The URL can be used to link to this page

MP09-01CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITIf AVENUE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (763) 572-3592 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR: S-2, REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL/ AMENDMENT FOR MASTER PLAN APPROVAL PROPERTY INFORMATION - site plan required for submittal, see attached Address: S�k�.-I�'C ; Property Identification Number: ' `' � � � � � ` , Legal Description: Lot s I5 -� 9 Block �_ Tract/Addition � S��-� �_4 1,�� /� �1 � Description of Proposed Project (attach narrative if necessary): Sc� �i�k�T/G� Have you operated a business in a city which Yes No ✓ If Yes, which City? _ If Yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? ��_��_�__��____�� required a business license? Yes No V" ��_��_�� FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) (Contract purchasers: Fee owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME: 5�°z-- �L�.-z. �.�.� �.�.4 Y,< �...,_ v'__ ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE: SIGNATURE/DATE: ��_��_��_��_��_��_��_�� PETITIONER INFORMATION _ NAME: S�" l t'� -�- '.��,. ��-z � � �.�� ADDRESS: / � f �- �°5�� S'1-.�-�..�- . -�Ke � ✓r� DAYTIME PHONE:C;?S�- ,1�fs�-_ �,�7�l,�IGNATURE/DATE: Z �_��__�_��_��__��_��_�__�_��__��_��_� FEES - - Fee: $500.00 �5�� -� � % '7� % A lic on Number: �� C� d3� PP � - I Receipt #: - � Received By: • - % �.,� � Scheduled Planning Commission Date: t�- �/- � q Scheduled City Council Date: ��_C�� -c.� �J 15 Day Application Complete Noti �cation Date: �' -��_ r, c''� 60 Day Date: ��- j (�:� - �% �/ i ::& .,4 3 y; F � i.':�L._.:: %fl:�N'-'-.�``� • , FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENT'ER • 6431 UNIVERSTTY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (763) 571-3450 • FAX (763) 571-1287 • TTD/TTY (763) 572-3534 December 31, 2008 Select Senior Living Joel Larson 12415 55th Street Lake Elmo MN 55042 Dear Mr. Larson: Per Minnesota Statute 15.99, local government units are required to notify land use applicants within 15 working days if their land use applications are complete. We officially received your applications for a Preliminary Plat and Master Plan Amendment on December 19, 2008. This letter serves to inform you that your applications are complete. Your Preliminary Plat and Mater Plan Amendment application hearing and discussion will take place at the City of Fridley Planning Commission Meeting on January 21, 2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers at 6431 University Avenue. The City of Fridley City Council is scheduled to take final action on your preliminary plat and master plan amendment on February 9, 2009 at 7:30 P.M. Please plan to be in attendance at both of the above referenced meetinqs. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the process, please feel free to contact me at 763-572-3595. Sinc rely, � i � , '1 �q �'7 ' �� , Stacy Stro erg City Plann cc: Daniel Levernz 1340 Mississippi Street NE F "ridley MN 55432 1314 Mississippi Street LLC Attn: Kenneth 40896 Graystone Avenue North Branch MN 55056 C-08-91 Frank & Sharon DeMello 2823 Teledo Avenue St. Louis Park MN 55416 Richard Carlson 7691 Central Avenue NE Fridley MN 55432 Mark Mattison 643 Summit Avenue St. Paul MN 55105 u � ��s� � ��- � r� ��e � ,� � �� City of Fridley (Official Publicatio�) PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to allow for the construc- tion of a 5enior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, mem- ory care units, and assisted living units, legal descriptions are on file and avail- able at Fridley Municipal Center, gener- ally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central Avenue NE. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions relat- ed to this item may be referred to Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at 763-572-3595. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572- 3500 no later than January 14, 2009. The TDD number is 763-572-3534. The proposed City Council meeting date for this item will be on February 9, 2009. 'This date is subject to cha�ge depending on the outcome of the Planning Commission meeting. Please confirm City Council date prior to attending the City Council meeting. DAVID KONDRICK, CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION Published: January 8, 2009 (Jan. 8, 2009) Y2-MP-09-Q1-Select Sr Living PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Fridley Planning Commission at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue N.E. on Wednesday, January 21, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of: Consideration of a Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, legal descriptions are on file and available at Fridley Municipal Center, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central Avenue NE. Any and all persons desiring to be heard shall be given an opportunity at the above stated time and place. Any questions related to this item may be referred to Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at 763-572-3595. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later than January 14, 2009. The TDD number is 763-572-3534. The proposed City Council meeting date for this item will be on February 9, 2009. *This date is subject to change depending on the outcome of the Planning Commission meeting. Please confirm City Council date prior to attending the City Council meeting. DAVID KONDRICK CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION Publish: January 8, 2009 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: All property owners/residents within 350 feet of property, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central Avenue NE CASE NUMBER: Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01 & Preliminary Plat PS #09-01 APPLICANT: Select Senior Living Petitioner or re resentative must attend the Plannin Commission meetin . PURPOSE: The Master Plan Amendment, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, and the preliminary plat is to replat 5 lots to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted livin units LOCAT/ON OF 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central PROPERTYAND Avenue NE LEGAL DESCRIPT/ON: Legal descriptions on file and available at Fridley Municipal Center DATE AND TIME OF Planning Commission Meeting: HEARING: Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 7:00 p.m. The Planning Commission Meetings are televised live the night of the meeting on Channel 17. PLACE OF HEAR/NG: Fridley Municipal Center, City Council Chambers 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN. HOW TO 1. You may attend hearings and testify. PARTICIPATE: 2. You may send a letter before the hearing to Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator, at 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, MN 55432 or FAX at 763-571-1287. SPECIAL Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an ACCOMODATIONS: Interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later than January 14, 2009. The TDD # is 763-572-3534. ANY QUESTIONS: Contact Stacy Stromberg, Planner, at 763-572-3595. * PROPOSED C/TY The proposed City Council meeting Date for this item will be COUNCIL MEET/NG Monday, February 9, 2009. *This date is subject to change DATE depending on the outcome of the Planning Commission meeting. Please confirm City Council date prior to attending City Council meetin . Publish: January 8, 2009 �—J ' '� CITY OF FR/DLEY Community Development Department Public Hearing Notice _ _ ,,, ___. � � -- �,� - �s� ,�� - __ �l 0 � _ _ � I 6581 �I m � I w � � � °D w r � p � � - L I - � _ �,� m � � � � � � � � i � I �'�., Ss � i 6609 6588 � s� I i I 6597 6596 I I 6597 6596 I 6599 6580 ` � W A a � �Ir� � - w w � � � �I >� $� y" i: - � - � � 50 � � 6581 � 658 � � 6581 '� 6580 1 � � 6568 � 6555 � � M � � � �! � p I I �, P � _ � _ _ z � — -- _ _ _ � � 6550 65 - -'� - ', � � ��C�� 6537 ' " � � � � � � !�_L �f1K LIV ��A, ` a i 6'--- - _ I 6565 6564 I� 6565 6564 'I I 6571 �� °� �� ,� 1 a� m I ' 546 T i��'I _ I_i� �_ -' �+ � I � n� a _T . II! 6549 _ _ -- - -- - , v 1380 h_ 6 5 4 8 N 6 5 4 9 ' 6 5 4 8 I 6 5 4 4 1 3 8 0 I. - seao I ssao I In _—I— � ! I_ s s 2 s � I, I 6520I, �. 6533 ' 6532 6531 6534 N � I� I - � 6533 6532 m � - ��- - -- � � �� - - -�- - I I �I 6519 'I ° � `- , . , , -. i r°'i 1 � � r� m 6517 6516 6517 6516 ' � � � '' -.-� - -� - ,n r� � � I � � � � � �, � �� 6501 � 6500 �, � 65� 01 � 6500 � � � �'i 6501 � 1341 M I � � � ' � � � I � I o -- - r I 6501 I- 1299 I I- _ - �- m-� I MISSISSIPPI ST p ll Of � N j. N � �2SO I �282 � �I I o p >� o I � rn ' o . -- . i . � N II ��I _- I-- �-�� I,, o�� o � � 6459 �I, ... _! � I �r° j o � N I�i a l� c� � ' �'� � � � ' � �' � � � , ' 6452 m - — � � I, ' �� r - 6449 � I _' — — Ir � saas �I saaa m � � �, j I 6435 Ili IS � ry{37 � 6436 I~ I 6435 � --{ - 6 4 4 0 G I I n � 6 4 9 0 r I i I I 6425 lO --- �� '._. . _- . , i r� �' �n . r� I cv �I � O� 6425 6424 I I 6423 I — _ � . M � °v_ v -I, a � 6428 I� - 6413 I 6412 � 6411 ! II� � � ' � I I� I� I 6417 I 6416 �� - �- - � - — - � 6401 �' � tO � �i �� i v v � _- - � �_ � I I � � i �I 6400 i 6389 - - I '__ IL� I` ' I�. �. �._ _�- I- � I! - - -�I i _ -- ,64T AVE _ I sao, s4o, � 6 3 9 3 6 3 9 0 � � 6 3 9 1 � 6 3 8 8 I I II i_. I � I— --_ - - I�- - �_ _ - , I 6 3 9 1 13 5 6 w i 6400 6379 6378 i � 6379 6378 6373 � i � o I I � . . , i� ' I� � fD I N O (O I� tL , - � - - 6381 � � � � I o � � �` 6367 � �_. ' 1372 -` v ; v v v � _ __ _ _ _ O I N � � I ._ ..-___ _. . . 6366 6366 6361 1356 m � i� I i� �3 �I i � r' 6355 _ ', � � ', - ' - �I i - 6352 II � 6303 I 6342 6343 - J �_ 6350 i I � r - 1 �- �- � - - � � � 8345 � � I -- 6336 � � 6319 6328 I 6329 _ � - - - -r _ -- . II � 'I � - - -- ; �335 6303 in � � 6319 � 8308 � 6315 8312 � � � � _ � --�-- �� - 6325 1� 1271 �, 6300 �- � � 1441�� 6301 ' 1065 � j �o ! �� 6301 � � � �� __� � � � _ 6 ^ , O� 6315 i - _ _ - � _ - AVE,, � »/ 3� i� — i — --- -- - 63R _ _ __ --T T � � _ N � O i p ,. ;/ � 6283 �I i 1430 � 8291 � <. 1310 I 1A101420 424 �_ _ - _ �� T � � � m . _ � � 6282 � �6283 1050 � I � �- / o o � � i / /,�N �j? I Z I 6271 j 1370 � 1400 � � � r � �� ° � ' --� � 6274 � ' 6275 � �� _ /� � � � � � � � � �, A�',� �, �'aV I �� zso sza5 � �,, a� ��,, rn�,,_— �oo� �� I y �; — _ �I _— o \ ��nQ��R__ . ��C/;' i szzs � , a� szaa � � ` , � � � � m � �� ' -�� Q,'� � �' � — — �� m �� N � � sz� �v i \ II N I� N (�V . N N � \ ' 1 _ - - .. .- 2 ao �� cn� .� � A w , 8236 - 6209 I - 'C - � _. I _-__ J,� A A nO � I � �I �.:��}-'��F'-�� i ', . � __ I.�_ .- f� \�. N� � ' ��`� SOURCES Fridley Engineering Fridley GIS Anoka County GIS Map Date: January 5, 2009 Preliminary Plat Request, PS #09-01 and N Master Plan Amendment Request, MP #09-01 w E Petitioner: Select Senior Living S WEINER GLEN MASON JOHNNY E& JILL L PHILLIPS GARY 1341 MISSISSIPPI ST NE 1361 MISSISSIPPI ST NE 6519 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 PODVIN CAROLE E 1391 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 COUNTRY HOUSE INC PO BOX 818 STILLWATER, MN 55082 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6525 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4653 KWONG ANDREW & SELINA 1321 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6555 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4664 TIESO TRISTAN 1340 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURR T OCCUPANT NE FRIDL Y, MN 55432 FRIDLEY�'CITY OF 6431 U AVE NE FRIDL MN 55432 QUISHPE MIGUEL 1427 MISSISSIPPI NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6501 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 PHILLIPS JON S& DIANE M 1361 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CUDD MELISSA A& LOVEN JEFFREY 1311 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 HALVORSON KIMBERLY J 2256 229TH AVE NE EAST BETHEL, MN 55011 MILKS DENISE 1320 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 SOLIS TRACY L& KEVIN A 1381 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENy�CCUPANT N E �/ FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 1427 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4740 KNUTSON ORVIS D 3723 POLK ST NE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55421 LUKE KENNETH W& KATHLEEN M 1341 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 BULTMAN JEAN 6537 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 BROUILLETTE LORI 1360 CREEK PARK LN NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MN STA,� E OF NO ADP�RESS GOTTWALD JON 1415 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55421 FRIDLEY TY OF 6431 UN ERSITY AVE NE FRIDLE , MN 55432 CURR��t'f OCCUPANT BURNS DEBORAH J& KING WILLIAM CURRENT OCCUPANT NE %t 1371 CREEK PARK LN NE 6572 CENTRAL AVE NE FRID�EY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 WELLS FARGO BANK N A TRUSTEE SPAETH WARREN T& SHERRILL MEHTA ROBERT 10790 RANCHO BERNARDO RD 6516 CHANNEL RD NE 6500 CHANNEL RD NE SAN DIEGO, CA 92127 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FEMRITE ROGER N& FAYE M 4773 MANITOU ROAD TONKA BAY, MN 55331 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6571 CHANNEL RD NE APT 1 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4667 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6552 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6556 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6552 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6556 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 KOZER JACK D& KAREN P 860 86TH AVE NW COON RAPIDS, MN 55433 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6534 CENTRAL AVE NE APT 1 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4649 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6542 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4607 MARCH SUSAN 6550 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EMOND STACY 6554 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MARC SUSAN 6550 C NTRAL AVE NE FRIDL Y, MN 55432 EMOND S ACY 6554 CE RAL AVE NE FRIDLE , MN 55432 1299 MISSISSIPPI LLC 2638 LOUISA AVE ST. PAUL, MN 55112 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6501 CHANNEL RD NE APT 1 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4631 KOZER JACK D& KAREN P 860 86TH AVE NW COON RAPIDS, MN 55433 HJ11 LLC PO BOX 270311 VADNAIS HEIGHTS, MN 55127 ULVE GERALDINE 6552 OLD CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 EISCHENS JILL M 6556 CENTRAL AVE NE #4 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ULVE GERA DINE 6552 OLD NTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, N 55432 EISCHENS�L M 6556 CENT L AVE NE #4 FRIDLEY, 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 1299 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4672 FEMRITE ROGER N& FAYE M 4773 MANITOU ROAD TONKA BAY, MN 55331 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6531 CHANNEL RD NE APT 1 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4632 CURRENT�CCUPANT CURRENT OCCUPANT BURMIS DELLA M NE 6459 PIERCE ST NE 5963 OAKWOOD MANOR NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5133 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 GUSTAFSON MARK KRAHN SHELDON SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URE 6449 PIERCE ST NE 6435 PIERCE ST NE 501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 1200 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6411 PIERCE ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5133 PETERSON THOMAS R 6401 PIERCE ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6373 PIERCE ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5131 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6490 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5112 PEHL ALESIA 1250 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 PRATT MARGUERITE 9650 STACY TRAIL CHISAGO CITY, MN 55013 STONE THOMAS D 1400 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 1376 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4623 FIGUEROA MILTON I& MARQUEZ R 9989 MADISON ST NE BLAINE, MN 55434 MAHOWALD KELI R& PAIGE TROY A 6389 PIERCE ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 LJT PROPERTIES LLC 6400 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT LLC 13750 REIMER DR N MAPLE GROVE, MN 55311 FRIDLEY HRA 6431 U V AVE NE FRIDL , MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 1428 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4739 EDWARDS DENNIS B& BARBARA J 1403 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 OLSON KURT E& ANDREA R 1385 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6423 PIERCE ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5133 BURKHOW JON R& ALLISON R 7800 TYLER ST NE SPRING LAKE PARK, MN 55432 TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT LLC 13750 REIMER DR N MAPLE GROVE, MN 55311 CURRENT OCCUPANT 1282 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-4650 CURF�ENT OCCUPANT NE / FRIDLEY, MN 55432 OKESON VIRGIL A& SUSAN M 1423 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ZIMMERMAN THOMAS JR & JUDITH 7518 TEMPO TERR FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ARCHER-KATH JULIE A 1348 HILLCREST DR NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT MARIHART BERNARD J LEVERENZ DANIEL 1358 MISSISSIPPI ST NE 1373 64TH AVE NE 1340 MISSISSIPPI ST NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLEY, MN 55432 HAW STEVEN DEMELLO FRANK & SHARON CURRE OCCUPANT 1314 MISSISSIPPI ST NE 2823 TOLEDO AVE S NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 FRIDL Y, MN 55432 CARLSON RICHARD S 7691 OLD CENTRAL NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6421 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5113 MADKINS TAMMY 1341 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MULROY PATRICIA S 1384 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURR T OCCUPANT NE FRIDL , MN 55432 FRIDL Y CITY OF 6431 U�IVERSITY AVE NE FRIDL Y, MN 55432 FLEMING JUSTIN 1356 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6381 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT 6303 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432-5111 CURR T OCCUPANT NE FRIDL Y, MN 55432 CALDERON BOB 6401 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FOX JASON 1426 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MULROY PA�� ICIA S 1384 64Tf-�� NE FRIDLEY, N 55432 MULROY PAT ICIA S 1384 64T E NE FRIDLEY, N 55432 CURRENT OCCUPANT NE FRIDL , MN 55432 RAMSEY SHARYN R 1340 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FLEMING J TIN 1356 64T VE NE FRIDLE , MN 55432 US FEDERAL CREDIT UNION 6303 OLD CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 MATTISON MARK JON P O BOX 40419 ST PAUL, MN 55104 WILLIAMS JAMES S 1357 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 ZERBY D MICHAEL & JUDITH A 1400 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 CURR NT OCCUPANT NE FRI EY, MN 55432 WOLTER LOWELL 1372 64TH AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 PIATZ PATRICK 6391 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 FRIDLE�ITY OF 6431 U ERSITY AVE NE FRIDLE MN 55432 CURRE OCCUPANT NE FRIDL , MN 55432 Beberg, Julie From: Stromberg, Stacy Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:52 PM To: Beberg, Julie Subject: Descriptions Hi Julie — Here is a list of addresses of the parcels involved with the Select Senior Living Project. 1314 Mississippi Street 1340 Mississippi Street 6461 Central Avenue 6441 Central Avenue 6421 Central Avenue Here are the descriptions for the Select Senior Living Project: PS #09-01— To replat 5 lots, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units. MP #09-01— The petitioner is seeking a Master Plan Amendment to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units. Stacy Stromberg, CitY Plannc:r City of Fridlc:y�, Minnesota 6�37 Universitv Aventae NE Fridley, Minnesota 55�32 PhonP: 763.572.:3595 Fax: 7EiS.571.1287 stromber�s(u;ci.fridlev.mn.us www.ci.fridlev.mn.us Development Review Committee Worksheet Address: Select Senior Living of Fridley_(Central & Mississi�pi) Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Scott Hickok ❑ Dave Jensen ❑ )ulie ]ones ❑ Ron Julkowski ❑ Jim Kosluchar Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Building Issues: ❑ 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: ❑ Ralph Messer ❑ Layne Otteson ❑ Mary Smith � Stacy Stromberg Enqineerinq Issues: o Drainage ❑ Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements 0 Fire Issues• o Truck access ❑ Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ Comments: _ ��, � ,, Name: � �, • � �, ,�-,,, ; �'r��k�'� Date: t f._ "� �;' €��> Development Review Committee Worksheet Address: Select Senior Living of Fridley_(Central & Mississippi) Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Scott Hickok ❑ DaveJensen ❑ Julie ]ones ❑ Ron Julkowski ❑ Jim Kosluchar Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Buildinq Issues: 0 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: ❑ Ralph Messer ❑ Layne Otteson ❑ Mary Smith ❑ Stacy Stromberg Enqineerinq Issues: ❑ Drainage ❑ Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements ❑ Fire Issues: ❑ Truck access ❑ Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ Name��'L ;;�'�llf( ��it-'� Date Development Review Committee Worksheet Address Select Senior Living_of Fridlev (Central & Mississipvil Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin o]ulie Jones ❑ Ralph Messer � Rachel Harris ❑ Ron Julkowski ❑ Layne Otteson o Scott Hickok ❑ Jim Kosluchar ❑ Mary Smith ❑ Dave Jensen ❑ Stacy Stromberg Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Buildinq Issues: ❑ 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: Enqineerinq Issues: ❑ Drainage ❑ Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements ❑ Fire Issues• ❑ Truck access o Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ Name: Date: ' � Development Review Committee Worksheet Address• Select Senior Livin4 of Fridle�(Central & Mississippi) Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Scott Hickok ❑ Dave Jensen ❑ . ]ulie ]ones � Ron Julkowski ❑ Jim Kosluchar Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative 0 Buildinq Issues: ❑ 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: Name: ❑ Ralph Messer o Layne Otteson ❑ Mary Smith ❑ Stacy Stromberg Enqineerinq Issues: ❑ Drainage ❑ Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements a Fire Issues� ❑ Truck access ❑ Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ � Date: 1� � � � Development Review Committee Worksheet Address• Select Senior Living of Fridley_(Central & Mississippi) Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin o Julie Jones ❑ Ralph Messer ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Ron Julkowski ❑ Layne Otteson � Scott Hickok ❑ Jim Kosluchar ❑ Mary Smith ❑ Dave Jensen o Stacy Stromberg Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Buildinq Issues: ❑ 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: S Name: Enqineerinq Issues: ❑ Drainage ❑ Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements ❑ Fire Issues: ❑ Truck access ❑ Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ Date: � Z �� / `�� Development Review Committee Worksheet Address: Select Senior Livina of Fridley (Central & Mississippi) Land Use Case: PS #08-XX ❑ Paul Bolin ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Scott Hickok ❑ Dave Jensen ❑ lulie ]ones ❑ Ron Julkowski s+; Jim Kosluchar Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage ❑ Allowable square footage o Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Buildinq Issues: ❑ _ 2007 State Building Code ;� . Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: Name: � ❑ Ralph Messer ❑ Layne Otteson ❑ Mary Smith o Stacy Stromberg Engineerinq Issues: o Drainage � Utilities � jh�� ; rJs��( S��Vk_:' . i:�:� �' �= �: �; �,y ,vr�i' �, � ❑ Curbing requirements '`' �'`' 'u`""'' � } ` � iii�.� I� P��ia l�C }-i'-� .��7�� C_i;��l- t��i S �(1�:— , p � . i � < I' .(' �! p ! IaV��uVi;��'Il � ��'i ` f ��'r . �'S _� , � �, � �� . I�u i l� I�; �� Z,�_ � � fi; �. : r ��`� { �- (.,ai'i� �<ii�l��.i, f: j �v�-4i�4� () .�..,;�� L'�f%�� ''I�,it� Fire Issues: ❑ Truck access ❑ Sprinkler requirements ❑ Hydrant location ❑ j � jG' �C' � Date: � � ,� i � Development Review Committee Worksheet Address: Select Senior Livin4 of Fridley �Central & Mississippi) Land Use Case• PS #08 XX ❑ Paul Bolin ❑ Julie Jones ,r� Ralph Messer ❑ Rachel Harris ❑ Ron Julkowski ❑ Layne Otteson ❑ Scott Hickok ❑ Jim Kosluchar ❑ Mary Smith ❑ Dave ]ensen ❑ Stacy Stromberg Planninq Issues: ❑ Setbacks ❑ Lot coverage o Allowable square footage ❑ Height ❑ Landscape ❑ Hardship statement/narrative ❑ Buildinq Issues: ❑ 2007 State Building Code ❑ Need signed plans ❑ Stipulations: Comments: Enqineerinq Issues: ❑ Drainage o Utilities ❑ Curbing requirements ❑ Fire Issues: �o Truck access �� Sprinkler requirements � Hydrant location ❑ _._ .._._..� Name: �=°E--� 1�,(�s�� . r�� -, Date. '� �'� _ ��ect ��e��u,�x ��v� � ! - - t � f r o - �. � - i �� - '� ` `�- � � , � � � ' �� f `,-�i��*r+f� CREATED BY OUR FAMILY � `. � � , ,�� . � TO SERVE YOURS... =��± , ��3 ��,��-�" ` ��- --..� .,: �.::.. � �" �•.� '��.-aG;'�x. �--a.ww.-��,. .;�i+:.. '"�6'. p . `^�-•-.r�....�.. _ aA�` � �. r.��'.:�:�.i� �.;;. T _ -� " �'i'� �1...3i.i s'i�:� .�tl�.il. "'S4� � � A?R�'� � _ i"-�� `Y "-?r! ._ .� . � . � � � ._ .i .. ;T � . '�. d C.i�i � _ ,i � � � A s a srnall family-owned and operated company we take great steps to treat each resident with the same care and dignity we would afford our loved ones. From the director to our aides, we strive each day to create a warm and caring environment where old friendships are renewed and new ones are created. Come and see the difference. TREAT YOURSELF TO V�ORRY-FREE LIYII�IG... A t Select Senior Living we are committed to providing customer driven services tailored to you. A licensed RN is available to assess each individual in order to provide a personal care service package that is right for you. If assistance is needed, our individualized service plans are designed to maintain your independence. We provide a wide range of customer driven programs and events that encourage participation, laughter and lasting memories. i We look forward to seeing you! ;j, � �'��. � ��. ��::� �� Included With Rent: t� 24-hour emergency call system � Daily OK Checks � Health & wellness program � 7 day-a-week complimentary continental breakfast $ Lunch & Dinner served "restaurant-style" w Light weekly housekeeping � Apartment building fire/smoke detector & sprinkler system � Individually controlled heat & air conditioning, water, sewer & trash pick-up � Programs & events for socialization � Apartment & building maintenance � Month to month lease agreement � Controlled entrance � Smoke-free environment � Daily afternoon coffee & cookies � Complimentary laundry facilities � Pets are welcome (some restrictions apply) � Refrigerator, stove/self-cleaning oven, dishwasher & rnicrowave , � ` ,� � Snow removal & lawn service ��,C't P�I2�7< <�1�G�2 � � [.[r'eii��f� or - �r,c,� � ,; _ SPECIAL FEATURES... _ � ��.,� w__._�� .��...�._._._� �� `�r - • Outdoor patio �' ` � • LibrarY i� = � � � ,� � �, • Private family dining • Public computer for internet access • Community room • Fitness center Other features for additional fee: • Personal service plan • Heated underground parking • Beauty/barber shop • Meal delivery • Additional housekeeping/laundry services ��.�� : �� .4 �.��.�; Building 2 1 Bedroom Accessible Unit - 1 A 643 SQ.FT. - 2 Thus .,� <_ , �-: ,..: -;_ �: , ,; , ; ;`; ;' L r Building 1 2 Bedroom Unit - 2D 1224 SQ.FT. - 3 Thus � .� �� s� .. � f P ��;g. � � �, � � �� ,��_ - �V � �� } � F� ,,,' � �. � � ��k � � ..j �' � �� - - :�g� �` .� r ,� .•� � f�:� .� '�� __ r�. r '_��-.� �,;�"' � . � t'_' ` � � e .��F�.., . _ Building 2 1 Bedroom Unit -1 C 674 SQ.FT. - 5 Thus L Building 2 Studio Unit - S-E 498 SQ.FT. -1 Thus �� 3� �_�� ;.� �„� �� i.': .,:.,. i�._:". ' . I ��:_. �� .�.- . � � � p: •.7: � 1.� 1 .. �- -1- � __ r Suilding 1 2 Bedroom Unit - 2 A 1268 SQ.FT. - 5 Thus ��' \ f� ►��'. �� f� Building 2 Siudio Unit - S-G 519 SQ.FT'. - 3 Thus . ,� � c_ L I�1/.�, ? -�' � �� 1�U Yi/U ► Y �,l �� . l �,� ��' �� L�1�� 1/L1 �' ,V � �. � -��n � �1 �� .� � C �� r� � �� y ' 1�� 1 '? }� � n �� V' V'�� '�'°�� ` � � �,? 1�1 �1 � � z� . . , � �; i�-�, U�'�'y� t� i � � -� �� n �,� ! � ��,�,�� .��,, . ,��,� ►�� L�--� ,T ,�, �:'! �l �� l � ,� � � ti � ��,,�,�, _ n �� 5.�� -�� L ��k � , �, �� ,� � �� — ��,+'1�� e � S F�l l�1'1,�1 � ��'Y� I�/1 �� i �?:�� ' � ._ � t�- ��I �"l � � h. 6�� 1 � � � �1 �� l U �'t-�� (� c>�,� � I �� 4�-�1% n��.. ��--�.�j� � � �, �� U Q�,,;,'� � �� C� � o �� 1 � J �� -�� • •, �,1�� i� , . � ��c , � c, l,� �I �� i� � �� -/,�- �� c��' � � �'� I��Vj l/�'� � � ` � -�� a �;�,y �� ,� � � � �: v� �� e'1'''��'. �,� � +� I �,� �� . . � � �,,�.�--� � �� - v�_�� _ � ,� �..� �''�' c�. .,��,�� (� � ►� � i�` . ��i �� ,�, � �,�t,��. u �� `�.�. n - �� Stacy Stromberg City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 COUNTY OF ANOKA Public Services Division HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD. N.W., ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304-4005 (763) 862-4200 FAX (763) 862-4201 January 7, 2009 Re: Site Plan - Select Senior Living of Fridley (Previously reviewed as Spring Valley Estates on 6/8/2005, 3/23/04, 1/27/2004) Dear Stacy, We have reviewed the site plan for Select Senior Living of Fridley, to be located in the southeast quadrant of CSAH 35 (Central Avenue) and CR 106 (Mississippi Street) within the City of Fridley, and I offer the following comments: All comments pertaining to this site from our previous reviews relating to right of way, access, drainage, noise and permits remain essentially unchanged (see attached copies of previous reviews). If the city has concerns regarding impacts of this development and the operation of the existing all-way stop at the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection, they should require that the developer complete a traffic study to determine if other mitigative measures are necessary to be completed as a part of this development. The ACHD Engineering Plan Review Process will apply to this project. The CSAH 35 access point is to be constructed as a right in/right (RURO) out access point. Construction of a NB CSAH 35 right turn lane and EB CR 106 right turn lane appear to be warranted as a part of this development, and will need to be coordinated through the ACHD Engineering Plan Review Process for this site. A$700.00 engineering plan review fee will apply to this project. Contact Daniel Frey, Engineer III (763-862-4209; email: Dauiel.Fre�(a�co.anoka.mn.us) for further information and to coordinate the ACHD Engineering Plan Review process. Please submit the drainage calculations, grading and erosion control plans, right turn lane construction plans, and the ACHD Design Requirements list for County Highway Modifications (copy available via our web site) and the applicable engineering plan review fee to Mr. Frey for his review and approval. Following completion of the Engineering Plan Review Process outlined in the above paragraph, two Access Permits and two Permits for Work within the County Right of Way are required and must be obtained by the prime contractor priar to the commencement of any construction. License Permit Bonding, methods of construction, design details, work zone traffic control, restoration requirements and follow-up xnspections are typical elements of the permitting process. Contact Terri Klein, Permit Technician, at 763-862-4239 for further information regarding the permit process. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, / �� ' Jane K. Rose Traf�ic Engineering Manager xc: CSAH 35/P1ats+Developments/2009 Randy Bettinger, Traffic Engineering Coordinator Terri Klein, Permit Technician Josie Scott, Traffic Engineering Technician Daniel Frey, Engineer III Mike Kelly, Chief Right of Way Agent Larry Hoium, County Surveyor Tom Hornsby, Traffic Services Supervisor - Signs June 8, 2005 COUNTY 4F ANOKA Public Services Division HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD. N.W., ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304-4005 (763) 862-4200 FAX (763) 862-4201 Stacy Stromberg City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 Re: 2005 Redesign: Spring Valley Estates Dear Stacy, �� `"' ,�s, � y�.�� ` x ?� �11 :�'n'�9.� r��r �'.✓ � We have reviewed the 2005 redesib of Spring Valley Estates, to be located on the southeast quadrant of CSAH 35 (Central Ave.) and CR106 (Mississippi St.) within the City of Fridley. The revised plan changes the CSAH 35 access scheme from previous submittals of this development. We find this 2005 redesigned access scheme acceptable, provided that the CSAH 35 access point is constructed as a right in/right (RURO) out access point. For your information and use, we have prepared the attached turn lane construction concept plan which details the level of turn lane construction we would require for this project (NB CSAH 35 right turn lane; EB CR 106 right turn lane). All other comments pertaining to this site from our previous reviews remain essentially unchanged. A $700.00 engineering plan review fee will apply to this project. Please contact Andrew Witter, Construction Services Engineer, to coordinate the engineering plan review process.. Thank you for the opportunity to meet and comment further on this development. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. �, Sincerely. , � Jane K. Rose Traffic Engineering Manager xc: CSAH 35 + CR106/PLATS/2004 Larry Hoium, County Surveyor Terri Klein, Permit Technician Tom Hornsby, Traffic Services Supervisor - Si�s Andrew Witter, Construction Services En�ineer Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer March 23, 2004 C4UNTY OF ANOKA Public Services Division HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD. N.W., ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304-4005 (763) 862-4200 FAX (763) 862-4201 _ J - (� , Stacy Stromberg City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 RE: Additional Redesign: Spring Valley Estates Dear Stacy, On March 17, 2004, we met with City of Fridley staff as well as the architect and developer for the Spring Valley Estates development, to be located on the southeast quadrant of CSAH 35 (Central Ave.) and CR106. (Mississippi St.) within the City of Fridley. At the meeting, a revised plan for this development was presented for our consideration that included an access onto CR 106 adjacent to the east property line of this site, an access onto CSAH 35 located directly opposite of the planned access point for the redevelopment of the Sandy's Restaurant site, and an access point onto 64`� Avenue NE adjacent to the east property line of this site. We listened to the rationale presented for this current redesign of the Spring Valley Estates development. While we still stand behind our previous comments for this site development, we are willing to compromise regarding this site plan development and we will permit the access scheme onto the CR 106 and CSAH 35 developed in the additional redesign of this site. Please note that there are no immanent plans for the reconstruction of either CR 106 or CSAH 35, nor are there any immanent plans to signalize the CR 106/C�i.SAH 35 intersection. While there are no county highway plans for the reconstruction of these routes, it is still important to plan for the future conditions as development plans are considered for approval. As we noted in our previous review of this site, it is likely that whenever the CSAH 35/CR 106 is rebuilt in the future, it will likely have raised median channelization, and access points within this development are likely to become right in/right out.We are pleased that the redesign of this site does provide for some site access to occur onto 64�' Avenue NE as we had recommended, as 64`� Avenue NE appears to have an adequate degree of separation from CR 106 and could possible serve as a location for a future median break or full access location. We are in agreement on the CR 106 access location. And we will allow an access onto CSAH 35 at the location presented at our 3/17/2004 meeting. If the City and the developer wish to revise this CSAH 35 access location somewhat so that it is located at a point where it may provide more access flexibility/potential access options in the future scenario, we would be open looking at a revised location for this CSAH 35 access point. It is our understanding that the developer will provide right turn lanes that meet our approval for the CSAH 35 and CR 106 access points. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer ii Stacy Stromberg Re: Additional Redesign: Spring Valley Estates March 23, 2004 Page 2 All other comments pertaining to this site from our previous review remain unchanged. Please contact Andrew Witter, Construction Services Engineer, for roadway section information, typicals/details for tum lane construction, and further information regarding our Engineering Plan review process.. Thank you for the opportunity to meet and comment further on this development. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sin erely. , Jane K. Rose Traffic Engineering Manager xc: CSAH 35 + CR106/PLATS/2004 Mike Kelly, Chief Right Of Way Agent Larry Hoium, County Surveyor Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator Josie Scott, Permit Technician Tom Hornsby, Traffic Services Supervisor - Signs Andrew Witter, Construction Services Engineer Stacy Stromberg City of Fridley 6431 University Ave. NE Fridley, NIN 55432 COUNTY OF ANOKA Public Services Division • HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1440 BUNKER LAKE BLVD. N.W., ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 RE: Redesign - Spring Valley Estates Dear Stacy, (763) 862-4200 � } FAX (763) 862-4201 �� . � � � January 27, 2004 We have reviewed the redesigned site plan for Spring Valley Estates, to be located on the southeast quadrant of CSAH 35 ,(Central Ave.) and CR 106 (Mississippi St.) within the City of Fridley, and I offer the following comments. Additional right of way along CSAH 35 and CR 106 will be required for future reconstruction purposes. While other portions of CSAH 35 have been reconstructed within a 100ft. corridor, it is anticipated that a 120ft, right of way corridor will be required for the CSAH 35/CR 106 intersection in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for safety and operational purposes, whenever the intersection were to become signalized. At this point, it is assumed thaf whenever the CSAH 35/CR 106 intersection is reconstructed in the future, it would be centered in the 120ft. right of way corridor. Consequently, the roadway right of way dedication needs for this site are 30ft. adjacent to CR 106, and lOft. adjacent to CSAH 35. The right of access along CSAH 35 and CR 106 (with exceptions for approved access locations) shall be dedicated to Anoka County_ It appeazs that there are severe deficiencies for the Sight Comers for both proposed access locations, and the obstruCtions include treas/bushes, and existing structures. It appears that the clearing and the removal of the existing structures associated with this development will eliminate some of the obstructions. However, the obstructions to the east of the proposed access on CR106 are located outside of the limits of this development. The City/Developer shall clear and/or grade so that all applicable Intersection Sight Distance Requirements are satisfied to the fullest extent possible for this development. This should include at a minimum, some effort toward negotiations with the adjacent landowners in an attempt to clear obstructions that are located outside of the limits of this development. The trees and plantings shown on the landscaping plan along CSAH 35 and CR 106 on the site plan that will be located within the sight comers shall be eliminated and no new sight obstructions (signs, plantings, etc.) shall be introduced at the access points in conjunction with this development. Please note that no plantings or business signs will be permitted within the county right of way. Care must be exercised when locating signs/plantings/berms/ etc. outside the county right of way, so as not to create sight obstructions. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer / With increasing tra�c volume and congestion, the importance for limited access to County Roads cannot be overstated. Limiting access is critical in minimizing highway congestion and is the single most important factor in reducing accidents on highways. CSAH 35 has a Functional Classification of Minor Arterial B with an ADT of over 13,000 vpd, while CR 106 has a Functional Classification of Collector with an ADT of 5,782 vpd. The proposed access scheme is as follows: 1) For the commercial area at the north end of the property: • One full access onto CSAH 35 apprdx. 210ft south of CR 106; This proposed access falls within the northbound right turn lane/turn lane taper. • One full access on CR 106 approx. 330ft east of CSAH 35. 2} For the high density residential area over the southern two thirds of the property_ • One full access onto CSAH 35 approx. 390ft south of CR 106. To maintain integrity on the county highway system and to provide for an appropriate level of safety for the highway users, we would like the site plan reworked, and recommended the following access changes access (see attached concept plans): • One full access withi.n SOft of the east property line onto CR 106 for the commercial area. • One full access onto 64`� Ave. NE for the residential area. In the future, when signalization/channelization of the CSAH 35/CR106 intersection occurs, it will likely result in access points from this development to the county highway system being changed to R.ight In/Right Out movements only. If the City is considering approval of any access location onto CSAH 35 for this development, further evaluation of the proposed (or approved) acc�ss to the proposed redevelopment of the Sandy's site on the west side of CSAH 35 should be completed. If any access points along CSAH 35 are considered they should be limited to the commercial area and be limited in movement, preferably to R.ight In Only, and shall be located outside of the northbound CSAH 35 right tum lane and right turn lane taper. If tbe City wishes to discuss the access schemes and altematives for the development proposals in this area, we would be happy to do so. Detailed drainage calculations must be submitted with a grading and erosion control plan that delineates the drainage areas for this site. The post-developed rate of discharge shall not exceed the pre-developed rate of discharge for the 10-year critical design storm. An engineering plan review fee currently estimated at $150.00 will apply to this project. Conta.ct Andrew Witter, Construction Services Engineer, for information regarding the engineering plan review process. .� It should be noted that residential land use adjacent to highways will usually result in complaints regarding traffic noise. Traffic noise at this location could exceed Noise Standards established by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Anoka County policy regarding new developments adjacent to existing county highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures. The City and/or the Developer should assess the noise situation and take any action deemed necessary to minimize associated impacts at this site from any traffic noise. Access permits and permits for work within the county right o� way are required and must be obtained prior to the commencement of construction (Access permit =$150.00 each; Permit for work within the county right of way =$110.00 for each affected roadway). License Permit Bonding, methods of construction, design deta.ils for turn lane construction, work zone traffic control, restoration requuements and follow-up inspections are typical elements of the permitting process. Contact Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator; or rosie Scott, Permit Technician, for further information regarding the permit process. Installation of permanent traffic control devices deemed necessary within the county right-of-way for this proposed development- will be coordinated, installed, and maintained by this department as part of the permit process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Feel free to conta.ct me if you have any questions. Sincerely. e K. Rose Traffic Engineering Manager xc: CSAH 35 + CR106/PLATS/2004 Mike Kelly, Chief Right Of Way Agent Larry Hoium, County Surveyor Roger Butler, Traffic Engineering Coordinator Josie Scott, Permit Technician Tom Homsby, Traffic Services Supervisor - Signs Stromberg, Stacy From: Vicki Vandell [vvandell�ffe-inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 12:27 PM To: Stromberg, Stacy Subject: FW: neighborhood meeting From: Joel Larson [mailto:jlarson@goldengate.net] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 3:23 PM To: 'Vicki Vandell' Subject: neighborhood meeting To Fridley Residents: You are invited to a neighborhood informational meeting for a proposed senior assisted living building to be located on the corner of Mississippi St. and Old Central Ave. We will be holding an informational, open house format, meeting that will be held at the Fridley Senior Community Building located at 6085 7�" Street NE, Fridley, room 109 on January 12`l' 2009, from 6:00-7:30 pm. The purpose of this meeting is to provide you an opportunity to view and discuss the site plan, exterior building elevations, floor plans and talk with a representative of Select Senior Living about the life style of living in a senior building. We hope you will take the time to come and learn more about this proposed project. Sincerely, Joel T. Larson Principal Stromberg, Stacy From: Vicki Vandell [vvandell�ffe-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 10:59 AM To: Stromberg, Stacy Subject: RE: Select Senior Living of Fridley Attachments: C2.1 Layout Plan.jpg; L1.1 Landscape Plan.jpg; 1.0 Title Sheet.jpg Hi Stacy, There are no wetlands on site. I have attached the jpeg's of the colored layout plan, landscape plan and the title sheet with the colored elevations.� Let me know if you need anything else. Have a great New Year. Vicki -----Original Message----- From: Stromberg, Stacy [mailto:5trombergS@ci.fridley.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 10:54 AM To: Vicki Vandell Subject: RE: Select Senior, Living of Fridley Hi Vicki - I haven't had a chance to read the wetland report yet, but can you give me a quick synopsis of the report and if there are any wetlands? Thanks. Also, you were going to forward me a jpeg of the site plan, landscape plan and elevations? Thanks, Stacy -----Original Message----- From: Vicki Vandell [mailto:vvandell@ffe-inc.com] Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 8:51 AM To: ']oe1 Larson'; Stromberg, Stacy Subject: Select Senior Living of Fridley Attached is the Wetland report for the Select Senior Living of Fridley project. Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. 1 Stromberg, Stacy From: Vicki Vandell [vvandell�ffe-inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:12 PM To: Stromberg, Stacy Subject: RE: Staff report Thanks, Stacy. The Congregate Care Facility peak hour numbers are: AM 0.14 PM 0.20 whereas the Assisted Living peak hour numbers are: AM 0.18 PM 0.35 See you tonight. From: Stromberg, Stacy [mailto:StrombergS@ci.fridley.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:08 PM To: Vicki Vandell Subject: Staff report Stacy Stromberg, City Planner City of Fridley, Minnesota 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 554�2 Phone: 763.572.3595 Fax: 76..571.1287 strombergs(a� ci.fridley.mn.us www.ci.fridley.mn.us Stromberg, Stacy From: Vicki Vandell [vvandell@ffe-inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 2:48 PM To: Stromberg, Stacy Subject: Select Senior Living Fridley Stacy, Per our conversation, below is some clarification relating to the traffic analysis for the assisted living versus the independent living based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual. Independent Living Congregate Care Facility is independent living with centralized amenities. 2.15 trips/day per occupied dwelling unit Assisted Living 2.74 trips/day per occupied dwelling unit. We used 2.74 trips/day for all occupied units for total building depicting the worst case scenario. Let me know if you need anything else. Vicki Stromberg, Stacy From: Vicki Vandell [vvandell cLDffe-inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 2:48 PM To: Stromberg, Stacy Subject: Select Senior Living Fridley Stacy, Per our conversation, below is some clarification relating to the traffic analysis for the assisted living versus the independent living based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual. Independent Living Congregate Care Facility is independent living with centralized amenities. 2.15 trips/day per occupied dwelling unit Assisted Living 2.74 trips/day per occupied dwelling unit. We used 2.74 trips/day for all occupied units for total building depicting the worst case scenario. Let me know if you need anything else. Vicki � City of Fridley Land Use Application PS #09-01 & MP #09-01 January 21, 2009 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Appiicant: Select Senior Living Joel Larson 12415 55th Street N Lake Elmo MN 55042 Requested Action: Replat 5 lots Master Plan Amendment Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue Existing Zoning: All properties are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District Size: Approximate size of entire area to be replatted: 142,857 sq. ft. 3.28 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use 8� Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map in the current Comprehensive Plan and the proposed Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. Legal Description of Property: 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17 Block 1 Spring Valley Addition Council Action / 60 Day Date City Council — February 9, 2009 60-Day Date — February 16, 2009 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, Joel Larson, of Select Senior Living, is requesting to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., and 6461 Central Ave. The petitioner is also seeking a Master Plan Amendment from the original master plan that was approved when these properties were rezoned in 2005. Both the replat and the master plan amendment will allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care �units, and assisted living units. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Sfaff recommends approval of the plat and master plan amendment, with stipulations. � Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional job opportunities. • Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg � PS#09-01 & MP #09-01 OVERVIEW The requests: Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to allow the construction of a 141 unit Senior-Housing building, on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The 141 units will consist of indepen.dent living, assisted living, and memory care units. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Master Plan Amendment. , i � �=� �� t ti,� '<� s� �� t�aa� �_�� 7�e1� aa91 A Plat is being requested to create two new parcels from � � � 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), and 6461 �` � �;,� • � Central Avenue (vacant). The two parcels will be occupied � { by the senior building. � '�` ��'� �� '-�8 '''�� „ The Planning Commission and City Council may recall in `�� :�� 2005 John DeMello and his company Family Lifestyle ' Development Corp., were granted a rezoning for the �� t?7? 13"s5 subject properties to S-2, Retlevelopment District. When � �� ' ;;,�� I,,,' _; a n y p r o p e r t y i s r e z on e d to S-2 Redevelo pment District, it ` il= !--.-- —� --�- --� �-----1-- requires that the accompanying site plan become the � 1y B�TH master plan for the site. Once the rezoning is approved ��n �I E?9ti 11_,^� ,:_E �,;;, ( by the City Council, any modification to that originally approved master plan would require a Master Plan Amendment. A Master Plan Amendment needs to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Since, the proposed project is different than what was originally approved with the rezoning of these properties in 2005, the petitioner is seeking a Master Plan Amendment. It should be noted that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will also need to review this Master Plan Amendment as the properties involved are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. Proposed Project: Joel Larson, with Select Senior Living, is proposing to construct a three story 141 unit senior housing . building with 60 independent living " ' -- �' --- units, 27 memory care units, and 54 r�1��,� � f.,�„ r< f�,�� j assisted living units. All of the units ' '� ��.�� r CM1NItlO will be between 470 sq. ft. and � �; 1,003 sq. ft. The smallest of the -- �#° T ,°x ;_ units are memory care apartments r � � �r � � �1� .. _1 �:; F��, ,�,� -��,��; and are located on the secured ` � �� .� '� � '�`''"� ��,, main floor of the south wing of the �� ,� ; � , � �� '''� � �� . building. They will have their own �° -� � � , � --- � ''��„.. ,;�,.,,. -�- private living/dining area and �� '"� �� :`�°�� ' "� ' '� `��"�� „� �_ r,.� �.�;� ,�.� ,.�_.._ __ kitchenette as well as a private � ..�`�. bathing room, a community laundry - �. '` ° and a private fenced in yard. The second and third floors in the south wing will contain 54 assisted living apartments, of which some will be studios, one bedroom, one bedroom with a den, or two bedroom apartments. Each floor of the assisted living area is also provided with a private bathing room and laundry room. The second and third floors of the north wing will contain 60 independent living apartments. Each of these units has their own laundry hook-up as well as a shared laundry room. Within the building there will be several shared amenities such as a shared two-story lobby, a stone fireplace, an intimate cafe, and a sitting area. The mail room, management office, nurses' office, and public restrooms are centrally located off of the lobby as are the central dining room, sports pub, and kitchen. Other shared amenities include an activity room with a small kitchen area and restroom, a media cente�, the activity director's office, an overnight guest room, a library on the second floor, and a salon and grandparent room for visiting children on the third floor. The development will include 84 underground heated garage parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls. The buildings architecture will consist of a hipped roof, with the use of brick, veneer, and two colors of complimentary lap siding on the exterior, with balconies. By designing the building to be located as close as code allows to the west property line, the petitioner is proposing to keep as many of the existing mature trees as possible. The petitioner also plans to install a 6 ft. wood privacy fence along the south and east sides of the property. Additional landscaping of new deciduous, coniferous, and ornamental trees along with shrub, perennial and annual plantings are also planned for the entire site to provide a welcoming entrance and development. ANALYSIS Plat Request #09-01 Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, and 6461 Central Avenue to create two separate lots. Both lots will be combined to accommodate the 141-unit senior housing development. The reason the development has 2 lots is because some of the land to be replatted is Torrens property while other portions of it are Abstract. Anoka County doesn't allow the combination of these different types of property without first getting a Registration of Land Titles by District Court Order, which can be a lengthy process. Instead, the developer is choosing to create 2 lots, � a�� , �'� �� '�� ,�� which will be required to be combined to allow for ,, ,�=� .,, �, � �.r:_,��;,�� the development to occur. memory care units. parking stalls. The proposed replat will consist of two lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block 1, Select Senior Living of Fridley. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for some degree of flexibility when designing a redevelopment project; however, City staff has asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to its intended use. The proposed development of a 47,508 sq. ft. footprint senior housing development would be most closely be aligned with a residential development in an R-3, Multi-Family zoning district. The proposed project area is 142,857 sq. ft. (3.28 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 141-unit senior housing building, which will consist of 60 independent units, 54 assisted living units, and 27. The development will include 84 underground parking stalls and 32 surface �� R-3, Multi-Family zoning regulations states, the average lot area required per dweiling unit is 2,500 sq. ft. for the units on the first (3) three stories with an additional 950 sq. ft. per unit from the fourth through sixth stories. National and regional development trends for assisted living and memory care appear to point to a lesser lot size requirement. The S-2 District classification will allow this land to unit ratio, without a variance. Though well-maintained landscaped grounds are essential to project appeal and resident enjoyment, the size of the lot in this situation can be smaller because the opportunity for residents to participate in larger scale outdoor activities on the grounds is much smaller. Also, less land is required because of the fact that the residents typically do not have cars, nor do they drive. Therefore, there is a lower standard for the number of parking stalls required and less land area to accommodate that automobile use. Consequently, this site size is adequate considering the ratio of assisted living and memory care, to independent living. There will be a stipulation with the recommendation on this project that requires that the building continue to be used with the resident population ratios proposed. If not, purchase of additional land and a Master Plan amendment will be required, prior to that resident ratio modification. The proposed 3-story building will be 35 ft. high at the midspan, which meets City code requirements. The proposed project is also in-compliance with lot coverage, parking and all setback requirements, except the rear yard setback. The R-3 zoning code requires a 25 ft. rear yard setback, and the proposed building is setback at 23 ft. 2 in. Discussions and correspondence with Anoka County when the John DeMello project was before the City in 2005, indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. The County anticipates that additional right-of-way will need to be dedicated along both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. To be safe, staff has assumed that the County will be requesting the same right-of-way dedication from this developer as they have with the past developer's proposal. A letter from the Anoka County Highway Department on January 7, 2009, confirmed this to be an accurate assumption. Consequently, the petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of-way dedication along both County Roads. Due to necessity of that right-of-way dedication, the rear yard setback falls short of ineeting code requirements by 2 ft. 10 inches. With the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setback can be recognized under the City's Master Plan Amendment approval, and no variance would be required. Master Plan Amendment Request MP #09-01 The petitioner is requesting a Master Plan Amendment to the original Master Plan that was approved as part of the 2005 rezoning of the subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. The original rezoning and master plan was approved to allow for the construction of mixed used building, with a 10,492 sq. ft. retail complex that would occupy the lower level of the northeastern corner of the building and have 70 owner-occupied condominium units occupying the remainder of the building. Despite the fact that the preliminary plat and rezoning and subsequent master plan were all approved for this site, the project never came to fruition, because the final plat was never submitted for approval. As stated earlier, the properties involved in the Master Plan Amendment are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage-welding shop), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot), and 6461 3 Central Avenue (vacant lot). All properties involved are currently zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. If the Master Plan Amendment being discussed in this report is approved by the City Council, it should be noted that any major modification of the site plan would again be required to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Comprehensive Plan Conformance The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community while looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". The rezoning was approved for the DeMello project since it was in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed senior project meets several of the objectives that the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update. This update is before the Met Council for approval at this time. One of the goals identified through those meetings and the telephone survey was to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live." Ways to accomplish that goal are to provide more housing diversity and to make Fridley a place where the aged can stay. Only about 8% of Fridley's housing is of the townhome or condominium structure type, yet 23% of Fridley's residents were over age 55 in 2000, and that percentage is growing. To accommodate Fridley's senior citizens desires to live in maintenance-free housing (no yards/house exterior care), more types of senior housing needs to be constructed. Types of senior housing to consider are one-level townhomes, independent living, assisted living, nursing home/memory care facilities. It is also important to explore the availability of a private maintenance service that would allow seniors to stay in their single family homes. This area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road is identified as an area for future redevelopment in both the existing 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Economic and Redevelopment Plan chapter in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, states that the City should continue to pursue high density senior housing in this area due to the demand for this type of housing in Fridley. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficient land uses and under-utilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to meet currenf market demands and desires of the communify, creates new fax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the redevelopment of this area for a Senior Living facility. HOUSING STUDY The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Preliminary Demand Estimate for Senior Housing in Fridley. The analysis done takes into account the demand for independent living, assisted living and memory care senior housing by calculating demographic, economic and competitive factors that would impact current demand for senior housing units in the designated "Market Area." The "Market Area" in which Maxfield analyzed includes the communities of Fridley, Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park and Hilltop. The analysis done indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 200 units of the above reference nature. They note that over the next five years the level of units demanded now will likely decrease due to other competitive developments in the area that are now in some stage of planning or construction. � TRAFFIC 2030 Comprehensive Plan — Transportation Chapter The City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed Senior Living project carried 8,900 vehicles per day. At this traffic level iYs carrying almost the exact amount of traffic the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that Old Central will be carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2030, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be at its capacity. As a result, Anoka County is requiring that additional right-of-way be dedicated with this plat, to ensure that the additional land needed is available to eventually expand the roadway. Review of Traffic Study prepared by Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. The petitioner had Foltz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., perform a traffic analysis on the proposed use. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition. The consultants used the Assisted Living Land Use category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed Senior Project complex would generate a total of 433 trips per day if all 158 beds within the complex were occupied. The Congregate Care Facility (Independent Living) land use would generate a total of 340 trips per day if all 158 beds were occupied. The consultants used the numbers for the Assisted Living land use to provide the worst case scenario for traffic at this facility, because it generates more traffic than an Independent Living land use. This can be attributed to the fact that an assisted living facility requires the need for more staff and employees. Trip Generation ITE Description Land Use 254 Assisted Living Land Use (141 units) Daily AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Trips (Mississippi (Central Ave) St) In Out PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour (Mississippi (Central Ave) St) In Out In Out In Out 433 13 8 5 3 9 11 16 19 It should also be noted, that according to the ITE manual, studies have shown that less than 5% of residents in an assisted living facility own vehicles, and if they do, they are rarely driven. Employees, visitors, and delivery trucks make up most of the trips to this facility. The ITE manual also points out that the "peak hour" generator typically doesn't coincide with the "peak hour" of the adjacent street traffic for an assisted living facility. This is primarily related to the shifts of the employees beginning at 7:00 a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. The typical peak hours on most roadways are between 6:00-7:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. WETLAND AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENT The petitioner hired Graham Environmental Services (GES), Inc., to complete a Wetland Evaluation Report for the project area. Based on GES's finding, no wetlands exist on the site. The petitioner has submitted the proposed project to the Rice Creek Watershed for the necessary approvals and permits. Once Rice Creek Watershed has reviewed and approved the project, the City's Engineering staff will further review the project. The petitioner has stated that storm water management for the site will be handled in an underground drainage system designed to meet the watershed's requirements for rate, quality 5 and volume control. The underground system will surround the building providing infiltration and storage, while directing the water to an existing storm sewer system found on the east boundary of the site. One of the reasons the petitioner is choosing to install an underground drainage system instead of a typical above ground pond, is to try to save as many of the mature trees as possible. STAFF RECOMMEDATION City Staff recommends approva! of the Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01 and Master Plan Amendmenf, MP #09-01 with stipulations. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional job opportunities. • Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that is the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan Amendment are approved, the following stipulations be attached. 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet al! Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64t`' Avenue, and 1357 64`h Avenue shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The pefitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3, 000. 00 ($1, 500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restricfions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treafinent systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for fax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. , ,• 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cosf of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install uti/ities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approvaL � � �� s�rC�T 3 � �+G' � 5` December 19, 2008 SELECT SENIOR LIVING Fridley, Minnesota Project Narrative Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. N v�- FFE E S LAND PLANNING • SURVEl'ING - ENGINEERING Select Senior Living in Fridley is a proposed three story 141 unit senior housing building with 60 independent living units, 27 memory care units, 54 assisted living units, a parking garage located beneath the building, two elevators, central trash chute, and many amenities. Visible from Mississippi Street and Old Central Avenue, the building's inviting grand entrance porch and circle drive drop-off are designed to draw residents and guests into the building with its' comfortable living suites and many amenities. The building's architecture with its hipped roofs, and exterior finish materials, such as brick veneer, lap siding, trim, dramatic overhangs, and balconies sharpens the building's residential flare in respect to the surrounding neighborhood and community. The shared amenities are located in the central core area, which is located in the middle of the building between the independent living units and the memory care/assisted living units. On the main floor, residents and guests are greeted by a luxurious two-story lobby, a stone fireplace, a grand stair case, an intimate cafe, and sitting areas with the comfortable cozy living room atmosphere. The mail room, management office, nurses' office, and public restrooms are centrally located off of the lobby as are the central dining room, sports pub, and kitchen. Other shared amenities include an activity room with a small kitchen area and a public restroom, a media center, the activity director's office, an overnight guest room, and a library on the second floor; and a salon and grandparent room for visiting children on the third floor. In addition to the heated parking, the parking level features a fitness center, an employee break room, and support spaces for the building. The two wings offer different levels of care for the residents. The 27 memory care apartments are located on the secured main floor of the south wing, and have their own private living/dining area and kitchenette as well as a private bathing room, a community laundry and a private fenced yard. There are 19 studio and 8 one bedroom apartments within the secure memory care portion of the building. The second and third floors in the north wing contain 23 studio, 24 one bedroom, 2 one bedroom with den, and 5 two bedroom assisted living apartments. Each floor of the assisted living area is also provided with a private bathing room and a laundry room. The north wing contains 42 one bedroom, 6 one bedroom with den, and 12 two bedroom independent living apartments. In addition to the shared ] 2/19/2008 Select Senior Living Project Narrative Page 2 of 2 laundry rooms provided on each floor of the independent living wing, each unit will have its' own laundry hook up. The 3.28 acre site offers an open surface area and large green areas with new landscaping and many existing mature trees. It is very important to the developer to keep as many existing trees as possible. Hence, the design of the site is pushed to the west and the storm sewer design provided in a linear fashion to disturb as little as possible adjacent to the residents on the east side of the site. The landscape plan incorporates plantings of red oak on the east side of the property, which are naturally found on the site and Austrian Pine for additional screening. The boulevard planting of linden greenspire trees along Old Central are used to breakup the mass of the building and to create a very appealing streetscape. The north portion of the site incorporates an aggressive planting of evergreens for screening along Mississippi Street. Additional ornamental trees, shrubs, perennial and annual plantings are also planned for around the perimeter of the building to provide a welcoming entrance. A detailed landscape plan that identifies the plantings can be found in the submittal package. Storm water management for the site will be handled in an underground system, designed to meet the watershed requirements for rate, quality and volume control. The underground system will ring the building, providing for infiltration and storage directing the water to an existing storm sewer system found at the east boundary of the property. A grading plan and utility plan can be found in the submittal package that details the grading and drainage for the project. There are a total of 116 parking spaces provided for the site, which consists of 32 open spaces on the surface and 84 spaces in the heated garage. Traffic for the site has been analyzed based on the number of beds associated with the facility. A breakdown of the traffic and how it relates to the adjoining streets can be found in the submittal package. To lesson the impact to the Old Central Traffic entrance, standard operations will require employees to park in the underground parking facility. Lighting for the site mainly consists of building lights along the east side of the building. This results in zero foot candles along the majority of the east property line. All of the lights have 90 degree cutoff to direct the light downward. A detailed lighting plan is located in the submittal package. Q1/12/2009 KON 12:1$ FAX f�u� iz, zoa9 Ms Ju1ie JoneS, Planning Coor(iinatt)r 6431 University Avenue N_�. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Ms 7ones, I am opposed to the plan to rezone ftve parcels into one for the sole purpose of high density housing. Why doesn't it seein to matter what thc citizens of Fridley really want"> Our property is valuablc to us and who would want to buy any of the houscs that arc in view of thc projcct that is an the agenda. This is nothing more than greed for the developer and the City of Fridley. Not all people who retire can afford to live in the units that are proposcd so why not do morc to cnsurc that they arc able ta stay in th��ir homes? Docs that mcan wc are to be penalized not once, but tvc�ice, because the vaIue of our home will depreciate? Whcn thc units arc cornpleted and are not rented out, what are your plans for filling the units? I've secn it happen rnany times when the units aren't being renied th�y talce alternate roults such as Section S, �tc_ It i.5 a knnwn fact that 4nce anylhing like that is built they manage to change the rules of how it can be filled. If the city is so concemed ovcr tax revenue why didn't the city put in a golf course that was purposed instead of Springbrook Nature Ccnter? Now the peupl� of Fridley are paying for the park to stay opcn. r�ooa�ooz It's beginning to look like Fridley wil] not be happy until the city is paved fr�m c�ne end to the other. There seems Ln be hitiden inter�st t��r somebody oiher th�n Q�e City of Fridley eiliiens. i guesti i f it iSn't near yc�ur property it dc�etin't matter what they 5tick in. City c>fficials are elected into office to ovetrsee wt�at is best fc►r the city and the citizezts :� whc� reside there. I for one, alo�xg witla others, do��'t thimk tlaey're doz�.g t��ei� job in our hest interest_ Sincerely, �G�a� Patricia Mulroy 1384 G4`�' Avenue N.F_ PridIey, MN 55432 Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. L.AND PLANNINC • SURVEYING • ENGINEERINC 12445 SSTH STREET NORTH ��LAKE EMO, MINNESOTA i5042 Phonc 16i1) 439.q�33 F� 165q 430.9331 � � � � N w FFE E S ORIGJNAL JYALf /GCV�KF 0 15 SG XNr Sue� L+ Fn � liJCr,vm M.+P S rna,v 13, T3CN - RIS�YV A � Ccu,m; M,v,vcscrA /�ie�E,GI�II/VARY I�,G�9T ��mo�,,, r��w S�,L�'Ci S�iVlOR ,L.11/INC OF FiQlD,L�7' Gn Gqv AtNV�vr.w � �� 3 I W b �� I � _ I _- Abo.wcn fo.wex os 1 hW 1W a� r — -- — — �— �� - Sf //4' Scrnav /3, 1JCN RIf'W Nc.e�.v (iry Os T AfV 1/Y n� �.r +� � -- Sf %v. S .uv !3. T3pN ,C'vW T - - � - :%:kS:S�i?',rj-',,J� �;=L'7=c"' i�c.�ti:'beF7�—/'L;/,+::�-La'"�:�1 - - - - - - - /�^/� R = 33v3/ ' ....� z,an,w�.-__ �i �A��T/ ��M ,--Abnw Lw 6a,r 1, SPRIAG ✓AILfY � - - a E 33�f.88 � � ., ....,•/ , _ — _ _ _ saew��sE-=' � � MISSlSSJPPJ SrzEEr (Cour✓�r vPo,ao IG6J � o�, ,�I sacz i i �' '�I... � I u_____ __ SB8'f715f 3PY69I I _____ _ u I y I � � . I . .�..,..,, .. �...,, �,,,... �- - � i - - - - - ,7 �u_ « o� � nl /� I I I ,a� r,..e .�.9�. I w � .._.�.. �+ T �� f � I� ��i ��/ iif. � ;�i I I u. �, ' ,�.. ;-1 saa•vsvrE rss.z i� I�` i I I � ,� � i I Q � A w La� I � !' - I W I 11,376 So. Fi. � � , GSI /k'.eE � ��s � �� Lor 1 �3 ; �, �W ��, -- � ��. -� � �� i� �� .^+ I � E�y$� I�ro �r � ', II � I I� � I ,�:.' li� y�� i g i i�.jl• 1 I � �v � O � v�� i I � l� �l � ��'1 NBB1f'/17V ZGGGY � I _ _ _ - _ ._ _ - I " f� L � 3� r` I I •� �11 _;a `�I �1 i � � II I`;'� nL.lawr �ru:; � i � � `,� ;`, . � � aQ ro I j. :�� a� � �I V� � `? � � � � , � ,j � r , � \ �. ° �� ' h ;;; `+ � � i _..,.. _. � �+�� i � _� r� j I �' O� I `yi i � � — I � � �� ,cock 1 � �° � `� �i �' i ' �' � '�DV :�� ft ) ° � - __ - - _ . - \ �� I , j f tU � v�"� f��l, �AF[c,/______� ` � i\ � I ^(/�^..�' IZG,9IV Sa. Fr. � � I.-` I �. i � 17B Aczcr I / � i w �; � � �OT � I . :� �I � f i � L~ ... v ` � ...�., li �.� I � � `r I sc io I s�[�� [o, n. 2aK r. I i � .. .sv,erne v,ouEr _ a�.,..... ..� U,.�, �.�.... .. '- T V�, �----------------- �� Ii �, �, --__y_—____—_-- / � � � �\ - N88'�f1'19 "!�l/ 33513 ' ' � a� � - �� _ i '� I � v, v.,.. � y '� . ti � � � � I ,_.. . <_'!% , �h I � � a�, �, �,.< i �„� �� , ro. �. ,, , . ---sv,euc v,ouEr � — _ � I I _ L — — — `� � I �� '.� i `1 -.� �.; ,� .� — ,e.; City of Fridley County of Anoka Section 13, T30N, R24W. LEGEND O DENOTES SET � INCH BY 16 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT MARKE� M9TH A PLAS7IC CAP INSCRIBED �FREEMNN LS 16989', UNLESS SHOWN O7HERVASE. • DENOTES FWNO MONUMENT, S12E AN� uARNINCS a5 INDICATED. R' DENOTES RECORO DIMENSIqJS FROM UNDERLnNG PLAT OF SPRING VAILEY. NOTES 1) ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SVSiEM IS BASEO ON THE NORTH LINE OG THE SOUTHEAST OUARIER OF SECTION 13, T.30N., R24W., Wr11CH IS ASSUMED TO BEAR S88'4Yt5'E. AREAS OYERALL 157,755 SWRRE FEET 3.62 ACRES DEDICAIED ROA�WAY 14,454 SO�ARE FEET 0.33 ACRE LOT 1 22,376 SWARE FEET 0.51 ACRE LOT 2 120,924 SWARE FEET 2.78 ACRES Owocn CerHfiuN KtiOW ALL MF.N HY THFSL PRFSE!.TS'. That Fndley Sclect Propertia, L.L.C., a Minnesota hmiled liability company, undcr ilie lax-s o( M'nvesota owner of �he foliowing descnbed properry siwa�ed in tLe Ciry o(Fndlry, Counry oC Moke, Sla�e o( Minnesota: Lots I5, 16, 18 and 19, SPRITG VALLEY, azcording b IM1e raoNed plat �M1ereof, Anoke County, Minnesota. aod Lol 17, SPRING VALLEY, eccording m the recorded plet Nereuf, Anoka Cowry, Mimewra. Cerofice¢ af Title!No. Nu rsused �M1e sarne m be survryed and planed az SGLECf SF.�'IOR LIVfVG OF FR7DLF.V end do hercby donare end dedica�e �o ihe public for public use forever he pu5lic ways a� shown on �his plat and also dediwu �he essemen�c created by tLis plet for dreinage end uuliry purposes oNy. ln wimess whereuf said Fridley Selea Pm�re.nies, L,L.C.. a Minneso�e limited lis6ilily cam�avy, has cnuxed these presen� to be signed by itc proper otLcer this _ day of __ __ , 200 . Signed: Fndlry Selat Properties, 4LC. Greg laMsan, ChiefManeger STATF, OF COl.7YlY OF ihe foregoivg instrument was acknowledged befon mc Utis day of . 200J by Greg JoMSOq CCief Manager, Fndley Select Pmpercies, LL.C., a Minnesou limi�ed liabiliry cumpany on behalf orue wm��Y. s;��oFho� I Pnu�ed Nemc of Notary � Nowy Public � , My Cownissian F_epires i Survevan Certlflwre 1, Timothy l. Freeauq Land Surveyor, do here6y ceniCy ihat I have survryed or direc�y supervised Ne survcy of Ne propeny described on ihis plae as SELECT SE�'IOR LIV1�G (lF F2IDLEY; prryared this plat or diratly supervised the preparation of this plat; tlut tAis plat is a comct rryresentation ofthe boundary survey; tha� alI mathematical da�a aud labels are wrzcctly designated on this plar, thac all muuumevts depicied on this plaz have bee� mctly set; that ell wa�er boundaries and wei lands, es defined in Minncsote StaNtes, Section 505.01, Su6d. 3, es of ihe date o(the Swveyor s Cenification ere ehoum end la6cled on Ihis plat; and all �ublic weys are shown end labeled on t6is plat. Daced�M1is. _deyof_ _ .200 . ��. � I � r., � m�,,... .u., �,.0 .em...x I I I N993953W � —� � � I �- � �—_y��r r 1 � I l�.V�y� 1' ^!•!!�� _ _ _ ' — — � I � — — _— � — — � _ � _ � ._. — '1 1 I I //1 '/ f` r � v � !�':�: 'J�T V,-%�L� :�%: � � I �� rv ��R '��,� , ---� s�,�..� i3. r3ci✓ ,eiwv e,n � .xew,..�.. i�omy l. t'�cm�, �,d survey�r Ativnaota License \o. 16989 STATE OF MRJNLSOTA couNrvor wnswncroN rner �o��s�eyorscerc�s��ew�a�w�wi�a�ean�r«m�m�s_aa��,r__ Todd A. F.ncksao no�y wnr� MyCom �ssiovcxpireslanueryJ1,20 Ciro ot Frldlev This plal wes approved by �he Ciry C uncil a(Ih� Ciq a!Fridlry, Minnema ihis _ day of 505.03, Subd. 2. n�yor Clerk Counn tiurvevor Checked nnd appmved iliix Cay of_ Lerty Hoium Moke Counry Surveyor 2(N1 _. 200 , by Timothy J. Frecman. Land Surveyor. , 200 , and hereby crnities complianre u�i� elI reyu�remem, a„e: foM in �liruie>o�a Stav�es, S�r��on JCLCl.1 JCIV 1 V K Ll V IIV l� V Y t K1LLL ] � � �p�. Y EXISTING CONDITIONS & REMOVAL PLAN 9„ �., � � �,... I �,' n I,r N T Y , C m e m r, .�q� �� ,,:,,�-.f�..,� -. v '�P � � .,, o� —'w'u�. — ��p '�� ;�� i,iQ � +� n ,�y .,�.. �� , :.'\ >�,..� �..':2�� „�. � �� o o�,��°o � � 8 �'"� �� : � �� '� , � �� qy � � �.-�.. ,.,� � �p�y '� � ��" � ,r`P'' � < �1 � �1F ° n ��O • g �� g�' Q I , ,d ��,: „� i �"� i �''C�pr,�.. r�,.•� ��v r,..� I I '" J � 'tt`�` °„`� �� r • �, ,� .� G�`f � � rJ _� -� � ',— — -- — — — --.� �J�,�� _ . i � O � j ` ' � � �•(G. � .� � I r ae `� I :: :' ;: ,� °�� .r.�.a� � � � o� I t.CiC:.:r:i.i.i " �° � I r ..... .... ...... r.'::::.':::::. . "' � 3 `✓y� � I {:::::::.. � QQ •� �::�:Fi:�i??:�i: ......:::: ��::(�::�:(�i:.... � �r� I } .::.............. r.'.'r.' �m�`".. ('� °°'' �SLI•' ^"' I rr::::: {.'::::. :.':::.': yy. '°°L"� � , "�� , I I ' .. , y �� I d e,�=o' g � �,E� � �� i 'I I � •�� > I fr I I � I oY er�^��T � E� /� � I � e�� } r� a /� � � ,e9si s�� _�� ' � ; I � � .,� �� i � I \ ,...� �'.:" �,��.. �<�.. % ,� � ,el I L — ".�. „�<�1 � ----------�� rv°��—��.�__�r�� --- �--�_'�� ! wr �--��,_A_------' s-,�.,,_�„� o.. Q,�� I ..w. ., e-_-__ _ - .�_o,,,,..�'��= �� l ��-- ------------- ' f-� _ - - _ _ -- — . - - . �c�.�`�iI�� f �� 7 _ _ ' . _ _ _ �. - 1'l' -� -- .�7��y.-CJ=Lj [t-� — _. �o,�� — – ��;:� I ' „ �,�;�" . .�, , ; �� , � ,... , � �, �. . . �� .a .. ,� . �,�; � ��, .o��, , I ` � � '� `1 , `� r i 1. i . �v� � , � ,� N W O E S ORIGINA� SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE IN FEEi LEGEND � � � PROPERTYBOUNDARY EXISTING 1-FOOT CONTOUR �a� � EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN ��. �� EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED , ' ��" EXISTWG SPOT ELEVATION �W� EXISTING WATER W/ HYDRANT, GATE VALVE AND CURB STOP ST $ EXISTING STORM SEWER s s � < EXISTING SANITARY SEWER W/MANHOLE AND CLEANOUT OE EXISTING ELECTRIC W/ POWER POLE UT EXISTIN6 UNDERGOUND TELEPHONE UC EXISTING UNDERGOUND CABLE N UG EXISTING UNDERGOUN� GAS � BUILDING REMOVAI � PAVEMENT REMOVAL EXISTING POWER POLE REMOVAL .�--,-�--r�- yC � �7 -� -� -�-� -� UTIIITY REMOVAL NOTES i. BACKGROUND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SURVEY FROM MIDWEST LAND SURVEVORS IN OCTOBER OF 2003. FFE, WC. OFFERS NO GUARANTV AS TO THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION FROM OTHERS. 2 27 EXISTING TREES WILL REMAIN ON-SITE. NOTE' THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY TNE ENGINEER OF ANV DISCREPANGES ANO SMALL NOT COMMENCE WITH ANV WORK PRIOR TO ENGINEERS APPROVAL. TME LOCATION OF UNpERGROUND FACIIiTIES OR STRUCTURES AS SMOWN ON iHE PIANS ARE BASED ON AVAILABLE RECOR0.5 AT THE TIME TME PL4N5 WERE PREPARED ANDARE NO? GUARANTEEO TO BE COMPLETE OR CORRECT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL UTILITIES 1] HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO DETERMINE TME EXACT LOCATION OF ALL FApLITIES AN� TO PROVI�E ADEOUATE PROTECTION OF SAID UTILITIES DIIRING THE COURSE OF WORK. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 1-BOd252-1166. � - r_ i � I � 0 _ <� z Re�rs�Er.iFic:nrior� oa er wns akeanaeo F�v Mr ou ur�oca uv o�cECr SUOER`nSION AND TrA' i A+! 4 DuL+ LiCENSED FROFESSIONNL ENf,!M1�_? UNDER LHE LAWS CF �N'- 5*AiE OF MiNNES0i.4_ TODD A IXICJCSON YOYIB LIBJSE NO. 11/19/C� DATE a��n vdv p,�yMry; VJV p�� ry TAE �yp�7e 72/t9/08 pIKA ��-� 3� U❑ � ra v C �� o a�� o0 � � ,� �n� �Q e .�i �i 9 � � � L (Q Z a` `j � F i � y "� � 3 w w �a � � Cu N W Z N Q o Z � �C � L � � � r p U N � N J W � W � Y W J J W � Y � W J � O � � OLL O � � Z� � °� > r Z � W J � g O � Z W� � � V U c W f/'i J � � C1.1 SNEET 20F 1B '"'"�-..., w._._ �_-.� � � �. �� : }��F� �4 � . ' i '� , .;�� I t" _ , � � - � �,�� `? i � ~��-=�5 �;� -. �.,.: , � � � � � * �r a � :;' _ ._. i : � � // � , - `' fjlY • � � � i� . / � - -� ^-^ .� � � i�� .�:-' ��1t��(�'�" _ .11��.��'� � A LIF�;TIME UF CARInG � r�. _ � ` � '� . # �--.:...:.�_ �� a ... � � " $ f � °�� '�°� � ,� < �,;� �' � ° � ,, p " ��, d 4 - _ t� x Y . t"�"'('" '^h -. ..'� P: ' Y. .� t 4 '§^^�n �� .2.... '� � `i�:,: .r"M �.. � } , ?g i_' .s " ,� ':.s ». � � . _ . � _ ' '_ . . ° ' ... . . , : t ..'�#'. . �. � � '�'t".:,'��«.- ; d+ {.�'- ",�., z �"`"` i.: m. y,�.., - �v, � . �� „ . .�:.ti �a - . � . . � .. . -� sa .. .. . i . . , .. . . ,:. p. �` _ w ,- ` , �,, �` , .,.x'�°'. � ..r i �� ° o°' .5-- �:.�- s;' �, �• ,i .��. .. .•�- � ,, - 'vr �. .w-�'�TM�. �# "�' "';:.°,E:: ;&�".�.� � � a�i ' w..'%t . �?� �. . �...,, y > �p � - .., < ✓,42� .�.. ' ... � . �, � .._.'w�.. ..r ,:. :':x:' u�' .i;.. . F . : .j r . �:� "�q'� �`kn��.."5*. `r+)�� :.t`. �w�'�t^ .e+�,:. .Y�;i.wd . . , t �.,. � �.>�� :,r,,, �. ,y .. . � .ro ,., . . . ,r.f � { ... ,p �.r�x , `ri '.y,.' .bm.:y . �.�.�..a X. ._. „� , , .> . , �.� . � ; .. � �= <: � ,... . �. .. i i ' .a': i �l ,..7 .5�: �:'::;:«.b 1.;,.. "wm�" y -� . �� ' , ...... ,..�, .. . -::. . . . . .. _ `c�" 3 9;.. .7.�_ ,.� _ . . .�. , .' .:�".'r.`t 'waiv` 7 � - rou��a-�_+""y`� -- E�=�f ?� � i � . _ _ --a- -i � . � , ,k ( � � . �.. .-« ! � � �. ��_ :� . ��.�� a � � � � � N ��f I' v Map Nu. OB- IJB ,. ., ., �' � �,. .. � ,,., . ��.,, . � � �� .;.� � -._I - �' , -� _ � ,,. . , . _ . ,� _ ... ,;.,.., � ;_ � �-�. . A .r.. ;--��. ..". X t � . � �� : .�.. �.�. "� �, t ' . ' :` ,, „ . �y � .,, ,,. v t � .. .. � � . ,.,.„ x { � ., ,.� ' t:.kt: . �.: " ' >.,.: :� .. . . �. ... . . : t4. ' • �fiv ia:e , . . �.... xi "4 N i io '"x. Y''F1�,'.' , .. _ ;s ..., �;. .: � ,�.�.. . „. , �,:.. . , �` .,. • �' ;, • . , y, ..._ . »�» , �i F�� j i�t '� � � :.' FS �' N � :�ty.� ,�, : „ ._. { � � � ��. .-. . ... .��:'�"' * .,.. S'�'�� ` ya.s. .�x ..F-'� �atb � �� - 1 � rr � �. °'� �y - . '# . € '�, % ». _ ., . > ;z.. .: . . �e - '� �p+ � .� � -s'_ . ; . f . ,.'�': . :a ._ r � i � _ .� `� I x 3 <:�•k, . :. . z�. #;�. ^ � u ,.:. � -;# :.;:� .�c a • � «� � ±rg,: z�' �`'t ,;""r- s;.,.m,:..w.._..,:.- �� :§ r . . ti r , v ,��,/' . Ess- , t a � � � : , < . "'i�� 4 �:... ! " ., . ,�y �, . , ° " -'�'„ . .: `. . j . . ;; . 'r : .,,� : �,�^"�°. . -`4u.� � �:+.. � r :aa ' ,�-.-_;,-. r ; � . �� ", , � ; , � � ,� , ,.� .�. - _ . . , . �,.. , � ... . . � � - �.-c.�„�.�"�»�*�F'%',-� �r y� ��:. *,� ' � / s '� x r�i:.: .�i, t .�=_� � �, a.r? � �:�� ;� � , : �: 9^` • { . ., _,.,�.., , .., �� . � ._ i � � - - . .�,,: . `,- � ,� . _ . . .. _ ...... .. r ,t.�.. �r �zy , �, "'" k a'� ,�r.> .. , . ,,. �, x. . . ' '` ' } . . '..4. a� .. � j � � ; :�.x. :.�1� --�.s � . - � .s � �. : �.��. a ,� ul L s �7 .;.+3 � ' :C. „ ..�. ��. , ��;.: ^' �, , :w �, .. . . .. , �: ; . , . :, ,� .. . .,..,.. � ., a ^.<. , .:e' .rv� . ". � +u4� ' ' .«a £ n�+ma , f l'r': � � w + .. k ,$v . .. , , t .� �y ..,r?�. � ., ..,, ..�4�;.5. s:. .. „ ., . ' .�^.ha«�^N v"�", _;:t ,...:w .`« �� ; q. � :`;e ak°''�"� 'f. ��`y� , a '" *�* ,. , ...:a..x ,. ...:-_.., _.,� i , .,::.�r.� -:n.^�� '��. „ _.,.�: �� ,. . . s.. . . , s � .':, 7 ts,.. i ,, „ ..,.,. ..,� . ��, �d ,� s;, " ? ,� �-�. � ��" , , �, � . .. . . . , � � x. . , � � r ` .. <.y ,� � <�:,,.,.. ;.. r , ;. �� .,„. _.., �v�.�. �. .:r;, � ,�-..,t "�"'x�� '�', ��..� * ,�..^ .,.. _,... � .. .t '.: �. ' � ' '.,.,' :'< f -a.;k ' -, . :,. �m�s`�.. P 'i!� }*w �te .st.`-;�.. ,�, �- ... "� •y, -�.. r±? ° '�.. . > f ! • . ;� ., ._ . } . ,:e=?� . � . ' �, s ��;.t , ::. ,<v. . . s•�.i � +x:., .. r - . �` r:.. ° �e„ -� � r,+ . w-� . , :s..:n. �y ' .,. �' ., i , ... � . # .., i ...., � ,Y, \ � ° �?.. -Y3 .'sd- � a,� , i � ` t �. n . ;� �'a . . ... ,_ .?+ „a'� d r. • { xix<,: ,k , ,�� , , � �.,, �:. . � , �; �� .�_ :: , � ,. : ,..� � x >� ,� ,_w�.,, �` � . � �, _�� , t �� ' �, ,.. �� ,� ;, ,� � , . � ., , . ;� . ( ��.� . � . .,� , . __ . � _ , r , � ,w j' � � �� . � � ` • _ '� � � � . �;;, r� b � � „ � t �..' � i� � i � xk � �, : +.,�`� ""`�,''�� " i��, ;.� �,._ ��. _,:�:. rb `- '¢ .:; .. `�; µ , y � � � � � 'r ..�vk.�:c ' �� ` . �_ 1 �-.. �:, c ,..-:: ..:: ._ . ��T..::.�71J �w %�� _ r s..i e]-. .. t .. . . ..� e ..»t. � . - .. , <'P,�u+ . . . . .. .. - `v.s '+ .�. �.. .. ..:.:. Y� aa r- s. ,. � g � e , r. �.... » � . �. ..n.. . ,.... . � . , �>.. . ... a„ � . . . .. '�, 5 ��. . �A .�� o.r, � � - � . r � . . . � . . ... � °' . . ... . , ..a.. . g. . .- . ' P , 3 . _. �.�� r.... ��, � r � . �? � . ., .. , ':....«. _. � .». l �_ .�.. ,.-. _ ., ,. .. � � . y �. . .. A � v .�.:. � . �, � �^r , * � . . . . . � . .. � `.� � � . „ » � y.�� g :.�e .a., iA�^ ..,-� � '� � . . � . `t . .. _ ... ..�-�� -. . . . - .� ' - _ ' � ' .. °�+?-._:_ `a� . - . ... _ _ � ""'''�,�" .�- „�� ` . .. .,. ;. �. .. . _ . . �.. - - � : h^° �«, _ J ^"°'x`.w;- r s , ., , . - . a , t , _ �. , t �„ � ° ` � ��, }� � �. �_ �,. . � a. ._ � '�r ;J.�. � >,w� �ir ��,`� �`�+��. �H"�f ' � �`iT _ ,�.� _ �,� yRs , _ �.¢. , , �,r, . � < . _ .r - ,. . �.. , _ . � , s . ,:.-z - -. . . . , . >_+r`"q ,_ � � `�: ��, , ..� �� . i� ` � :��,,"^''� ` i��s�, � � �' �`l+� , , ' ° ��F� '� '� . . ,.�`" -- j _ _ . . � a � J � '� ��,� � �a�t�•. ;,�.: ,�.�.,., � �°_� �, � � , � � > . � .�� . � , , _ „_ � . - . ' . . _ _ �, ..�,�'`1��,��., �. � _a�. �..� =�.3 T}� r�� , _ ��;�__- .�__ � _ . , � � . � �r". . _`.,�� — ^t,. —.,w__ ��`��"..�"'w ,. . . ,�?�,� - ., . .,,..�„Q,r...� �*t,.. ' . ^_ ". `�".. .i;,;'�,. � � ..�. ` F�� . .. � .. .._"` � ._. �.. -.. Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING • ENGINEERING �� 12445 55TH STREET NORTH iW E'I STII.LWATER, I�MrNESOTA 55082 s Phone (651) 439•8833 Faac (651) 430-9331 /�� archtte�ts'"y 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N. , SUITE 230 OAICDALE, MN 55128 PH(851)714A115 FN( (B51)7351228 w�.w.d6earchilecGS.com SHEET INDEX SHEET DESCRIPTTON C0.1 TITLE SHEET C1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 8 REMOVAL PLAN C2.1 LAYOUT PLAN C3.1 GRADING & EROSION CONTROI PLAN C4.1 UTILITY PLAN C5.1 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS C7.1 DETAIL SHEET NO. 1 E1.1 LIGHTING PLAN L1.1 LANDSCAPE PLAN A1.1 SITE PLAN A2.1 GARAGE FLOOR PLAN A2.2 FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2.3 SECOND FLOOR PLAN A2.4 THIRD FLOOR PLAN A2.5 FLOOR PLAN DETAILS A3.1 ELEVATIONS A3.2 ELEVATIONS A3.3 ELEVATIONS SELECT COMPANIES - SELECT SEN[OR LIVING - FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA - DECEMBER 19, 2008 SHEET I OF 18 SHEETS � � � 5 3 �1�^� vMJ • J � � J� � �r� V � q � � �r^ vl � � � V �• � �MODULAR � RETAININ( � �NP.� � � � ^V U � N O LAYOUT PLAN (C0 UNT Y STA TE AID HIGH �'H Y M I S S I S S I P P I S T R E E T .,.�- - - — N O . 6 ) RETAINING WALL (TVP.) MODULARBLOCK RETAINING WALL (TVP.) I ) ) ) N w FFE E s ORIGINAL SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND � � PROPERTVBOUNDARV PROPOSED PAVEMENT PROPOSED CONCRETE NOTES t) BACKGROUND INFORMATION FROM FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED BY MIDWEST LAND SURVEYORS. A�DITIONAL UTILITV INFORMATION FROM ASBUILTS BY CITY OF FRIDLEY. FFE, INC. OFFERS NO GUARANTEE AS TO THE ACCUR4CY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS. 2) ALL RADII TO BACK OF CURB. 3) ALL DIMENSIONS TO THE FACE Of CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 4) PAVEMENT STRIPING TO BE 4" WIDE WHITE PAINTED STRIPE. ACCESSIBLE ACCESS AISLE STRIPING SHALL BE 4" WIDE WHITE PAINTED STRIPE 18" ON CENTER AND AT 45 DEGREE ANGLES TO STALL. AREA SUMMARY IMPERVIOUS BUILDING 47,508 S.F. SIDEWALK/PATIO 2,204S.F. DRNEWAY/PARKINGLOT 16,2555.F. 70TAL 65,967 S.F. PERVIOUS MPERVIOUS TOTAL 76,957 S.F. 54 % 65,967 S.F. 46% 142.924 S.F. 700 % NOTE- THE CONTRACTOR SMALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY �ISCREPANCIES AND SNALL NOT COMMENCE WITH ANY WORK PRIOR TO ENGINEERS APPROVAL. THE LOCATION OF UNOERGROUND FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON THE PL4N5 ARE BASED ON AVAILABLE REGORDS AT THE TIME THE PIFNS WERE PREPAREO ANDARE NOT GUAfiANTEED TO BE COMPIETE OR CARREGT. CONTFACTOR IS RESPONSIBIE FOR CONTACTING ALL IITILITIES i2 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO �ETERNINE THE EXACT LOGTION OF ALL FApLITIES AND TO PROVIDE ApEQUATE PROTECTION OF SAI� UTILITIESDURINGTHECOURSEOFWORK. GOPHERSTATEONE CALL tA00252-t 166. � � �; > 0 i o <s z 4:P`��r�wns�avE�anaEO ar E �R UNDER u+ OiRECT SUPERVISION AN� iMAT I aM A ��LY LiCENSED P3CGESSiONPL _N ;iNEE� >NS ' Tq'c _r MI.'vVESi'A_ TODD A FRICKSON S'OYIB 110E�5E NO. 11/19/Q8 DAiE �m �� pR,� M VJV p�pg� � TAE �yp�R 12/19/OB Ia1A �$—� 3$ u �, H �� S 0 �� a �I, C� � � � � � Q a u s w � � �c a �" o" � cCtl 3 z � y G � � � y .� 3 i�i w �a N � Q '" N W Z N Q ° Z �, a � � �� r o V N � N J � W � `* W � Y W � J W N Y J Z � � QLL J O � Z � � � > r J W � O � OZ � ` W LL' / � � � U W � �,� C2.1 SHEET 3 OF 1 B ( C 0 U N T Y �,�^ VMJ ` J � � � � � 'I � q 6GREENSPIRELINDEN- � � ' � I LANDSCAPE PLAN STA TE AID HIGH �Y�i Y 1�t �. 6� M I S S I S S I P P I S T R E E T . _' _ — . __.. . . .. . .. _. .. .. ._. . ,� _ . . . � . �- _ . �.— _— _—___ _ r�d"� � - 5) BLACK HILLS SPRUCE �� r.�� _ �� , $� / \ � 4.r' � I� I � Y � 'wti�+' / � � � � 'S ' � `— ___ _ ��? I � �, -- 5} BLACK HILLS SPRUCE � � � � ��p � � , � ` -- 5) AUSTRIAN PINE �� fM - _ .ti � 5)AUSTRIANPINE � I � �'�8)AUST,i21ANPINE 1) PRAIRIE FIRE CRABAPPLE PINK SPIRE ;RABAPPLE 3) MUC�P-�_ PINE I � . I ,.,. � � f ___-�, ANNUALS --.�� / � ��-� 3) MUGO-, `� y 15) HAPPY -! PINE � ''� 4) ANNABELI �� ; RETURNS j � O HYDRANGEA \ \ �AYLILY I , � 18)HAPPY- . �, --�-�� - � �� RETURNS .� . .�yYrk, �\ DAYLIIY , � �I i � �� 1 � f � I � W � 1j 7) GREENSPIRE LINDEN 'I q I O I II i II I� 3) MUGO-� �' PWE -- ___ O Z) PINK SPIRE - _ ..,�s c � 9) AUSTRIAN PINE ��-� � t I ` � 2) PJM r "' �"4 �� . - _ RODODENDRON f ,i � � ''�,,,.r � --4)ANTHONY � � _ WATERER � , �� 6PIRAEA .r«u.. � C �G 8)ANNABELL HYDRANGEA ` ' ''�'�'.�.% r 0 �� jc� � 4) ANTHONV �-�� `r . WATERER `�, Q�; SPIRAEA t � . � � � �• �. 0 - 2) PJM 4) `� . � RODODENDRON , MUGO � _^,� %� � �-`'s".v� / PINE �''.._., 1 �, _. / ��rr ��ai' �� y- I . 12) HAPPY `� � O ,��'�� RETURNS .":_'� O � . y�, . .SENIOR i�01lSING onvu�v p � �i.. `�%,SOB S.F. FOOTPRINT O � �r � - 4) PJM 4) PJM V �� O � RODODENORON RODODENDRON � �.. Q J ��lF� ' �. FFE CJi1G� `�-010as� _ � 4) MUGO PINE � � (� BFE 880.�fG :; `�-�' � �-14) HAPP�' --- 2) PJM �°"� RETURNS'` • , � RODODENDRON � �_ DAVLILY \ y0 � � '— 8) ANTHONY � �� 4 - �WATERER j 1� a SPIR4EA I ,J ; 6) PR4IRIE RRE --� � -.- � �� 'In �-10)ANNABEIL . CRABAPPLE ( �_,,. , � �1, ��;� � � - 8) ANTHONY � 5 �� •p WATERER "�w� Q SPIRAEA - 2) PJM i) PRAIRIE FIRE -1 RODODENDRON CRABAPPLE 10) RED OAK 6) BLACK HILLS . . _.� ... .. a ,-.��.a��..w .n � -:. ,-.,t-_.,,�,..,,,� . � ,,.�q �"'�"� . �� , 3) RED OAK-- . � � � .�� a ,� �� I � w. � M� a s,� �� 3) AU6TRIAN PINE ✓ K I J � LEGEND . � i � �� N W O E S OftIGINAL SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE IN FEET NOTES BACKGROUND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY SURVEY FROM MIDWEST LAND PROPERTY BOUNDARY �� SURVEYORS IN OCTOBER OF 2003. FFE, INC. OFFERS NO GUARANN AS TO THE ACCURACV OF INFORMATION FROM OTHERS. 2) AlL ROUGH GRADING TO BE DONE BY OTHERS DECIDUOUS TREE 3) NO PL4NTING WILL 6E INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRA�ING AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. q) 3" DEEP WOO� MULCH WILL BE INSTALIED UNDER ALL TREES AND SHRUBS THAT ARE ISOLATED FROM GROUND COVER AREAS, GENERAL SHRUB MASSES, AND ROCKED AREAS. ORNAMENTAL TREE 5) ALL AREAS WHERE SOD AND ROCK MULCH TOUCH SHALL HAVE PIASTIC EDGER. REQUIREMENTS CONIFEROUS TREE ONE CONIFEROUS TREE FOR EVERY 1,000 S.F. OF FLOOR AREA. 30 k REQUIRED TO BE CONIFEROUS TREES. 2 ORNAMENTAL TREES CAN BE SUBSTITU7ED FOR 1 OVER-STORV 7REE. FOR EVERV EXISTING TREE OVER 4" TO REMAIN, 2 REQUIRED TREES MAY BE DELETED. ROCK MULCH 143 TOTAL NEW TREES RE�UIRED 27 TREES TO REMAIN'2 = 54 TREE CREDIT 89 NEW TREES REQUIRED 27 CONIFEROUS RE�UIRED 120RNAMENTALTREES=60VERSTORY 7- 3" OVERSTORV TREE5=142-1/2" OVERSTORY 69 TREES RE�UIRED. TREE PLANTING SCHEDULE NOTE- THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFV THE ENGINEE0. OF ANY DISCREPANCIES AND SHALL NOT COMMENCE WRMANV WORK PRIOR TD ENGINEEftS APPROVAL. THE IOCATION OF UNDERGROUN� FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON THE PL4NS ARE BASED ON AVAILABLE RECORDS I AT THE TIME THE PLANS WERE PREPARED ANDARE NOT i. GUARANTEED TO BE CAMPIETE OR CORRECT. CANTRACTOR IS '� RESPONSIBLE fOR CONTACTING ALL UTILITIES ]2 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO DETERMINE TME E%ACT LOCATION OF ALL I FACIIITIES AN� TO PROVIDE ADEOUATE PROTECTION OF SAID IITILITIES DURING THE COURSE OF WORK. GOPHER STATE ONE '� CALL i E00.Z52-� 166 � ,� Iz 0 U � 0 > _} I I z c =oer wns �eeoneeo dr NE OR 11NDER MY piRE�: 5 PERVISION AND �HAt i AM A ]U�Y Lf,ENSED P40GESSIONAL ENGINEEN I otF iHE LAWS �F i��E "- '-F M 4NESOlA. TODD A FAICJCSON YOY18 LICHJSE NO. IZ/19/L19 DATE �pg� M VJV p,�y�y h VJV p� ry, TAE MyypAR 12/19/08 p,,,p 08-138 u � d�� a �(7�� o0 ,.� 7.� n 7 � : o U ,� " [+� , �L� � � 5 � ��yV, o � � z � � � � 3 7J w �d � � 0 - W Z � Q � Z � � F � < � Z L = � O ~ � U �� y� J � ll.� � � W � Y W ¢ J W N > W Z � � � LL � o Z � w z � Q >r J J U o°— N z � Q W LL � Z � � U W � L1.1 SMEET 90F 1B �� m m 0 B 0 0 X ° - X �� a� r 0 rt' z � � 0 ti B �� aa ea m• X A _X �f� � a � m , B � � _� i - � � T i° /�' I y iv i � � �il a iI ' C U I � �;� � I C z�� Z III � � � rn � b O L D C E N T R A L A V E N U E (C 0(JNT Y S TATE AlD HI C N NA Y NO. 3 5 J � n 0 c � � � � ii y � a �n I y y 'I � I � I a "' O b I ti a I � n y x A , � � ;i a �4 .� y Z O . Q �' 0 L D C E N T R A L�� z�A V F��,,I�� V�NU� A � �� I V I UNTY STA TE AID 1�7 � HWA Y N0. 35) EXISTINCs PROPERTY LINE _._ — — — — — — --- — — — --- — — -- — —� — � — — — — — — — — — — — —�— — — — -- — ----� E a m � � ' e a NEW PROPERiY LINE '� �' I -- - --------�-- �--------.. _----- J _ --- -�- ---------� -- -- 0 -------- N--- � ------- ------- , Ilii � �- P0'-0" PAPoCINCs SET-BACK I � � ,- ----- --- - ----�— -- � - — -- � �- — --�- �--- � ,}- -- -- _� --� ---� --- — 95�_m�� BUILDINCx &ET-BACK�� I�� y � � —� � � � i',; � i"- ��O-�8 � � I i I 0 ��m-�8 ��m-�8 0 � ; � I �, . _� � �..�\ � � ��0,�� I-�II � I�� / � � I13'-1 � ' � i ' ��C-dl � � - � - ' � � �I , .. — - . A , - — � , y '� _ ,. I ' I j;� 'a � � � " a E N�iiii� y � � ia 'e i� ��i' n7 ti �' ciz cni E.n Em nm (lz '�� n � -�� I'' �� D �� 9 �� -A- �0 � � �� 4 � ��il � I , � � � � � � �' ry,' 'I ,`�', A I i j '� � I � � � z � � �� , � � ''`" '- � � '� ml�� '� � � � �O �e � 35�_3�� ,� b � � ��iD �N i I�� jIJU � `� � �' � � � I r'�� I 01 � �� I � I� I I m � I� � � Iq � �_ � ,z �, c ! .�, � � v � � ,� ihi � '� � � �ii � � ;;' ; � � � � � I II � ' , c� � o ti � � ! , �; � � � �� a i`�= , c� m = n m 11 -m" SIDE B'JILDINCs SET-BAGK 5 -0" PApCING 5Ei-BAGK PROPERTY LINE � m X E � N N � Z �m v,z � G� ^� � � ln m � D �' U� �O �m �m S�J� �D �D T � T � � -'z -� �n � �� 6� ��zN � -i C1G�� u'� ��rt D U' D� D G� �(7 �m�m � D �' �' � O � � � � A < Z D n n� p G� nmm— rn � NNN� � (ml r m D � �Nm -U U, � n = v' N Z i � � y ii " II�I IaI II I II� � lii _ —�'I.JIIII O li �' i V' !�tt � Z � � � � � O� D z D 3 z—Dmr� � cN_n 3 ��cU'i�3zti 0�ti�� m A�n^'�u,m �a��o� pmm��D �._, Z � �� O� p�� Oz N D O O� D rD �� D � m� -iOm�,y�< D C1�J �<itl DD�m{ D��p�O� rD�m ��m ��I�Z �dC7 � o �"° O p �� p Q � O � O 3 3 p�� O CJ p m z Z m�� SELECT SENIOR LIVING N NoT To BE �� : �� ° US�D �OR � archi tects z�• INDEPENDANT LIVING, ASSISTED LIVING, AND MEMORY CARE � co�sTRUC��oN 7300HUDSONBLVD.N.,�,�� e � OAImALE, MN 55128 PH(651)7148115 FAX (651)73�1228 FRIDLEY, MN �.d��.� �' , �III 1 (1 (l nn mm vm 00 m m X A _ X � � � A � � � m � � O O � � � � Z z 0 A _ !� IL, E � D � � A m � n�n c� `� N g � N Z n a � D C�l N N � m o�� SELECT SENIOR LIVING N NoTTOB� .�� '�� INDEPENDANT LIVING ASSISTED LIVING AND 1V1E11�ORY CARE � USED �OR � archltects ' � �� , CONS7RUC7I ON �� HUDSON BLVD. N. , surrE xio z a � OAImALE, MN 55128 PH(651)7148115 FAX (651)7351718 FRIDLEY, MN ,�,.d�,,�.� �� mm w � ,,, m 0 0 e m X A _ X � � m z O � � z -T9 /� �� D Z z � A L i i A � 0 m : N �• a N Z m � 3 -p O my„"'^'z �m(� �u A pt�� 2 �(l V rn � m D � � � � r � m p � O O p< � N� �og� � � �a3�, � T Z � o � A 0 A SELECT SENIOR LIVING N NoTTOB� T INDEPENDANT LIVING ASSISTED LIV G `� USED FOR 1 ar�h1 te�ts � , IN , AND MEMORY CARE � coNS�RUCr�oN 730DHUDSONBLVD.N.,�,�� F R I D LE Y, M N o��, MN 55128 PH(651)7148115 FAX (6'S1)73r1YlB www.d6semhitec�.can nn mm c � aa X A _x �� m= V' m � O � r O O �l � r D z z � _ �� 0 m � N �• a �� SELECT SENIOR LIVING INDEPENDANT I,IVING, ASSISTED LIVING, AND MEMORY CARE FRIDLEY, MN v NOT TO BE a US�D FOR °' GONSTRUCTION � N T N '� N z �wE-ti=m Z � O � � � � D m0� < O p O z G� � �� a o � � g 0 � � architects 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N. , SUfTE 230 ON(DALE, MN 55128 PH(651)7148115 FAX (651)735�1228 www.dbae�diitec�.00m � (l C1 �m N m 06 m o X A _ X � � n m � � � � O 0 � � � � Z z 0 A x € � '0 N _m j,,,_�c��,�,� � O p g m m O< � � D � � � 4� p< OO�' � = 3 � � � � � � � o�� SELECT SENIOR LIVING N NoTTO�� .�d�:�� '� INDEPENDANT LIVING ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE � us�� oR � a��hs te�ts '�� Z � � > > GONSTRUCTION � ��,��,��115FAX(651)73�1228 FRIDLEY, MN �.d��.� D D r m m 0 0 m m X j' — X � � 0 � �., m Z n m � �, �i n� m m �N A aa X " � x 6 �n � m v � A m � �� n n m m �� B B X X � � a � D ti M z m a m a W � � � � U �,, n � � � � � O w � � o`. 3 � z � I � � �. r �� ;-e � � � � � O m � m � 0 0 � � �� '^3 v' � � � � -� � T V � r v' � � � O � Z � ��_� I �� 0� 00 � � x � 0 � N D D m rn i _ _ � m p B 0 I O XA — X � � 0 cp Il a A � r - n I a o �., m z x 0O �II a� m i � ti , 3 i � � _ � -, � . � - � -------------- � i_ . � il � - - � I��n ,� � — �� o �I oa a� �, 0,� ab x,� III X= �r � °'-O I I �m ,_� �� z X � �� A� �;L�� a � � r% . � � �,. ��------ � �—� � �'-- - -- 0�� _________________ ti� x 4� 6` p �� = Q � a o � a? o� 7� �: ep x� � x= l�J m p o=Z i � � 0 _J_JI u a� � A�� 0 - - �Q -- � � _ 7 � /� ,� o ?� ' `—'I \.i?�o' x � Op =� � li � - � ° �� e X$ _—_—_ � G A � � 0 D _______ � � i � � —_--.. �� i � �� , � , � — � 4� — �l ❑ _� �i �i D D m rn � A aa m. X A _ X B � A m N � s� rn � �� n n m m � A B B X �' � � e � N rn z m A m m � II � � � � � � � �� /� � � � Z � I (� ➢— N � N � �� rn � �I O 0 � 0 z � z �M� W � V' � � � � � � 0 � � � � O � Z —� �� I � 1 a� ---- - ----- O o , � '//}\�\ 0 � V' - � x z O =z �� x a O w � �v �., z � B � � _ X � I a , ao �_ ; o� x° � � � a� -- — 0 � -- -------- -------- o�� SELECT SENIOR LIVING N NOT TO BE �'�� INDEPENDANT LIVING ASSIS`I'ED LIVING AND 11�1E1V10RY CARE � us�� oR � archl tects n a v' > > CONSTRUCT I ON 7300 HUDSON BLVD. N. , sur� x�o F R I D LE Y, M N o�, MN 55128 PH(651)7148115 FAX (651)73S171B www.dbaa�iteds.com ( C" 0 U N T Y' �_ _ �� 'I . .x �-� � . '�� I� . � : II � c J I� �� 1 , . � ' I I `, � , I � �\ � - � � b4 '�o I� ✓�1° � i � r I� � � � I� I � I I � ' � � II �I � ij I ' � �� I � � '.... II i � � II � � II I � � I � ii I� , I I � ✓�1 � �� .-Lm�'.. � - ea o y � � � 3 II'� � aes.a�, aa o e .� t� �� `� �^ '' � :�J � � � s� a �e� � ?1�' � �9 r_,t l+ ^V �� / V (�1�AULNC� 1'LAN S T A T E A I D H I G H YY �t�a. j- _ N 0<�. � 6) MISS ISSIPPI STREE.T �_�;��\��-�..� �. `�----____,---- =�,.w __ „ ... .; __ � ' a:T .....e �' i�. r�` . ____ _ ...... . .. _ . .... . '� 884.60 B84 4 884 35 ce c9 �� EHS..rS .. �.._i "_ .._ . _. . _. � _ — .. .._ .�.-.."_ _s-. x. a ... . �\ .. ,.._'__"` _ _. _ _.— ._. :..� �... �__ . �. __ � .. � I _ _ _''�_ _ . _. _ _ _ �. _ �� _ "_ _ - '_' - - __—�_—__-_-_______ - .—_—._.-...__".__.____. -''� _ _ _ - - " _ _ _ _ _ - �AB4 - _ -�i. _� ■ z --� � �-_ �� i1 �--m—T---- 2 SENIOk HOl1SING '"�{%SOB S.F. FOOTPRINT z FF£ 891.20 z BFE 8BG.5�0 � --'' I � I I I � � -- �I ° � I � � �� , � � I � � I � � I - �� : I � � I I� � 1 � � 'I I i 1� I • 2 � � I �� I �I I �� ' �� I �� I �� II I�� ._... ____ - � If I -- --. �I��6 ��I 'I II �I il i I � �� i i 'I � ____— �� i 'I I �I � � � s � �� I � � �� I �� 1 � ,� �� :I � ,�, � �� I �� I I �� I i, � I ' —� I '�� ' -- -- -- -1 'I ' I I i � i i ------ =��J I � I — _—�—� J -� r-- 3 �r `ii'u'�':T� "i- � _ 1r�� ORIGINAL SCALE 1 WCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE W FEET LEGEND — � — PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING CONTOUR 83o PROPOSED CONTOUR PROPOSED RETAINING WALL � i2^o .► ! � PROPOSED STORM SEWER W/ M.H., C.B. & F.E.S. —��2"�� o EXISTING STORM SEWER W/M.H, C.B. 8 F.E.S. — _ _ — — DRAINAGE ARROW — — — — — — — PROPOSED SILT FENCE � O INFRASAFE INLET PROTECTION OR E�UAL 1) BACKGftOUND INFORMATION FROM FIELD SURVEV PERFORMED BY MIDWEST LP.ND SURVEYORS. ADDITIONAL UTILITY INPORMATION FROM ASBUILTS BY GTY OF PRIDLEY, FFE, INC.OFFERS NO GUARANTEE AS TO THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BV OTHERS. 2) SPOT ElEVA710NS ARE ALI. GUTTER lWE ELEVATIONS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 3) ELEVATIONS/CONTOURS SHOWN AS FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS. 4) PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING, INSTALL SILT STOP FENCE IN LOCATIONS SHOWN OR AS OIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER OR CITY STAFF. 5) PROVIDE 4" OF NATIVE TOPSOIL IN GREEN AftEAS. 6) SLOPES 3:1 AND GREATER SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH FIBER BL4NKET. 7) MAINTAIN AND REPAIR SILT STOP FENCES (INCLUDING REMOVAL OF ACCUMUL4TED SILT) UNTIL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED. B) CONTRACTOR TO INSPECT AND DOCUMENT EROSION COMROL DAILY AND AFTER ANY RAIN EVENT. 9) SILT FENCE FOUND DAMAGED MUST BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED W/IN 24 HOURS UPON DISCOVERY. REMOVAL OF SILT FENCE RE�UIRED AFfER SITE IS STABILIZED (AT DIREC710N OF ENGINEER). 10) ALL EXISTING CIN STREETS SHALL BE SWEPT AS NEEDED AND AS RE�UESTED BY ENGINEER. 11) REFER TO GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. 12) AFTER GR4DING OPERATIONS ARE COMPLETED, LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNCOMPACT ALL GREEN AREAS PRIOR TO SODDING AND LANDSCAPING. NOTE THE CONTR4CTOR SMALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANV �ISCREPRNCIES AND SHALL NOT COMMENCE W ITH ANV WORN PRIOR TO ENGINEERS APPROVPL. THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUNO FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE BASED ON AVAILABLE RECAROS AT THE TIME THE PLANS WERE PREPARED AND ARE NOT GUARANTEEO TO 9E COMPLETE OR CORRECT. CANTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL UTILITIES i2 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRIICTION TD DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL FAGLITIES AND TO PROVIDE ADE�UATE PROTECTION OF SAIO t1TILITIES �URING THE COURSE OF W017K. GOPHER STATE ONE CALL t-B00.252-t 166 � 0 0 z � SPW�C, CAi1GN �R P�PG4i P4EPAr�� ? E OR UNDER INV �,RECi SU4'EHV5i0rv AND TNni �, � . UULY LICENSE� � I20�ES5'OM1AL �NGINEER I1Nf1E� HE LAWS CF iH- `� A'L ",4 .'SGiA_ r000 w ouacsori fOS'18 uw+s� r+o. 11/19/Q3 DAIE o�� a vdv �M VJV p�p� ry; TAE �yp�re 12/19/08 ,o.,,o 08-138 � �� o � �S o '�% p U ,x y�y � a a .Vi j y S d �" � � � G ` 3 � � y F < � � .: 3 w �� N � o - N W Z N Q � Z � a � � < � Z L = � Q �" O U �� J ll.� � � W � Y W J J W N Y W J Z � � � � � Q., � Z (7 � � V Z Z J W � o Q o � z � I W � U V "' W � ffi� C3.1 SHEET OOF 1B �, � � � � � � i � '� V CONNECT TO WATERMAIN WITH 6' WET TAP AND VALVE AND 6" WATER. CONTINUE TO7HE BUILDING AS SHOWN. VJ � _CO UNT Y UTILITY PLAN CONNECT TO WATERMAIN WITH 8" WET 7AP �\ AND VALVE AND 8" COMBINED FIRE AN� \ DOMESTIC SERVICE. CONTINUE TO THE `a' BUILDING AS SHOWN. S T A T E A I D H I M I S S I S S I P P I S H W H Y, , N 0 I`� 6) R E E T R-��1 �� -BBI SS m � I � � r _— -- — : . —�..,,_ I ;. 1—,-------=----_—�.��—=�;y��:- � t :,: � : �—°. �� f I. . ," � . . _., p . � I I I Y FIRE AND DOMESTIC � WATER SERVICE TO . �I � I , � i � BE SPLIT IMERNALLV. � ' � I 0 � .. m..=av�. �) r� � � i � f q � � i� 3 � � � t CBMH 107 �� RIM 886.60 ��.. 48' DIA. SUMP CATCH BASIN � ✓� CASTING R-3067 ' � � 0 , v n �" CONNECTTO SANITARV SEWER � WITH NEW MANHOLE � I RIM 886.5 INVERT OF SERVICE AT MAIN � 872.85. F>(TEND TO � � THE BUILDING AS � , SHOWN. � � i I� � i ; ^�I � V II q � 0 I I N I k I m I '�� I I I � � I I i HVDRANTA GATE VALV _ . ASSEMBLY - CBMH 108---- RIM 887.40 � 48" DIA. SI+MP-- CATCH BASIN � CASTING R-�E �,�?�BPS�N �% Ili 11 II :� �_ _ ._ �� _'_'_� ' BMH 106 , I I ._RIM 886.90 48' DIA. SUMP � � � -�—EkTCH BASIN /�i .. CASTING R-306 � i _—_ I �i � — — CBMH 105 —� L I I� � OASCI�NG R-3W7 SEE MECHANICAL PLANS FOR DETAILS. — � STMH 101 FLYGHT PUMP STATION 600 GPM DUPLEX PUMP SYSTEM RIM 881.0 INV. E 87625 INV. S OUT 879.0 MANHOLE BOTTOM866.25 DESIGN BWLD, CONSULT WITH ENGINEER � � I 12' 12" HDPE I � 2.08% _ — � 7I I �� CBMH 102 P-3'HDPESDR9 '�iS RIM879.75 FORCEMAIN �� INV. W 876.50 � BOTTOM 873.50 S�I I MNDOT {� STANOARD I�II PL4TE4021E —FIRE �' DEPARTMENT CONNECTION SENIOR /i�01lSING `�f7,SOB S.F. FOOTPRINT SEWERRNV. FFE U/I LO 874.19 BFE 880.�0 6" RISER CLEANOUT (TYPJ I 6" ROOF ORAIN CONNECTION 36" CMP PIPE STORAGE. (TYPICAL) BOTTOM OF ROCK BED 880.0 TOP OF ROCK BED 885.0 BOTTOM OF PIPE 881.0 TOP OF PIPE 884.0 ' +�.�� r � -w --- CBMH 703 RIM 888.50 36' CMP RISER CONNECT TO TOP OF PIPE SVSTEM CAS7ING R-7T92 �III I J I �. .---_—_� C 52 72" HDPE @ 1.0�_ I� I OUTLET CONTROL � � STRUCTURE 104 RIM 88Z0 I�� INV. BB1.0 'I i�. L __ "__' .— ____I �__.... _.—'_ __—..._._—...-, � ROOF DRAM _�-� INV. 885.5 (TYP.) 6' CLEANOUT RISER (TYP.)ALLCORNERS / � N W O E s ORIGINAL SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND � � � PROPERTY BOUNDARY —» » EXISTINGSTORMSEWER e"wnr� EXISTING WATERMAIN e' snr�—�� EXISTING SANITARV SEWER � �2•ST -. � � PROPOSED STORM SEWER W/ M.H., C.B. & F.E.S. ♦ -Y ��- 8"W �- - •- PROPOSEDWATERMAIN B'S e � PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER " UTLLITY NOTES 1) BACKGROUND INFORMATION FROM FIELD SURVEV PERFORMED BV MIDWEST L4ND SURVEVORS ADDITIONAL UTILITV INFORMATION FROM ASBUILTS BY CITY OF FRIDLEY. FFE, INC. OFFERS NO GUAR4NTEE AS TO THE ACCUR4CY OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BV OTHERS 2) PROPOSED SANITARV SEWER PIPE: 8' PVC SDR 26 3) PROPOSED WATER PIPE: 8" DIP CLASS 52 4) PftOPOSED STORM PIPE: 12" & 18" HDPE, DRAINTII.E 4" PVC, FORCEMAIN 4" HDPE SDR 9 5) MINIMUM 8' OF COVER OVER NEW WATERMAIN. 6) PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE TO THE CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR END OF FLARE� END SECTION UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. 7) ALL UTILITV CONSTRUCTION PER CITY OF FRIDLEY STANDARO SPECIFICATIONS. 8) VERIFV ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 9) CONTACT GOPHER S7ATE ONE CALL FOR EXISTINC� UTILITV LOCATIONS. IF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN LOCATED UTILITIES AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ARISE, NOTE IT AND FORWARD TO THE ENGINEER. NOTE. THE CONTRACTOR SHPLL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES AND SHALI NOT COMMENCE WITH ANY WORK PIiIOR TO ENGINEERS APPROVAL. THE �OCATION OF UNDERGROUNO FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES AS SHOV✓N ON THE PLANS ARE BASED ON AVAILABIE RECARDS AT TME TIME TME PlANS WERE PREPARED AND ARE NOT GUAFANTEEO TO BE COMPLETE OR CARRECT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACtING P1L UTILITIES ]2 HOURS PRIOR TO CANSTRUCTION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF PLL FACILITIES AND TO PROVIDE ADEOUATE PROTECTION OF SAID UTILItIES DIIRING THE CAURSE OF WORK. GOPHER STATE ONE cnLi i�oo-zs�-i �se. HFf BY E�' � iHiS P�F ee�raT � rR�v eo ar ME ]N LVDER �1 L�.�2E�.� �o a s�r� nNO � .. n�ou�r uceNSeo PRCFESSONA ENCNE.? \� N; �TAIL .NY-S�.T TODD A FRIOCSON �f�f/8 LI�NSE NO. 11/19/09 DA7E pgp�M VJV ��r. wv p�ry TAE My�p�re 12/19�08 101W. �$—�38 u h,Cj � V � $ o �� N �� ,� ��,z _ o C ��~ � LL � � 3 z � y � � B y : 3 w � d � � Q " Z � Q � Z i° �< � L � � O ~ O U �� J W � � W � Y W J J W N W J Z � � Q LL J ° z � � Z � � } � J J � � � � � J w� � � ~ � U w W N �� C4.1 SMEET 5 �F 18 � �6 � PM � 5 —► AM ,,�^ VJ � O � � F� � � � q � � �r� rl � � o t� � � � '^ V ! � � � � �� Q � � �^` � L � � U q 0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ( C 0 U N T Y S T A T E A I D M I S S I S S I P P I � Current ADT = 3,635 HIGH Yvx � N0. S T R E E T 7�AM� 9�PM� 113 19 O O VEHICLE COUNT: AM PEAK HOUR ENTRANCE 1 - MISSISSIPPI 67% ENTERING/33% EXITING 80 % Exit Right - 20 % 6cit Lefl TOTAL 1588EDSX0.18BED=28 EMPLOYEE (MAX) 20 (MISSISSIPPI ENTRANCE) VISITORS/DELNERIES 8 (OlD CENTRAL ENTRANCE) ENTERING (0.67 x 20) = 13 UNITS EXITING (0.33 x 20) = 7 UNITS EXIT RIGHT (0.20 x 7) = 1 UNITS EXIT LEFT (0.80 x 7) = 6 UNITS VEHICLE COUNT: PM PEAK HOUR ENTRANCE 1 - MISSISSIPPI 46°o ENTERING / 54 % EXITING 80% Exit Right - 20 % E�cit Left TOTAL 158 BEDS X 0.35BED = 55 EMPLOYEE (MAX) 20 (MISSISSIPPI ENTRANCE) VISITORS/DELIVERIES 35 (OLD CENTRAL ENTRANCE) ENTERING (0.46 x 20) = 9 UNITS EXITING (0.54 x 20) = 17 UNITS EXIT RIGHT (0.20 x 11) = 2 UNITS EXIT LEFT (0.80 x 71) = 9 UNITS VEHICLE COUNT: AM PEAK HOUR ENTRANCE2-OLD CENTR4L 67% ENTERING/33% EXITING 100 % 6cit Right TOTAL 158 BEDS X 0.18/BED = 28 EMPLOYEE (MAX) 20 (MISSISSIPPI ENTRANCE) VISITORS/DELIVERIES 8 (OLD CENTRAL ENTR4NCE) ENTERING (0.67 x 8) = 5 UNITS EXITING (0.33 z B) = 3 UNITS EXIT RIGHT (1.0 z 8) = 3 UNITS VEHICLE COUNT: PM PEAK HOUR ENTR4NCE 2 - OLD CENTR4L 46 % ENTERING / 54 % EXITING 100 % 6cit Right TOTAL 158 BEDS X 0.35/BED = 55 EMPLOYEE (MAX) 20 (MISSISSIPPI ENTRANCE) VISITORSlDELIVERIES 35 (OLD CENTRAL ENTRANCE) ENTERING (0.46 x 35) = 16 UNITS EXITING (0.54 x 35) = 19 UNITS EXIT RIGHT (1.0 x 19) = 19 UNITS N W O E S ORIGINAL SCALE 1 INCH = 30 FEET 0 15 30 60 SCALE M FEET LEGEND � � � PROPERTYBOUNDARY NOTES 1) TRIP QUANTITIES WERE DERIVED FROM TRAFFIC STUDIES FOUND IN THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS TRIP GENER4TION MANUAL TfH ADDITION FOR ASSISTED LIVING LAND USE (k254). 2) ACCORDING TO THE ITE MANUAL, STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT LESS THAN 5% OF RESIDENTS OWN CARS, wHICH ARE RARELV DRIVEN. EMPLOYEES, VISITORS AND DELIVERY TRUCKS MAKE UP MOST OF THE TRIPS TO THIS TVPE OF FACILITY. 3) ACCORDING TO THE ITE MANUAL, THE PEAK HOUR GENEftATOR TYPICALLY DOES NOT COINCIDE WRH THE PEAK HOUR OF THE ADJACENT STREET TR4FFIC FOR THIS TYPE OP FACILITI, PRIMARILV BECAUSE OF THE SHIFTS OF THE EMPLOVEES BEGIN AT 7:OOAM, 3:OOPM AND 11:OOPM. THE AM PEAK HOUR TYPICALLY OCCURS BETWEEN 6:OOAM AND 7:OOAM, WHILE THE PM PEAK HOUR TYPICALLV WILL OCCUR FROM 3:00-4:OOPM. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC PROJEC770N PERCENT ADT AT ENTRANCE BASED ON PEAK HOUR TOTAL SPLIT ADT = 2.74 x OCCUPIED BEDS = 2.74 x 158 = 433 TOTAL ENTRANCE 7- MISSISSIPPI - 48 % OF TOTAL ADT = 208 ENTRANCE 2- OLD CENTRAL - 52 % OF TOTAL ADT = 225 NOTE: THIS CALCULATION ASSUMES ALL BEDS ARE 100 % OCCUPIED. NOTE' THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIfY THE ENGINEER OF ANV �ISCREPANCIES ANO SHALL NOT COMMENGE WITN ANV WORK PRIOR TO ENGiNEERS APPROVAL. THE IOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS ARE BASED ON AVAILABLE RECOR0.S AT THE TIME THE PIANS WERE PREPARE�ANDARE NOT GUARANTEE� TO BE COMPLETE OR CORRECT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL UTILiTIES ]2 MOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO DETERMINE THE E%ACT LOCATION OFALL FAGLITIES AND TO PROVIDE ADEOUATE PROTECTION OF SAID UTILITIES Ot10.1NG THE CAlIRSE OF WORK. GOPHER STATE ONE CP1L 1-804252-1166. �� HEa�er ceanF�v rHn� rws � LAN, SPE� IFiCAiION OR REPORT WAS PftEPARF� BY uE OR �JNDER Mv DiRECT SL'PERVSION AND it�A AMI � DuLY LiCENSF.D u:=ess�oNn� [: NO�.0 r�F �nwY oF��n�� i. i�. 0� v��'�il.c^.i�. TODD A �UOCSON 5'df18 u�rnE r�o. 11/19/Q8 DA7Y p�Qg�M VJV �n, wv p�pg�ry; TAE rawu�re �2/iv/oa 10�N4 ��—�3� U v N V z � 3 a z y � � o 0 ,x ��z �a � '� 3 �L � � .9 d �" o �' � fCC 3 Z � °J G � � � y : 3 w �d .N. � w — � N W Z N Q � Z �° �< � L � � � ~ O U �� J W � `* W � Y W a J W N > � o � � J LL O ¢ z � � Q � > � J J U �� o� LL w � � � Q r � W I"' W N ffi� C5.1 SHEET 60F 18 l2WN`-� :'uie.Frccmm.Lric4a�n.in.—AlllliyhbRCCrvW 0 N � m 7v � T � � Z -v -o m 2 m m � � H C N C � n � � m N � H � � m z � � m � v � O m�y � � NIyn �Or Oi; mm� -i v m �� : m.ZI . I , 0 mo; N y° � N o � -� g oZ � n �� Z m — n , y m 1n z �. c m - _ � m A Nm � � n Ov m C� � 0 C z 0 m < ti g D _ 2 � �p�CmJ D mLla� � z x m O m O-�oz pNO o �'pz z � pmv v �oo 0 mZ � -�i � ' � m Ov� o. m 'mmT �' . ��O o� � . m�� vo o '�2� () � �, � �. mv ' ��m. ��0p. �DO. �z�. :� �. , �� O �� 0 yc 0=p pov oz �L OCN l°n�o � �� m A y m a m � � O m O � � � n � � � m �� n i��/ � ' yc .. /�\ /// / Otnc� \� j�. ��%� ��,' po,.� '�%/ �� /i j��/�� /��% r; o �� ; ��a ,%� � o %%' � D � A� � � ��m /,`_ �' � m i�_/; -� �om� �� ,/�'�, %% : � � . mo mo /� / �" \�� "; ; �;,:� �;, /�%i � � z �� DO�A �/-�/,� ' n�� m�o % ;/i// � ° ��j��j; � . .. ... . %� ��i\�;� � � . , b � � � ��J y � �T� � Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. o - 9 A'z' _ � DETAIL SHEET SELECT COMPANIES w.�r ��'�''G � q � � � �� _ _KS�A= � � o � m =Dm; excu,rte�c Oo _ n z ^ � ^ � ^ �c0[cr wv.� 41�.id�PgESt I � < `< � „� o o � ; a y � m ; 12#5 iSTH STREE7 NORTH, LAKE ELMO, A4J SSP}2 W o m — SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF FRIDLEY 1Y415 SSTH ST. N. Phore�651�439kNJJ Fu�651){30A3J1 � o �„ — FRIDLEY, MN LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 wen�r�: ,�,..xr.��.wm �= — NG. � REV15lON DESCRIr'" Gv �.;E canwrv��v_�. OLD CENTRAL AVENUE (COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO . 35) 8g 8 e _ . __ _ _ _ �� o o`_ o o o 0 0 0 0�' o 0 0� o__o 0 o o 0 0 0 -o � o o�o o' o°-�a--�-�-��-�--P- --� a--��-� 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - � o a o 0 0 0 0 0 � � � � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o °'q b� (� ` 1 . � �.. �__ �o� � .�_ � � -� � � o� �- � -�-� -r+—h � O o ._P ir Rt 6 y�I• o > �, .. o 0 0 _ N W A � De m � u,, y � _ �>. � D�` �,. v.. � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a �; � o d a ' o � � o 0 0 J a... o. � �. o. �o m W - a a, _.� ..I.�p.. .� i�-f,} ; � '� .. � o e o c o 0 o � mw � o a o � � �, � «� � � � � ` � w ' ' ` . lI o 0 0 0 - � _ � , _ _ " I I � ti �; �� " I � �. � �. l � ti _ o 0 0 � '�l , 8 �� w p �, ti _ � �, �° +�° u � .. N e o m w, m. �, N � a,. � e o e a o N _ o o ti. � o �, � _ �, , � o �, u � �. , o m m N � �' � iJ . . . . . � H u � �,� N / N I:. m � m v � a1 ° I i I� � m � 0 � � �. � m� t� _m ,�Im� _�� a� e ti Ha _ �.�� U um*� _ �� a � � � � , o,�o , o o , W � e . � m W: W � m.�� .aN u� _o o b- �y � �� u m � �� N � o 0 0 0 o�a �� w m � �,�o 0 0, � o� � �` � � o� � o 0 0 0 o I �' a, � I � _� °��°� �� o00 0o b� _� o �' �� , � o0o ao� bd � _ _ � � � � o e o 0 0 � � � : �,°� ti � � � " �� u �� °° �� ~ momm� � a o0 � � ° � � � � � �. em.N__ � N�m.,� o0 00l � e� �, ��Pmu�ti�ti�_ aN�m�� o0 00� `�� e �� , �, W v N N w D � H�, �.> �_ � o 0 0 o I '�7 . �o 0 o N o 0 o N o o w� o>�,� N N o � o , � �� e > � .. _ m o 0 0 0� o 0 0 o d � o • o o a� o ;� : . - . • I u u w -� � � � v rv u �n m u v N � N N n u � m N � A+ I� ��; �+ N N m u � + � + � I.i a c e u u a u + �. + + � ra L+ a m in N m w I.i' j• N I ��a- o. - . RI, . I .,. lY �� Nu � u___oo 0 000000 _ _ti�pP �tiv .H.�m�� I;j y~c . a ; . o oa a �.�00000,.;oo o . .. . ... . ��,_N�m��v_��0000000000000o_,__u��. �� _., 00000o aoo 00 0 0_o P , N e � o � __ — — , _u�m�mP�ti_,000 a00000000ao,_,_utiW ��.�tiN��Nati N�.mmmm.N_,_000 0000000000___�_NVu ti __ _N ._ o N � a �0000000�0000000a000 -,—�-.�--� — u u u e u x a u h+ N + + o o c o 0 0 + + + -- � � � u u -- 0 - o 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 - � + + + � �- - - - � + o o �� 0 0 � � � � �� .. � � � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o - - - - � - � � � o 0 0 0 0 �•IC��. o a o � � � � � � > > ol`. I nc�oNC:uD,� pv°-,�lo -_ pn �o ��g"�� m�� o; mm � m�� _� �m �c"ozp°mi° >A m��ZOm2�m �i� ooma�f v n � m A� o�o "°��'"9mz �°3 oom�Dpao ia�� °i omm��on°' im �,°�b'�"'"�`� '"� �yz?" Fm � � a p pzyq"'om� io ~Yotizm� i ">oz�g°.p� F� oo�,P,$ �y " m �°m m � n II1 D � � 3 D 2 D 0 m � � O >o mo oD T � �� !^ m � D O m m O � � m n T 1 .a O c m b s n � 3 D S D O m 0 0 � W b h � 0 I � ' i � � i o Z m D p � � m O Z A < �p a i � _ u s � 0 � � ��. � �� z� h7 � G� w y � � N � � � �� Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. � � � � � � � � � n - rn LIGHTING PLAN SELECT COMPANIES `"N°P''`""`w� �$ __ �e 5�� o � � � � °^ > N � . e:vcu.ttieaLUC pp - < < - � `> ^ � m � `n x - z � MlOER HAME �,�g[� � � < `< � ,N � z � o � A n - 12q45 SSTH STREET NORTH, LAKE 8LM0, MN 55042 W � - m�, SELECT SENIOR LIVING OF FRIDLEY 12415 55TH ST. N. po - o Phooe (6511479.8tlJ3 Fu 1651) {30-9ll I = - - - ' � - -- i � FRIDLEY, MN LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 we��: ,.,�.tt�.�.,�m m - -- - N�� REVISION DESCRIFTION oarE oeavmcNr:a 2. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to replat 5 lots, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted tiving units, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441 & 6421 Central Avenue NE. 3. Consideration of a Master Plan Amendment MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441 & 6421 Central Avenue NE. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE HEARING OPENED AT 7:55 P.M. Ms. Stromberg stated Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to allow the construction of a 141 unit Senior-Housing building, on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The 141 units will consist of independent living, assisted living, and memory care units. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Master Plan Amendment. Ms. Stromberg stated a Plat is being requested to create two new parcels from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), and 6461 Central Avenue (vacant). The two parcels will be occupied by the senior building. Ms. Stromberg stated the Planning Commission and CiTy Council may recall in 2005 John DeMello and his company Family Lifestyle Development Corp., were granted a rezoning for the subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. When any property is rezoned to S-2 Redevelopment District, it requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. Once the rezoning is approved by the City Council, any modification to that originally approved master plan would require a Master Plan Amendment. A Master Plan Amendment needs to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Since, the proposed project is different than what was originally approved with the rezoning of these properties in 2005, the petitioner is seeking a Master Plan Amendment. It should be noted that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will also need to review this Master Plan Amendment as the properties involved are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. Ms. Stromberg stated Joel Larson, with Select Senior Living, is proposing to construct a three story 141 unit senior housing building with 60 independent living units, 27 memory care units, and 54 assisted living units. All of the units will be between 470 sq. ft. and 1,003 sq. ft. The smallest of the units are memory care apartments and are located on the secured main floor of the south wing of the building. The second and third floors in the south wing will contain 54 assisted living apartments, of which some will be studios, one bedroom, one bedroom with a den, or two bedroom apartments. The second and third floors of the north wing will contain 60 independent living apartments. Within the building there will be several shared amenities such as a shared two-story lobby, a stone fireplace, an intimate cafe, and a sitting area. The mail room, management office, nurses' office, and public restrooms are centrally located off of the lobby as 13 are the central dining room, sports pub, and kitchen. Other shared amenities include an activity room with a small kitchen area and restroom, a media center, the activity director's office, an overnight guest room, a library on the second floor, and a salon and grandparent room for visiting children on the third floor. Ms. Stromberg stated the development will include 84 underground heated garage parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls. The buildings architecture will consist of a hipped roof, with the use of brick, veneer, and two colors of complimentary lap siding on the exterior, with balconies. By designing the building to be located as close as code allows to the west property line, the petitioner is proposing to keep as many of the existing mature trees as possible. The petitioner also plans to install a 6 ft. wood privacy fence along the south and east sides of the property. Additional landscaping of new deciduous, coniferous, and ornamental trees along with shrub, perennial and annual plantings are also planned for the entire site to provide a welcoming entrance and development. Ms. Stromberg stated Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, and 6461 Central Avenue to create two separate lots. Both lots will be combined to accommodate the 141-unit senior housing development. The reason the development has 2 lots is because some of the land to be replatted is Torrens property while other portions of it are Abstract. Anoka County does not allow the combination of these different types of property without first getting a Registration of Land Titles by District Court Order, which can be a lengthy process. Instead, the developer is choosing to create 2 lots, which will be required to be combined to allow for the development to occur. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed replat will consist of two lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block l, Select Senior Living of Fridley. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for some degree of flexibility when designing a redevelopment project; however, City staff has asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to its intended use. The proposed development of a 47,508 sq. ft. footprint senior housing development would be most closely be aligned with a residential development in an R-3, Multi- Family zoning district. The proposed project area is 142,857 sq. ft. (3.28 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 141-unit senior housing building, which will consist of 60 independent units, 54 assisted living units, and 27 memory care units. The development will include 84 underground parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls. Ms. Stromberg stated R-3, Multi-Family zoning regulations states, the average lot area required per dwelling unit is 2,500 sq. ft. for the units on the first (3) three stories with an additional 950 sq. ft. per unit from the fourth through sixth stories. National and regional development trends for assisted living and memory care appear to point to a lesser lot size requirement. The S- 2 Districf classification will allow this land to unit ratio, without a variance. Though well- maintained landscaped grounds are essential to project appeal and resident enjoyment, the size of the lot in this situation can be smaller because the opportunity for residents to participate in larger scale outdoor activities on the grounds is much smaller. Also, less land is required because of the fact that the residents typically do not have cars, nor do they drive. Therefore, there is a lower standard for the number of parking stalls required and less land area to accommodate that automobile use. Consequently, this site size is adequate considering the ratio of assisted living and memory care, to independent living. There will be a stipulation with the recommendation on this project that requires that the building continue to be used with the resident population ratios proposed. If not, purchase of additional land and a Master Plan amendment will be required, prior to that resident ratio modification. 14 Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed 3-story building will be 35 ft. high at the midspan, which meets City code requirements. The proposed project is also in-compliance with lot coverage, parking and all setback requirements, except the rear yard setback. The R-3 zoning code requires a 25 ft. rear yard setback, and the proposed building is setback at 23 ft. 2 in. Discussions and correspondence with Anoka County when the John DeMello project was before the City in 2005, indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. The County anticipates that additional right-of-way will need to be dedicated along both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right- of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and l0 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Ms. Stromberg stated to be safe, staff has assumed that the County will be requesting the same right-of-way dedication from this developer as they have with the past developer's proposal. A letter from the Anoka County Highway Department on January 7, 2009, confirmed this to be an accurate assumption. Consequently, the petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of- way dedication along both County Roads. Due to necessity of that right-of-way dedication, the rear yard setback falls short of ineeting code requiremenCs by 2 ft. 10 inches. With the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setback can be recognized under the City's Master Plan Amendment approval, and no variance would be required. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is requesting a Master Plan Amendment to the original Master Plan that was approved as part of the 2005 rezoning of the subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. The original rezoning and master plan was approved to allow for the construction of mixed used building, with a 10,492 sq. ft. retail complex that would occupy the lower ]evel of the northeastern corner of the building and have 70 owner-occupied condominium units occupying the remainder of the building. Despite the fact that the preliminary plat and rezoning and subsequent master plan were all approved for this site, the project never came to fruition, because the final plat was never submitted for approval. Ms. Stromberg stated as stated earlier, the properties involved in the Master Plan Amendment are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage-welding shop), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot), and 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot). All properties involved are currently zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. Ms. Stromberg stated if the Master Plan Amendment being discussed in this report is approved by the City Council, it should be noted that any major modification of the site plan would again be required to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Ms. Stromberg stated the City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community while looking to the future and working towards achieving a comn�uniry wide vision ". The rezoning was approved for the DeMello project since it was in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. 15 Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed senior project meets several of the objectives that the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update. This update is before the Met Council for approval at this time. One of the goals identified through those meetings and the telephone survey was to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live." Ways to accomplish that goal are to provide more housing diversity and to make Fridley a place where the aged can stay. Only about 8% of Fridley's housing is of the townhome or condominium structure type, yet 23% of Fridley's residents were over age 55 in 2000, and that percentage is growing. To accommodate Fridley's senior citizens desires to live in maintenance- free housing (no yards/house exterior care), more types of senior housing needs to be constructed. Types of senior housing to consider are one-level townhomes, independent living, assisted living, nursing home/memory care facilities. It is also important to explore the availability of a private maintenance service that would allow seniors to stay in their single-family homes. Ms. Stromberg stated this area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road is identified as an area for future redevelopment in both the existing 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Economic and Redevelopment Plan chapter in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, states that the City should continue to pursue high density senior housing in this area due to the demand for this type of housing in Fridley. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opportuniry for more efficient land uses and eliminate ine�cient land uses and under-utilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to meet current market demands and desires of the community, creates new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the redevelopment of this area for a Senior Living faciliiy. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Prelin�inary Demand Estimate for Senior Housirrg in Fridley. The analysis done takes into account the demand for independent living, assisted living and memory care senior housing by calculating demographic, economic and competitive factors that would impact current demand for senior housing units in the designated "Market Area." The "Market Area" in which Maxfield analyzed includes the communities of Fridley, Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park and Hilltop. The analysis done indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 200 units of the above reference nature. They note that over the next five years the level of units demanded now will likely decrease due to other competitive developments in the area that are now in some stage of planning or construction. Ms. Stromberg stated the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed Senior Living project carried 8,900 vehicles per day. At this traffic level it's carrying almost the exact amount of traffic the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that OId Central will be carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2030, based upon increases in population for Fridley and surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles a day, Old Central will be at its capacity. As a result, Anoka County is requiring that additional right-of-way be dedicated with this plat, to ensure that the additional land needed is available to eventually expand the roadway. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner had Foltz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., perform a traffic analysis on the proposed use. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7`�' Edition. The consultants used the Assisted Living Land Use category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed Senior Project complex would generate a total of 433 trips per day if all 158 beds within the complex 16 were occupied. The Congregate Care Facility (Independent Living) land use would generate a total of 340 trips per day if all 158 beds were occupied. Ms. Stromberg stated the consultants used the numbers for the Assisted Living land use to provide the worst-case scenario for traffic at this facility, because it generates more traffic than an Independent Living land use. This can be attributed to the fact that an assisted living facility requires the need for more staff and employees. Ms. Stromberg stated it should also be noted, that according to the 1TE manual, studies have shown that less than 5% of residents in an assisted living facility own vehicles, and if they do, they are rarely driven. Employees, visitors, and delivery trucks make up most of the trips to this facility. The ITE manual also points out that the "peak hour" generator typically doesn't coincide with the "peak hour" of the adjacent street traffic for an assisted living facility. This is primarily related to the shifts of the employees beginning at 7:00 a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 1 1:00 p.m. The typical peak hours on most roadways are between 6:00-7:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner hired Graham Environmental Services (GES), Inc., to complete a Wetland Evaluation Report for the project area. Based on GES's finding, no wetlands exist on the site. The petitioner has submitted the proposed project to the Rice Creek Watershed for the necessary approvals and permits. Once Rice Creek Watershed has reviewed and approved the project, the City's Engineering staff will further review the project. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has stated that storm water management for the site will be handled in an underground drainage system designed to meet the watershed's requirements for rate, quality and volume control. The underground system will surround the building providing infiltration and storage, while directing the water to an existing storm sewer system found on the east boundary of the site. One of the reasons the petitioner is choosing to install an underground drainage system instead of a typical above ground pond, is to try to save as many of the mature trees as possible. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01 and Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01 with stipulations as it provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors, provides additional job opportunities, and the proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Stromberg stated Staff recommends that if the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan Amendment are approved, the following stipulations be attached: l. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A 1.1 dated January l 5, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-]9-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 17 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading anc issuance of building permits. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22, area of site and shall be fil�d with the City drainage plan prior to Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot) The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issnance of a building permit. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Chairperson Kondrick asked the petitioner how the meeting they had with the neighbors went? Joel Larson, Select Senior Living, stated they currently have a facility going up in Coon Rapids and roughly 30 people have moved into it. That is their first similar type project and they have another project that just got approved in Mounds View which they will begin construction in March or April. Regarding the neighborhood meeting, they did have approximately 20-25 people, which was a good turnout for a snowy night. Some of neighbors had concerns about storm water. It sounds that at one time there was some kind of flooding a block or so away from this location on a hundred year flood. From what he has been told the City has done some corrections on the storm water in this area and the petitioner's engineer is present along with the architects, if the Commission has any questions for them. From what their storm water calculations, they are within the guidelines of what the City wants. Mr. Larson stated one of the neighbors that is adjacent to the property asked what type of fence we are proposing for the project. We would like to work with him and accommodate what he would like to see. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Larson what did the neighbor recommend? 18 Mr. Larson replied he was open to the six-foot wood fence. We also brought up the possibility of doing a maintenance free type fence. He was open to that and we are happy to sit down with people on an individual basis and find out exactly what the neighbor want and get that into the plan. Quite a few of the questions had to do with the services and what the building actually provides for residents who live there. We went through some of that at the meeting. We are actually building the kitchen a little bit bigger than what the needs are for the building. This is under the pretense that possibly some of the Meals on Wheels that the County and State people pay for may go away because of tough times, and we would be able to open some of those services up to the community. Mr. Larson stated a couple of concerns were about what type of building it will be and is there an age restriction on the building? There is a 55 and older age restriction. We do have an allowance for somebody who is less than 55 and has to go into a memory service type facility or assisted type facility if they have a doctor or nurse order stating the need this type of care, then we would allow for them to move in. It is for State reasons that we cannot discriminate based on age. However, the independent units are for people 55 and older. Commissioner Oquist asked if that would be for people who leave a hospital and go to this care for a month because of a surgery or something and then they would leave? Mr. Larson replied, they could, but that really is not what this facility is about. This faeility is for people when they get to a point where they cannot take care of themselves or a spouse who was taking care of the other spouse needs assistance for medical reasons, then they would come to live in this type of facility. This is a building you can age in. You can come in on the independent end of it and you do not have to leave, you go to assisted living or memory type assistance if you need it. Chairperson Kondrick asked if he has the rent structure worked out? What are the numbers? Mr. Larson asked, as far as cost goes? Chairperson Kondrick replied, yes. Mr. Larson stated he can give some approximates. Your independent, one-bedroom, would roughly be around $1,200 -$1,300 a month. With that you also get one meal a day and you get some other things. A one-bedroom plus den would be approximately $1,600. The two-bedrooms you would be at $1,695-$1,650. That is for your independent apartments. For assisted living, you would be at $2,500-$2,600 range and, depending on how much assistance you need, and there maybe additional charge above that. For memory care, studios, you are looking at $2,500- $2,600 and then there is an additional services with memory care which are $1,900 on top of that. He does not think they have any one-bedrooms. That is based off their Coon Rapids facility assuming Fridley's facility would be real close to these numbers. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Larson whether he has read the 22 stipulations? Does he or his company have any problem with those stipulations? Mr. Larson replied, none, whatsoever. Commissioner Oquist asked about deliveries to the facility. Will they come in through the garage? � Mr. Larson replied, some will come through the garage. The garage is underneath and comes in off of Mississippi. The majority will come in through the front door off of Central Avenue. Commissioner Oquist asked about food services, when they bring a semi? Mr. Larson they deliver twice a week at our other facility. They usually are not the big full semi's trucks, they are the middle-sized trucks. Some of the laundry is shipped out and some is done in the facility. Garbage would be taken out through the garage. They personally restrict the times deliveries are made so they are not having a truck beeping at 6 in the morning. Commissioner Velin mentioned there is a letter in the packet. Chairperson Kondrick asked if we need to accept this letter we received ahead of time? Ms Stromberg replied, yes, that would be a good practice. MOTION by Commissioner Velin to receiving a letter from Patricia Molroy at 1384 — 64`h Avenue NE, dated January 12, 2009, addressed to the City of Fridley. Seconded by Commissioner Saba. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Joan Olson, 6320 Van Buren NE, stated she has lived there for 22 '/z years. Chairperson Kondrick asked Ms. Olson how far is her home from this project? Ms. Olson replied maybe a mile as the crow flies. It is, however, around the corner and very close to her son's house. She is against a project like this on general principles. It is cramming, 150 people minimum, into 5 city lots. On average 4 people to a house, that is 20 people vs. 158. This is warehousing for senior citizens, and she is so against this type of housing. If her son ever tried to put her into one of these places, she would come back and haunt him. Her mother was in a nursing home, did not go in until she was 92 years old. She did not really get super skilled care until she turned 99 and was over 100 when she died. She can understand at that point she needed skilled care because her memory was starting to go. Ms. Olson just thinks this is cramming too many people on a lot. It is certainly not the kind of thing she would want to live in. She does not know why we do not get more senior townhouses that people could go into. She does not know how anybody could live in 450 square feet. That is the size of four cells in Stillwater. She thinks this is detrimental for the City and the neighborhood. There are only two things she can guarantee them on this. The people who are building this are going to make money hand over fist and they are going to destroy the neighborhood. There are houses on that block that are sitting now for sale. She does not think this is what most people think of as being something they would like to move inta Kurt Olson, 1385 — 64`�' Avenue NE, stated he is one lot away from the proposed project. Although he knows something has to go there, and he does not really care what it is, his concems are related to the lighting on the east side of the building. He has a large lot and has put a lot of money into his house, and he bought the place because he wanted privacy. He really does not want people looking into his backyard. The change in zoning is allowing that. He would like to see something besides a six-foot privacy foot, and he would like to see some stipulations that the lighting will not bleed off into his yard so when he wants to go out in the dark it is actually dark. 20 Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Olson, in terms of a fence, was he the gentleman the petitioner spoke to? Mr. Olson replied, no. He would like some sort of a living fence. He knows they cannot plant 30-foot trees immediately but there are hybrid trees that will grow very fast, and he would like to see some sort of dense screen. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Olson whether he saw the landscape plan when they put it on the screen? Mr. Olson replied he did and they are going to try to leave as many trees as possible but "try" does not mean anything to him. He asked Mr. Hickok, how tall was the DeMello project? Mr. Hickok replied, this building is the size as the building on the DeMello project. Chairperson Oquist recalled the last one started out at four stories and then they came back and reduced it to three stories. Mr. Olson stated the petitioner had mentioned they are going to have underground parking. Mr. Olson thought there were some issues last time where they actually had to build their underground parking level with the street and berm up to it and then go up from there which is not what the petitioner is saying this time. Commissioner Velin replied information from the petitioner states that the site will have lights along the east side of the building and they will result in zero foot candles along the east property line. All lights have a 90-degree cutoff to direct light downward. Mr. Olson stated he understands that but, still when he walks out in his yard at night, and he looks up he is going to see light shining where there is no light shining now other than stars. If there are 20-30 lights on the back of the building, he does not want to see that. Honestly he does not want to see peoples' lights on in their windows that high up. He wants to be able to walk around, do whatever he wants to do, and not worry about people watching him or having to look at them. Commissioner Saba asked for some response from the owner. There should be a way to accomplish screening, through fencing and landscaping. Mr. Larson stated our goal is to try and keep the big trees because it took many years to grow them. He is one of the rare develo,pers who actually owns a 90-inch tree spade that he can put in some fairly good sized trees, not as big as what is there, but we can get some taller trees to plant if they have to take some of those trees down. That is their intention to try and screen as much as that as they can, along with the fence. Mr. Larson stated as far as the lighting goes, we have designed the lighting so that it is not leaking out off their property onto the neighbors' property. There will only be downward trends. The lighting plan submitted meets code requirements. There are also no decks or patios on the back of the building. We are trying to be good neighbors as we don't want people standing out on a deck, overlooking someone else's backyard. They can look out a window but you also can look out of a two-story house. We are also trying to be good neighbors by planting more trees to act as a buffer. If there needs to be more trees added, we' I1 do that. 21 Chairperson Kondrick asked if they have figured out the water table issue? Mr. Larson replied, yes, they have figured that out. He is not an engineer, so he cannot answer the particulars on that, but they have figured it out; and the parking lot is not going to be under water. Commissioner Sielaff asked whether they have done borings on the site? Mr. Larson replied, yes. We have done all the borings, and our civil engineers have gone through all that. There was some debris that was dumped off there from when they built Old Central or Central Avenue that has to be removed to dig the foundation but, yes, all the borings are in place. Ms. Olson asked Mr. Larson if he has sufficient financing for this project? She heard one time that the City does not ask about the financing but she thinks Councilmember Bolkcom opened the door the other night at the City Council meeting when she asked the developer of the 694/East River Road project whether he had sufficient financing. We have gone through this all before and the financing fell through and the one across the street fell through because the market dropped out for the sale of condominiums. Chairperson Kondrick stated that was a good point. Mr. Larson replied, yes, they do have financing. They do not have a final commitment letter on project as they are in t}�e process of financing two other ones. He does have partners that have really deep pockets. The banking world changes from week to week as and he can't guarantee that something four or five months from now might change in the economy as far as the financing, but he feels real confident. He would not be spending the money on plans and going through the process if he didn't feel preriy confident he is going to get this done. He cannot speak for the other gentleman who proposed the previous development on these lots and he has no affiliation with him whatsoever. Mr. Larson stated this is not a condominium project. Most condominium projects require that 50% of the units are sold before you can starf construction. This type of facility doesn't require that. Chairperson Kondrick asked, assuming all goes as planned, when would he start construction? Mr. Larson replied, late spring, early summer. Commissioner Velin stated in Patricia Molroy's letter she is concerned that the petitioner will end up putting Section 8 renters in the building. Mr. Larson has said the building will be for 55 and up seniors and only on certain occasions would they allow somebody under 55 to move in. Are they going to consider Section 8 housing in this building? Mr. Larson replied, no Section 8 people are allowed in this building. We do allow something called an EW, or an. Elderly waiver. Here is an example. You have an 85-year old mother who runs out of money and has to move into this facility. The County comes in and pays a portion of her rent. If she has a taxable income of $1,000 a month, including social security and she needs to be in the memory care portion of the building, the County will pay a portion of that over and 22 above what she makes. It is County Assistance but it is a different type than Section 8. They will allow a portion of their building to have EW residents. Commissioner Saba asked Ms. Stromberg to put up the landscape plan again. He asked Mr. Olson to show him approximately where his house is in relation to the development. Mr. Olson pointed out his lot on the screen. Chairperson Kondrick pointed out that Mr. Olson has one lot between him and the development? Mr. Olson replied, that is right. Commissioner Saba stated he just wanted to make sure that the landscaping plan takes into consideration sufficient height of trees, fencing, or whatever else is needed to address Mr. Olson's concerns. Mr. Hickok stated to Commissioner Saba that he is right on with staff's concern regarding the needs for screening through landscaping. Staff would prefer a screening device that gets better looking over time as opposed to some of the other alternatives. They have looked at this landscape plan and are pleased that, one, they are going to try and preserve as many of the trees as possible and, two, they have made a commitment to supplement the existing trees to try and give Mr. Olson, and other neighbors, an opportunity to have a more natural softening of the edge. Commissioner Saba stated his concern is that they try to keep as many trees as possibte. He still remembers when the Sears properly was taken down and the health club was going to try and preserve as many trees as possible and they just knocked down every tree. The beautiful oak trees were gone. He knows that one of the things they have done in the past is mark trees that are going to be removed and have a plan to replace those. They talked about a living fence, and he would like to see this be done in this case, especially for the neighbors on the east side. Mr. Hickok stated that petitioner's commitment to the underground storage, which is by far the most expensive storm water treatment option, shows the petitioner's commitment to preserving trees. It is the best way to not have to grade the site from corner to corner. When you are grading so that the site will pitch property or pond, it is very different than putting something underground that allows you to basically keep the contours roughly the same. Virgil Okeson, 1423 — 64`�' Avenue, stated he is approximately three lots down to the east of the property. The concern he has is related to the 25 ft. setback on the east side property. The height and diameters of the trees would dictate how close you could plant them to the proposed building. He is concerned about how much coverage would you get it that small area? Chairperson Kondrick stated that is a good question. Commissioner Oquist stated if you look at the landscape plan they are proposing to plat spruce trees in the south corner. Mr. Okeson stated he is concerned about the number of trees you can fit in that narrow 25-foot strip on the east side for shading of any light that is coming off of the building. What if a few years down the road, the trees die because of the root disturbance due to construction of the building and they have to be removed, is there any stipulation to have that tree replaced? 23 Mr. Larson replied the closest spot the building will be to the east property line is approximately 46-47 feet. Chairperson Kondrick asked, from the building to the lot line? Mr. Larson replied, yes. It is not 20 feet, it is 46. If you look at the landscape plan some of those trees are coming out of there; and they will have to put some new trees. Again, he has a tree spade and to be a good neighbor to the neighbors who are on that side, if they let him come onto their property and put a few trees in, he would be happy to do it. It is just tight with the amount of ground that he has. Whatever it takes to make that buffer as attractive as they possibly can - that is to their best interest. They own this building and are keeping the building. It is not for sale. So if a tree dies, they will want to replace it with a nice tree. It will help the people who live there. Mr. Olson stated on the last project there was supposed to be some sort of a fire access going up that east side? How does that affect the trees and things like that. Is fire access needed for this project along the east side? Mr. Hickok replied, the Fire Marshal has reviewed this plan and is comfortable with the layout of the plan and the type of equipment they have for responding to a fire in this building, and the fact that the building is fully sprinkled. He doesn't want to speak for the Fire Marshal in his absence other than to say that they have seen the proposed plans. The original DeMello project went all the way down to 64`�' Avenue, which is why fire access was required at that time. They have not heard a comment from the Fire Marshal indicating this plan is not satisfactory nor that they would try and put a truck behind the building. He thinks that the way the parking is laid out on the west side, and the fact the building is fully sprinkled, they would fight a fire from the west side. MOTION by Commissioner Saba to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:56 P.M. Commissioner Oquist stated to him this project seems to be more thought out. They have really looked into everything and they seem to have covered all aspects of it. There are enough stipulations to cover it. He thinks there is real need for this type of facility in Fridley. He thinks the petitioner is ready to move on the project and since they already have one and are building another, they seem to be in the business. On a personal not, his mother-in-law died in one of these facilities at 94. She went in there probably 20 years earlier. They said she would never leave her single-family home in South Minneapolis and then one day she decided she was ready to move. She looked at a similar type facility in New Hope, moved in, and said why didn't you tell me about this place sooner? She just thoroughly enjoyed it. Commissioner Sielaff stated he didn't have any problems with it. He thinks the neighbors could be far worse off than having this facility. He has seen that in Fridley many times where things have not gone through and something else goes in there that has been worse. He thinks the petitioner has been pretty good taking into account the homeowners and their concerns. He does not see any problems with approving this. , 24 Commissioner Velin stated he likes this. He thinks some people would like to get new trees in their yard. He thinks that is a very nice offer. They are not going to be able to put in a 30 or 40 foot tree, but it will not take long. He thinks the owner has done an excellent job of presenting it. It answers his questions and he thinks Mr. Larson answered some of the questions to the letter from Ms. Molroy. He has no problem with this. Commissioner Saba again his only concern is that City staff is going to review the landscaping prior to issuing building permits. He would like to see some kind of teeth in there that the landscaping will continue as planned. Other than that he sees this as an improvement to the last plan. Chairperson Kondrick stated, he agreed. Commissioner Sibel stated the only concern she has had, and she is surprised it has not been brought up, was the traffic pattern. They are going to be bringing in more traffic in than there is now. It appears there is a plan in place to allow road expansion and to accommodate that traffic, but she thought they might hear more concerns on that. Otherwise she supports it. Chairperson Kondrick stated the County is probably concerned about that. Even widening Central Avenue and making the developer take part of his land and have it ready in case the street needs to be dug up. He is also in favor of this project. They have a well thought out plan including a good landscape plan. He is in favor of this. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist Approving a Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to replat 5 lots, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441 & 6421 Central Avenue NE with the following stipulations: l. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A 1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The buitding elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. The County prior to planting shall approve any planting within the right-of-way. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a perrnit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 1 1. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 1.Ti". 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. ] 9. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. MOTION by Commissioner Velin Approving a Master Plan Amendment MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441 & 6421 Central Avenue NE with the following stipulations: l. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way shall be approved by the County prior to pianting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shal) obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 26 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18 19 20 21 22 Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot) The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. Properly owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Chairperson Oquist. Chairperson Kondrick asked when will this be before the City Council? Ms. Stromberg replied, February 9. Receive the MOTION by Commis nutes of the September 24 2008, Appeals Commission Meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, A THE MOTION CARRIED 5. Receive the Minutes Saba to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. MOTION by Commissioner Sie VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED ANIMOUSLY. December 10, 2008, Appeals Commission Meeting. to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTkj�1G AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIM�USLY. � 6. Receive the Minutes of the Aug�st 12, 2008, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Meeting. �. MOTION by Commissioner Velin to receive the�jvlinutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, C�AIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 27 � AGENDA ITEM ` CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 CffY OF FRIDLEY Date: February 4, 2009 � To: William Burns, City Manager � � From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Manager Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01, Joel Larson, Select Senior Living INTRODUCTION Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to allow the construction of a 141 unit Senior-Housing building, on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The 141 units will consist of independent living, assisted living, and memory care units. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Master Plan Amendment. The Planning Commission and City Council may recall in 2005 John DeMello and his company Family Lifestyle Development Corp., were granted a rezoning for the subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. When any property is rezoned to S-2 Redevelopment District, it requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. Once the rezoning is approved by the City Council, any modification to that originally approved master plan would require a Master Plan Amendment. A Master Plan Amendment needs to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Since, the proposed project is different from what was originally approved with the rezoning of these properties in 2005, the petitioner is seeking a Master Plan Amendment. It should be noted that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will also need to review this Master Plan Amendment as the properties involved are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the January 21, 2009, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for MP #09- 01. After receiving public comment and a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of plat request, MP #09-01, with the 22 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED UNAMIOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectura/ site p/an A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. : 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevafions, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obfain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater managemenf area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreemenf shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3, 000.00 ($1, 500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide fhe Cify with a copy of the condifions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior fo issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed developmenf fo occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any fraffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. :� City of Fridley Land Use Application PS #09-01 & MP #09-01 January 21, 2009 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Select Senior Living Joel Larson 12415 55th Street N Lake Elmo MN 55042 Requested Action: Replat 5 lots Master Plan Amendment Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue Existing Zoning: All properties are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District Size: Approximate size of entire area to be replatted: 142,857 sq. ft. 3.28 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map in the current Comprehensive Plan and the proposed Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. House fire in 2008 — house demolished. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. Rezoned to S-2 in 2005. Legal Description of Property: 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition Council Action / 60 Day Date City Council — February 9, 2009 60-Day Date — February 16, 2009 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, Joel Larson, of Select Senior Living, is requesting to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., and 6461 Central Ave. The petitioner is also seeking a Master Plan Amendment from the original master plan that was approved when these properties were rezoned in 2005. Both the replat and the master plan amendment will allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of the plat and master plan amendment, with stipulations. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional job opportunities. • Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg PS#09-01 & M P #09-01 OVERVIEW The requests: Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to allow the construction of a 141 unit Senior-Housing building, on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The 141 units will consist of independent living, assisted living, and memory care units. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Master Plan Amendment. � �x, I ....: ��A �� —�-� 138t 391 A Plat is being requested to create two new parcels from �� , ��'��' � 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 � Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), and 6461 � � '�,�� Central Avenue (vacant). The two parcels will be occupied � —�� ' by the senior building. � , �� ' -E '"'� ; The Planning Commission and City Council may recall in � 2005 John DeMello and his company Family Lifestyle � Development Corp., were granted a rezoning for the �'x� ��i � �-� j�� f subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. When ��s �� ;,;,. .,5- ( � � �e any property is rezoned to S-2 Redevelopment District, it -� �- � I--- ��:� requires that the accompanying site plan become the � 4 master plan for the site. Once the rezoning is approved �`� ��; '� E�' �� "� ( ��3� by the City Council, any modification to that originally approved master plan would require a Master Plan Amendment. A Master Plan Amendment needs to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Since, the proposed project is different than what was originally approved with the rezoning of these properties in 2005, the petitioner is seeking a Master Plan Amendment. It should be noted that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will also need to review this Master Plan Amendment as the properties involved are zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. Proposed Project: Joel Larson, with Select Senior Living, is proposing to construct a three story 141 unit senior housing building with 60 independent living �, units, 27 memory care units, and 54 � � ,;1��,,� r� f., � t� yr�,r� � assisted living units. All of the units �� A� � � r� �>, � ��.� H � n � 'k'w^_'; »Yer�-- � will be between 470 sq. ft. and �" °� °�' 1,003 sq. ft. The smallest of the �� .� � ,� units are memory care apartments � �Y� �° ��`�� '; and are located on the secured � � ' � ��` ` � .��,s��°"� �: '�� =�. �;� � � � �. � y P�� , �,"" , r �'� � main floor of the south wing of the �� ; ,� � ' building. They will have their own �:e � �`<<� ��-- � - � �� °°` �� _ rivate livin /dinin area and "' � � � : ~��'�""�'"` o � `�'�"� P 9 9 ' ��a � � . �.�- �,�� . ... � kitchenette as well as a private � � ��°`�� '�� -� . � �� bathing room, a community laundry and a private fenced in yard. The second and third floors in the south wing will contain 54 assisted living apartments, of which some will be studios, one bedroom, one bedroom with a den, or two bedroom apartments. Each floor of the assisted living area is also provided with a private bathing room and laundry :. room. The second and third floors of the north wing will contain 60 independent living apartments. Each of these units has their own laundry hook-up as well as a shared laundry room. Within the building there will be several shared amenities such as a shared two-story lobby, a stone fireplace, an intimate cafe, and a sitting area. The mail room, management office, nurses' office, and public restrooms are centrally located off of the lobby as are the central dining room, sports pub, and kitchen. Other shared amenities include an activity room with a small kitchen area and restroom, a media center, the activity director's office, an overnight guest room, a library on the second floor, and a salon and grandparent room for visiting children on the third floor. The development will include 84 underground heated garage parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls. The buildings architecture will consist of a hipped roof, with the use of brick, veneer, and two colors of complimentary lap siding on the exterior, with balconies. By designing the building to be located as close as code allows to the west property line, the petitioner is proposing to keep as many of the existing mature trees as possible. The petitioner also plans to install a 6 ft. wood privacy fence along the south and east sides of the property. Additional landscaping of new deciduous, coniferous, and ornamental trees along with shrub, perennial and annual plantings are also planned for the entire site to provide a welcoming entrance and development. ANALYSIS Plat Request #09-01 Joel Larson of Select Senior Living is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, and 6461 Central Avenue to create two separate lots. Both lots will be combined to accommodate the 141-unit senior housing development. The reason the development has 2 lots is because some of the land to be replatted is Torrens property while other portions of it are Abstract. Anoka County doesn't allow the combination of these different types of property without first getting a Registration of Land Tifles by District Court Order, which can be a lengthy process. Instead, the developer is choosing to create 2 lots, �� ° : � �� .. � �� ° � which will be required to be combined to allow for � '�` @'��' ��° *��` the develo ment to occur. '� .��. .�, � .�.,�vP . � -:��.n..-,c�,!'� .�. ��... p memory care units. parking stalls. The proposed replat will consist of two lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block 1, Select Senior Living of Fridley. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for some degree of flexibility when designing a redevelopment project; however, City staff has asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to its intended use. The proposed development of a 47,508 sq. ft. footprint senior housing development would be most closely be aligned with a residential development in an R-3, Multi-Family zoning district. The proposed project area is 142,857 sq. ft. (3.28 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 141-unit senior housing building, which will consist of 60 independent units, 54 assisted living units, and 27 The development will include 84 underground parking stalls and 32 surface 87 2 R-3, Multi-Family zoning regulations states, the average lot area required per dwelling unit is 2,500 sq. ft. for the units on the first (3) three stories with an additional 950 sq. ft. per unit from the fourth through sixth stories. National and regional development trends for assisted living and memory care appear to point to a lesser lot size requirement. The S-2 District classification will allow this land to unit ratio, without a variance. Though well-maintained landscaped grounds are essential to project appeal and resident enjoyment, the size of the lot in this situation can be smaller because the opportunity for residents to participate in larger scale outdoor activities on the grounds is much smaller. Also, less land is required because of the fact that the residents typically do not have cars, nor do they drive. Therefore, there is a lower standard for the number of parking stalls required and less land area to accommodate that automobile use. Consequently, this site size is adequate considering the ratio of assisted living and memory care, to independent living. There will be a stipulation with the recommendation on this project that requires that the building continue to be used with the resident population ratios proposed. If not, purchase of additional land and a Master Plan amendment will be required, prior to that resident ratio modification. The proposed 3-story building will be 35 ft. high at the midspan, which meets City code requirements. The proposed project is also in-compliance with lot coverage, parking and all setback requirements, except the rear yard setback. The R-3 zoning code requires a 25 ft. rear yard setback, and the proposed building is setback at 23 ft. 2 in. Discussions and correspondence with Anoka County when the John DeMello project was before the City in 2005, indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. The County anticipates that additional right-of-way will need to be dedicated along both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. To be safe, staff has assumed that the County will be requesting the same right-of-way dedication from this developer as they have with the past developer's proposal. A letter from the Anoka County Highway Department on January 7, 2009, confirmed this to be an accurate assumption. Consequently, the petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of-way dedication along both County Roads. Due to necessity of that right-of-way dedication, the rear yard setback falls short of ineeting code requirements by 2 ft. 10 inches. With the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setback can be recognized under the City's Master Plan Amendment approval, and no variance would be required. Masfer Plan Amendment Request MP #09-01 The petitioner is requesting a Master Plan Amendment to the original Master Plan that was approved as part of the 2005 rezoning of the subject properties to S-2, Redevelopment District. The original rezoning and master plan was approved to allow for the construction of mixed used building, with a 10,492 sq. ft. retail complex that would occupy the lower level of the northeastern corner of the building and have 70 owner-occupied condominium units occupying the remainder of the building. Despite the fact that the preliminary plat and rezoning and subsequent master plan were all approved for this site, the project never came to fruition, because the final plat was never submitted for approval. As stated earlier, the properties involved in the Master Plan Amendment are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage-welding shop), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot), and 6461 88 3 Central Avenue (vacant lot). All properties involved are currently zoned S-2, Redevelopment District. If the Master Plan Amendment being discussed in this report is approved by the City Council, it should be noted that any major modification of the site plan would again be required to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Comprehensive Plan Conformance The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community while looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". The rezoning was approved for the DeMello project since it was in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed senior project meets several of the objectives that the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update. This update is before the Met Council for approval at this time. One of the goals identified through those meetings and the telephone survey was to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live." Ways to accomplish that goal are to provide more housing diversity and to make Fridley a place where the aged can stay. Only about 8% of Fridley's housing is of the townhome or condominium structure type, yet 23% of Fridley's residents were over age 55 in 2000, and that percentage is growing. To accommodate Fridley's senior citizens desires to live in maintenance-free housing (no yards/house exterior care), more types of senior housing needs to be constructed. Types of senior housing to consider are one-level townhomes, independent living, assisted living, nursing home/memory care facilities. It is also important to explore the availability of a private maintenance service that would allow seniors to stay in their single family homes. This area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road is identified as an area for future redevelopment in both the existing 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Economic and Redevelopment Plan chapter in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, states that the City should continue to pursue high density senior housing in this area due to the demand for this type of housing in Fridley. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficienf land uses and under-utilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to meet current market demands and desires of the community, creates new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the redevelopment of this area for a Senior Living facility. HOUSING STUDY The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Preliminary Demand Estimate for Senior Housing in Fridley. The analysis done takes into account the demand for independent living, assisted living and memory care senior housing by calculating demographic, economic and competitive factors that would impact current demand for senior housing units in the designated "Market Area." The "Market Area" in which Maxfield analyzed includes the communities of Fridley, Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park and Hilltop. The analysis done indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 200 units of the above reference nature. They note that over the next five years the level of units demanded now will likely decrease due to other competitive developments in the area that are now in some stage of planning or construction. 89 4 TRAFFIC 2030 Comprehensive P/an — Transportation Chapter The City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed Senior Living project carried 8,900 vehicles per day. At this traffic level it's carrying almost the exact amount of traffic the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that Old Central will be carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2030, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be at its capacity. As a result, Anoka County is requiring that additional right-of-way be dedicated with this plat, to ensure that the additional land needed is available to eventually expand the roadway. Review of Traffic Study prepared by Folz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc. The petitioner had Foltz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., perform a traffic analysis on the proposed use. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition. The consultants used the Assisted Living Land Use category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed Senior Project complex would generate a total of 433 trips per day if all 158 beds within the complex were occupied. The Congregate Care Facility (Independent Living) land use would generate a total of 340 trips per day if all 158 beds were occupied. The consultants used the numbers for the Assisted Living land use to provide the worst case scenario for traffic at this facility, because it generates more traffic than an Independent Living land use. This can be attributed to the fact that an assisted living facility requires the need for more staff and employees. Tri Generation ITE Description Land Use 254 Assisted Living Land Use (141 units) Daily Trips AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour (Mississippi (Central Ave) St) In 433 13 In Out 8 5 Out PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour (Mississippi (Central Ave) St) In Out � In Out � 3 9 11 16 19 It should also be noted, that according to the ITE manual, studies have shown that less than 5% of residents in an assisted living facility own vehicles, and if they do, they are rarely driven. Employees, visitors, and delivery trucks make up most of the trips to this facility. The ITE manual also points out that the "peak hour" generator typically doesn't coincide with the "peak hour" of the adjacent street traffic for an assisted living facility. This is primarily related to the shifts of the employees beginning at 7:00 a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. The typical peak hours on most roadways are between 6:00-7:00 a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. WETLAND AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENT The petitioner hired Graham Environmental Services (GES), Inc., to complete a Wetland Evaluation Report for the project area. Based on GES's finding, no wetlands exist on the site. The petitioner has submitted the proposed project to the Rice Creek Watershed for the necessary approvals and permits. Once Rice Creek Watershed has reviewed and approved the project, the City's Engineering staff will further review the project. 90 5 The petitioner has stated that storm water management for the site will be handled in an underground drainage system designed to meet the watershed's requirements for rate, quality and volume control. The underground system will surround the building providing infiltration and storage, while directing the water to an existing storm sewer system found on the east boundary of the site. One of the reasons the petitioner is choosing to install an underground drainage system instead of a typical above ground pond, is to try to save as many of the mature trees as possible. STAFF RECOMMEDATION City Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01 and Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01 with stipulations. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional job opportunities. • Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that if the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan Amendment are approved, the following stipulations be attached. 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural sife plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings af 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The pefitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed Districf approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management mainfenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by Cify Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3, 000.00 ($1, 500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage freatment systems /ocated on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 91 s 19. Screening fhrough the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petifioner prior to final plat approval. 92 7 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 12 16. The petitioner will provid the City verification that Clear Channel's easement shown on 7/12/07 survey does not rohibit parking or access 17. This Special Use Pe t will be brought back to the Fridley City Council for review six months after issuanc to ensure continued compliance, and City staff shall be given the opportunity to revie any new leases before new tenants lease available space. Seconded by Councilme ber Barnette. UPON A VOICE OTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRI UNANIMOUSLY. 12. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to Replat 5 Lots to Allow for the Construction of a Senior Living Project, which will Consist of Independent Living Units, Memory Care Units, and Assisted Living Units, Generally Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 and 6421 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 2). 13. Master Plan Amendment, MP #0901, by Select Senior Living, to Allow for the Construction of a Senior Living Project, which will Consist of Independent Living Units, Memory Care Units, and Assisted Living Units, Generally Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 and 6421 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 2). Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated he would like to present Items 12 and 13 together. Petitioner is requesting a plat to create two new parcels to construct a senior housing building. A master plan amendment was also requested. When any property is rezoned to S-2, it is required it be accompanied by a site plan that will ultimately be the master plan for the site. Since the proposed project is different than what was originally approved with the rezoning of this property, a master plan amendment is now required. The petitioner is proposing to construct a three-story, 141-unit building with 60 independent living units, 27 memory care units, and 64 assisted living units. All the units will be between 470 and 1,003 square feet. They are "for rent" units, not "for sale" units. The developer will include 84 underground heated garage parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls as well. The building will ha�e a hipped roof and will be brick veneer. It will have two colors of lap siding on the exterior, and some units will have balconies. The architecture is very attractive. Mr. Hickok stated by designing the building to be located as close to what the City Code would allow if this was an R-3 site to the west property line, the petitioner is proposing to keep as many of the existing mature trees as possible. Mr. Hickok stated the Petitioner plans to install a 6-foot privacy fence along the south and east sides of the property. The site will be landscaped with new deciduous, coniferous, and ornamental trees along with shrubs, perennials, and annual plantings to provide a welcoming entrance to the development. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 13 Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner is seeking to replat five lots to create two lots. The reason is that some of the property is torrens and some is abstract. Anoka County does not allow the combination of these different types of land without first getting Regists�ation of Land Titles by District Court Order, which can be a very lengthy process. Instead the developer is choosing to create 2 lots, which will be required to be combined to allow for the development to occur. Mr. Hickok stated rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District allows for some degree of flexibility when designing a redevelopment project; however, City staff has asked the Petitioner to design their project to try and meet the rezoning classifications most similar to its intended use which would be R-3, Multi-Family Residential. The R-3, Multi-Family, code states the average lot area required per dwelling is 2,500 square feet for the units on the first three stories with an additional 950 square feet per unit from the fourth through sixth stories. The S-2 district classification will allow the proposed land-to-unit ratio without a variance. Mr. Hickok stated there will be a stipulation with the recommendation on this project that requires that the building continue to be used with the resident population ratios as proposed. If not, they will need to purchase additional land, and a master plan amendment would be required prior to resident ratio modification. The reason for that is if they should reduce the number of memory care or assisted living and increase the amount of independent living units, that would mean more cars and we would ask them to go with more of an independent living ratio instead of this lower number of stalls allowed because of it being memory care and assisted living. Mr. Hickok stated the proposed project is in compliance with lot coverage, parking, height, and all setback requirements except the rear yard setback. So, even though it is an S-2, it is designed really like an R-3 project. The R-3 code does require a 25-foot rear yard setback, and the proposed building is setback at 23 feet 2 inches. The rear yard in this case is the one that is furthest from Mississippi. It is not the one that is to the east but the one to the south that backs up to the properties. There are single-family residential homes on 64th Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated Anoka County is requiring that additional right-of-way be dedicated along both Old Central and Mississippi Street. As a result, the rear yard falls short of ineeting the 25- foot requirement by 2 feet 10 inches. Flexibility though is allowed in the S-2 District, and the diminished setback can be recognized under the City's master plan amendment approval and no variance would be required. They have been very good about keeping this an R-3 development basically with the exception of that setback. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner is also requesting a master plan amendment to the original master plan approved as part of the 2005 rezoning for this site. The original rezoning and master plan were approved to allow the construction of a mixed-use building with 10,492 square feet of retail on the lower level and then a 70-unit owner occupied condominium project above. Despite the fact that the preliminary plat rezoning and the master plan were all approved for this site, the project never came to fruition because the final plat was never submitted for approval. If the master plan amendment being discussed is approved by the City Council, it should be noted that any major modifications to this site plan would again require that it come back before the City Council for review and approval. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 14 Mr. Hickok stated the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000. The rezoning was approved for the DeMello project because it was within the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed senior project meets several of the objectives residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. One of the goals identified through those meetings and a telephone survey was to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live." Ways to accomplish that goal are to provide more housing diversity and to make Fridley a place where �he aged can stay. Only about 8 percent of Fridley's housing is of the townhome or condominium structure type, yet 23 percent of Fridley's residents are over 55 or were in 2000. To accommodate Fridley's senior citizens' desires to live in a maintenance-free housing situation, more types of senior housing need to be constructed. The Comprehensive Plan does show the axea of Old Central between Mississippi and Rice Creek Road as an area for redevelopment. The Economic and Redevelopment Plan in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan states that the City should continue to pursue a variety of housing types iri this area. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner hired M�field Research to complete a Preliminary Demand Estimate for Senior Housing in Fridley; and the analysis takes into account the demand for independent living, assisted living, and memory care. They have calculated demographics, economics, and other competitive factors that would impact the current demand in the marketplace. They feel very comfortable with the project that they have. The market area in which Maxfield analyzed also included Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park, and Hilltop. The analysis indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 200 units of this nature. Mr. Hickok stated the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005 the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed project carried 8,900 vehicles per day. At this traffic level, it is carrying almost the exact amount of traffic the roadway was designed and constructed to carry and to function at a level of Service D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that Old Central will be carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2030. At 10,000 vehicles per day, Old Central will be at its capacity. As a result, Anoka County is requiring additional right- of-way with this plat to ensure that the additional land needed is available to eventually expand the roadway. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner had Foltz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., perform a traffic analysis on the proposed use, using methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7`h Edition (ITE) which is the industry standard. They used the assisted living land use category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior project would generate a total of 433 trips per day if all 158 beds within the complex were occupied. Independent living land use would generate a total of 340 trips per day if all 158 beds were occupied. The consultants used the number for the Assisted Living use to provide the worst-case scenario for traffic at this facility because it generates more traffic than an Independent Living land use. This can be attributed to the fact that an assisted living facility requires the need for more employees. Also, it should be noted that according to the ITE manual, studies have shown that less than 5 percent of the residents in an assisted living facility own vehicles. If they do, they rarely drive them. Employees, visitors, and delivery trucks make most of the trips to this facility. A delivery vehicle coming and going is "two trips." The ITE manual also points out that the peak hour generator typically does not coincide with the "peak hour" of the adjacent street traffic for an FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 15 assisted living facility. This is primarily related to the shifts of employees beginning at 7:00 a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. The typical peak hours on most roadways are between 6:00 to 7:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. according to traffic analysis standards. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner hired Graham Environmental Services Inc. (GES) to complete a Wetland Evaluation Report for this project and, based on their findings, no wetlands exist on this site. The petitioner has submitted the proposed project to the Rice Creek Watershed for the necessary approvals and that review is underway. Once the Rice Creek Watershed folks have reviewed the plan and approved, the City's Engineering staff will further review this project. Mr. Hickok said Petitioner has stated that storm water management for this site will be handled in an underground drainage system. The cost of those underground drainage systems are very high, but it allows them to put it underground and keep more landscape on the surface and keep more open space. By having this alternate design they can work around the trees on the site. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner held a neighborhood meeting on January 12, and about 20 to 25 people attended. Specific information about that meeting would be best provided by the petitioner. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for these items on January 21. After receiving public comment and having a short discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval with twenty-two stipulations. Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Cominission's recommendation. Commissioner Varichak asked if Petitioner had any problems with the 22 stipulations. Mr. Larson replied, no. Commissioner Varichak asked whether he has the proper financing for doing this project. Mr. Larson said he had partners. He does not have financing, but feels very comfortable that they will be able to get the financing. In today's economy, the banking industry changes daily, so it is always a challenge. They are closing on a site in Mounds View the last week of February which is a$12 million site, and their next one will be this one. Councilmember Saefke asked for an explanation on the difference between Torrens and abstract properties. Mr. Hickok said abstract property is probably the most common property. Torrens property goes back to a formal but court-ordered way of describing land. Because it comes by virtue of court order, it takes actually a court order to change that back. There is a formal process and by order of the court then they could have that description changed and an abstract designation put on the property. We experienced that on the southwest quadrant. We went through a process whereby the developer had some abstract and torrens property. In that case they felt more comfortable going and asking the court to change it. We have other situations out there where there is development and there is a mixed of torrens and abstract where the County is okay with it being a tax parcel but they will not blend the lot lines. They need to keep that distinct unless the court otherwise orders. He asked Attorney Knaak if he had anything to add. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 16 Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said Minnesota has two different systems for recording land. One is the normal abstract systems where it is described in metes and bounds, or if you have a plat that has been platted you can just sell it based on those descriptions. Minnesota also has a system called the "torrens" system where you basically start a legal proceeding. The purpose is to make your title good through a declaration of the court. You then get a Torrens Certificate or an Owner's Certificate. It is considered a far more secure way of owning property. To do anything, whether you put a mortgage on it or anything like that, you actually have to have it specifically recorded on the certificate and there is a formal process you follow. The two systems are parallel. A torrens property can be right next to an abstract parcel. The hope was that the whole state would eventually go torrens and it has not happened. Councilmember Saefke said he noticed in the Planning Commission that Petitioner intends to save as many mature trees as possible. He asked what percentage of trees could be saved. He said he also noticed Mr. Larson has a 90 square foot tree spade. Mr. Larson replied he is one of the few developers who actually likes trees. They do have a tree spade. Their intentions are to use that as much as they can. On the landscape plan they have indicated a lot of trees on the backside. Depending on what kind of tree it is and how it looks, they may take it down. Their intention is to put up some more trees to buffer the side yard. Councilmember Saefke stated he also noticed Mr. Larson had some discussion with one of the neighbors about fencing, and he seemed very amenable to working with the neighbors on the kind of fencing that they want. One proposal is a six-foot high wooden fence. Mr. Larson stated at the neighborhood meeting he did talk to a gentleman who he thinks has the adjacent property on the backside. He asked him what type of fence h� wanted. At that point he did not have one. If he wants the PVC-type fence that is maintenance free, they would be happy to do or even if he wants a cedar fence. They are very open to that and can coordinate that through staf£ They want to be good neighbors. On the design of the building, they also kept the balconies off the back of the building so they are not looking down on top of the neighbors in their backyards. The balconies are on the front and on the Mississippi Street side. Councilmember Saefke asked Mr. Larson if this building is going to be comparable to the Norwood Square building. Mr. Hickok replied, comparable in terms of age-restricted, that it has a hip roof on it and it has some brick on it. He said he though it was more comparable to the Noah's Ark building and the Banfill building. Councilmember Saefke asked whether the front of the building will be facing Old Central. Mr. Larson replied, correct. Councilmember Saefke asked if that is where the entrance would be. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 17 Mr. Larson replied, correct. � Councilmember Saefke asked if there would be a right turn lane into the development. Mr. Hickok replied there is no plan because of the volume of traffic for one, to put a turn lane into their front drive. One of the things that did evolve through their discussions with the County was that they limited access to Old Central to one access point. That is taken at the point back where the DeMello proj ect had its access point with the idea that once development happens across the street, they will be looking across at access points, and it would line up the way we would want it to. If the roadway is widened, there may be a different design. Councilmember Saefke stated there has been some criticism about the size of the units. He said his house is only 938 square feet and two kids and two adults have lived there for almost 40 years just fine. A facility that is very necessary. He does believe that our community is getting older and there is a need for this type of housing. Some of the concerns of the neighbors have been taken care of and he thinks Mr. Larson is very willing to work with them. He thinks it is good project. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were any concerns related to the Rice Creek Watershed District. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, said they looked at the grading plan which does not seem to be a problem. He does not know the particulars on the underground storage system. Rice Creek has a fairly elaborate set of rules and instructions that professionals will follow in a design for a building like this. Councilmember Bolkcom said but we do not see it at this point because they have only looked at the grading. They do not really look at any of the other issues until after the Rice Creek Watershed District gives their approval. Mr. Kosluchar agreed. Councilmember Bolkcom said she wanted to go on record that she thinks they either need to have the maintenance free fence or a wooden fence. She does not think a chain link provides enough privacy. Mr. Larson said their intention is to do either wood or maintenance free. Not a chain link. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about variances. Mr. Hickok stated a 7-foot fence is allowed in the residential district and is very typical. Mr. Larson stated he is okay with a 7-foot fence if that is what the neighbors and the City want. Councilmember Bolkcom asked, as far as variances, if this was not an S-2, the only variance they are looking at is 2 feet 10 inches. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9. 2009 PAGE 18 Mr. Hickok replied, yes. If we were talking about "for sale" condominiums, we would be talking about 2,500 square feet of land per unit. But we are not. We are talking about an assisted living memory care facility where the units axe small and that, too, is recognized through the S-2. It is not that pure formula of one unit per 2,500 square feet that you would find if this were "for sale" condominiums or something else. Councilmember Bolkcom asked but it is not decreasing in any way the green space or any of our requirements. The only real variance here is because of it being an S-2. They are not requesting to have any less green space. Mr. Hickok said we made a text amendment to the City Code, to recognize that certain types of senior living would have less demand for parking. There is no commercral included like the previous project, so the parking requirements are reduced. There will be a lot more green space on this site. Mr. Larson stated with respect to the 2 feet, it is just a stairway that is coming out of the building that is encroaching. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the traffic generated at the site. Mr. Hickok replied the ITE Manual for owner-occupied units has a number of 7 trips per day if he is not mistaken and, at 7 trips per day, they would be looking at over 900 trips for this development. In the presentation, he believed they said the numbers were 480 or 344, depending on whether they used all independent living or a mix with memory care. The trips generally are from staff, deliveries and visiting family members, not from the residents. Councilmember Bolkcom stated from her experience with assisted living and memory care, there are staff there but it not an incredible increase of staff. Mr. Larson replied, you will see 1 per 15. Staff park inside and underneath. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the shifts--staff working between 7 and 3 and 11 o'clock at night. She said she thought the peak morning hours would be 7 to 8 o'clock. She asked if there would be any problems. Mr. Hickok stated the distinction is if there are any residents with cars there who drive, they are not going out at those peak hours. Councilmember Bolkcom stated they are talking about probably half the traffic than the previous development. Mr. Hickok said he thinks maybe more like an eighth, because the previous project was for an owner-occupied unit for what they call "active adults" starting at age 55. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 19 Mr. Larson stated their average age is 80 years old. They are there because they need to be there. Councilmember Bolkcom stated staff said Stipulation No. 20 says if there was a major modification in the plan that they would have to come back before Council. Mr. Hickok said they have much more protection with the S-2 because you do not make a modification to the footprint of the building without coming back before Council. If you are going to change the master plan it is going to come back to the Council. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she went on-line and looked at other facilities with assisted living and memory caxe. She looked at the sizes because someone made the comment that these were small. They are not. They are about the same size you would see at other places. Our community needs this. Rental property does not concern her. She lciiows there was also some question about Section 8, and this is not something that would be in this facility other than the Anoka County vouchers. It is a wonderful opportunity for people in our own community. She understands the petitioner is going to be working with the neighborhood. Keeping the big trees is huge. Also, there is the underground water storage and they do not have to deal with a ponding issue. It looks like a quality project. Councilmember Barnette said if the plan ever needs to be modified or anything, it has to come back before the City, correct? Mr. Larson replied, correct. Councilmember Barnette asked Mr. Larson, using his facility in Coon Rapids, could he give them a rough percentage of couples vs. singles residing there. Mr. Larson said he believes they have two couples in the building. It is just opening now. By the end of February they should have about 40 residents in it out of the 90-unit building. Councilmember Barnette asked if there is an association agreement and if they have a say in how the association is run. Mr. Larson said there is no. However, they do have monthly meetings with their residents and get their input on food and activities. They have a full-time activities director. They have full- time nursing and full-time chefs. There is a lot of common space, so when people start talking about room sizes, they are basically sleeping in their rooms. They have the ability to have a one- bedroom plus den if they can afford it, or they can have an efficiency if that fits their budget. Councilmember Barnette asked about the memory units. He asked if the County would get involved if there was a need for placement of a person under 55 in a memory unit and if they would be required by law to provide a unit. Mr. Larson replied, if a doctor or nurse assessment says there is a 45-year old person who needs to have memory care, they will look at that, although they are not advertising for that. There FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 20 may be laws about that, and they do have to obey them. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is some question about actually increasing the kitchen to have congregate dining and that other seniors could go there and eat. She asked if it would generate an additional 340 trips if all 158 beds were occupied. Mr. Larson stated budgets are getting tightened up, and Meals on Wheels and all the other programs are starting to disappear. They would like to be able to market to some of those people who are 72, 73, or 74 years old who have a friend here and want to come and have lunch with their friend. They are designing and making the dining hall a little bit bigger to invite those people to come and have dinner or lunch. It would be surprising if they had 20 people a day extra stop in and have lunch. They are going to open it up to seniors so they can get a feel for the building. Councilmember Bolkcom said that was her only concern. She knows that at the Fridley Community Center a fair amount of seniors from other communities come to the lunches. She was wondering about the increased traffic, but he is saying it would be big enough to accommodate no more than about 20 to 25 people. Mr. Larson replied, somewhere in that range. He does not know the exact number but they are making it a little bit bigger. There is also a little cafe out front that seats 10 to 12 people so that could be another area a group could sit and visit and have lunch together at a cheap price--$3, $4, or $5 a meal. It is just something they want to offer seniors. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the trips would generate additional traffic. Mr. Hickok said those are blended into the visitation trips already. Councilmember Bolkcom said there was a public hearing on this matter before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hickok said the two items before them require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Mayor Lund said he would like to give the people present in the audience an opportunity to give them new information. They have the minutes from the Planning Commission. There was also a neighborhood meeting held as well. Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton, stated one of the things she is wondering about is the replat to two lots. In 2005, Mr. DeMello sought to replat the multiple lots to one lot. This was granted by Council. Now the developer is seeking to make two lots because of land recording issues. Her research took her to the Anoka County property tax records where it showed the property on Mississippi is abstract and the other one was changed to abstract on February 3 and was previously Torrens to January 30, 2009. With respect to the properties on Old Central, it shows one changed to abstract on February 3, 2009, that was previously Torrens through January 30, 2009. Strangely enough, 6441 and 6461 did not appear on any property records at the County or FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 21 at the City self zoning. She asked how much of the original plan remains in tact. Does the County still recommend the 64�' Avenue access. There was really no discussion about what the landscaping will be. There was no discussion regarding the alley easement that people in the neighborhood had a concern with previously. She said the storm water issues seem to have disappeazed. In 2005 there was concern by Jon Haukaas that there was a problem there. Nancy Jorgensen said there was a problem there. A document from the Rice Creek Watershed said there was really no way to tell what the impact would be until the project was built. She is not sure how much of a difference putting the water underground is going to make. They did find there was a problem with the underground parking and that is why they built it at grade and bermed it. In 2005 and in Planning Commission meetings, Stacy Stromberg said that R-3 was the closest. The DeMello project pretty much had to meet those R-3 requirements, and she believes our zoning code language in 2005 said it needs to meet the closest. Now the Planning staff is saying that the S-2 has some special leeway. Our City Code S-2 does absolutely nothing to describe what the lot lines are and what the usages are. It refers you back to City Code for an "S" District which tells you nothing. Ms. Reynolds stated this proposed project is 142,847 square feet with a proposed footprint of 47,508 square feet, giving it a 33.26 percent lot coverage. In an R-3 it would be a m� of 30 even with underground parking. The DeMello project was 26.67 percent, and that was one of the 11 reasons given for denying that project was the amount of lot coverage. The R-3 requirement is what was used on the old one, and she does not understand how a master plan amendment changes what code requirement they have. Ms. Reynolds stated Ms. Stromberg noted that the proposal meets several of the goals in the Comprehensive Plan. However, the one thing she failed to mention is that the citizen survey identified single-level senior housing as the desire of 67 percent of those polled. Assisted living and those things came in there, too. She went back and looked at the paperwork from the DeMello project. Some of the concerns are still very valid. One of those was the height of the proposed structure on the parcel in the development would significantly block sunlight and impede the view of adjoining residential development more than what they currently enjoy. All of a sudden a different developer, and the size of the building becomes okay. She still has a concern using that piece of property for such a huge building. She wonders what the impact is and what the possibilities will be for developing the other side of the street. She thinks there are some issues with the zoning. Ms. Reynolds stated is also concerned with the number of projects the Petitioner has going on. They have projects in Coon Rapids, Mounds View, and it is her understanding there is one in Stillwater. She is also concerned about the cost. Mr. Hickok said this developer is not getting benefits the other developer did not. The height of the building, for example, is precisely the same as the DeMello Project. Mayor Lund asked what the mid-roof height was. Mr. Hickok replied, 35 feet at mid span. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 22 Mr. Hickok stated the point in coming back for a master plan amendment is that the original plan did not stay in tact. There is a new footprint, and there is a new project here. Also, they may recall along the right-of-way side of the road, in the northwest corner of the site, the DeMello Project had a deficiency that had to be recognized by the S-2 District. This 2-foot 10- inch variance is much less than the deficiency that revealed itself through the DeMello Project. Mr. Hickok stated regarding an easement that land locks the land, that does go back to a time when there was a discussion about a property on 64t" that has a right-of-way that runs along the east side of that property and then dead-ends at their back property line. There was some discussion during the DeMello project about access. This project does not go down to 64tn Avenue, so it cannot even be considered here. With respect to the alley behind the building, the developer has not sought to do anything different other than develop the land they own here. An alley has not been an issue. Mr. Hickok said storm water issues go to the Rice Creek Watershed District and only after they have been thoroughly reviewed do they go to our engineers. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was less of an issue because of the underground parking. Mr. Hickok stated it is less of an issue. Anytime you limit the hard surface on a site, you are eliminating some of the runof£ With respect to the landscaping and what will be required, there was no rela�tation of the landscaping requirements for this developer. There is a relationship between the size of the building and/or the size of the lot and the number of trees that are planted. That is what is used by staff to calculate whether the project meets the requirements or not. Mr. Hickok said the S-2 District is predicated on the master plan. Council has the ability to approve a project based on its master plan. We ask the developer to match the R-3 as close as they can. Staff tries to alleviate any problems by asking the developer to do this. It is not a requirement or law. We are doing that to help make the project blend in the area and make it as close to the R-3 District as possible. It is based on a master plan, and Council, in its discretion, can approve a plan that is very, very different than the R-3. With respect to lot coverage, there is some benefit to parking underneath the building, and it is an incentive for developers because they can do a bigger footprint if they put the parking underneath the building. It does limit the surface parking outside and goes a long way to maYimizing the green space and the overall aesthetics of the development. Mr. Hickok stated regarding blocking access to light, in the R-1 District, they can go that high. Someone can build a house that is multi-stories high and have the same issue. If you saw a shadow study on this site, the argument about the shadow would go away pretty quick. Mr. Hickok said this developer is not being given any breaks Mayor Lund stated regarding the DeMello project being under the 30 percent and this one at 33 percent, even though the parking may be less, diminishing the need for some storm water storage, the footprint is larger. Is it correct this is exceeding it by a little over 3 percent? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 23 Mr. Hickok stated there is a 10 percent benefit basically for a building. This really gives you the benefit or the incentive to put the parking under the building, and then you can go the full 30 percent with the footprint of the building. With the S-2 master plan, they have some discretion. They are not held to an R-3 standard. Staff asked the developer to get things down to an R-3 standard if they could. William Burns, City Manager, asked Mr. Hickok to address Ms. Reynolds' concerns regarding the two lots that do not appear to be on any property records. Mr. Hickok said he believes it needs to be investigated further. With respect to property changing from Torrens to abstract, he would go back to the original developer on this project who probably did not understand that and came in believing that they could file a plat as one lot but understanding that they would have to have a court ruling on that piece of property before it could all become abstract. This developer determined what is Torrens or abstract. A preliminary plat has been reviewed by the County surveyor. What they are saying is you have an abstract piece here and you have to reconcile those. You do not have to change it to abstract and have the entire lot that way, but you do have to recognize that they cannot be joined and made one lot. Mr. Larson stated he has a site plan that is basically the same thing the Council has as a landscape plan, except the landscape plan will identify the species of trees. Mayor Lund asked if the plan showed every tree that will be on the site. Mr. Larson replied yes. Mayor Lund said either by saving a tree or planting a tree. Mr. Larson replied correct. Mr. Hickok stated up to a certain percentage, for every existing tree that they save, they can take away trees that they would otherwise�be required to plant. That is only a certain percentage of the overall trees that they are required to plant there. They get a certain benefit that really behooves them to keep as many of those trees as they can. They get a 2 to 1 ratio if it is over a certain size. Mr. Larson said the previous project was a"for sale" project. He is going to own this project and put his name on it, so he wants a lot of trees. He wants the people who live there to have trees. He wants it to be beautiful. Mayor Lund stated but the neighbors recognize that it takes a long time for them to benefit from those trees when you have a 35-foot tree at the midspan. Mr. Larson said that is why they are trying to save as many as they can. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 24 Ms. Reynolds stated at no time did she indicate that she felt this developer was getting something special. She was merely interested in why Mr. DeMello was required to maintain an R-3 standard, and this project does not. She said if it was originally platted as one lot, why is it necessary to do it as two, unless Mr. DeMello did not file the final plat. Mayor Lund stated that is correct. Mr. DeMello never filed it. Ms. Reynolds stated her biggest concern with S-2 is exactly the fact that there is nothing in writing that says what can go there, what it has to look like, what the perimeters are. So there are guidelines that say he would have to reflect the closest thing to it. Susan Okeson, 1423 — 64th Avenue NE, said she attended the Planning Commission meeting and the meeting at the Community Center. At the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the stipulations talked about properties on 64�' Avenue. Mr. Hickok indicated that it was a mistake. She asked if the original stipulations had been corrected. Mr. Hickok replied, yes. Ms. Okeson stated all she can say is the landscaping and maintain as much of the woods on the property as possible is very important to the neighborhood. She asked what happens if a tree dies after it is planted. Mr. Hickok said once a landscape plan is approved, it is required. It does not matter if it is within the first year or 14 years down the road. When the tree dies it needs to be replaced. If they were counting on an existing tree for their count, if the roots get damaged, etc., and the tree dies, remembering that the ratio then is 2 trees to 1, they will come back with two trees for one of those mature ones as a replacement. Mayor Lund stated regarding a living fence, there has been discussion here about no chain link fence, and that it needs to be either the maintenance free (PVC over lumber) or just a lumber privacy type fence. He heard the applicant clearly state that he is amenable to what the neighborhood would want. He thought there should be some kind of consensus. He is sure that staff would take that very kindly as to if we can get to some consensus. If one resident says I want the PVC and the other one says something else, there we are. If there is some consensus he does not see there is an issue. With respect to the living fence, he understands that to mean some type of vine or another plant growing on the fence. Mr. Hickok stated in the landscape portion of our City Code and the different chapters, it does mention using a fence or using live plant material. Mayor Lund stated one or the other but not both. Mr. Hickok replied it could be both. In the context that it was being discussed at the Planning Commission, he thought it was about planting something that gets better looking all the time. It is a much better alternative than something that needs maintenance. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9. 2009 PAGE 25 Councilmember Bolkcom said we have to be careful that we are not putting in green things that are also going to need to be replaced and trimmed. Andrea Olson, 1385 — 64�' Avenue NE, said they have gone through all these different sessions over the years. They are still very disappointed that the S-2 zoning made it through and that they are going to have this gargantuan building in their back yard. Everything else has been decided. The landscaping is the last thing they can affect. She would like to see something a little more concrete to the landscape plan to make her feel more comfortable. It is not about saying, okay, you have to do this and this. She is wondering about a solid fence and landscaping. While she thinks that a six-foot fence would provide a lot of privacy, it only provides that privacy if you are within six feet of the property so it does not do a lot for privacy of her backyard. She wondered how that is going to inhibit the growth of the plantings and such that he is required to put in. She is wondering if there is something that could be done outside of even that property line that could work as far as providing more privacy. Better green space. Mayor Lund stated the petitioner has publicly mentioned that he wants to be neighborly and amenable. He thinks the big issue, the living fence, it is best to have trees that would get higher over time that would add to the privacy above the six-foot or seven-foot fence line. It is more of a long-term thing, not something that is going to happen overnight. Kurt Olson, 1385 — 64th Avenue NE, stated he would like to see a stipulation that says, okay, if he has to replace two for one, he has a 90-inch tree spade, he brings in two 6-inch diameter 20- foot tall trees and puts them in. Not a 6 or 7 foot tree that is going to take 15 years to grow to give his yard the privacy that he has right now. His biggest concern is losing his privacy in his yard. He wants to make sure that his privacy is respected and the petitioner is absolutely held to putting in trees that are not twigs and wants the ma�cimum tree that is absolutely possible no matter what his cost. Mayor Lund asked what the landscape requirements were. Mr. Hickok stated they are a minimum 2.5 inch caliper tree at a point measured 6 inches above grade or a 6-gallon coniferous. He is not a tree.expert, but will tell them from experience that the larger the tree, the greater its vulnerability and possibility of it being lost to disease at that late transplant stage. A 2.5 inch tree is a pretty good size tree. That is the caliper around the area 6 inches above the ground. However, it is a rather tall tree and is close to 20 feet in height; and that is what Code requires, nothing less than 2.5 inches. What he heard the developer say is to the best they can, they would spade in somewhere around 6 inch. Now he would say that is about the biggest tree you would want to spade in based on the vulnerability they talked about. Mr. Olson stated but that is the petitioner's problem. He is building the building and he needs to knock down whatever, and he just cannot believe that he is going to be able to leave all that many trees over there. The plan looks great, but he just does not see it happening. It is a huge building for that neighborhood so he would like to see something set in stone holding him responsible. If he brings in 2 and they both die, then he has to bring in 4. He just keeps going until we get a bunch of trees that make it no matter what his cost is. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 26 Mr. Larson replied he is okay with bringing in as big of trees that he can. When you starting getting 6-inch or bigger, the chances of living are a lot tougher. He does not have a problem at all with replacing trees 2 to 1 or whatever. If two die, he replaces them with two. Otherwise you would have a forest. Also, the 90-inch spade requires a lot of room. This is a tandem truck. He is more than happy to put in what he can, what will get in there, but they have to reasonable, too. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were inature trees at the Coon Rapids project. Mr. Larson replied, yes. Councilmember Bolkcom asked approximately how many. Mr. Larson replied he did not know but they are pretty good-sized trees. They have not finished the landscaping. The back of that project, similar to the back of this project, was heavily wooded. They want to go in there and clean it out so people can actually enjoy it, too. They are talking about saving the big trees. Make it look like a park. Councilmember Bolkcom stated the 2 for 4 does not make sense to her either. Mayor Lund stated if a mature tree is lost later on that was used as part of the calculation for what he has to have under the landscaping ordinances, then in that case he is required to put in 2 trees for the 1 lost. Mr. Hickok suggested the people drive by the Coon Rapids development. Dan Leverenz, 1340 Mississippi, stated you have to look at the area. There are a lot of dead trees in there now and the place is a mess. If Mr. Larson is going to do anything, he is going to put nicer trees there and that is what it needs. Councilmember Barnette asked the address of the Coon Rapids project was. Mr. Larson replied, at Hanson Boulevard and Highway 10. Councilmember Varichak said that project was a renovated project from before. It was not built from ground level. Mr. Larson said it was a condo project that they converted to assisted living. One building was 100 percent complete, the other building was just framed. With the economy being the way it was, it was not going anywhere. They went back to the City and redesigned the project. Dr. Burns stated Ms. Reynolds voiced a concern about the number of project the Petitioner had. He thinks the implication is that the Petitioner is overbuilding the market. She felt a concern about the affordability of the units to Fridley units. While he thinks those are all valid concerns, are they a legitimate part of this approval process? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 27 Mr. Hickok said the City does ask for a market study. They did one and it was 200 units relative to Fridley. That recognizes that there are projects going up in Mounds View, New Brighton, and other places; but it is for Fridley based on what the conditions are right now and the surrounding development. Regarding the overbuilding, he would see that as a positive thing. In this market place, if they have a lot of projects going and are successful with them, that says a lot about the developer. Mayor Lund stated the discussion was very good and everyone brought up very good concerns and questions and thinks they were answered adequately or fairly. He knows there is the diminished privacy issue. It will take time to grow trees and there is no way around it. He does think there is a need for this and it is supported by the independent study. This may diminish another project very similar to this. He does disagree that without S-2 those properties could never be built because of the different zonings. He thinks that we can always legislate and it changes. He does think that a property owner should have some rights to develop his property(ies). They are zoned differently. He thinks this kind of cleans it up. It is a big building. With respect to the ponding issue, the underground tank is a significant improvement. It creates more green space. He thinks this is a better project all around. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it is the petitioner's and the property owner's responsibility to take care of the storm water. There was some mention related to Mr. Haukaas mentioning this before, but she also heard that there is not a stricter watershed in the metro area than the Rice Creek Watershed District. It is definitely a difference in the neighborhood. This is a different petitioner from the one before who had never done any of these projects. This gentleman wants to be a good neighbor, and we need to hold him to that and we will do that with the landscaping and the 22 stipulations. The petitioner cannot change this without coming back to Council. This will keep people in our community. It is going to be a positive thing for our community and well-run. MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to approve Preliminary Plat Request, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, subject to the following 22 stipulations: 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 28 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for t� purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to approve Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living with the following 22 stipulations: 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. �. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 29 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and sha11 provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot). 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for t� purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OLD 2. Resolution �,�lpproving Agreement with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportati� for Replacement of the Existing Traffc Control Signal at Trunk Highway 65 an��Moore Lake Drive (Ward 2) (Tabled January 5, 2009). _ CI"IYOF FR[DLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (763) 571-3450 • FAX (763) 571-1287 • TTD/TTY (763) 572-3534 CITY COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN NOTICE February 12, 2009 Select Senior Living Joel Larson 12415-55'h Street Lake Eimo MN 55042 Dear Mr. Larson: On Monday, February 9, 2009, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Preliminary Plat, PS #09-01, to replat 5 lots, to allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units; legal descriptions are on file and available at Fridley Municipal Center, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central Avenue NE. Approval of this Preliminary Plat is contingent upon the following stipulations: 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet a118uilding code, Fire code, and ADA requirem.ents. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shal! identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. Select Senior Living Preliminary Plat 8� Master Plan Amendment Page 2 Februarv 12. 2009 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3, 000.00 ($1, 500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petifioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or fandscaping shall be approved by City siaff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvemenfs necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilifies, etc., will be preparecl by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. The Council action described above is only to approve the preliminarv plat. You must have an approved final plat prior to recordinq at Anoka Countv. When the final plat has been prepared by your surveyor, a copy of the plat should be sent to the Anoka County's Surveyor's office for review. Once that review is completed, please submit three full size copies of the final plat to the Community Development Department. The Community Development staff will contact you as to which council meeting the item will be scheduled for consideration (it will be placed under the "consent agenda"). After Council action on the final plat, the mylars of the plat must be submitted to the City for signature by the Mayor and City Clerk. Once signed, the plat is ready for recording at Anoka County. The final plat must be submitted for action within six months of approval of the preliminary plat. Also, On Monday, February 9, 2009, the Fridley City Council officially approved your request for a Master Plan Amendment MP #09-01, to allow for a master plan amendment from the original master plan that was approved when these properties were rezoned in 2005, both the replat and the master plan amendment will allow for the construction of a Senior Living Project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, legal descriptions are on file and available at Fridley Municipal Center, generally located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, 6461, 6441, & 6421 Central Avenue NE. Approval of this Master Plan Amendment is contingent upon the following stipulations: 9. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, fitled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to constructron. Select Senior Living Preliminary Plat & Master Plan Amendment Page 3 Februarv 12, 2009 4. The petitioner shal! meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the righf- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The pefitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater managemenf maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 91. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permifs. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedicafion Fee of $3, 000.00 ($1, 500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the�City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both /ofs. 19. Screening through fhe use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a masfer plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by fhe development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approvaL Select Senior Living Preliminary Plat & Master Plan Amendment Page 4 Februarv 12. 2009 If you have any questions regarding the above action, please call me at 763-572-3590. Sincerely � Scot ckok Com unity Development Director SH/jb cc: Daniel Levernz, 1340 Mississippi Street NE, Fridley, 55432 1314 Mississippi Street LLC, 40896 Graystone Avenue, North Branch, 55056, Kenneth Frank & Sharon Demello, 2823 Teledo Avenue, St. Louis Park, 55416 Richard Carlson, 7691 Central Avenue NE, Frid�ey 55432 Mark Mattison, 643 Summit Avenue, St. Paul 55105 Plat File Master Plan Amendment File Address File Assessing Dept. � GIS Dept. Special Assessing-Greg Mary Fitz Stacy Stromberg Ray Statler i iiiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiii iiii Record ID 2185344 2��5969.011 ABSTRACT/TORRENS DOCUMENT .LN�Wn�O� SN32i2�01/1��i1S9�d L00 � �bZ�L6�b ��ES8 �Z al pao�a�{ ��I ��I �� I��I �� I�� I�� I�� II��I � STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ANOKA CITY OF FRIDLEY In the Matter of: A Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01 Owner: See list below of separate owners for each address CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT The above entitled matter came before the City Council of the City of Fridley and was heard on the 9th day of February, 2009, on a petition for a master plan amendment pursuant to the City of Fridley's Zoning Code, for the following described property: To allow for the construction of a senior living project, which will consist of independent living units, memory care units, and assisted living units, generally located at and legally described as the following: • 1314 Mississippi Street — owner - 1314 Mississippi Street LLC Legal description — Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. • 1340 Mississippi Street — owner — Daniel Levernz Legal description — Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. • 6421 Central Avenue — owner — Mark Mattison Legal description — Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. • 6441 Central Avenue — owner — Richard Calson Legal description — Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. • 6461 Central Avenue — owner — Frank DeMello and Sharon DeMello Legal description — Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. IT IS ORDERED that a master plan amendment be granted as upon the following conditions or reasons: Approval with 22 stipulations. See City council meeting minutes of February 9, 2009. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ANOKA CLERK CITY OF FRIDLEY OFFICE OF THE CITY I, Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk for the City of Fridley, with and in for said City of Fridley, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy and Order granting a wetland replacement plan with the original record thereof preserved in my office, and have found the same to be a correct and true transcript of the whole thereof. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand at the City of Fridley, Minnesota, in the County of Anoka on the �_ day of �� , 2009. DRAFTED BY: City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Debra A. Skoge , City erk _ (SEAL) �'RIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 12 16. The petitioner will provide he City verification that Clear Channel's easement shown on 7/12/07 survey does not rohibit parking or access 17. This Special Use Pe 't will be brought back to the Fridley City Council for review six months after issuanc to ensure continued compliance, and City staff shall be given the opportunity to revi any new leases before new tenants lease available space. Seconded by Councilm ber Barnette. UPON A VOICE�OTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRI UNANIMOUSLY. 12. Prelimina Plat Request, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, to Replat 5 Lots to Allow fo the Construction of a Senior Living Project, which will Consist of Indepe ent Living Units, Memory Care Units, and Assisted Living Units, Gener ly Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 and 6421 Centr 1 Avenue N.E. (Ward 2). 13. Master Plan Amendment, MP #0901, by Select Senior Living, to Allow for the Construction of a Senior Living Project, which will Consist of Independent Living Units, Memory Care Units, and Assisted Living Units, Generally Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 and 6421 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 2). Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated he would like to present Items 12 and 13 together. Petitioner is requesting a plat to create two new parcels to construct a senior housing building. A master plan amendment was also requested. When any property is rezoned to S-2, it is required it be accompanied by a site plan that will ultimately be the master plan for the site. Since the proposed project is different than what was originally approved with the rezoiung of this property, a master plan amendment is now required. The petitioner is proposing to construct a three-story, 141-unit building with 60 independent living units, 27 memory care units, and 64 assisted living units. All the units will be between 470 and 1,003 square feet. They axe "for rent" units, not "for sale" units. The developer will include 84 underground heated garage parking stalls and 32 surface parking stalls as well. The building will have a hipped roof and will be brick veneer. It will have two colors of lap siding on the exterior, and some units will have balconies. The architecture is very attractive. Mr. Iiickok stated by designing the building to be located as close to what the City Code would allow if this was an R-3 site to the west property line, the petitioner is proposing to keep as many of the existing mature trees as possible. Mr. Hickok stated the Petitioner plans to insta.11 a 6-foot privacy fence along the south and east sides of the property. The site will be landscaped with new deciduous, coniferous, and ornamental trees along with shrubs, perennials, and annual plantings to provide a welcoming entrance to the development. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9 2009 PAGE 13 1VIr. Hickok stated Petitioner is seeking to replat five lots to create two lots. The reason is that some of the properiy is torrens and some is abstract. Anoka County does not allow the combination of these different types of land without first getting Regist�^ation of Land Titles by Dist��ict Court Order, which can be a very lengthy process. Instead the developer is choosing to create 21ots, which will be required to be combined to a11ow for the development to occur. Mr. Hickok stated rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District allows for some degree of flexibility when designing a redevelopment project; however, City staff has asked the Petitioner to design their project to try and meet the rezoning classif cations most similar to its intended use which would be R-3, Multi-Family Residential. The R-3, Multi-Family, code states the average lot area required per dwelling is 2,500 square feet for the units on the first three stories with an additional 950 square feet per unit from the fourth through sixth stories. The S-2 district classification will allow the proposed land-to-uiut ratio without a variance. Mr. Hickok stated there will be a stipulation with the recommendation on this project that requires that the building continue to be used with the resident population ratios as proposed. If not, they will need to purchase additional land, and a master plan amendment would be required prior to resident ratio modification. The reason for that is if they should reduce the number of memory care or assisted living and increase the amount of independent living units, that would mean more cars and we would ask them to go with more of an independent living ratio instead of this lower number of stalls allowed because of it being memory care and assisted living. Mr. Hickok stated the proposed project is in compliance with lot coverage, parking, height, and all setback requirements except the rear yard setback. So, even though it is an S-2, it is designed really like an R-3 project. The R-3 code does require a 25-foot rear yard setback, a.ud the proposed building is setback at 23 feet 2 inches. The rear yard in this case is the one that is furthest from Mississippi. It is not the one that is to the east but the one to the south that backs up to the properties. There are single-family residential homes on 64�' Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated Anoka County is requiring that additional right-of-way be dedicated along both Old Central and Mississippi Street. As a result, the rear yard falls short of ineeting the 25- foot requirement by 2 feet 10 inches. Flexibility though is allowed in the S-2 District, and the diminished setback can be recognized under the City's master plan amendment approval and no variance would be required. They have been very good about keeping this an R-3 development basically with the exception of that setback. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner is also requesting a master plan amendment to the original inaster plan approved as part of the 2005 rezoning for this site. The original rezoning and master plan were approved to allow the construction of a mixed-use building with 10,492 square feet of retail on the lower level and then a 70-unit owner occupied condominium project above. Despite the fact that the preliminary plat rezoning and the master plan were all approved for this site, the project never came to fruition because the final plat was never submitted for approval. If the master plan amendment being discussed is approved by the City Council, it should be noted that any major modifications to this site plan would again require that it come back before the City Council for review and approval. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 14 Mr. Hickok stated the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000. The rezoning was approved for the DeMello project because it was within the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed senior project meets several of the objectives residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. One of the goals identified through those meetings and a telephone survey was to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live." Ways to accomplish that goal are to provide more housing diversity and to make Fridley a place where 1�lie aged can stay. Only about 8 percent of Fridley's housing is of the townhome or condominitun structure type, yet 23 percent of Fridley's residents are over 55 or were in 2000. To accommodate Fridley's senior citizens' desires to live in a maintenance-free housing situation, more types of senior housing need to be constructed. The Comprehensive Plan does show the axea of Old Central between Mississippi and Rice Creek Road as an area for redevelopinent. The Economic and Redevelopment Plan in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan states that the City should continue to pursue a variety of housing types iri this area. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner hired Maxfield Research to complete a Preliminaxy Demand Estimate for Senior Housing in Fridley; and the analysis takes into. account the demand for independent living, assisted living, and memory care. They have calculated demographics, economics, and other competitive factors that would impact the current demand in the marketplace. They feel very comfortable with the proj ect that they have. The market area in which M�field analyzed also included Columbia Heights, Spring Lake Park, and Hilltop. The analysis indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 200 units of this nature. Mr. Hickok stated the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005 the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed project carried 8,900 vehicles per day. At this traffic level, it is carrying almost the exact amount of traffic the roadway was designed and constructed to carry and to function at a level of Service D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that Old Central will be carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2030. At 10,000 vehicles per day, Old Central will be at its capacity. As a result, Anoka County is requiring additional right- of-way with this plat to ensure that the additional land needed is available to eventually expand the roadway. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner had Foltz, Freeman, Erickson, Inc., perform a traffic analysis on the proposed use, using methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7rh Edition (ITE) which is the industry standard. They used the assisted living land use category in the ITE manual to deternune that the proposed senior project would generate a total of 433 trips per day if all 158 beds within the complex were occupied. Independent living land use would generate a total of 340 trips per day if all 158 beds were occupied. The consultants used the number for the Assisted Living use to provide the worst-case scenario for tra�c at this facility because it generates more traffic than an Independent Living land use. This can be attributed to the fact that an assisted living facility requires the need for more employees. Also, it should be noted that according to the ITE manual, studies have shown that less than 5 percent of the residents in an assisted living facility own vehicles. If they do, they rarely drive them. Employees, visitors, and delivery trucks make most of the trips to this facility. A delivery vehicle coining and going is "two trips." The ITE manual also points out that the peak hour generator typically does not coincide with the "peak hour" of the adjacent street traffic for an FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 15 assisted living facility. This is primarily related to the shifts of employees beginning at 7:00 a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 11:00 p.m. The typical peak hours on most roadways are between 6:00 to 7:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. according to traffic analysis standards. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner hired Graham Environmental Services Inc. (GES) to complete a Wetland Evaluation Report for this project and, based on their findings, no wetlands exist on this site. The petitioner has submitted the proposed project to the Rice Creek Watershed for the riecessary approvals and that review is underway. Once the Rice Creek Watershed folks have reviewed the plan and approved, the City's Engineering staff will further review this project. Mr. Hickok said Petitioner has stated that storm water management for this site will be handled in an underground drainage system. The cost of those underground drainage systems are very high, but it allows them to put it underground and keep more landscape on the surface and keep more open space. By having this alternate design they can work around the trees on the site. Mr. Hickok stated Petitioner held a neighborhood meeting on January 12, and about 20 to 25 people attended. Specific information about that meeting would be best provided by the petitioner. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for these items on January 21. After receiving public comment and having a short discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval with twenty-two stipulations. Staff recommends concurrence with the Platuzing Commission's recommenda.tion. Commissioner Varichak asked if Petitioner had any problems with the 22 stipulations. Mr. Larson replied, no. Commissioner Varichak asked whether he has the proper financing for doing this project. Mr. Larson said he had partners. He does not have financing, but feels very comfortable that they will be able to get the financing. In today's economy, the banking industry changes daily, so it is always a challenge. They axe closing on a site in Mounds View the last week of February which is a$12 million site, and their next one will be this one. Councilmember Saetke asked for an explanation on the difference between Torrens and abstract properties. Mr. Hickok said abstract property is probably the most common property. Torrens property goes back to a formal but court-ordered way of describing land. Because it comes by virtue of court order; it takes actually a court order to change that back. There is a formal process and by order of the court then they could have that description changed and an abstract designation put on the property. We experienced that on the southwest quadrant. We went through a process whereby the developer had some abstract and torrens property. In that case they felt inore comfortable going and asking the court to change it. We have other situations out there where there is development and there is a mixed of torrens and abstract where the County is okay with it being a tax parcel but they will not blend the lot lines. They need to keep that distinct unless the court otherwise orders. He asked Attorney Knaak if he had anything to add. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 16 Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said Minnesota has two different systems for recording land. One is the normal abstract systems where it is described in metes and bounds, or if you have a plat that has been platted you can just sell it based on those descriptions. Minnesota also has a system called the "torrens" system where you basically start a legal proceeding. The purpose is to make your title good through a declaration of the court. You then get a Torrens Certificate or an Owner's Certificate. It is considered a far more secure way of owning property. To do anything, whether you put a mortgage on it or anything like that, you actually have to have it specifically recorded on the certificate and there is a formal process you follow. The two systems are parallel. A torrens property can be right next to an abstract parcel. The hope was that the whole state would eventually go torrens and it has not happened. Councilmember Saefke said he noticed in the Planning Commission that Petitioner intends to save as many mature trees as possible. He asked what percentage of trees could be saved. He said he also noticed Mr. Larson has a 90 square foot tree spade. Mr. Larson replied he is one of the few developers who actually likes trees. They do have a tree spade. Their intentions are to use that as much as they can. On the landscape plan they have indicated a lot of trees on the backside. Depending on what kind of tree it is and how it looks, tliey may take it down. Their intention is to put up some more trees to buffer the side yard. Councilmember Saefke sta.ted he also noticed Mr. Larson had some discussion with one of the neighbors about fencing, and he seemed very amenable to working with the neighbors on the kind of fencing that they want. One proposal is a six-foot high wooden fence. Mr. Larson stated at the neighborhood meeting he did talk to a gentleman who he thinks has the adj acent property on the backside. He asked him what type of fence he wanted. At that point he did not have one. If he wants the PVC-type fence that is maintenance free, they would be happy to do or even if he wants a cedar fence. They are very open to that and can coordinate that through staff. They want to be good neighbors. On the design of the building, they also kept the balconies off the back of the building so they are not looking down on top of the neighbors in their backyards. The balconies are on the front and on the Mississippi Street side. Councilmember Saefke asked Mr. Larson if this building is going to be comparable to the Norwood Square building. Mr. Hickok replied, comparable in terms of age-restricted, that it has a hip roof on it and it has some brick on it. He said he though it was more comparable to the Noah's Ark building and the Banfill building. Councilmember Saefke asked whether the front of the building will be facing Old Central. Mr. Larson replied, correct. Councilmember Saefke asked if that is where the entrance would be. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9 2009 PAGE 17 Mr. Larson replied, correct. Councilmember Saefke asked if there would be a right turn lane into the development. Mr. Hickok replied there is no plan because of the volume of traffic for one, to put a turn lane into their front drive. One of the things that did evolve through their discussions with the County was that they limited access to Old Central to one access point. That is taken at the point back where the DeMello project had its access point with the idea that once development happens across the street, they will be looking across at access points, and it would line up the way we would want it to. If the roadway is widened, there may be a different design. Councilmember Saefke stated there has been some criticism about the size of the units. He said his house is only 938 square feet and two kids and two adults have lived there for almost 40 years just fine. A facility that is very necessary. He does believe that our community is getting older and there is a need for this type of housing. Some of the concerns of the neighbors have been taken care of and he thinks Mr. Larson is very willing to work with them. He thinks it is good project. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were any concerns related to the Rice Creek Watershed District. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, said they looked at the grading plan which does not seem to be a problem. He does not know the particulars on the underground storage systein. Rice Creek has a fairly elaborate set of rules and instructions that professionals will follow in a design for a building like this. Councilmember Bolkcom said but we do not see it at this point because they have only looked at the grading. They do not really look at any of the other issues until after the Rice Creek Watershed District gives their approvaL Mr. Kosluchar agreed. Councilmember Bolkcom said she wanted to go on record that she thinks they either need to have the maintenance free fence or a wooden fence. She does not think a chain link provides enough privacy. Mr. Larson said their intention is to do either wood or maintenance free. Not a chain link. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about variances. Mr. Hickok stated a 7-foot fence is allowed in the residential district and is very typical. Mr. Larson stated he is okay with a 7-foot fence if that is what the neighbors and the City want. Councilmember Bolkcom asked, as far as variances, if this was not an S-2, the only variance they are looking at is 2 feet 10 inches. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9. 2009 PAGE 18 Mr. Hickok replied, yes. If we were talking about "for sale" coildominiuins, we would be talking about 2,500 square feet of land per unit. But we are not. We are talking about a.n assisted living memory care facility where the units are small and that, too, is recognized through the S-2. It is not that pure formula of one unit per 2,500 square feet that you would find if this were "for sale" condominiums or something else. Councilmember Bolkcom asked but it is not decreasing in any way the green space or any of our requirements. The only real variance here is because of it being an S-2. They are not requesting to have any less green space. Mr. Hickok said we made a text amendment to the City Code, to recognize that certain types of senior living would have less demand for parking. There is no commercial included like the previous project, so the parking requirements are reduced. There will be a lot more green space on this site. Mr. Larson stated with respect to the 2 feet, it is just a stairway that is coming out of the building that is encroaching. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the traffic generated at the site. Mr. Hickok replied the ITE Manual for owner-occupied units has a number of 7 trips per day if he is not mistaken and, at 7 trips per day, they would be looking at over 900 trips for this development. In the presentation, he believed they said the numbers were 480 or 344, depending on whether they used all independent living or a mix with memory care. The trips generally are from sta.ff, deliveries and visiting family members, not from the residents. Councilmember Bolkcom stated from her experience with assisted living and memory care, there are staff there but it not an incredible increase of staff. Mr. Larson replied, you will see 1 per 15. Staff park inside and underneath. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the shifts--staff working between 7 and 3 and 11 o'clock at night. She said she thought the peak morning hours would be 7 to 8 o'clock. She asked if there would be any problems. Mr. Hickok stated the distinction is if there are any residents with cars there who drive, they are not going out at those peak hours. Councilmember Bolkcom stated they are talking about probably half the traffic than the previous development. Mr. Hickok said he thinks maybe more like an eighth, because the previous project was for an owner-occupied unit for what they call "active adults" starting at age 55. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009_ PAGE 19 Mr. Larson stated their average age is 80 years old. They are there because they need to be there. Councilmember Bolkcom stated staff said Stipulation No. 20 says if there was a major modification in the plan that they would have to come back before Council. Mr. Hickok said they have much more protection with the S-2 because you do not make a modification to the footprint of the building without coming back before Council. If you are going to change the master plan it is going to come back to the Council. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she went on-line and looked at other facilities with assisted living and memory care. She looked at the sizes because someone made the comment that these were small. They are i1ot. They are about the same size you would see at other places. Our community needs this. Rental property does not concern her. She knows there was also some question about Section 8, and this is not something that would be in this facility other than the Anoka County vouchers. It is a wonderful opportuxiity for people in our own community. She understands the petitioner is going to be working with the neighborhood. Keeping the big trees is huge. Also, there is the underground water storage and they do not have to deal with a ponding issue. It looks like a quality project. Councilmember Sarnette said if the plan ever needs to be modified or anything, it has to come back before the City, correct? Mr. Larson replied, correct. Councilmember Barnette asked Mr. Larson, using his facility in Coon Rapids, could he give them a rough percentage of couples vs. singles residing there. Mr. Larson said he believes they have two couples in the building. It is just opening now. By the end of February they should have about 40 residents in it out of the 90-unit building. Councilmember Barnette asked if there is an association agreement and if they have a say in how the association is run. Mr. Larson said there is no. However, they do have monthly meetings with their residents and get their input on food and activities. They have a full-time activities director. They have full- time nursing and full-time chefs. There is a lot of common space, so when people start talking about room sizes, they are basically sleeping in their rooms. They have the ability to have a one- bedroom plus den if they can afford it, or they can have an efficiency if that fits their budget. Councilmember Barnette asked about the memory units. He asked if the County would get involved if there was a need for placement of a person under 55 in a memory unit and if they would be required by law to provide a unit. Mr. Larson replied, if a doctor or nurse assessment says there is a 45-year old person who needs to have memory care, they will look at that, although they are not advertising for that. There FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE, 20 may be laws about that, and tliey do have to obey thein. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is some question about actually increasing the kitchen to have congregate dining and that other seniors could go there and eat. She asked if it would generate an additional 340 trips if all 158 beds were occupied. Mr. Larson stated budgets are getting tightened up, and Meals on Wheels and all the other programs are starting to disappear. They would like to be able to market to some of those people who are 72, 73, or 74 years old who have a friend here and want to come and have lunch with their friend. They are designing and making the dining hall a little bit bigger to invite tliose people to come and have dinner or lunch. It would be surprising if they had 20 people a day extra stop in and have lunch. They are going to open it up to seniors so they can get a feel for the building. Councilmember Bolkcom said that was her only concern. She knows that at the Fridley Community Center a fair amount of seniors from other communities come to the lunches. She was wondering about the increased traffic, but he is saying it would be big enough to accommodate no more than about 20 to 25 people. Mr. Larson replied, somewhere in that range. He does not know the exact nuxnber but they are making it a little bit bigger. There is also a little cafe out front that seats 10 to 12 people so that could be another area a group could sit and visit and have lunch together at a cheap price--$3, $4, or $5 a meal. It is just something they want to offer seniors. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if tlie trips would generate additional traffic. Mr. Hickok said those are blended into the visitation trips already. Councilmember BoIkcom said there was a public hearing on this matter before the Plaiuuilg Commission. Mr. Hickok said the two items before them require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Mayor Lund said he would like to give the people present in the audience an opportunity to give them new information. They have the minutes from the Planning Commission. There was also a neighborhood meeting held as well. Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton, stated one of the things she is wondering about is the replat to two lots. In 2005, Mr. DeMello sought to replat the multiple lots to one lot. This was granted by Council. Now the developer is seeking to make two lots because of land recording issues. Her research took her to the Anoka County property tax records where it showed the property on Mississippi is abstract and the other one was changed to abstract on Februaxy 3 and was previously Torrens to January 30, 2009. With respect to the properties on Old Central, it shows one changed to abstract on February 3, 2009, that was previously Torrens through January 30, 2009. Strangely enough, 6441 and 6461 did not appear on any property records at the County or FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 21 at the City self zoning. She asked how much of the original plan remains in tact. Does the County still recommend the 64'� Avenue access. There was really no discussion about what the landscaping will be. There was no discussion regarding the alley easement that people in the neighborhood had a concern with previously. She said the storm water issues seem to have disappeared. In 2005 there was concern by Jon Haukaas that there was a problem there. Nailcy Jorgensen said there was a problem there. A document from the Rice Creek Watershed said there was really no way to tell what the impact would be until the proj ect was built. She is not sure how much of a difference putting the water underground is going to make. They did find there was a problem with the underground parking and that is why they built it at grade and bermed it. In 2005 and in Planning Commission meetings, Stacy Stromberg said that R-3 was the closest. The DeMello project pretty much had to meet those R-3 requirements, and she believes our zoning code language in 2005 said it needs to meet the closest. Now the Planning staff is saying that the S-2 has some special leeway. Our City Code S-2 does absolutely nothing to describe what the lot lines are and what the usages are. It refers you back to City Code for an "S" District which tells you nothing. Ms. Reynolds stated this proposed project is 142,847 square feet with a proposed footprint of 47,508 square feet, giving it a 33.26 percent lot coverage. In an R-3 it would be a max of 30 even with underground parking. The DeMello project was 26.67 percent, and that was one of the 11 reasons given for denying that project was the amount of lot coverage. The R-3 requirement is what was used on the old one, and she does not understand how a master plan amendment changes what code requirement they have. � Ms. Reynolds stated Ms. Stromberg noted that the proposal meets several of the goals in the Comprehensive Plan. However, the one thing she failed to mention is that the citizen survey identified single-level senior housing as the desire of 67 percent of those polled. Assisted living and those things came in there, too. She went back and looked at the paperwork froin the DeMello project. Some of the concerns are still very valid. One of those was the height of the proposed structure on the parcel in the development would significantly block sunlight and impede the view of adjoining residential development more than what they currently enjoy. All of a sudden a different developer, and the size of the building becomes okay. She still has a concern using that piece of property for such a huge building. She wonders what the impact is and what the possibilities will be for developing the other side of the street. She thinks there are some issues with the zoning. Ms. Reynolds stated is also concerned with the number of projects the Petitioner has going on. They have projects in Coon Rapids, Mounds View, and it is her understanding there is one in Stillwater. She is also concerned about the cost. Mr. Hickok said this developer is not getting benefits the other developer did not. The height of the building, for example, is precisely the same as the DeMello Project. Mayor Lund asked what the mid-roof height was. Mr. Hickok replied, 35 feet at mid span. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 22 Mr. Hickok stated the point in coming back for a master plan amendment is that the original plan did not stay in tact. There is a new footprint, and there is a new project here. Also, they may recall along the right-of-way side of the road, in the northwest corner of the site, the DeMello Project had a deficiency that had to be recognized by the S-2 District. This 2-foot 10- inch variance is much less than the deficiency that revealed itself through the DeMello Project. Mr. Hickok stated regarding an easement that land locks the land, that does go back to a time when there was a discussion about a property on 64th that has a right-of-way that runs along the east side of that property and then dead-ends at their back property line. There was some discussion during the DeMello project about access. This project does not go down to 64�' Avenue, so it cannot even be considered here. With respect to the alley behind the building, the developer has not sought to do anything different other than develop the land they own here. An alley has not been an issue. Mr. Hickok said storm water issues go to the Rice Creek Watershed District and only after they have been thoroughly reviewed do they go to our engineers. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was less of an issue because of the underground parking. Mr. Hickok stated it is less of an issue. Anytime you limit the hard surface on a site, you are eliminating some of the runof£ With respect to the landscaping and what will be required, there was no relaxation of the landscaping requirements for this developer. There is a relationship between the size of the building and/or the size of the lot and the nuxnber of trees that are planted. That is what is used by staff to calculate whether the project meets the requirements or not. Mr. Hickok said the S-2 District is predicated on the master plan. Council has the ability to approve a project based on its master plan. We ask the developer to match the R-3 as close as they can. Staff tries to alleviate any problems by asking the developer to do this. It is not a requirement or law. We are doing that to help make the project blend in the area and make it as close to the R-3 District as possible. It is based on a master plan, and Council, in its discretion, can approve a plan that is very, very different than the R-3. With respect to lot coverage, there is some benefit to parking underneath the building, and it is an incentive for developers because they can do a bigger footprint if they put the parking underneath the building. It does limit the surface parking outside and goes a long way to m�imizing tlie green space and the overall aesthetics of the development. Mr. Hickok stated regarding blocking access to light, in the R-1 District, they can go that high. Someone can build a house that is multi-stories high and have the same issue. If . you saw a shadow study on this site, the argument about the shadow would go away pretty quick. Mr. Hickok said this developer is not being given any breaks. Mayor Lund stated regarding the DeMello project being under the 30 percent and this one at 33 percent, even tl�ough the parking may be less, diminishing the need for some storm water storage, the footprint is larger. Is it correct this is exceeding it by a little over 3 percent? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 23 Mr. Hickok stated there is a 10 percent benefit basically for a building. This really gives you the benefit or the incentive to put the parking under the building, and then you ca.�l go the full 30 percent with the footprint of the building. With the S-2 master plan, they have some discretion. They are not held to an R-3 standard. Staff asked the developer to get things down to an R-3 standard if they could. William Burns, City Manager, asked Mr. Hickok to address Ms. Reynolds' concerns regarding the two lots that do not appear to be on any property records. Mr. Hickok said he believes it needs to be investigated further. With respect to property changing from Torrens to abstract, he would go back to the original developer on this project who probably did not understand that and came in believing that they could file a plat as one lot but understanding that they would have to have a court ruling on that piece of property before it could all become abstract. This developer determined what is Torrens or abstract. A preliminary plat has been reviewed by the County surveyor. What they are saying is you have an abstract piece here and you have to reconcile those. You do not have to change it to abstract and have the entire lot that way, but you do have to recognize that they cannot be joined and made one lot. Mr. Larson stated he has a site plan that is basically the same thing the Council has as a landscape plan, except the landscape plan will identify the species of trees. Mayor Lund asked if the plan showed every tree that will be on the site. Mr. Larson replied yes. Mayor Lund said either by saving a tree or planting a tree. Mr. Larson replied correct. Mr. Hickok stated up to a certain percentage, for every existing tree that they save, they can take away trees that they would otherwise be required to plant. That is only a certain percentage of the overall trees that they are required to plant there. They get a certain benefit that really behooves them to keep as many of those trees as they can. They get a 2 to 1 ratio if it is over a certain size. Mr. Larson said the previous project was a"for sale" project. He is going to own this project and put his name on it, so he wants a lot of trees. He wants the people who live there to have trees. He wants it to be beautiful. Mayor Lund stated but the neighbors recognize that it takes a long time for them to benefit from those trees when you have a 35-foot tree at the midspan. Mr. Larson said that is why they are trying to save as many as they can. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 24 Ms. Reynolds stated at no time did she indicate that she felt this developer was getting something special. She was merely interested in why Mr. DeMello was required to maintain an R-3 standard, and this project does not. She said if it was originally platted as one lot, why is it necessary to do it as two, unless Mr. DeMello did not file the final plat. Mayor Lund stated that is correct. Mr. DeMello never filed it. Ms. Reynolds stated her biggest concern with S-2 is exactly the fact that there is nothing in writing that says what can go there, what it has to look like, what the perimeters are. So there are guidelines that say he would have to reflect the closest thing to it. Susan Okeson, 1423 — 64�' Avenue NE, said she attended the Planning Commission meeting and the meeting at the Community Center. At the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the stipulations ta.lked about properties on 64�' Avenue. Mr. Hickok indicated that it was a mistake. She asked if the original stipulations had been corrected. Mr. Hickok replied, yes. Ms. Okeson stated a11 she can say is the landscaping and maintain as much of the woods on the property as possible is very important to the neighborhood. She asked what happens if a tree dies after it is planted. Mr. Hickok said once a landscape plan is approved, it is required. It does not matter if it is within the first year or 14 years down the road. When the tree dies it needs to be replaced. If they were counting on an existing tree for their count, if the roots get damaged, etc., and tlie tree dies, remembering that the ratio then is 2 trees to 1, they will come back with two trees for one of those mature ones as a replacement. Mayor Lund stated regarding a living fence, there has been discussion here about no chain link fence, and that it needs to be either the maintenance free (PVC over lumber) or just a lumber privacy type fence. He heard the applicant clearly state that he is amenable to what the neighborhood would want. He thought there should be some kind of consensus. He is sure that staff would take that very kindly as to if we can get to some consensus. If one resident says I want the PVC and the other one says something else, there we aze. If there is some consensus he does not see there is an issue. With respect to the living fence, he understands that to mean some type of vine or another plant growing on the fence. Mr. Hickok stated in the landscape portion of our City Code and the different chapters, it does mention using a fence or using live plant material. Mayor Lund stated one or the other but not both. Mr. Hickok replied it could be both. In the context that it was being discussed at the Planning Commission, he thought it was about planting something that gets better looking all the time. It is a much better alternative than something that needs maintenance. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 25 Councilmember Bolkcom said we have to be careful that we are not putting in green things that are also going to need to be replaced and trimmed. Andrea Olson, 1385 — 64�' Avenue NE, said they have gone through all these different sessions over the years. They are still very disappointed that the S-2 zoning made it through and that they are going to have this gargantuan building in their back yard. Everything else has been decided. The landscaping is the last thing they can affect. She would like to see something a little more concrete to the landscape plan to make her feel more comfortable. It is not about saying, okay, you have to do this and this. She is wondering about a solid fence aild landscaping. While she thinks that a six-foot fence would provide a lot of privacy, it only provides that privacy if you are within six feet of the property so it does not do a lot for privacy of her backyard. She wondered how that is going to inhibit the growth of the plantings and such that he is required to put in. She is wondering if there is something that could be done outside of even that property line that could work as far as providing more privacy. Better green space. Mayor Lund stated the petitioner has publicly mentioned that he wants to be neighborly and amenable. He thinks the big issue, the living fence, it is best to have trees that would get higher over time that would add to the privacy above the six-foot or seven-foot fence line. It is more of a long-term thing, not something that is going to happen overnight. Kurt Olson, 1385 — 64th Avenue NE, stated he would like to see a stipulation that says, okay, if he has to replace two for one, he has a 90-inch tree spade, he brings in two 6-inch diameter 20- foot tall trees and puts them in. Not a 6 or 7 foot tree that is going to take 15 years to grow to give his yard the privacy that he has right now. His biggest concern is losing his privacy in his yard. He wants to make sure that his privacy is respected and the petitioner is absolutely held to putting in trees that are not twigs and wants the maximum tree that is absolutely possible no matter what his cost. Mayor Lund asked what the landscape requirements were. Mr. Hickok stated they are a minimum 2.5 inch caliper tree at a point measured 6 inches above grade or a 6-gallon coniferous. He is not a tree expert, but will tell them from experience that the larger the tree, the greater its vulnerability and possibility of it being lost to disease at that late transplant stage. A 2.5 inch tree is a pretty good size tree. Tliat is the caliper around the area 6 inches above the ground. However, it is a rather tall tree and is close to 20 feet in height; and that is what Code requires, nothing less than 2.5 inches. What he heard the developer say is to the best they can, they would spade in somewhere around 6 inch. Now he would say that is about the biggest tree you would want to spade in based on the vulnerability they talked about. Mr. Olson stated but that is the petitioner's problem. He is building the building and he needs to knock down whatever, and he just cannot believe that he is going to be able to leave all that many trees over there. The plan looks great, but he just does not see it happening. It is a huge building for that neighborhood so he would like to see something set in stone holding him responsible. If he brings in 2 and they both die, then he has to bring in 4. He just keeps going until we get a bunch of trees that make it no matter what his cost is. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 26 Mr. Larson replied he is okay with bringing in as big of trees that he can. When you starting getting 6-inch or bigger, the chances of living are a lot tougher. He does not have a problem at all with replacing trees 2 to 1 or whatever. If two die, he replaces them with two. Otherwise you would have a forest. Also, the 90-inch spade requires a lot of room. This is a tandem truck. He is more than happy to put in what he can, what will get in there, but they have to reasonable, too. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were inature trees at the Coon Rapids project. Mr. Larson replied, yes. Councilmember Bolkcom asked approximately how many. Mr. Larson replied he did not know but they are pretty good-sized trees. They have not finished the landscaping. The back of that project, similar to the back of this project, was heavily wooded. They want to go in there and clean it out so people can actually enjoy it, too. They are talking about saving the big trees. Make it look like a park. Councilmember Bolkcom stated the 2 for 4 does not make sense to her either. Mayor Lund sta.ted if a mature tree is lost later on that was used as part of the calculation for what he has to have under the landscaping ordinances, then in that case he is required to put in 2 trees for the 1 lost. Mr. Hickok suggested the people drive by the Coon Rapids development. Dan Leverenz, 1340 Mississippi, stated you have to look at the area. There are a lot of dead trees in there now and the place is a mess. If Mr. Larson is going to do anything, he is going to put nicer trees there and that is what it needs. Councilmember Barnette asked the address of the Coon Rapids project was. Mr. Larson replied, at Hanson Boulevard and Highway 10. Councilmember Varichak said that project was a renovated project from before. It was not built from ground leveL Mr. Larson said it was a condo project that they converted to assisted living. One building was 100 percent complete, the other building was just framed. With the economy being the way it was, it was not going anywhere. They went back to the City and redesigned the project. Dr. Burns stated Ms. Reynolds voiced a concern about the number of project the Petitioner had. He thinks the implication is that the Petitioner is overbuilding the market. She felt a concern about the affordability of the units to Fridley units. While he thinks those are a11 valid concerns, are they a legitimate part of this approval process? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEET UARY 9, 2009 PAGE 27 Mr. Hickok said the City does ask for a market study. They did one and it was 200 units relative to Fridley. That recognizes that there are projects going up in Mounds View, New Brighton, and other places; but it is for Fridley based on what the conditions are right now and the surrounding development. Regarding the overbuilding, he would see that as a positive thing. In this market place, if they have a lot of projects going and are successful with them, that says a lot about the developer. Mayor Lund stated the discussion was very good and everyone brought up very good concerns and questions and thinks they were answered adequately or fairly. He knows there is the diminished privacy issue. It will take time to grow trees and there is no way around it. He does think there is a need for this and it is supported by the independent study. This may diminish another project very similar to this. He does disagree that without S-2 tliose properties could never be built because of the different zonings. He thinks that we can always legislate and it changes. He does think that a property owner should have some rights to develop his property(ies). They are zoned differently. He thinks this kind of cleans it up. It is a big building. With respect to the ponding issue, the underground tank is a significant improvement. It creates more green space. He thinks this is a better project all around. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it is the petitioner's and the property owner's responsibility to take care of the storm water. There was some mention related to Mr. Haukaas mentioning this before, but she also heard that there is not a stricter watershed in the metro area than the Rice Creek Watershed District. It is definitely a difference in the neighborhood. This is a different petitioner from the one before who had never done any of these projects. This gentleman wants to be a good neighbor, and we need to hold him to that and we will do that with the landscaping and the 22 stipulations. The petitioner cannot change this without coming back to Council. This will keep people in our community. .It is going to be a positive thing for our community a11d well-run. MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to approve Preliminary Plat Request, PS #09-01, by Select Senior Living, subject to the following 22 stipulations: 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. . FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 28 ' 9. The petitioner sha11 identify stormwater management area of site and shall provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot) 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building pernut. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to a11ow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any tr�c improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to approve Master Plan Amendment, MP #09-01, by Select Senior Living with the following 22 stipulations: l. The property shall be developed in accordance with the architectural site plan A1.1 dated January 15, 2009. 2. The building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A3.1, A3.2, and A3.3, titled Elevations, dated 12-19-08. 3. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. The petitioner shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA requirements. 5. The buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street and 1340 Mississippi Street shall be removed prior to issuance of building permit. , ` V FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2009 PAGE 29 6. The petitioner shall receive Rice Creek Watershed District approvals prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. No signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any plailting within the right- of-way shall be approved by the County prior to planting. 8. The petitioner shall obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 9. The petitioner shall identify stormwater management area of site and sha11 provide necessary easements. 10. Stormwater management maintenance agreement shall be filed with the City prior to issuance of building permits. 11. The petitioner sha11 obtain any required NPDES Permits. 12. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 14. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,000.00 ($1,500 per lot). 15. The petitioner shall provide the City with a copy of the conditions or restrictions for residency within the proposed building. 16. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 17. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The petitioner shall combine Lot 1 and Lot 2 for tax purposes and to allow the proposed development to occur over both lots. 19. Screening through the use of a fence or landscaping shall be approved by City staff prior to installation. 20. If the proposed development is modified to be used for units other than independent living, assisted living, and memory care units, a master plan amendment will need to be obtained. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for their share of the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepaxed by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNA1vIMOUSLY. 2. Resolutioii Approving Agreement with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportat for Replacement of the Existing Traffic Control Signal at Trunk Highway 65 an �Vloore Lake Drive (Ward 2) (Tabled January 5, 2009). .\N(:)1�:� COt'N"1'�� 1INN�;SO"I'_� llocun��rit Nc>.: 20U5969.01 1 _�3STR:4C"1' I l�rr�b�� i2il� tl�at tl�� itl�in in�tru�ilanl �t�as lilzcl in this oflic� for rec��rd o»: U3;�09i20O9 3:27:00 P'�I I'e�s�,.l a��s In th� Arnount of: $46.O0 ;�-l��l_�RE}�;� J. 1)EG'INE �ioka Countti' Propel-ty Tak _-�d�ninistrator��Rzcorder�'Registrar c�f Titlzs ,TI�1ll, I�)eputy ,a1��C)I�� COC1N'T1' I�11N?�ESO'1':'� � Do�um�nt :ti<�.: �497�24.QQ7 'I'ORRENS I h�r�hti� cc;rtilv 11iat tha ��itl�in in�trum�nt �i�as fil�ci in tl�is ot�tice tot- i-ecord on: 03%0��20O9 3:27:�0 Pl��i �'ees��'I'a�zs In the ��loltnt of: �46.C)� i�1:�11_!R1�;I�;N J. I)I:�'INI. :�lul�a Cuunt`� Propert`� Ta� .adiz�ini�U�ator� Rt�curder��Rzgistrar of "I'itlz5 1?�iD. Dapi�ty Record ID: 21R�3�� Rea�t-d ID: 21R�3�3