Agenda - Council - 10/23/2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

in parking facing Peridot Street NW. Since a building addition is planned it seems onerous to require an architectural wall if it will eventually be removed for the building addition. Staff recommends installation of landscape screening that meets the 3 feet height minimum along the entire west property line extending from the northerly building line to the northerly property line to provide parking lot screening and a consistent "street presence" of the site along this western edge. This suggested alternative is consistent with past practices and approvals of other phased developments in the COR. At their meeting on October 4th, the Planning Commission supported this condition as an alternative to a screen wall. Required sidewalk and streetscaping is installed along the entire portion of Sunwood Drive. The applicant will be responsible for a similar pattern of sidewalk and streetscaping consisting of landscaping, street furniture and lighting along Peridot Street NW. The COR Design Framework establishes parameters for parking in all subdistricts and sets a minimum parking space standard of one space per five seats for places of assembly (with a maximum of one per three seats). The guidelines also support the use a wide range of parking options to fulfill required parking including use of on -street parking and encouraging shared parking solutions. Based on the total of 504 seats at 1 space per 5 seats a total of 101 parking stalls are required. The applicant is proposing 43 on -site parking stalls, 40 proof of parking stalls (on -site) and 25 on street parking stalls (along Peridot Street NW and 145th Avenue NW) to fulfill its required parking. While this shared method of parking is different than other "typical" sites in Ramsey, it is the intent in the COR that sites minimize surface parking and create strategies for shared parking between adjacent users particularly when taking advantage of peak and off peak parking cycles. This proposal is an excellent candidate for alternative parking arrangements due to their primary use on Sunday mornings and evenings, opposite of other users immediately adjacent to the site. The applicant has provided a summary of information regarding their proposed use and its intent to install only the parking it needs while relying on shared and joint parking and facility use with PACT, NAU, Allina, the City, and other community groups. The Design Framework states that the City may approve joint parking for one or more businesses where the total number of parking stalls provided for joint use is less than the sum of the total required for each business should they be provide them separately. A written report, as detailed on Page 21 of the Design Framework, is required. Staff is generally supportive of the use of on -street parking for the proposed use, as no parking structures (vertical) are planned in this area. It is important to note that the first phase construction could meet required parking if the City required the construction of 40 additional stalls, accepted the proposed proof of parking alternative. The applicant is proposing proof of parking as a method to save initial site development and construction costs. The applicant intends to utilize shared parking through cross -parking agreements with PACT, Allina and NAU. Again, the COR Design Framework encourages shared parking as a method to provide required off-street parking. However, any shared parking shall be approved only when it's in close proximity, no conflict in hours and a legally binding instrument for joint use of off-street parking is approved by the City and recorded at the County. While the Northgate intends to share parking through "cross -parking agreements", and has an effective history of doing so, no recordable document has been provided to the City therefore the site is not meeting minimum requirements for off-street parking. This leaves the City in the position of needing to make a decision on whether to support the proposed proof of parking or require installation of the 40 stalls during Phase 1. Options to consider include: • Require full parking to be installed with Phase 1 due to lack of legally recordable shared parking agreements to meet requirements of the COR Design Framework. • Provide City with legally recordable shared cross -parking agreement. • Accept proof of parking plan with a condition that at such time that parking demand is beyond what is provided on -site and the 25 accepted on -street parking stalls, and extending into additional on -street parking areas beyond 300' radius of the site, such proof of parking shall be installed at the applicants expense. The Planning Commission discussed the proposed parking plan and agreed that a combination of on -street, on -site and use of proof of parking is acceptable for this use for the Phase one construction. The Planning Commission supported the condition that proof of parking may be utilized as written in the Conditional Use Permit resolution.