5.3.
Regular Planning Commission
- Meeting Date:
- 02/02/2017
- Submitted For:
- Patrick Brama
- By:
- Patrick Brama, Administrative Services
Information
Title:
Stone Brook Academy Site Selection
Purpose/Background:
PURPOSE
Development Challenges
(1) Yolite Street connection. Existing curb cuts. Existing intersection. Existing Storm water line.
(2) Remnant lots. 1/2 acre lot. 3 acre lot.
(3) The well, and well easement.
(4) Location of existing utility stubs.
Per Council direction, attached to this case are four professional drafted development scenarios for consideration/ discussion. These scenarios are based on the current zoning (COR-2 Retail) and the master plan. The Council requested this case be reviewed one more time by the Planning Commission before the Council made a final decision. The Council would like to receive feedback from the Planning Commission on the attached four concepts.
REVIEW
This case was reviewed by the EDA on 12/08/16 and 01/12/2017. This case was reviewed by the Planning Commission on 01/05/2017. This case was reviewed by the Council on 01/24/2017. The Council was generally very supportive of the use/ proposed project. However, the Council remains undecided about site location.
CITY REVIEW PROCESS
This case is being addressed in several separate steps:
The City Council has indicated more information is needed before a final decision can be made (RE site location). The Council was concerned about the ramifications this single project (about 1 acre) would have on the development of the larger parcel/ block (about 5 acres). The Council desires to know more about how the various development challenges associated with this site will play out in various development scenarios (i.e. Stone Brook proposal vs. single developer master planned site).
Development Challenges
(1) Yolite Street connection. Existing curb cuts. Existing intersection. Existing Storm water line.
(2) Remnant lots. 1/2 acre lot. 3 acre lot.
(3) The well, and well easement.
(4) Location of existing utility stubs.
Per Council direction, attached to this case are four professional drafted development scenarios for consideration/ discussion. These scenarios are based on the current zoning (COR-2 Retail) and the master plan. The Council requested this case be reviewed one more time by the Planning Commission before the Council made a final decision. The Council would like to receive feedback from the Planning Commission on the attached four concepts.
REVIEW
This case was reviewed by the EDA on 12/08/16 and 01/12/2017. This case was reviewed by the Planning Commission on 01/05/2017. This case was reviewed by the Council on 01/24/2017. The Council was generally very supportive of the use/ proposed project. However, the Council remains undecided about site location.
CITY REVIEW PROCESS
This case is being addressed in several separate steps:
Step 1: Site Location/ Site Concept**This Case**
The purpose of this case is to provide direction from a master developer perspective (site location, concept project layout).
Step 2: Real Estate transaction
The purpose of this step will be to consider a formal purchase agreement (i.e. deal terms).
Step 3: Entitlement
The purpose of this step is to review Plat and Site Plan applications (i.e. zoning/ land use regulations).
The purpose of this case is to provide direction from a master developer perspective (site location, concept project layout).
Step 2: Real Estate transaction
The purpose of this step will be to consider a formal purchase agreement (i.e. deal terms).
Step 3: Entitlement
The purpose of this step is to review Plat and Site Plan applications (i.e. zoning/ land use regulations).
Notification:
NA
Observations/Alternatives:
Questions Received by Saff:
(1) Why does Stone Brook want to be located on Site #1 Why is being located near the center of The COR important? Please see attached log for Site #1. Please see feedback from Stone Brook.
(2) Why does the pad ready site located north of Coborn's (the McDonald's sites, Site #2), not work for Stone Brook? Please see attached log for Site #2. Please see feedback from Stone Brook.
(3) Is Stone Brook a daycare or a pre-school? Please see attached log for Site #1. Please see feedback from Stone Brook.
(2) Why does the pad ready site located north of Coborn's (the McDonald's sites, Site #2), not work for Stone Brook? Please see attached log for Site #2. Please see feedback from Stone Brook.
(3) Is Stone Brook a daycare or a pre-school? Please see attached log for Site #1. Please see feedback from Stone Brook.
Attached:
(1) background information (project, owners, benefits, term sheet).
(2) log for Site #1 and Site #2. Both updated (Council & Stone Brook comments added, simplified).
(3) MEMOs from CBRE.
(4) four site concepts (as requested by Council for PC to review)
(5) former Dominium senior apartment complex proposal. 120+ units, first floor parking. This proposal is not allowed via the existing zoning disrict (i.e. COR-2 retail). In 2015, the City indicated they did not want to see this project on this site, as it didn't fit the vision. This was added for reference purposes only.
(2) log for Site #1 and Site #2. Both updated (Council & Stone Brook comments added, simplified).
(3) MEMOs from CBRE.
(4) four site concepts (as requested by Council for PC to review)
(5) former Dominium senior apartment complex proposal. 120+ units, first floor parking. This proposal is not allowed via the existing zoning disrict (i.e. COR-2 retail). In 2015, the City indicated they did not want to see this project on this site, as it didn't fit the vision. This was added for reference purposes only.
Funding Source:
NA
Recommendation:
NA
Action:
A) Provide City Council with direction on the attached four site layout concepts (are they acceptable--if not, specifically why?)
B) Provide Council with final feedback RE the proposed project on Site #1 (feedback on their proposed site plan concept?)
B) Provide Council with final feedback RE the proposed project on Site #1 (feedback on their proposed site plan concept?)
Attachments
- SITE 1
- Four Master Planned Sites (COR 2 Zoning)
- Former Dominium Concept 2015
- CBRE MEMOS (2)
- Background
- SITE 2
Form Review
- Form Started By:
- JoAnn Shaw
- Started On:
- 01/30/2017 12:11 PM
- Final Approval Date:
- 02/01/2017