Agenda - Council - 04/26/2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Development (PUD), which would allow the mix of uses as proposed (outpatient center and residential/inpatient units). A list of Frequently Asked Questions from the Riverplace Counseling Center's website is attached as background. The proposed relocation helps the City of Anoka achieve one of their land use goals to redevelop this section of Ferry Street. A copy of the River Walk Redevelopment Plan is attached as background. This information is provided for context only. According to the Riverplace Counseling website, Riverplace Counseling provides primary chemical dependency therapy programs and related services with a mission to provide highly structured chemical dependency care in the least costly, least restrictive, non -institutional manner possible, consistent with the individualized needs of person they have an opportunity to serve. Anoka Staff has been working through the following potential deviations to the Critical Area Overlay dimensional standards. 1. Bluff Setback. The Executive Order for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) establishes a minimum setback to bluff lines of 40 feet through 'interim development regulations' for the 'Urban Diversified' district of the Overlay. It is Staffs understanding that this provision would remain the same under the proposed rule changes for the Critical Area. However, this provision is not found in Anoka's existing ordinance. The proposed Bluff Setback is only 30 feet, which is Anoka's current standard (voluntary). It appears that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has recommended that this setback be amended to 40 feet to comply with existing MRCCA rules and proposed amendments to MRCCA rules. Additionally, Anoka is choosing to employ the use of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for this dimensional standard, which is a commonly employed tool. Staff simply requests that Anoka verify that this approach is acceptable under the Critical Area standards. 2. Water Setback. The Executive Order for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) establishes a minimum setback to the 'Ordinary High Water' mark (OHW) of 100 feet through 'interim development regulations' for the 'Urban Diversified' district of the Overlay. However, this provision is not found in Anoka's Ordinance. Several of the proposed structures appear deficient in this setback. Additionally, Anoka has indicated that this is not a riparian lot, and is not subject to the OHW Setback, as the City of Anoka will retain a small strip of property along the shoreline. The DNR has not commented on this issue. Ramsey simply requests that Anoka verify that this is an acceptable approach within the Critical Area Overlay. Additionally, Ramsey Staff has acknowledged a potential concern with the proposed use. 1. Pedestrian Connectivity. The proposed site plan lacks any immediate pedestrian connectivity to existing facilities. Given the fact that residents generally do not have vehicles at this facility, there are lack of options to arrive at area destinations outside of structured events. There are longer term plans to connect to the Mississippi River Trail to the south by a future connection to the east of this site, but there is no current timetable nor funding for these improvements. There will be a gap in time between opening of the proposed facility and any future pedestrian facility connections. Attached to this case are comments provided by Ramsey Residents that attended the April 21, 2016 Workshop. These were the topics that were raised at the workshop itself. 1. How many pedestrian trips will this generate? 2. Is there a better location within Anoka where this could be located? 3. Does the program accept individuals with pending criminal cases? 4. Is there sufficient parking for the potential parking demand? 5. Would Riverplace Counseling consider a shuttle service in lieu of the lack of pedestrian connectivity? 6. Why didn't the City of Ramsey comment on this proposal sooner? A majority of the concerns raised above would need to be considered by the City of Anoka, which has jurisdiction over this review in compliance with its approved land use plans. The final comment regarding the timing of Ramsey's comments warrants additional discussion. At the request of Anoka Staff, Ramsey did not notify residents in the City of Ramsey until after Anoka had completed their review of the site plan to ensure that the project was feasible and were able to publish as part of a public agenda. Anoka desired to avoid Ramsey residents having the