low point having coordinate values of Not thing 190770 feet and Fasting 554570 feet, said coordinate values are based upon Ramsey County Coordinates, NAD 83, Published December 17, 1991, 30 feet more or less, to the shoreline of Lake Johanna; thence northwesterly along said shoreline to its intersection with a line drawn South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West from said low point, to the point of intersection of the Original Government Survey Meander line and the northwesterly line of said Lot 27; incorporated thence South 83 degrees 21 minutes 32 seconds West, along last described line, 15 feet, more or less, to said intersection; thence South 46 degrees 56 minutes 01 seconds West, along the said northwesterly line of Lot 27, 177.10 feet to the north line of said Government Lot 5; thence South 89 degrees 51 minutes 59 seconds West, along said north line, 61149 feet to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 11 seconds East, along said west line, 1313.28 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. The North and East Boundaries of the above described parcel have been determined pursuant to Court File No. C7- 00- 10198, and marked by Judicial Landmarks. (Torrens property, Certificate of Title No. 533995) B. The Property is currently developed for institutional uses consisting of the McKnight Care Center (208 assisted living and primary care units); Sutton Place (19 independent senior units); and Lake View Residence (136 assisted living Units and 33 memory care units) all as shown on Exhibit A attached and C. The redevelopment of the Property is expected to proceed according to the following construction schedule "CS 1. May 2011 -Start of site work and construction of 2/3 of new Lakeview building "CS 1 2. August 2012- Relocate Lakeview residents from old Lakeview building to new Lakeview building. Demolish old Lakeview building and remove demolition debris "CS 2 3. October 2012 through March 2013- Construction of remaining portion on new Lakeview building ("CS 3 4. May 2013- Landscaping /hard soaping for new Lakeview building "CS 4 5. September 2013 -Site work for first brownstone building "CS 5 6. February 2014- Relocate residents from Sutton Place "CS 6 2 7. March 2014- Demolish Sutton Place and remove demolition debris. Begin construction of second brownstone building "CS 7 8. Spring 2015 Completion of final landscaping /hard- scaping improvements for the Property "CS 8 D. On September 7, 2010, Developer submitted a completed application requesting that the City approve a rezoning of the Property from R2 to R4; approve an amendment to the original and Amended Conditional Use Permits that currently apply to the Property; approve a Preliminary and Final Plat for the Property; and approve a Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development Plan for the Property "Completed Application E. Planning Commission Review. 1. On the 6 day of October, 2010, at a public hearing preceded by the required notices, the City's Planning Commission reviewed the Completed Application; the reports and comments of the City's staff and consultants; the reports and comments of the Developer and its consultants; and comments and /or written materials submitted by members of the public. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City's Planning Commission continued its review of the matter until November 3, 2010. 2. In response to information and comments received at the October 6, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, the Developer made several revisions to its proposed Redevelopment Plan as defined and illustrated on Exhibit B attached and incorporated "Revised Plans 3. On November 3, 2010, the City's Planning Commission continued its review of the Completed Application and Revised Plans; and recommended approval of the rezoning of the Property, the Amendment of the Conditional Use Permit for the Property, the Preliminary and Final Plat of the Property; and the Master Planned Unit Development and Final Plan Unit Development Plan for the Property based upon the findings and subject to the recommended conditions of approval as contained in the City Planner's Memo dated November 3, 2010 attached and incorporated as Exhibit C. F. City Council Review. On November 29, 2010, the Arden Hills City Council reviewed the Completed Application, the Revised Plans, the comments and reports of the City's staff and consultants, the comments and reports of the Developer and its consultants, and public comments. 3 2, The City Council approved the rezoning of the Property "Resolution No. 2010- 064 approved the Preliminary and Final Plat of the Property "Resolution No. 2010- 065 approved the Amendment of the Conditional Use Permit for the Property "Resolution No. 2010- 066 and approved the Master Planned Unit Development and Final Planned Unit Development Plans for the Property "Resolution No. 2010 -067). The action of the City Council was based on the findings and subject to the recommendations contained in the report of the City Planner dated November 29, 2010; and upon the terms and conditions contained herein. 3.0 Terms and Conditions. In consideration of the above referenced City Council approvals, in compliance with the provisions of the City's Development Regulations, and in consideration of the undertakings herein expressed, the parties agree: A. Development Plans. Developer shall construct the project in compliance with the following plans, requirements and specifications "Project Plans signed and dated by the City Planner (Exhibits E -1 through E -16, attached and incorporated) and contained in the City's file for Planning Case No. 10 -012. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council: 1. Lake Johanna Fire Department Memo dated September 13, 2010, or other solutions as agreed to by the Fire Marshal (E -1). 2. Public Work Director's Memo dated November 24, 2010 (E -2). 3. Narrative for Project Application Submittal dated October 28, 2010, and additional Narrative dated November 23, 2010 (E-3). 4. Illustration of Building Elevations revised October 25, 2010, prepared by Pope Architects -3 Sheets (E -4). 5. Preliminary Plat prepared by Sunde Land Surveying dated August 31, 2010 and updated October 15, 2010 -6 sheets (E -5). 6. Overall Site Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010-sheet C 1.0 (E -6). 7. Site Development Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010 Sheets C 2.0 and C 2.1 (E -7). 8. Geometric Site and Phasing Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010-Sheets C 3.0 and C 3.1 (E -8). 9. Zoning District Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. clarified November 24, 2010-Sheet A 1.1 (E -9). 4 10. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010- Sheets C 4.0 and C 4.1 (E -10). 11. Civil Detail Sheet prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010 -Sheet 6.0 (E -11). 12. Tree Preservation Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010 Sheets C 7.0 and C 7.1 (E -12). 13. Landscape Plan prepared by LHB, Inc. dated September 24, 2010 -Sheet LO (E-13). 14. Tree Planting Plan by LHB, Inc. dated September 24, 2010 -Sheet L 1 (E- 14). 15. Photometric Light Plan prepared by Clark Engineering Corp. dated October 25, 2010 -Sheet E 1.0 (E -15). 16. Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills Redevelopment Site Rendering prepared by Pope Associates, Inc. revised November 24, 2010 (E -16). B. Conditions Precedent to Issuance of Development Permits. Prior to the City's issuance of any development permits for the project, the Developer shall: 1. Obtain the Fire Marshal's written approval of the Development Plans. 2. Obtain the City Engineer's and Public Work Director's written approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans. 3, Obtain approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District and all other applicable permitting agencies prior to the issuance of any City permits. Copies of such permits shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any permits. 4. Prepare a construction phasing and emergency vehicle access plan and obtain the Public Work Director's, Ramsey County Sheriff's and Fire Marshals written approval of the construction phasing and emergency vehicle access plan, which plan shall apply to all phases of construction. 5. The Developer shall work with adjacent property owners who reside on Shorewood Drive to determine the exact location and species of landscaping materials to be planted along the east line of the Property. 6. Submit a financial surety, in the amount of 125% of the estimated cost of the landscaping improvements. The form of surety should be approved by the City Attorney and shall remain in effect for (2) two years from the 5 completion date of the landscaping plan. Financial surety will be released in accordance with City regulations. C. Development Permits. The Developer shall apply for and obtain its first development permit within one year of the City Council's approval of the Master and Final Planned Unit Development Plan or such approvals shall expire unless extended by the City Council prior to the PUD Development Plan's approval expiration date. The extension request must be in writing to the City Planner at least forty -five (45) days prior to the expiration date. As used herein the term "Development Permit" includes, but is not limited to building permits, grading permits and erosion control permits. D. Use of Trails. Developer shall allow public use of the trail systems within the development, so long as the public does not abuse the privilege or create an adverse affect on the property. Developer's trail use policy will be applied to the trail system shown on the site plan. Developer will notify the City thirty (30) days in advance of a change to its trail use policy and the reasons for the change. E. Construction Schedule Variations. City Planner shall be given written notice of variations in the CS. City Council shall be advised of significant variations in the CS and the reason for such variations. F. As -Built Landscaping Plan. Upon completion of the project Developer shall submit an as -built landscaping plan to the City. G. Occupancy Permit. The City reserves the right to withhold occupancy permits if demolition of existing buildings does not proceed according to CS unless the City Council approves an extension of the building demolition date. H. Compliance with City Regulations. During the redevelopment of the Property, Developer shall comply with all applicable City Regulations, including but not limited to, the Building Code, Fire Code, and the Zoning Code. If there is a conflict between the City's Zoning Regulations and the provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall apply. I. Container Screening. Garbage and recycling containers shall be fully screened from the view of residential properties and shall be located in the lower level of the loading and service area designated on the rendered site plan presented in the November 3, 2010 Planning Case Report. J. Stop Sign. If a warrant analysis indicates that a four -way or a three -way stop is necessary at the intersection of the entrance to the Property on County Road D and Wheeler Avenue, Developer, at its sole expense, shall construct such four way or three -way stop according to plans and specifications approved by the City Engineers for the City of Roseville and the City of Arden Hills. 6 K. Right -Out Only onto County Road D. Traffic leaving the site onto County Road D shall be prohibited from continuing directly down Wheeler Avenue with a right out only barrier curb median, subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. 4.0 Indemnification of City. Developer shall and does hereby indemnify, defend and hold the City, its council, agents, employees, attorneys and representatives harmless against and in respect to any and all claims, demands, actions, suits, proceedings, losses, costs, expenses, obligations, liabilities, damages, recoveries and deficiencies, including interest, penalties and attorneys fees, including without limitation, any litigation which may be commenced by Developer, that the City incurs or suffers, which arise out of and result from or relate to any of the following: A. Failure of the Developer to observe or perform any covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part, either jointly or severally, to be observed and performed under the terms of this Agreement; B. Failure of Developer to pay contractors, subcontractors, laborers, or material men; C. Failure of the Developer to pay for materials; D. Approval by the City of PUD Plans, the Final Plans and other PUD controls; E. Approval by the City of any final Plats; and F. Failure to obtain the necessary permits and authorizations to redevelop the Property. 5.0 Notice. A. Where written notice is required of the City, it shall be sent to: Meagan Beekman Arden Hills City Planner City of Arden Hills 1245 West Highway 96 Arden Hills, MN 55112 B. Where written notice is required of the Developer it shall be sent to: Pamela Belz PHS of Arden Hills, Inc. 2845 Hamline Avenue North Roseville, MN 55113 6.0 Defense of Claim. With respect to any claims or demands asserted against the City by a third party of the nature covered by Section 4.0, and provided that the City gives timely 7 formal written notice thereof to the Developer. The Developer will, at its sole expense, provide for the defense thereof with counsel of its own selection, but approved by the City, which approval shall not be unnecessarily withheld or delayed; the Developer will pay out costs and expenses, including attorney's fees incurred and so defend against such claims, provided that the City shall, at all times, also have the right to fully participate in the defense at the City's expense. If the Developer fails to defend, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to undertake the defense of, to compromise or settle the claim or other matter, for the account of and at the risk of the Developer. All attorney's fees incurred by the City related to such defense shall be paid by the Developer. This Section 6.0 shall not apply to costs incurred or suffered by the City which relate to, result from, or are caused by the City's willful violation of applicable law. 7.0 City Remedies. If a default occurs, that is not caused by force majeure, the City shall give the Developer formal written notice of default and the Developer shall have thirty (30) working days to appear before the City Council to discuss the default. If the Developer, after formal written notice by the City, does not cure the default within thirty (30) working days following the Council appearance, the City may avail itself of any remedy afforded by law and any of the following cumulative, not exclusive remedies: A. City may specifically enforce the Agreement. B. The City may suspend any work, improvement or obligation to be performed by the City with respect to the CS affected by the default. C. The City may collect on the appropriate security bond, irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or other security applicable to the redevelopment of the Property. D. The City may deny building and occupancy permits for buildings within the redevelopment project. E. The City may, at its option, in regard to landscaping improvements and in regard to damages caused to public or private property as a result of the construction of the redevelopment project on the Property, subject to the determination of the City, perform the work to be performed by the Developer, in which case the Developer shall, within thirty (30) days after written billing by the City, reimburse the City for any commercially reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City. In the alternative, the City may, in whole or in part, specially assess any of the costs and expenses incurred by the City; and the Developer hereby waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the isolation of the landscaping improvements and the special assessments resulting there from, including but not limited to the hearing requirements and any claim that the special assessments exceed benefit. With respect to such special assessments incurred in cases of default under this provision, the Developer hereby waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to Minn. Stat. §429.081. 8 8.0 Validity. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause or paragraph of this Agreement is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Agreement. 9.0 Recording. This Agreement or a Memorandum Summary thereof shall be recorded with the county recorder and the Developer shall provide and execute any and all documents necessary to implement the recording. 10.0 Binding Agreement. The parties mutually recognize and agree that all terms and conditions of this recordable Agreement shall run with the subject Property, and shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, administrators and assigns of the Developer. 11.0 Contract Assignment. The Developer may not assign this Agreement, except to an entity controlled by the Developer without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligations hereunder shall continue in full force in effect, until completion of the terms of this Agreement. 12.0 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the State of Minnesota. 13.0 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one in the same instrument. 14.0 Headings. The subject headings of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are included for purposes of convenience only, and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of its provisions. 15.0 Access. The Developer hereby grants to the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter upon the subject Property to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the redevelopment of the Property. 9 ATTEST: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above named parties have hereunto set their hands. Patrick Klaers, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF On this day of 2010, before me, a notary public within and for said county, personally appeared Stanley D. Harpstead and Patrick Klaers, to me known to be respectively the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Arden Hills, and they executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same by authority of and on behalf of City of Arden Hills. 10 Notary Public CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, a Minnesota statutory city Stanley D. Harpstead, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF Arden Hills\Agreements\Developement Agreement -Pres. Homes.v l 3.doc 11 PRESBYTERIAN HOMES OF ARDEN HILLS, INC. By: Its: On this day of 2010, before me, a notary public within and for said county, personally appeared the of Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc., and has executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same by authority of and on behalf of Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills, Inc. Notary Public City ofArden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment F Partial Site Plan at Sandeen Road PARTIAL SITE PLAN AT SANDEEN ROAD POPE PHS of Arden Hills Redevelopment 2010 ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 11-11 -i0 1 COMM. #72535 -10080 `1111 Presbyterian homes services City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Attachment G Revised Development Plan Narrative dated November 23, 2010, and Traffic Per Entry Analysis November 23, 2010 Ms. Meagan Beekman City Planner City of Arden Hills By email RE: PHS of Arden Hills Redevelopment Project As the proposed redevelopment project for the PHS campus in Arden Hills has moved through the approvals process we have integrated changes based on input from the City, County and neighborhood residents. At the Planning Commission hearing on November 3, we heard comments from Roseville residents living south of County Road D. Most comments related to concerns of increased traffic that may occur on Wheeler Road. The residents have been concerned about student traffic cutting through the neighborhood to class at Northwestern and feel our County Road D access will greatly increase traffic onto Wheeler. As traffic projections provided to the City demonstrate, the redevelopment is expected to increase traffic slightly adding 52 trips over the current number today. Staff from both cities acknowledged this is a relatively minor change that is not expected to impact traffic. Of significant note is that trips made to and from practice and games by those utilizing the soccer fields were not counted in the current site traffic numbers which has a significant impact on Wheeler. In addition that traffic will not exist in the proposed project making the projection of increased traffic even less likely. Given the concerns voiced by the Roseville residents, PHS held a neighborhood meeting on November 15 to further discuss concerns and solutions. This meeting produced plan changes which are being incorporated into the drawings to be delivered to the City. The most significant change is the reconfiguration of the access onto County Road D. This access is now proposed to include a "right out only" from campus onto County Road D. This will send traffic leaving the site to the Fairview intersection. This relieves much of the potential traffic increase to Wheeler. There remains the opportunity for traffic entering the site from County Road D to travel through Wheeler. We examined making our entry a one way in a number of configurations and found that it compromised movement of traffic within the site to an unacceptable conclusion. This would have made residents from the Brownstone have to leave the site and drive "around the block" to come in the main entrance to get to the main building if they desired to join in a meal, chapel or other event. The second change was made internally to the site parking layout. It will encourage much of the main parking area to exit out the main entry onto Lake Johanna. The configuration was suggested by a neighbor at the meeting. We have made this change to the plan. The third result is to meet with the neighbors directly across County Road D at the time landscaping is installed to give them input as to location and type of landscape materials they feel best would screen their views. This is similar to the agreement we made with the neighbors to the east along Shoreline Drive. Although the traffic evaluation shows no notable increase to traffic for the site, we have been asked to estimate the distribution of traffic at each entry. This is only an estimate but is based upon reasonable assumptions. Enclosed are a diagram and spreadsheet with calculations. This study resulted in a distribution of the 1030 trips per day as follows: 95 at Sandeen Road, 643 at Lake Johanna, 292 at County Rd D. Furthermore of the 292 trips at County Rd D, half of them are leaving the site and will be directed to Fairview by the right out only configuration. This reduces the impact to Wheeler to a maximum of 146 inbound trips per day. It is reasonable to expect that not all trips into the southern entrance of campus will travel on Wheeler thus the impact is limited further. PHS believes the plan presented strikes a balance between the needs of our residents and the community. We will be present at the City Council meeting on November 29 to answer any questions the Council may have. In the meantime, if you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Thank you Pamela Belz Project Developer Encl: Entry diagram Entry calculations z 0 rn z 0 N 0 z z 0 0 in 0 m 1 g i 0 0) -4 0 N -4 0 Z z0 -I t 23 0 r (J) 0 z 0 ni 1111 Pm* 111 Arden Hills Campus Traffic per Entry analysis Lake Johanna Main Entrance November 2010 projections ots I trips per c Lower lot staff care center and AL ist and 2nd shifts 40 spots per 160 3rd shift 15 spots per 30 Lower lot visitor resident transport 16 spots x filled twice per day 32 Garage 54 residents apts generate 43 40 staff spots x 2 shifts 160 Brownstone 14 units x 2.02 per day 28 Main Lot west portion visitor resident transport 30 spots 2.5 per day 74 staff parking AL IL 1st 2nd shifts at 16 spots per shift 64 add 20% for PT staff trips additional 26 per shift 52 Total trips per day at Lake Johanna Main Entry pots ndeen County Road D South Entry Brownstone 22 x 2.02 trips Per day 44 Main Lot West 33 west section 17 of middle section st 2nd shift 50 200 20% add for PT staff trips additional 24 per shift 4 Total trips per day at County Road D Entry Total trips at build out full occupancy 11/24/2010CADocuments and Settings\meagan. beekman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\1 G43TE78\AH Traffic per entry analysis.xlsAH Traffic per entry analysis.xls Trips 160 30 32 43 160 28 74 64 52 643 1030 Attachment H Revised Site Rendering and Zoning District Plan dated November 24, 2010 City of Arden Hills City Council Meeting for November 29, 2010 Upper n d Terrace N EVISED co 535 10080 my��.. �1 �.:,�4 a� ter.,"' w :a k S`' e `"4 1 PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE VIEW NO.6 1 1 111 !V NORM .i i 1 1 7 VIEW NOA EXISTING SENIOR BUILDING TO BE DEMOUSHED VIEW NO.7 PARKING SUMMARY: UNDERGROUND SENIOR MC. 100 SPACES BROWNSTONE t40.1 •37 SPACES BROWNSTONE NO. 2 25 $PACES SUBTOTAL 1e4 SPACES ON-GRADE 195 SPACES TOTAL 357 SPACES e PRECAST METAL CONCRETE PIN-MOUNTED NUMERALS SIGN FACE i 11 SF. 14 SF. CU 1 4 SF. II Ji 0 SANDEEN SERVICE ENTRANCE 0 COUNTY ROAD D DRIVE ENTRANCE 1; 4SF. 0 LAKE JOHANNA BLVD. COUNTY ROAD D PROPERTY EAST OF LAKE JOHNANNA BLVD. CURRENT MING: Fh2 CURRENT USE: SKILLED CARE, ASSISTED AND INDEPENDEW UVING WITH A CONDMONAL USE PERMIT PROPOSED USE: SKILLED CARE, ASSISTED AND INDEPENDENT LIVING LAM USE INTENSITY: NO CHANGE R-2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS ACRE 5.5 PROPOSED DWELLING UNITS ACRE 17. PROPOSED DWELLING UNITS ACRE EXCU/DING CARE CENTER 9.3 (188 UNITS /20.18 ACRES) R-2 ALIONABLE BUILDING HEIGHT 35 0 LAKE JOHANNA BLVD. MAIN ENTRANCE Ft-2 MINIMUM LANDSCAPE AREA ess 837,204 &F. PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA 138% .854,279 S.F. 3 SF. 88F. Lk PROJECT SIGNAGE 1/4"=1'-0" R-2 LOT COVERED SY STRUCTURMLOWED 25% PROPOSED LOT COVERED BY SIRUCTURE 14.2% 139,073 S.F. PROPOSED STRUCTURE AREA 150.904 SF. EXISTING STRUCTURE AREA 151,418 ILF. PROPOSED SENIOR ASSISTED LIVING MEMORY CARE BUILDING HEIGHT: 55 PROPOSED AVERAGE HEIGHT ABOVE MN ENTRY 37 PROPOSED BROWNSTONE NO. 1 BUILDING HEIGHT: 30, PROPOSED BROWNSTONE NO. 2 BUILDING HEIGHT: 30, SEE NARRATNE FOR DISCUSSION OF AVERAGE SEMOR /ASSISTED LIVING MEMORY CARE BUILDING HEIGHT PE ASSOOATES INc. LISS ENERGY PARK DRIVE ST. PAUL, MN mains PIL Cf6044a-eaoo FAX WO 042-1,01 ARDEN HILLS SENIOR LIVING CAMPUS ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA 111111011111111=111111111111111111111111111111111110 presbyterian homes services ZONING DISTRICT PLAN Isms ad ReirsIce: PUD SUBMITTAL 9/7/10 PUD SUBMIi TAL 9/24/10 WEAR. 9/28/10 10/25/10 10/29/10 Fingon. 11/18/10 CLARIFICATION 11/24/10 Westin h 72535-10080 Bra by BS fleeted ly DW A1.1 Attachment 1 November 3, 2010, Report to the Planning Commission City of Arden Hills City Council fleeting for November 29, 2010 www.ci.arden- hills. mn.usJplanningcases