CITY OF FREDERICK PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT STAFF REPORT August 8, 2016

Transcription

1 PROJECT INFORMATION CITY OF FREDERICK PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT STAFF REPORT August 8, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: H. NAME OF PROJECT: MMI-2, Frederick Research Park, Lot 7B TYPE OF PROJECT: Final Site Plan CASE NUMBER: PC16-360FSI OWNER/DEVELOPER: MD Thomas Johnson Real Estate Associates, LLC ADDRESS: 184 Thomas Johnson Drive, Suite 104 Frederick, MD PHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT: Fran Zeller, Harris Smariga & Associates ADDRESS: 125 South Carroll Street, Suite 100 Frederick, MD PHONE NUMBER: (301) PROPERTY LOCATION: Thomas Johnson Drive REVIEWED BY: Pam Reppert DATE: August 1, 2016 EXHIBITS: Modification letter Colored renderings PROJECT PROPOSAL The Applicant is requesting approval of a revised Final Site Plan to construct a 55,625 s.f. medical office building on Lot 7B of the Frederick Research Park complex located off of Thomas Johnson Drive. The Applicant is also requesting the following modifications to the requirements of the Land Management Code (LMC): 1. Section 405(c), MO District- Standards Setback and Modifications; 2. Section 605(e), Landscape Buffers and Berms; 3. Section 607(g), Parking and Loading Standards; and 4. Section 607(h), Loading Space Requirements.

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Lot 7B is surrounded by previously developed lots. Lot 7A was developed in 1988 and Lot 8H was developed in 2006, both with medical offices. At that time, Lot 7B was considered Phase 2 in coordination with Lot 8H and forest conservation for the two lots was satisfied, the sites were graded, and stormwater management facilities sized to serve Lots 7A, 7B, and 8H properties. Lots 8H and 7B were recorded on November 25, 2003 (PC03-127FSU). The original site plan (PC03-123FSI) was approved for Phases 1 and 2 with Phase 1 constructed in 2006 and Phase 2 containing a 41,000 s.f. building which has not yet been constructed. A revised site plan (PC13-121FSI) was approved on June 10, 2013 for Phase 2 to increase the building square footage to 46,000 s.f. This application will revise the previously approved plan once again by increasing Phase 2 to 55,625 square feet. As a revision it is important to note that per Section 309(g) of the LMC, in considering an amendment to an approved final site plan, the Department or Commission may only consider issues relating to the proposed amendment, and may not consider matters that have been approved and that are not related to the proposed amendment. The above modifications were technically requested with the previous site plan; however, the dynamics and increase of the building size makes it relevant to re-approve similar modifications. PRIOR CASES Case Number & Date of Approval Annexation November 1972 Sketch Plan SF13-44SKT 2/13/13 Preliminary Subdivision Plan PC97-01PSU 7/1/97 Final Subdivision Plan PC02-305FSU 3/26/3 PC03-127FSU 6/9/03 Final Site Plan PC02-306FSI 3/26/03 PC03-123FSI 6/9/03 PC13-121FSI 6/10/13 Forest Stand Delineation STF02-307PFC 11/20/02 Preliminary Forest Conservation Plan PC02-307PFC 12/9/02 Archeological Assessment ARCH13/313 5/1/13 DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS Total Lot Area Property Zoning Roadway Dedication Open Space (HOA) Park Land Dedication Area 3.62 acres MO Manufacturing/Office HNO Highway Noise Overlay none NA NA

3 ENVIRONMNETAL CHARACTERISTICS Disturbed Lot Area Impervious Surface Ratio Floodplain on Site Disturbed Floodplain Nontidal Wetlands on Site Disturbed Wetlands MDE Permit Required Area 3.62 acres 0.9 required provided None NA None NA NA FACILITIES AND SERVICE Road Name Comprehensive ROW Access Provision Plan Classification Thomas Johnson Drive Collector 70 Yes FIRE & RESCUE Fire Service & Ambulance Service Provided by Approved by City Fire Engineer Independent Hose Company No Baughman s Lane, Frederick Yes LEGAL AGREEMENTS Type of Agreement Easement Agreements Forest Conservation Agreements Date Submitted & Approved by Office of Legal Services Prior to IP approval NA NAC NAC# 4 Meeting Date May 12, 2016 Number of Attendees 12 Comments No Concerns APFO TYPE APPLICABILITY ISSUED (Y/N) CAPF-WL Sec 4-9(a)(1) Final Plat EXEMPT CAPF-SL Sec 4-10(a)(1) Final Plat EXEMPT CAPF-R Sec 4-11(a)(1) Final Plat EXEMPT

4 CAPF-SCH N/A N/A STAFF COMMENTS & ANALYSIS REVIEW AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY In reviewing a final site plan, the Commission must consider the criteria outlined in Section 309(e) of the LMC which includes compliance with all of the applicable criteria of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the LMC, conformance with any area or master plan approved for the subject property, the adequacy of facilities and services to accommodate the impacts of the development, and lastly, where applicable, the provision of Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDU). The subject property is not subject to a previously approved area or master plan and it does not include a residential component, therefore, MPDUs are not required. Staff has reviewed the application for compliance with the other applicable sections of the LMC as well as for the adequacy of facilities to serve the development and offers the following analysis. LAND USE Lot 7B is zoned Manufacturing/Office (MO), the purpose and intent of which is to provide a park-like setting for a community of industries which have no nuisance factors. Section 406(c) of the LMC provides additional development criteria for the MO district including unique setback standards and design considerations which are reviewed more thoroughly below. Section 405(c)(1) MO District Standards setback and modifications A. In the MO district, building setbacks for side and rear yards shall be 30 feet on each side if adjacent to a commercial or employment district and 100 feet if adjacent to any other district or an Interstate Highway unless modified by the Planning Commission. The Applicant is requesting a modification to reduce the 100 feet interstate setback to 80 feet. The Applicant has indicated that the reduced surface parking facing US 15 as a result of providing underground parking and the adequate screening of the surface parking justify the request. Section 405(c)(2), Modifications, states that the 100 feet setback to an interstate highway may be modified to as low as 50 feet if the Planning Commission approves a landscaping plan which provides an adequate buffer or meets the park-like setting intent of the MO district. In considering the above modification under Section 309(j)(4) of the LMC, the Commission must find that: 1. The modification will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Code;

5 2. The modification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The application includes compensating design or architectural features so as to meet the overall objectives of the particular requirement. The reduction in setback is not contrary to the intent and purpose of the Code as described the setback aligns with previously approved plans and adjacent site conditions. The Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element Policy 1 states a foremost fact to Encourage development to be compatible with the character of existing or planned development in the vicinity and continues with 1) Mitigate potential negative impacts of development through site design, including location of facilities and access; building height, scale and massing; and buffers between different uses; and 2) Identify impediments to infill development. The Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element Policy 5 supports the Journey Through Hallowed Ground and one way in support is to assure that sufficient screening is provided in designs along the US 15 byway. Increased screening between the parking and the highway serves to compensate for the requested modification and also supports the planting goals for the scenic byway. B. Maximum Building coverage on any lot in the MO district shall be 20 percent. The proposed building footprint is 27,812 s.f. which equals 14% of the overall lot area and as such, the proposal is in compliance with this standard. C. Minimum landscaped area on any lot in the MO district shall be 20 percent. Based on the lot size, a minimum of 31,552 s.f. is required; the Applicant has indicated that a total of 31,584 s.f. is in greenspace, which technically computes to 20%. D. Predominant exterior building materials must not include the following: smooth-faced concrete block, smooth faced tilt-up concrete panels, or prefabricated steel panels. The Applicant has provided architectural elevations with colored renderings. The Applicant is proposing a combination of masonry materials include red brick, ground face architectural masonry and buff colored prairie stone units as exterior materials. These materials should be listed on the colored renderings and/or site plan. Loading docks, service areas or other similar features shall be screened from view from all public streets and under no circumstances shall outdoor material storage area be permitted in the MO district. Screening in any portion of the MO

6 district that abuts any R district shall be at a minimum, Level II screening. The Planning Commission must approve the landscaping plan and may require screening above the level of Level II screening depending on the type of development within the 100 foot yard and adjacent land uses. Site plan note 18 states there will be no outdoor storage. With regards to loading, the Applicant is requesting a modification to reduce the required 12 x50 loading space to a 9 x20 loading space based on the tenants anticipated operational needs. Both the reduced size and the location prevent the loading space from being seen from the public street although it will be in view from the private access drives and placed alongside regular parking. The Applicant is also requesting a modification to Section 605(e) to eliminate the level I screening between Lot 7B and Lot 7A and Lot 7B and 8H since the lots have been designed as a unified business park, with shared access, parking and utilities. To ensure aesthetically pleasing development compatible with adjacent or neighboring buildings, all applications for the site plan approval in the MO district shall include architectural renderings or other information concerning the design and materials of the proposed building. The Applicant has provided colored renderings to reflect architecture that is consistent with the adjacent buildings of the business park. The façade material includes red brick and prairie stone buff rockface. Highway Noise Overlay District. Lot 7B also has frontage along US 15 although it is denied access. The Property falls within the Highway Noise Protection Overlay (HNO), however this development is not impacted because it is nonresidential. PARKING AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT Access to Lot 7B is provided via a private drive within the panhandle portion of the lot where common ingress and egress is also provided to Lots 7A and 8H. A Covenants and In-Common Easements Agreement was originally recorded on May 10, 1990, with numerous amendments to cover shared areas and maintenance responsibilities between Lots 7A, 7B, 8H, and 8G. With regards to Lot 7B parking, a maximum of 278 parking spaces are permitted based on the 55,625 square footage of the building and its use. However, a total of 245 parking spaces are proposed for the new use including 44 underground parking accessed along the eastern façade of the building. Under a previously approved agreement, 30 spaces are reserved for Lot 7A on Lot 7B at all times and as such, those 30 spaces have not been counted towards the maximum permitted or provided for the subject use. However, the actual number of spaces on Lot 7B equals 275, including the off-site parking, falling slightly under the maximum parking permitted for the site.

7 Loading Space. The Applicant has requested a loading space reduction from Section 607(h) for one required, 12 x50 sized space to a 9 x20 space to accommodate box trucks and FedEx style delivery trucks. The office uses are serviced by box type trucks or vans rather that large tractor trailers as demonstrated with similar operations on Lot 8H. The loading space modification is not contrary to the intent and purpose of the Code. The building and its operations shall provide parking for support services and make deliveries as needed. Staff would reiterate that the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element Policy 1 supports making modification to the loading space for this use taking into consideration 1) Mitigate potential negative impacts of development through site design, including location of facilities and access; building height, scale and massing; and buffers between different uses. The compensating features to consider is the need for less impervious surface for a large loading space and the ability integrate a smaller loading space around the footprint of the building and screen it from the public highway view. Bicycle parking is also required under Table at a ratio of 1/10 vehicle spaces provided. For the calculation, the 30 parking spaces reserved for Lot 7A have been excluded; however, the 44 underground parking spaces are included for a total of 245 spaces with a bicycle requirement of 25 spaces. The Applicant has provided seven (7) 2-space racks on Lot 7B and six (6) 2-space racks on Lot 8H. Lot 8H is a closely associated medical building under the same ownership. Staff supports dispersing the bike racks to serve both properties, however, since compliance with the parking requirements is evaluated on a per lot basis, a modification must be requested to reduce the number of bike spaces to those provided on the subject lot with the compensating feature being the provision of remaining spaces be placed on Lot 8H. The reduced bicycle parking modification is not contrary to the intent and purpose of the Code, by providing bicycle parking to the overall medical campus area. Clearly the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Policy 7 supports the modification as stated Promote bicycle and pedestrian mobility in the City of Frederick and (3) Promote the integration of all transportation modes within office and residential parking areas, such as transit stops, additional sidewalks, and bicycle parking design in appropriate locations. The compensation for the modification is the distribution of bicycle parking to Lot 8H which was approved for development prior to the 2005 LMC regulations requiring bicycle parking on site. LANDSCAPING

8 The Applicant is requesting a modification from Section 605(e) for the requirement of Level I screening along property lots between two MO properties due to the fact that Lots 7B, 7A and 8H share a common access drive and an access easement and maintenance agreement across the lots. The reduction of buffer trees along lot lines is not contrary to intent and purpose of the Code. The three lots are integrated as a unified medical campus and share parking facilities, maintenance responsibilities, and access. The purpose of screening lots from each other is to separate different uses from sometimes detrimental impact. The Comprehensive Plan Community Character and Design Element Policy 4 states: Design light industrial areas to complement the community image and the visual aesthetics of adjacent neighborhoods. Reduction of the lot line trees promotes the image and aesthetics of the medical campus and supports its functionality. The Applicant offers as compensation proof of existing unified documents and easements in support of design of the medical campus created between Lots 7A, 7B, and 8H. ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE (APFO) The site is exempt from the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) because a final subdivision plat for the lot was recorded prior to the adoption of the APFO in April of However, an analysis of the roads was conducted, as required under Section 1203, for the previously approved plan and as such, the subject plan required analysis to capture any increased impact associated with the new square footage of Phase 2. With the previous plan, the Applicant was required to mitigate the impacts on the surrounding street network by paying a pro-rata traffic contribution of $137,769 to the City CIP project at Thomas Johnson Drive and Opossumtown Pike and a contribution of $5,054 to CIP at Thomas Johnson Drive and Hayward Road. The Applicant was also required to make a monetary contribution towards the striping of a center left-turn lane on Thomas Johnson Drive. With previous applications, Staff has required developers to actually construct this improvement along the frontage of their property; however based on the limited amount of frontage that this lot has as a panhandle lot, Staff was accepting to a contribution amount for this improvement also, with the stipulation that the Applicant submit a proposed striping plan and cost estimate in order to determine the contribution amount. Engineering has determined that the increase square footage of the building and its increased impact on roads shall be mitigated in the amounts of contribution as follows: $163,064 for Thomas Johnson Drive and Opossumtown Pike CIP $6,250 for Thomas Johnson and Hayward Road CIP Engineering is not requesting any restriping contribution from this development since the restriping has been completed by the Aspen Ridge developer.

9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the modification request to Section 405(c)(1) to reduce the 100 feet interstate setback to 80 feet finding that: 1. The modification will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Code; 2. The modification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. That the reduced surface parking as a result of provided underground parking and adequate screening of the parking from the highway serve as a compensating design features to meet the overall objectives of the particular requirement. Staff recommends approval of the modification to Section 607(h) for the Loading Space Requirements to reduce the required loading space from 12 x 50 to 9 x20 finding that: 1. The modification will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Code; 2. The modification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The unique needs of the use do not necessitate deliveries by a large tractor trailer and that the reduced amount of impervious surface on the site and the increased ability to screen a smaller loading space serve as compensating design features to meet the overall objectives of the particular requirement. Staff recommends approval of the modification under Section 607 Table requested to reduce the number of bike spaces from 26 to 14 on Lot 7B finding that: 1. The modification will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Code; 2. The modification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The provision of 12 bicycle parking spaces on Lot 8H serves as a compensating design feature to meet the overall objectives of the particular requirement. Staff recommends approval of the modification from Section 605(e) for the requirement of Level I screening along Lots 7B and 7A and 8H common property lines finding that 1. The modification will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of the Code; 2. The modification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The design of the site as part of an integrated office complex as evidenced by the blanket cross access and maintenance easements serves as a compensating design feature to meet the overall objectives of the particular requirement and the MO district more generally. Staff recommends approval of Final Site Plan PC16-360FSI for MMI-2, Frederick Research Park Lot 7B, in accordance with all of the applicable criteria of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the LMC and with the following conditions to be met: 1. Correct property reference for Lot 8H should be PB 75, P List the materials to be used on the renderings and/or the site plan. 3. Label all sewer lines and identify as proposed or abandon

10

11

12

13