5. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL MENORAH MEDICAL CENTER OFFICE BUILDING Vicinity of the southwest corner of 119 th Street and Nall Avenue

Transcription

1 5. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL MENORAH MEDICAL CENTER Avenue 1. APPLICANT: Hoefer Wysocki Architects, L.L.C., is the applicant for this request. 2. REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting final development plan approval of a new medical office building. 3. LOCATION: The subject property is located in the vicinity of the southwest corner of 119 th Street and Nall Avenue. 4. EXISTING ZONING: This property is currently zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District, with an indefinite special use permit (SUP No ) to allow a hospital campus. 5. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting final development plan approval to construct a two-story, 40,000 square-foot office building. The building is proposed to be located at the northeasterly corner of the Menorah Medical Center campus in an area that is currently used for employee parking. The proposed use of the building is for medical offices and outpatient surgery. The finish materials of the building will be the same type and color of the panels used for the main hospital building. The building will also have glazing on all sides. The Menorah Medical Center campus has incorporated substantial landscaping alongside natural wooded areas along the creek channel. The landscape plan demonstrates that this theme will continue with the installation of new trees in all of the parking lot islands, additional street trees along Nall Avenue, and trees and shrubs around the parking lot and building. The total required parking for the campus has been shown on the Master Plan; therefore, parking specifically for this building would not be limited to the parking immediately adjacent to the building. The applicant has provided a parking stall count for that area adjacent to the building and it exceeds the minimum Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirement of 3.8 parking stalls per 1,000 square feet of building area. Parking in the area of the proposed office building is 176 stalls, which exceeds the UDO minimum requirement of 114 stalls. A loading dock/delivery truck parking area is shown on the north side of the building which is in the vicinity of a thoroughfare intersection. The applicant has shown landscaping along the northern side of the delivery

2 area, but staff is requiring that more substantial measures be incorporated to completely screen any parked trucks from view of the adjacent public streets. Staff has suggested that the screen wall for the mechanical area and trash enclosure be continued to screen the delivery area. Staff has added a stipulation that states that an acceptable design be submitted and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit for the medical office building. A Preliminary Stormwater Management Study that addresses just this final development plan has been submitted, reviewed and accepted by staff. This Preliminary Stormwater Management Study did not include the flood study stipulated with the special use permit approval by the City Council. A separate Revised Preliminary Stormwater Management Study (the revision of the study that accompanied the special use permit) was submitted and included a flood study. Staff has reviewed that study and found it acceptable. The study was made available to the Hawthorne Valley Homes Association for review on July 21, It included the addition of impervious surface represented by this application. The study s conclusion was that the increased impervious surface from this project and the rest of the proposed expansion actually provided a small reduction in the peak 100-year flow experienced at Ash Street, the location of the downstream house flooding. The added impervious surface increases the rate of run-off from the Menorah site before the peak run-off from the rest of the drainage area arrives. By the time the peak flow from the rest of the drainage area arrives, the run-off rate from the Menorah site is reduced because most of the run-off has already left the site. This situation occurs when the site generating the additional runoff is close to the point of interest, relative to the distance to the top of the drainage area, as measured along the flow path of the run-off. Included with the final development plan is a drawing that shows an erosion and sediment control concept plan that was required by stipulation g of the special use permit. All erosion is proposed to be captured by either the existing curbs, gravel filter bags around inlets, or silt fencing. The only potentially effective place for a silt basin would be in the trees south of the proposed building, and at that location, the basin potentially could serve only about 50 percent of the disturbed area. Given that the total disturbed area is less than two acres, trees would need to be destroyed to install a silt basin, and a silt basin could not effectively collect

3 much more than half the run-off. Staff does not believe a silt basin is appropriate for this portion of the site. 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommended approval of Final Development Plan, Menorah Medical Center Office Building, subject to the stipulations approved by the Planning Commission. 7. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission heard this item on August 22, The Planning Commission allowed for the public to comment on this final development plan approval at the request of the City Council. The concern is what the overall impact of future development on the Menorah Medical Center campus may have on the downstream development, more specifically the lake and adjacent residential homes in the Hawthorne Community Master Association on the east side of Nall Avenue. One person spoke at the Planning Commission meeting in opposition to the proposed medical office building. The individual prepared a letter that was provided to each Planning Commissioner and placed into the formal record. The letter included a response to the Preliminary Flood Study that was required to be provided to the Hawthorne Community Master Association at least 30 days prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The engineering staff had reviewed the letter and responded to questions for the Planning Commission about the letter. On August 18, 2005, the Hawthorne Community Master Association sent a letter to Mr. Roger Peterson with copies to the City Council, the Planning Commissioners, the City Attorney, and others. In the five page letter, 12 numbered points were made by the association. It is the engineering staff s judgment that there was overlap in the 12 points presented and that there were fewer main engineering issues as addressed below: 1. Houses other than Ash Street in the Hawthorne Community Master Association are projected to flood. Answer: The other houses in the Hawthorne Community Master Association projected to flood are along the main channel of Tomahawk Creek, not along Tributary 6 as is 12243

4 Ash Street. It is doubtful that changes on the Menorah site will have a measurable effect on house flooding on the main channel. Without consideration of peak flow timing, the peak Tributary 6 flow represents approximately 15 percent of the Tomahawk Creek main stem peak flow; the total Menorah site represents about 8 percent of the total area in Tributary 6; and the increased impervious area on the Menorah site represents about 10 percent of the total Menorah site. Multiplying the percentages together indicates the changes on the Menorah site could not represent much more than one-tenth of one percent of any change on Tomahawk Creek. When timing is considered, the same analogy applies to the houses along the main channel as applies to Ash Street. Because of the position of the Menorah site in the lower onefourth of Tributary 6 and the position of the flooding houses along the main channel in the lower one-fifth of the main channel drainage area, it is more beneficial in regard to flood elevations to allow the run-off from the Menorah site to go undetained. This result is expected when the development under consideration is located in the lower third of the drainage area upstream from a flooding situation. Detention is not always beneficial. 2. Based on the flood study performed for the Menorah project, the Tomahawk Creek Flood Study (TCFS) is not reliable. Answer: The TCFS is a macro-scale study based on subareas, some that exceed three square miles in size and with a total drainage area on 23.3 square miles. The current flood study examined one tributary of less than 600 acres in more detail. The TCFS had to make assumptions where detailed information was not available. Those assumptions were believed to be conservative when they were made. The current flood study does not invalidate the TCFS, but does provide better information on Tributary 6, mostly because it is an update of work done about eight years ago. The watershed is now nearing complete development. 3. The TCFS was flawed because they did not analyze the outlet from Hawthorne Lake properly.

5 Answer: Hawthorne Lake was intentionally analyzed the way it was in the TCFS to provide a conservative estimate of the floodplain boundary. One decision in the study was to not count on any existing detention value from existing ponds and lakes. In order to do that, the modelers forced virtually all the 100-year flow over the top of Hawthorne Lake dam or Tomahawk Creek Parkway. This increased the flood elevation experienced at Ash Street. The current flood study analyzed the existing two box culverts with the result the flood elevations decreased some, about three inches, but not enough to eliminate the flooding. 4. Development will degrade the water quality of Hawthorne Lake. Answer: The city currently does not have ordinances addressing the issue that are relevant to this application with the exception of erosion and sediment control. Staff believes the information contained in the final development plan complies with the special use permit stipulations and city ordinances in regard to erosion and sediment control. As a point of perspective, it should be kept in mind that Hawthorne Lake was constructed with the idea that it would be part of the planned drainage system. Without the storm sewer system feeding into the lake, there would not be enough water to keep the lake full without supplemental water. The Planning Commission voted 9 to 0 to recommend approval of Final Development Plan, Menorah Medical Center Office Building, subject to the following stipulations: a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a point by point photmentric plan that meets the Planning Commission Resolution No. 76 requirement for parking lot lighting. b. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the office building, the applicant shall submit, for staff review and approval, a plan that screens the delivery truck parking area from the adjacent public streets and neighboring properties as required by the Unified Development Ordinance.

6 c. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all rooftop and ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view with an architectural treatment that is compatible with the building architecture. d. Concurrent with the submittal of construction plans for each phase of development, the applicant shall provide a Final Stormwater Management Study that addresses the outstanding items from the Preliminary Stormwater Management Study and includes any design changes. e. The applicant agrees to comply with the requirements of the city s Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance, Chapter , O.P.M.C., and with the State of Kansas General Permit for Construction Activity. f. The location and geometrics of all driveways and parking areas are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Services Department. g. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit a payment for unspecified transportation improvements, as detailed in stipulation d of Special Use Permit No

7