97-090
.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 97. 90
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR SHOREWOOD
SENIOR HOUSING (EAGLECREST NORTHWEST, INC.)
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, Eaglecrest Northwest, Inc. (the "Applicant") has an interest in approximately
19 acres of real property located in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, legally described
in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has applied to the City for approval of a Concept Plan for the
construction on the property of a residential planned unit development known as Shorewood
Senior Housing which is proposed to contain twenty (20) four-unit structures (80 dwelling units)
(the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project is proposed as elderly housing, pursuant to the provisions of
1201.03 Subd. 20 of the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on 5 August 1997 and
at its regular meeting of 2 September 1997 regarding Concept Plan for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Park Commission, at its 12 August 1997 meeting, reviewed and
commented on the Project; and
.
WHEREAS, the Applicant's request was considered by the City Council at its regular
meetings of 22 September 1991 and 13 October 1997, at which time the City Planner's
memoranda, and the minutes of the Planning Commission and Park Commission were reviewed,
and comments regarding the Project were heard by the City Council orally and in writing from the
Applicant, City staff and members of the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood
as follows:
. FINDINGS OF FACT
1 . The Property is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Eureka Road and
State Highway 7. The Property consists of three parcels containing a total land area of
approximately 19.08 acres, of which 2.77 acres exists as City-designated wetland. The net
area of the Property, after subtracting City-designated wetland and public street
right-of-way, is 14.86 acres, of which 4.79 acres is located in the R-1A, Single-Family
Residential District and 10.07 acres is located in the R 1C Single-Family Residential
District.
(combined paragraphs 2. and 3. into paragraph 1. and renumbered from paragraph 4. onward)
2.
The existing Land uses and zoning of parcels surrounding the Property are as follows:
.
West: Freeman Park ball fields; zoned R -1 C
North: Freeman Park wetland; zoned R-1C
East: Eureka Road, then vacant and one single-family dwelling, zoned R-1A
South: State Highway 7, then Chanhassen; zoned residential.
.
.
9.
.
11.
Resolution No. 97. 90
Page 2
3.
The Applicant proposes to construct 20 four-unit structures for a total of 80 dwelling units,
the occupancy of which will be limited to persons 62 years of age and older. Six of the
proposed dwelling units are proposed to be constructed over the zoning district boundary
between the R-1A and R-1C portions of the site. The proposed dwelling units are intended
to be owner-occupied and will each have two bedrooms and a two-car garage.
The Applicant proposes to construct a public street extending westward from Eureka Road
to the easterly boundary of Freeman Park. In addition a 20-foot wide, private road, serving
10 of the proposed structures, is proposed to loop through the site north of the proposed
public street.
Eureka Road, a designated collector street abutting the east side of the Property, is
substandard in terms of right-of-way width. Dedication of an additional 13.5 feet of r.o.w.
will be necessary to bring Eureka Road into compliance with City standards.
The Applicant proposes to trade approximately 1.2 acres of the Properly for approximately
.9 acres of adjacent City park property.
Required building setbacks from the periphery of the Property are as follows:
From State Highway 7: 50 feet for the R -lA portion of the site, 40 feet for the R -1 C
portion
From the west property line: 40 feet
From Eureka Road: 50 feet
From the City-designated wetland: 50 feet
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Applicant proposes to develop the Project over two construction seasons. The Project
is proposed to be developed with single-story structures. The Applicant proposes two
garage spaces for each dwelling unit, plus additional parking in front of each garage.
City sanitary sewer is available to the Property from Eureka Road. City water for general
domestic purposes is available to the Property through Freeman Park. The current water
supply is not adequate to meet fire protection needs of the Project.
10.
Development of elderly housing such as the Project is regulated by Section 1201.03,
Subd. 20 of the City's zoning ordinance as follows:
a Purpose: The purpose of this Subdivision is to provide opportunities for elderly
housing within residential zoning districts and to maintain compatibility with other
uses within those districts.
b. Conditional Use: Elderly housing shall be allowed by conditional use permit in
the following zoning districts: R-1A, R-1B, R-1C, R-1D, R-2A, R-2B, R-2C,
R-3B and R-C. In addition the following conditions shall apply:
(1) Elderly housing projects shall be processed as planned unit developments
(P.U.D.) in compliance with Section 1201.06 of this Code.
In administering a planned unit development, Section 1201.06, Subd. 3 of the City's
zoning ordinance provides for review of the Project under two sections as follows:
.
Resolution No. 97-
Page 3
90
Subd. 3. Special Procedures: The establishment of a PUD by conditional use
permit shall be subject to the procedures and requirements for conditional use
permits as set forth in Section 1201.04 of this Ordinance and the standards and
criteria set forth in Section 1201.25 of this Ordinance. (Ord. 208, 4-11-88)
12. In reviewing the application for a conditional use permit for the Project, Section 1201.04,
Subd. 3 of the City's zoning ordinance requires the City to consider the following:
a. Purpose: The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide the City of
Shorewood with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of
certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety. In
making this determination, whether or not the conditional use is to be allowed, the
City may consider the nature of the adjoining land or buildings, whether or not a
similar use is already in existence and located on the same premises or on other
lands immediately close by, the effect upon traffic into and from the premises, or on
any adjoining roads, and all other or future factors as the City shall deem a
prerequisite of consideration in determining the effect of the use on the general
welfare, public health and safety.
13. In processing he application for the Project as a planned unit development, Section
1201.25, Subd. 6b(1)(k)iv of the City zoning ordinance establishes the scope of evaluation
of the application as follows:
.
In evaluating the request, the Council shall determine the relationship between the
proposed development, the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance.
14. The land use element of the City's Comprehensive Plan contains the following land use
goals, objectives and policies:
IV.
a) Development which is not accompanied by a sufficient level of supportive services
and facilities (utilities, parking, access, etc.) is to be prevented. Land Use Goals
and Objectives No.3)
b) Intensification of land use activity and development will only be allowed if
accompanied by sufficient corresponding increases in related supportive and service
facilities such as parks, off-street parking, fire and police protection, etc. (Land Use
Policies No. 10)
c) Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses shall be accomplished in
an orderly fashion which does not create a negative (economic, social or physical)
impact on adjoining developments. (Land Use Policies No. 11)
d) Density and lot size shall be the primary consideration in the review of development
requests. (Land Use Policies - Residential No. 11)
e)
High density housing is to be concentrated and allowed in those portions of the
community where adequate supportive facilities (high capacity streets, utilities, etc.)
are existing, service needs are minimized and activities in the form of work and
leisure time are directly accessible. (Land Use Policies - Residential No. 17)
.
.
Resolution No. 97-
Page 4
90
15. The transportation element of the City's Comprehensive Plan articulates the following
transportation issues and standards:
a) Fire Protection. Due to the narrow surface widths of certain streets in Shorewood,
a serious question exists over the adequacy of road access for emergency vehicles.
As the availability of municipal water is quite limited, fire fighting efforts are
generally dependent upon the use of tank trucks. However, on narrow roads, there
often is not sufficient room for tank trucks and pumpers to pass each other, and
thus fire protection efforts my be critically jeopardized. (Transportation Issues)
b) While strictly applicable only to public streets, the following comments are made in
the comprehensive plan regarding street widths:
24- foot street
For local streets the following criteria should be used to evaluate appropriate widths:
use in areas where zoning requires lots to be 20,000 square feet in
area or larger;
on-street parking restricted to one side;
consider additional parking restrictions for through streets
use in areas where zoning allows lots smaller than 20,000 square
feet in area
on-street parking restricted to one side
use in areas where abutting properties are occupied or zoned for
two-family or multiple-family dwellings or on through streets where
on-street bicycle/pedestrian traffic is a factor
if on-street parking is allowed on both sides of street, consider
separate bicycle/pedestrian facilities
(Transportation Plan - Streets)
16. Minnesota Statues, Section 473.8958, Subd. 1, establishes the supremacy of the
comprehensive plan over other official controls and states that when there exists a conflict
between the City's zoning ordinance or other official control and the Comprehensive Plan,
it is the Comprehensive Plan which supersedes.
28-foot street
32-foot street
.
CONCLUSIONS
A. The Applicant's concept plan is based upon trading a portion of the Property for a portion
of Freeman Park. An existing deed restriction on the Freeman Park property prohibits any
use of the park for anything but park use and makes accomplishment of this impossible.
B. Indications from available data suggest an increase in total traffic may be experienced if the
Project were constructed. The City has identified problems with traffic circulation in the
vicinity of the proposed Project. Alternatives for Freeman Park south entrance and local
street connections to Eureka Road are currently under study by the City and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation. The Department of Transportation has indicated that a traffic
signal is unlikely to be local at the intersection of Eureka Road and State Highway 7.
The 20-foot wide private road is inadequate in width to provide on street parking on at least
one side of the street and poses a threat to the City's ability to provide fire protection to
residents of the Project.
C.
.
.
.
.
.. ..
Resolution No. 97-
Page 5
gO
D. The Applicant's Concept Plan does not comply with the required setback from the
proposed right-of-way for Eureka Road.
E. City water available to the site has inadequate flow for fire protection.
F. The proposed Project is contrary to each of the portions of the Comprehensive Plan cited
above.
G. For each and all of the above reasons, the application of Eaglecrest Northwest, Inc. for
approval of the Concept Plan for the Shorewood Senior Housing P.D.D. as set forth above
is hereby denied.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 27th day of October, 1997.
ATTEST:
TO