Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-05-13-PC1245 W Highway 96 Clayton Larson -- Andy Holewa Sam Scott Roberta Thompson www.cityofardenhills.org Vacant Janet Stodola (Alternate) Dave McClung Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, well-maintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our long-standing tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2.A.May 8, 2013, Draft Planning Commission Minutes Documents:MAY 8, 2013, DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.PDF PLANNING CASES 3.A. 1201 County Road E PUD Amendment; Stuart Companies Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF 3.B. 2 Pine Tree Drive Zoning Code Amendment And CUP; Country Financial Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF, C.PDF,ATTACHMENT D.PDF COMMENTS AND REPORTS 4.A.Report From The City Council Documents:JUNE 5, 2013 REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.PDF A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting. Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2013 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Vice Chair Roberta Thompson called to order the regular Planning Commission meeting at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were: Vice Chair Roberta Thompson, Commissioners Angela Hames, Andrew Holewa, and Clayton Zimmerman. Absent: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Samuel Scott, and Janet Stodola (Alternate). Also present were: City Planner Meagan Beekman; Councilmember Dave McClung; Community Development Intern, Matthew Bachler; and Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MAY 8, 2013 Vice Chair Thompson stated the agenda will stand as published. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 3, 2013 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Commissioner Zimmermanmoved, seconded by Commissioner Hames, to approve the April 3, 2013, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). PLANNING CASES A.Planning Case 13-005; E Street Flats Sign Standard Adjustment: Stuart Companies Not a Public Hearing. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated the applicant has requested a site plan review for a sign standard adjustment that would allow for a deviation from the Sign Code for the permit length and sign area of temporary wall signage at 1195 County Road E. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 2 Background Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler explained the property at 1195 County Road E is owned by TAT properties, represented in this case by Stuart Co. The property is located in the B-2 General Business District on the north side of County Road E directly west of Lexington Avenue. The applicant is proposing to install two vinyl banners each measuring 216 square feet on the exterior walls of the property. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated on December 21, 2012, the City Council approved a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to remodel the existing structure at 1195 County Road E and construct 74 residential unit apartments on the site in Planning Case 12-019. The applicants have concerns about visibility of their advertising signs. The proposed reuse converts the building from a former hotel into residential apartment units, which is a substantial change in land use and may not be known by the average person driving by the building. Further, given the size of the building and the large building setback from Lexington Avenue, advertising signs are not easy to see. The building is setback approximately 360 feet from Lexington Avenue and 70 feet from County Road E. The proposed signs include images and text that would better identify the new use of the property as a residential apartment building and would provide directions on how to obtain information about the project. The applicant has provided images of the two signs. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler indicated one sign would be located on the east building wall facing Lexington Avenue and the second sign would be located on the south building wall facing County Road E. Each sign would measure 12 feet by 18 feet, an area of 216 square feet. The combined area of the two signs would be 432 square feet. A professional sign company would install the signs. Stuart Co would maintain the signs in like new condition and repair and/or replace a sign if it is torn or deteriorates during the approved timeline.Section 1250.02 of the Sign Ordinance regulates the use of temporary on-premise signs. The property fronts Lexington Avenue and therefore standards for Sign District 5 apply in this case. The Ordinance permits the property to have no more than one temporary sign not exceeding 40 square feet in area. However, because the building currently has space for lease the property is allowed one additional temporary sign not exceeding 25 square feet in area. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler commented the applicant has asked to display the banners from the date the sign permit is issued to 30 days after the residential property receives the Certificate of Occupancy. Under the Sign Ordinance, the property is allowed to display a permitted temporary sign for no more than 30 days per calendar year. A sign advertising available space for lease in a building can be displayed until seven days after the building is leased. Site Data Future Land Use Plan: Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Apt 4+ Units Zoning: B-2 General Business District Size: 7.65 Acres Topography: Relatively Flat Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler reviewed the surrounding area, in addition to the Plan Evaluation. 1.Site Plan Review Section 1260: Sign Standard Adjustment ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 3 Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number 1 or 2 is met and the required criteria number 3 is met. In this case, criteria one and three are most applicable. The criteria are as follows: 1. There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or, 2. The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the site; and 3. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use. 2. Purpose of the B-2 District According to Section 1320.04Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, the purpose of the B-2 District is as follows: 1. To be a place in which people can live, work and play. 2. To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly community with a distinct identity. 3. To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize. 4. To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with lasting and sustainable value. 5. To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity. 6. To provide an adequate supply of business and professional service areas to meet the needs of residents. 7. To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar safety problems. 8. adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings: 1. The property is located in the B-2 Zoning District and Sign District 5. 2. The property is a conforming use in the B-2 Zoning District under the approved Planned Unit Development. 3. In Sign District 5, one temporary sign is permitted up to 40 square feet. The sign may be in place for up to 30 days per calendar year. 4. In Sign District 5, one temporary sign up to 25 square feet advertising available space in a building is permitted. The sign may be in place until seven days after the building is leased. 5. The proposed signs would be vinyl banners that would each measure 12 feet by 18 feet, or 216 square feet in size. 6. The proposed signs would be displayed from the date the sign permit is issued to 30 days after the residential property receive the Certificate of Occupancy. 7. Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site Plan Review process. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 4 8. The location of the building limits the visibility of temporary signage as permitted in the Sign Code from County Road E and Lexington Avenue. 9. ability to effectively advertise the availability of apartment units in the building. 10. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the B-2 zoning district. 11. The signs would not be visible from residential properties. 12. The sign would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole because they are consistent with the size and layout of the property on which they would be located. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-005 for a sign standard adjustment under the Site Plan Review process. Staff recommends the following conditions be included with the approval: 1. The applicant shall remove all freestanding signs related to the apartment use located on the property upon the completed installation of the two temporary signs. 2. The two temporary wall signs shall be displayed from the date the sign permit is issued to 30 days after the property receives the Certificate of Occupancy. 3. The two temporary signs shall each measure 12 feet by 18 feet and be 216 square feet in size. 4. The applicant shall maintain the two signs in like new condition and repair and/or replace a banner if it is torn or deteriorates during the approved timeline. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted 3.Recommend Denial 4.Table Vice Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Vice Chair Thompson questioned the maximum amount of time that the signs would be hung on the building. City Planner Meagan Beekman anticipated that the certificate of occupancy would be issued in August or September of this year. She noted the signs could be hung on the building no more than 30 days after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if staff knew the square footage of the east and south faces of the building. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 5 Lisa Moe, Stuart Companies, discussed the sign sizes in detail with the Planning Commission. She commented the signs were attractive and proportional to the size of the building and provided maximum visibility. Commissioner Holewa inquired when the remodeling work would be complete. Ms. Moe indicated the work should be completed prior to September as she was hoping to have units available for lease for the upcoming school year. She noted a model unit would be complete on May nd 22. on of the building. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Hames seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13-005 for a Site Plan Review at 1195 County Road E based on the findings of fact, the submitted plan as amended by the four conditions in the May 8, 2013, Planning Case report. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B.Planning Case 13-006; TCAAP Sign Standard Adjustment: Ramsey County Not a Public Hearing. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated the applicant has requested a site plan review for a sign standard adjustment that would allow for a deviation from the Sign Code for temporary freestanding signage on the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) site owned by Ramsey County. Background Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler commented Ramsey County is proposing to install four temporary freestanding signs each measuring 32 square feet in total sign area on the TCAAP site owned by Ramsey County. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler explained the real estate closing for the transfer of the TCAAP site from the U.S. Army to Ramsey County was completed on April 15, 2013. Ramsey County has contracted Carl Bolander and Sons Co. to carry out demolition work and site remediation in order to prepare the site for future development. These activities are scheduled to commence in May 2013, and take approximately 30 months. The proposed sign includes graphics and text that help explain to the public the nature of the work being done on the site and how to obtain more information about the project. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler indicated the sign area for each sign would measure 8 feet by 4 feet, an area of 32 square feet. The signs would be located in four separate locations around the site. Ramsey County has provided the City with a map showing the precise location of each sign: 1. Highway 96 between Highway 10 and Snelling Avenue N. 2. Gate 4 on Highway 10 3. Eastern terminus of County Road H 4. Northwestern corner of the Rice Creek Trail Corridor Section 1250.02 of the Sign Ordinance regulates the use of temporary on-premise signs. The TCAAP property falls within two separate sign districts. The portion of the property fronting Highway 96 is in Sign District 6. The remainder of the property is in Sign District 9. One of the proposed sign locations is within District 6, while the other three are within District 9. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 6 Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated the Sign Ordinance permits one temporary freestanding sign not exceeding 22.5 square feet in area on the portion of the property fronting Highway 96. Temporary freestanding signs are not permitted on the remainder of the site. The applicant has proposed to display the signs for the duration of the demolition and remediation project on the TCAAP site. Under the Sign Ordinance, the property is allowed to display a permitted temporary sign for no more than 30 days per calendar year. Site Data Future Land Use Plan: Mixed Business; Park Preserve Existing Land Use: Vacant; Parks and Open Space Zoning: M-B Mixed Business; R-1 Single Family Residential Size: 427 acres Topography: Rolling Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler reviewed the surrounding area and the plan evaluation. Plan Evaluation 1. Site Plan Review Section 1260: Sign Standard Adjustment Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number 1 or 2 is met and the required criteria number 3 is met. In this case, criteria 1 and 3 are most applicable. The criteria are as follows: 1. There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or, 2. The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the site; and 3. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use. Staff explained that site conditions on the TCAAP property justify a sign adjustment to allow the sign in Sign District 6 to be reasonably visible from the roadway adjacent to the site. This proposed sign would be located on Highway 96, which carries higher speed traffic and where there is a significant distance between vehicles and the property. Given that the signs are designed to provide the public with information about the project, an adjustment to the permitted sign area that would allow this sign to be clearly visible from Highway 96 is warranted. Additionally, an adjustment to the Sign District 9 regulations that prohibit any freestanding signs should be granted. The TCAAP property covers a total of 427 acres of land. Under the Sign Ordinance, Ramsey County would only be able to place signage about the TCAAP project at the southern end of the site on Highway 96. In order for the County to effectively inform a greater percentage of the public about the work being done on the TCAAP site, signs will need to be located at additional sites on the property. It is a benefit to the public for the County to be able to inform interested people about the activities on the TCAAP site; therefore, an adjustment to the Sign ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 7 District 9 standards to allow an additional three temporary freestanding signs on the TCAAP site is warranted. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler noted the Sign Ordinance permits a property to display a temporary sign for 30 days per calendar year. However, the demolition and site remediation work on the TCAAP property is expected to take 30 months. Allowing Ramsey County to display the temporary signage until work on the site is completed would ensure that a source of information about the project was available to the general public for its duration. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler provided the Findings of Fact for review: General Findings 1. The property is located in the Mixed Business and Single Family Residential Zoning Districts. 2. The property is located in Sign District 6 and Sign District 9. 3. In Sign District 6, one temporary freestanding sign is permitted up to 22.5 square feet. The sign may be in place for up to 30 days per calendar year. 4. In Sign District 9, no temporary freestanding signs are permitted. 5. Ramsey County is proposing four temporary signs. 6. The proposed signs would measure 8 feet by 4 feet with a sign area of 32 square feet. 7. The proposed signs would be displayed for the duration of the demolition and remediation project on the TCAAP site. 8. Section 1260 of the Sign Code permits deviation from the Sign Code through the Site Plan Review process. 9. Site conditions limit the visibility of signs from adjacent roadways. 10. to share information about the TCAAP project with the public. 11. Sign Code regulations on the permit length of temporary signage would limit Ramsey 12. The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the Mixed Business and Single Family Residential Zoning Districts. 13. The sign would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole because providing information about the TCAAP project is a public benefit. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-006 for a sign standard adjustment under the Site Plan Review process. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler reviewed the options available to the Planning Commission on this matter: 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted 3.Recommend Denial 4.Table Vice Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Holewa questioned where the northernmost sign would be located. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 8 Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler explained this sign would be on the Rice Creek Trail and would inform the public that the area was now a construction site. Commissioner Holewa asked when the signs would be removed. City Planner Meagan Beekman indicated Ramsey County would remove the signs when the remediation work was complete. She stated this could be added as a condition. Vice Chair Thompson requested another condition be added to assure the signs remain in good condition. Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Hames seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13-006 for a Site Plan Review at the Ramsey County TCAAP site based on the finds of fact, the submitted plan, and the May 8, 2013, Planning Case report with two conditions. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A.B-2 District Design Standards Discussion. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler requested the Planning Commission review initial recommendations for amendments to the B-2 District Design Standards and provide further direction to staff. Background Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated that on October 27, 2008, the City Council adopted the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District. The plan included design guidelines for development and redevelopment in the B-2 District. These guidelines addressed fundamental site planning and design principals and proposed standards for building height and density, façade treatment, pedestrian circulation, parking, and landscaping. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler noted the City Council subsequently approved ordinance amendments on November 24, 2008, that adapted the design guidelines contained in the Guiding Plan for the Zoning Code. These guidelines are located in Section 1325.05 of the Zoning Code, Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development, Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler explained that the B-2 design standards have not been revised since their adoption in 2008. During this period, three development projects in the B-2 District have been required to meet the design standards: Planning Case 09-011: Arden Plaza Master Planned Unit Development Planning Case 11- Planning Case 12-019: 1201 County Road E Master Planned Unit Development Through the process of both reviewing these development proposals and seeing the projects built out, Staff has had the opportunity to identify components of the B-2 design standards that may require adjustments or additions. Staff is currently drafting changes to design standard provisions on bicycle parking, building materials, and commercial transparency; however, additional amendments may be necessary as Staff continues its review of the existing design standards. These revisions are ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 9 needed in order to update the design standards to reflect new practices and standards, to provide developers wit development review process, and to ensure that future development in the B-2 District is well designed. Discussion Bicycle Parking Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated Section P of the B-2 District design standards addresses pedestrian and bicycle circulation improvements. Specifically, the section states that projects which are required to meet the design standards must comply with the following ear a public additional guidance is given regarding the design, dimensions, or location of bicycle parking on the site. Further, a minimum number of bicycle parking spaces is not specified. Staff has drafted an amendment to the design standards to provide detailed specifications on bicycle parking (Attachment A). These revisions address what qualifies as bicycle parking, where bicycle parking should be located in relation to buildings and the overall site, dimension and installation requirements, and the total number of bicycle parking spaces required. Staff reviewed bicycle parking regulations used in other municipalities to inform the draft revisions. Municipalities consulted included Roseville, St. Paul, and Minneapolis. Additionally, information on dimension criteria for bicycle parking was obtained from the Minnesota Department of Transportation Bikeway Facility Design Manual. Building Materials Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler commented Section D of the B-2 District design standards specifies acceptable and undesirable exterior building materials. Staff has revised this section to expand and refine the list of permitted and discouraged materials as well as to build in more flexibility for Staff in the development review process. Staff has conducted research on high-quality building materials that are not currently on the acceptable materials list and which meet B-2 design guidelines. Many of these materials are also permitted by municipalities in the metro that have established similar design standards for their primary commercial centers or downtowns. Design guidelines for Roseville, Shoreview, Burnsville, and Hopkins were reviewed. Staff has relied on industry standards and aesthetic considerations in determining which materials are appropriate as principal building materials as opposed to trim and accent materials. The draft revision to the building materials section incorporates these new materials. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated the section on undesirable building materials has been revised to include more stringent restrictions on the use of mirrored or reflective glass in the B-2 District. Previously, the extensive use of mirrored glass on the first floor of a building was listed as undesirable. Staff believes the City should discourage the use of this material entirely in the district. Given the pace at which building material technology evolves, Staff believes a provision should be included in the section that allows the Community Development Department to approve new materials of equal quality other than those listed. An example of how this provision could be worded is included in the current draft. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 10 Commercial Façade Transparency Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler indicated Section F of the B-2 District design standards includes specifications on the configuration and transparency of windows and doors for commercial properties. The section does not address window transparency for multi-family residential uses, which are allowed in the B-2 District within a Planned Unit Development. Additionally, specific guidelines on the arrangement of windows on a building and the permitted materials for windows and doors are not included. Staff has revised Section F to include transparency requirements for residential facades. These specifications are intended to keep with the established design principals while also recognizing that commercial façade transparency requirements are not necessarilyappropriate for residential buildings. Guidelines on how windows and doors should be arranged along a building wall are included in the draft revisions. These specifications are meant to ensure consistency between the overall design of the building façade and the placement of window and door openings. The list of acceptable materials for windows and doors is based on industry standards and complements the permitted building wall materials for the district. Further Points of Discussion Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated the drafts that Staff are currently working on represent initial recommended revisions to the B-2 District design standards. Staff is hoping to start an on-going discussion with the Planning Commission about the existing design standards and areas within the standards that could be improved. Additional points of discussion might include the following: Do the draft bicycle parking space requirements accurately reflect the demand for bicycle parking facilities in Arden Hills? Are the new materials added to the acceptable building materials list enduring, timeless, and well-detailed? Are there additional types of materials that should be added to the list? concerns regarding the quality of building materials? Are the residential façade transparency requirements appropriate? What additional sections of the B-2 District design standards need to be revised? Staff has identified the provisions on parking and franchise architecture as areas that should be studied further. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler requested the Planning Commission review the initial recommendations for amendments to the B-2 District Design Standards and provide further direction to staff. Vice Chair Thompson opened the floor to Commissioner comments. Commissioner Zimmerman questioned if Chair Larson had provided comment on these points of discussion. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated staff planned to have a discussion with Chair Larson to gain additional feedback. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 11 Commissioner Zimmerman was pleased that the City was reviewing this document further as it would greatly assist in creating a redevelopment vision for the County Road E corridor. Vice Chair Thompson was in favor of reviewing franchise architecture further. Commissioner Hames thanked staff for the high level of detail and photos provided this evening presentation. Commissioner Holewa questioned if the photos would be added to the Zoning Code. City Planner Meagan Beekman commented this has not been done in the past but could be added as an addendum to the code for staff to review with future developers. Commissioner Holewa inquired if the B-2 design standards would come before the Planning Commission for approval. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler stated this would take place after revisions were made to the code. Vice Chair Thompson did not approve of having lists within the code as this could limit future developers and their creativity. Commissioner Hames agreed with this comment. Community Development Intern Matthew Bachler indicated there was a provision within the code that stated other new building materials of equal quality may be approved by the Community Development department. Commissioner Holewa supported the bicycle rack requirements stating one rack per twenty parking spaces seemed adequate. Commissioner Hames agreed. Vice Chair Thompson commented the City may want to consider motorcycle and scooter parking in this B-2 district. Commissioner Zimmerman stated plug-in ports for electric cars should also be considered. Vice Chair Thompson thanked staff for his work on the B-2 Design Standards and for taking comments from the Commission this evening. No action is requested. REPORTS A.Report from the City Council April 15, 2013, City Council Work Session Councilmember McClung reviewed that the City Council directed staff to move forward with the purchase of the tax forfeited property located at 3208 Hamline Avenue N. The property was formally approved for subdivision by the Planning Commission in 2008, as the Christianson Estates Plat. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 12 The City has closed on the triangle parcel located at 3151 Lake Johanna Boulevard. The City Council directed staff to move forward with instal and landscaping the site. Staff is working with a landscape architect to design the landscaping plan and it is anticipated that work will be completed on the site and the gateway sign installed in June. April 29, 2013, City Council Meeting Councilmember McClung stated the City Council unanimously approved a contract with Kimley- Horn for the AUAR, Master Planning, and Regulations and Policies for the TCAAP site in an amount not to exceed $426,004. The City Council awarded a contract to repaint the south water tower located on Red Fox Road. The Council directed staff to move forward with adding logos to the tower as part of the repainting process. B.TCAAP Update Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher stated Ramsey County closed on the purchase of TCAAP on April 15. The full Notice to Proceed has been issued to Bolander and Sons. Installation of erosion control and the pre-demolition removal of hazardous materials (i.e., fluorescent bulbs/ballasts, asbestos) has begun. Building demolition will begin in approximately two weeks. Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher explained the gate at Highway Avenue/County Road H will be the main gate, and everyone entering the site will need to check in at the Bolander construction office. The area outside of the perimeter at Highway Avenue/County Road H will be signed No Parking to eliminate conflicts with construction traffic. Barriers will be placed to separate Rice Creek trail users from construction traffic. It was noted the Ramsey County sheriff will be patrolling the property. Trespassing and theft of building materials will be prosecuted. Staff reported Ramsey County will hold a public informational meeting for the demolition and remediation project on Tuesday, May 7, 5:00 to 7:00 pm in the Marsden Room at the Ramsey County Public Works Facility. Postcards have been mailed to residents in Arden Hills and surrounding communities. Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher commented the City has contracted with Kimley- Horn to complete the AUAR, Master Plan, and Regulations and Policies for development. This process is anticipated to take 14-18 months. Vice Chair Thompson requested an update on the JDA. Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher indicated the JDA met this past Monday and review. She noted the Master Planning process was being discussed by the JDA at this time. C. Commission and Staff Comments Vice Chair Thompson wished City Planner Meagan Beekman all the best in her new position stating she would be missed by all. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 2013 13 Commissioner Holewa requested the Council discuss the Ramsey County patrolling efforts borhoods. He stated in the past several months there has been no police presence in his neighborhood. City Planner Meagan Beekman announced that the Community Clean-Up Day would be held on May 18, 2013 at the Public Works Facility. ADJOURN Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Hames, to adjourn the May 8, 2013, Planning Commission Meeting at 8:16 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). MEMORANDUM 3.A DATE: June 5, 2013 PC Agenda Item TO: Planning Commission FROM: Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern SUBJECT: Planning Case #13-009 - This application requires a PUBLIC HEARING Applicant: Stuart Companies Property Location: 1201 County Road E Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment Requested Action The applicant has requested a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for a site-wide master sign plan to install monument, wall, and auxiliary signs at 1201 County Road E. Background On December 21, 2012, the City Council approved a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to remodel the existing structure at 1201 County Road E and construct 74 residential unit apartments and approximately 20,000 square feet of specialty retail space on the site in Planning Case 12-019. A signage plan for the property was not included in the approved PUD. The City Council approved a Site Plan Review for the property on May 13, 2013, allowing two temporary wall signs each measuring 216 square feet for the E Street Flats building in Planning Case 13-005. Since receiving City Council approval, the property owner has installed the two signs. The signage will remain on the building until 30 days after the property receives the Certificate of Occupancy, which the property owner expects to receive in August 2013. 1.Overview of Request: The property at 1201 County Road E is owned by TAT Properties and is represented in this case by Stuart Companies. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the existing PUD to include a master sign plan for the property. Monument, wall, and auxiliary signage are included in the plan. The applicant has submitted a letter describing the request, images of the proposed signage, and site plans showing where signs would be installed on the property (Attachment A). City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 1 of 8 Two monument signs are proposed for the principal land uses on the property: the E Street Flats residential apartment building and the E Street retail stores. The sign copy area of the E Street Flats sign would measure 6.4 feet wide by 7 feet tall, or 44.8 square feet. The E Street Shoppes sign would measure 6.4 feet wide by 8 feet tall, or 51.2 square feet. Both signs would sit on a two foot tall stone base designed to match the new stone work being added to south façade. The signs wouldbe located on County Road E adjacent to the two principal site entrances on the eastern and western end of the property. The applicant is proposing a wall sign measuring 25 feet by 3.5 feet (87.5 square feet) for the primary retail bay in the E Street Shoppes building. Both of the two smaller retail bays would be allowed wall signs measuring up to 50 square feet in area. An additional wall sign is proposed to help brand the retail component as the E Street Shoppes. The proposed E Street Shoppes sign is comprised of individual cut, back-lit letters at a maximum height of 24 inches. The total area of this sign would be 34 square feet. Wall signage is proposed for the E Street Flats residential apartment building as well. One sign would be located on the south wall of the building facing County Road E and measure 10 feet wide by 5 feet tall, a total area of 50 square feet. The second sign would be installed on the east building wall facing Lexington Avenue and measure 18 feet wide by 3 feet tall, or an area of 54 square feet. Auxiliary signage on the site would be used to provide direction and demarcate the parking lot. Each sign would have the same dimensions: 75 inches in height with a sign copy area of 24 inches by 18 inches. A total of 16 auxiliary signs are proposed. The signs would identify parking spaces as being reserved for customers, employees, renters, or guests, and would define a loading and delivery zone for the retail property. 2.Surrounding Area: Direction Future Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use Light Industrial and Office, North CommercialB-3 Service Business District Industrial, Commercial South Community Mixed Use B-2 General Business DistrictCommercial Commercial East City of ShoreviewCity of Shoreview City of Shoreview West Community Mixed Use B-2 General Business DistrictCommercial 3.Site Data: Future Land Use Plan: Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Apt 4+ Units Zoning: B-2 General Business District Size: 7.65 Acres Topography: Relatively Flat City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 2 of 8 Plan Evaluation 1. Chapter 12 Sign Code: Section 1240.02 Permitted Sign Type, Area, Height, and Illumination by Sign District Freestanding Signage Sign District 4 1201 County Road E Sign Type County Rd E PUD Amendment Frontage (Proposed) (Permitted) FREESTANDING Type Monument Monument Max Area (Sign 1) 50 SF 51.2 SF Max Area (Sign 2) 25 SF 44.8 SF Max Height 10 FT 10 FT Lighting E/I/B Internal (a) E = external, I = internal, B = backlit The property at 1201 County Road E is located in Sign District 4. For properties not included in a Planned Unit Development, 50 square feet of freestanding signage is permitted in this District. Since the site fronts two public streets (Lexington Avenue and County Road E), the property owner is allowed an additional freestanding sign not to exceed 25 square feet. Freestanding signs are not permitted to exceed 10 feet in height. The Sign Code includes specific design standards for freestanding signs in this District. Only freestanding monument signs are permitted and the signs must be designed so that the sign copy is supported by a solid base of brick or rock-faced block in a color similar or complimentary to the main structure on the site. Materials used for the sign base are required to extend at least one- half way up the sides of the sign face. Between the two monument signs, a total of 96 square feet of sign copy area is proposed. The E Street Shoppes sign exceeds the allowed area by 1.2 feet while the E Street Flats sign exceeds the allowed area by 19.8 square feet. The proposed additional sign areafor the E Street Flats building is reasonable in this case because there are two distinct land uses on the property each requiring sufficient signage to advertise and provide directions. The applicant is requesting to place both monument signs on County Road E. This deviates from the Sign Code, which requiresa permitted second freestanding sign to be placed on the other public street that the building fronts. Since the building is setback approximately 360 feet from Lexington Avenue and there is no driveway access to the property off of this street, it is reasonable to have both signs located on County Road E where the primary entrances are. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 3 of 8 The stone base material does not extend one-half way up the sides of the proposed monument signs. Incorporating the base material along the sides of the E Street Shoppes sign would make it difficult to replace the individual tenant panels on the sign. Althoughthis design constraint does not exist for the E Street Flats sign, the applicant is looking to maintain aesthetic consistency between the two signs and has not include the base material on the sides of this sign. Wall Signage Sign District 4 1201 County Sign Type County Rd E Road E Frontage PUD Amendment (Permitted) (Proposed) WALL Max Total Area (Includes E Street 200 SF 325.5 SF Flats building and 3 retail tenants) Max Height None - Lighting (a) E/I/B Backlit (a) E = external, I = internal, B = backlit Properties in Sign District 4 are permitted a total of 50 square feet of wall signage. In multi- tenant buildings or sites, the permitted sign area may be installed by each individual business establishment that has some exclusive use of the primary level of the building. The Sign Code does not directly address the use of wall signage by property owners of multi-tenant buildings for the purpose of branding the property. The applicant is proposing 87.5 square feet of wall signage for the largest retail bay, which exceeds the requirements by 27.5 square feet. This request is justified given that the tenant will occupy 114 feet of frontage. While there are no guidelines on permitted wall signage for property owners, the proposed E Street Shoppes sign, measuring 34 square feet, is less than what an individual business establishment would be allowed and is deemed reasonable in this case. All other proposed wall signage for the E Street Shoppes building meets the Sign Code requirements. The applicant is requesting an additional 54 square feet of wall signage for the E Street Flats building. A total of 104 square feet of wall signage is proposed. This request for flexibility is reasonable because the size of the building and the large building setbacks from the public streets make signage difficult to see. The building is setback approximately 360 feet from Lexington Avenue and 70 feet from County Road E. The proposed wall signs would cover approximately 2.3% of the east building façade and 0.5% of the south building façade. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 4 of 8 Auxiliary Signage Sign District 4 1201 County Road E Sign Type County E PUD Amendment Frontage (Proposed) (Permitted) AUXILIARY Max area per 8 SF 3 SF sign Wall Height 8 FT - Freestanding 8 FT 6.25 FT Height Auxiliary signs must be 8 feet or less in height and are allowed a sign copy area of 8 square feet. There are no provisions in the Sign Code regulating the number of auxiliary signs allowed per property. The proposed auxiliary signage plan meets the Sign Code requirements. 2. Chapter 12 Sign Code: Section 1260.01 Sign Standard Adjustment Section 1260.01 of the Sign Code permits adjustments to sign height, number, type, lighting, area, and/or location through the site plan review process if criteria number 1 or 2 is met and the required criteria number 3 is met. The criteria are as follows: 1.There are site conditions which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site; or, 2.The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that will enhance the area or that is more consistent with the architecture and design of the site; and, 3.The sign adjustment will not result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the zoning district in which the property is located or the current land use. While the above criteria are not directly referenced or required for PUD Amendment requests to add signage to a property, they do provide guidance for evaluating these types of applications. In this case, criteria one and three are most applicable. The PUD process itself permits the City to be flexible with signage standards depending on the needs and impact of a particular use. 3. Chapter 13 Zoning Code: 1325.05, Subd. 8 Additional Design Standards for New Development Redevelopment, and Modifications to Existing Sites in the B2 and B3 Districts Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code establishes design standards for the business City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 5 of 8 districts of Arden Hills. The standards in this section are only applicable to the building or site components being developed or altered. In this case, the specific guidelines on signs are pertinent: 1.Business signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style, composition, materials, colors and details of the building and should be an integral part of the building. Signs shall be incorporated into the facades of the building rather than extending past the roof line and should not project more than twelve (12) inches beyond the plane of the facades. Retail business wall signs shall be located in a position above the front window that is located consistently among stores. 2.All other provisions in Chapter 12, Sign Code, shall apply. The proposed signage in the plan meets the requirements contained in Section 1325.05, Subd. 8 of the Zoning Code. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed PUD Amendment at 1201 County Road E would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: 1.The property is located in the B-2 Zoning District and in Sign District 4. 2.The Planned Unit Development at 1201 County Road E was approved by the City on December 21, 2012 in Planning Case 12-019. The approved Planned Unit Development did not include a master sign plan for the property. 3.The applicant is proposing an amendment to the approved PUD for a site-wide sign plan that includes monument, wall, and auxiliary signage. 4.The City has adopted the Guiding Plan for the B2 District that includes design principals and standards for signage in the area. 5.The proposed PUD Amendment is in substantial conformance with the requirements of . 6. Zoning Code. 7. requested by the applicant due to the site conditions and land use mix unique to the property at 1201 County Road E. 8. regulations through a negotiated process with a developer. 9.The signage plan would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties or the City as a whole because they are consistent with the size and layout of the property on which they would be located. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 6 of 8 Notice Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin and notice was prepared by the City and mailed to residents within five hundred (500) feet of the subject property. Resident Comments Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regard to this planning case. Staff Recommendation Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case 13-009 for a Planned Unit Development Amendment at 1201 County Road E. Staff recommends the following five conditions be included with the approval: 1.The master sign plan shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2.Freestanding signs shall be monument type ground signs with the copy resting on and supported by a solid base of brick or rock-faced block in a color similar to or complimentary to the main structure on the site. The materialof the base must extend at least one-half way up the sides of the sign face. 3.Freestanding signs shall be located at least five (5) feet from any property line and shall not project over the property line. 4.Wall signs shall be comprised of individual cut, back-lit letters and shall not extend more than twelve (12) inches from the wall they are attached to. 5.In the event that the property at 1201 County Road E is subdivided to create a new parcel abutting Lexington Avenue and County Road E, the new corner parcel will be permitted only one freestanding sign and this sign shall be located on Lexington Avenue. Signage along County Road E may be added to the freestanding sign authorized on the adjoining parcel to the west. Options 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13-009 for a PUD Amendment at 1201 County Road E based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the five conditions in the June 5, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 7 of 8 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 13- 009 for a PUD Amendment at 1201 County Road E based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the June 5, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. 3.Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 13-009 for a PUD Amendment at 1201 Country Road E based on the following findings of fact: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4.Table: Motion to table Planning Case 13-009 for a PUD Amendment at 1201 County Road E in order to gather the following information: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May 6, 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by July 5, 2013 (60 days), unless the city provides the petitioner with written reasons for and additional 60 day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A.Application and Supporting Materials B.Site Map City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 8 of 8 ATTACHMENTA MONUMENT SIGNAGE 76.8” 96” JIMS SHOES stone base to match new stone work on building 24” proposed location MONUMENT SIGNAGE 76.8” streetflats 84” YOUR HOME. OUR COMMITMENT. stone base to match new stone work on building 24” proposed location DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE (Generic design - see following pdf for locations) DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE (Location map) A3 B3B2B2 A2 A1 B1 A1 B1 A1 B1 A1 C A1A1 C Sign Key: A1 - customer parkingB1 - RenterC - Directional A2 - Loading/Delivery A3 - EmployeB3 - Guest Future Resident Guest Customer Employee Loading/ Resident Parking Parking Parking Parking Delivery Parking Between Signs Between Signs YOUR HOME. OUR COMMITMENT.YOUR HOME. OUR COMMITMENT.YOUR HOME. OUR COMMITMENT. A1A2A3B1B2B3C BUILDING SIGNAGE - E STREET 18 = 33= 22.25= 29.8 logo signage on east side of building facing Lexington BUILDING SIGNAGE - E STREET 120 logo signage on south side of building facing County Road E BUILDING SIGNAGE - COMMERCIAL Fitness knocked out of the red rectangle and back lit. The sign is sized to 25 wide by 3.5 with a total square footag e street shoppes will be individual cut back lit letters at a ma height of 24 with a total square footage of 35 sf. Additional commercial tenants will have up to 50 square feet of storefront logo signage. 1201 County Road E 0360.00720.0Feet 720.0 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and 1:4,320 is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be NAD_1983_HARN_Adj_MN_Ramsey_Feetaccurate, current, or otherwise reliable. © Ramsey County Enterprise GISTHIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION MEMORANDUM 3.B DATE: June 5, 2013 PC Agenda Item TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Planning Case #13-008 - This application requires a PUBLIC HEARING Applicant: Bob Revoir for Mutual Service Life Insurance Company (aka Country Financial) Property Location: 2 Pine Tree Drive Request: Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Requested Action Consider approval of Planning Case 13-008 including a request to amend Section 1320.05 of the Zoning Code to allow schools for higher education as a conditional use in the B-2 zoning district. The request also includes a conditional use permit (CUP) for Mutual Service Life Insurance Company (also known as Country Life Insurance Company and Country Financial) to allow a higher education use as a tenant in the office building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive. Both requests are as presented in the June 5, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. Background 1.Overview of Request The City has received a proposal (Attachment A) from Bob Revoir, Cushman & Wakefield, to obtain a CUP to allow a higher education use in the office building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive in the B-2 Zoning District. Mr. Revoir is a real estate broker representing Country Financial. Country Financial would like to lease space to Bethel University for administrative offices, classrooms, and meeting space. This application includes two distinct requests: 1.Zoning Code Amendment to allow schools for higher education as a Conditional Use in the B-2 District. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 1 of 6 2.Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a higher education use as a tenant in the office building located at 2 Pine Tree Drive. 2. Background Country Financial, located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, has applied for a Zoning Code amendment to allow higher education uses in the B-2 zoning district with a Conditional Use Permit. The property includes a 5-story, 227,138 square foot multi-tenant office building. Although the building address is located at 2 Pine Tree Drive, a small portion of the building and most of the parking lot is located on the parcel with the address of 12 Pine Tree Drive. The size of the parcels located at 2 and 12 Pine Tree Drive are 19.16 and 21.52 acres, respectively, for a total size of 40.68 acres. Country Financial has vacated much of the building and is currently marketing the building for sale or lease. Approximately 62% of the building is currently vacant. Country Financial has received a request for leased space from Bethel University. Bethel would like to lease approximately 26,000 square feet for administrative offices, general and specialized classrooms, meeting rooms, common spaces, and other general educational and related purposes. Most classes will be held between 5:30 pm and 10:00 pm, Monday through Thursday. The tenant will also use the leased space during the hours of 8:00 am to 10:00 pm Monday through Friday and 8:00 am to 4:00 pm on Saturday, although this use will be more limited during normal business hours and weekends. According to information provided by Country Financial, Bethel students, guests, faculty, and administration will not exceed 4 per 1,000 rentable feet leased during normal business hours and no more than 8 per 1,000 rentable square feet after normal building hours. The property currently has approximately 777 surface parking stalls, or approximately one space per every 290 gross building square foot (one space per every 250 square feet of gross floor area is required by the Zoning Code for business and professional office uses). The applicant does not propose to add parking due to this use. The proposed use will not affect the exterior of the building. The tenant would like to sign a long-term lease for the facility with a scheduled occupancy date of August 15, 2013. The City approved a similar zoning amendment request on May 22, 2006 (Attachment C) that was brought forward by Rob Davidson for property owned at 1212 Red Fox Road in the B-4 District. In that case, the City Council determined that higher education and special education uses were consistent with the purpose of the B-4 District, and a special use permit was approved. Staff has prepared a draft amendment (Attachment D) to Section 1320.05 (Land Use Chart) of the Zoning Code that adds School, higher education as a Conditional Use in the B-2 Zoning District. The applicant has submitted information addressing the request for a Zoning Code Amendment and CUP (Attachment A). City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 2 of 6 3.Surrounding Area: Direction Future Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use North CMU Community Mixed Use B-2 General Business District Commercial P/OS Park and Open Space South and LDR Low Density R-1 Single Family Residential Residential and Parks/Open Space Residential B-2 General Business District; CMU Community Mixed Use; R-4 Multiple Dwelling District; HDR High Density East and R-3 Townhouse & Low Commercial and Residential Residential; and LDR Low Density Multiple Dwelling Density Residential District West LDR Low Density Residential R-1 Single Family Residential Residential 4.Site Data: Future Land Use Plan: CMU Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Commercial Zoning: B-2 General Business District Size: 40.68 acres (2 and 12 Pine Tree Drive) with a 227,138 square foot office building Topography: Relatively Flat Plan Evaluation 1.Zoning Regulations The City does not have specific criteria for evaluating proposed Zoning Code amendments or additions. However, the following questions should be considered when reviewing the proposal: 1.Would the proposed use be compatible with the other uses in the B-2 District? 2.Would the proposed use be consistent with the purpose of the B-2 District? The higher education use proposed by the applicant includes office, classroom and meeting space. Uses that allow office and assembly that are currently permitted in the B-2 District include: business service; medical office clinic; non-profit club or lodge; sports & fitness clubs; indoor commercial recreation; daycare facility for over 10 people; financial institution and service; and office. Office and assembly uses that are currently allowed as Conditional Uses in the B-2 District include: brewpub; house of worship; multiple occupancy building; public use; research & development facility; schools for specialized education; and indoor theater. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 3 of 6 Higher education schools are currently permitted in the Mixed Business District (TCAAP) and allowed as Conditional Uses in the B-1 Limited Business, B-4 Retail Center, CC Civic Center and Mixed Residential Districts. According to Section 1320.04 Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, the statedpurpose of the B-2 District is as follows: 1.To be a place in which people can live, work and play. 2.To create a compact, architecturally diverse, pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly community with a distinct identity. 3.To provide a connected sidewalk system and places for people to gather and socialize. 4.To implement design standards to promote an attractive environment with lasting and sustainable value. 5.To group compatible retail and service business uses that tend to draw trade that is naturally interchangeable and promotes business prosperity. 6.To provide an adequate supply of business and professional service areas to meet the needs of residents. 7.To minimize the effects of traffic congestion, noise, odor, glare and similar safety problems. 8. adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2008. 2. Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Criteria Section 1355.04 Subd 3 The following CUP criteria would apply to schools for higher education in the B-2 District: Section 1355.04 Subd. 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a Conditional Use Permit Amendment. The Planning Commission and City Council should consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the owners and occupants of the surrounding land, in particular, and the community as a whole, in general, including but not limited to the following factors: 1.Existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions; 2.Noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, and other nuisance characteristics; 3.Drainage; 4.Population density; 5.Visual and land use compatibility with uses and structures on surrounding land; 6.Adjoining land values; 7.Park dedications where applicable; and the 8.Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose and intent of theZoning Code and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 4 of 6 Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: Zoning Code Amendment Evaluation Findings: 1.The property at 2 Pine Tree Drive is located in the B-2 Zoning District. 2.The proposed use is compatible with the other uses in the B-2 District. 3.The proposed use is consistent with the stated purpose of the B-2 District. Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings: 1.The proposed use will primarily occupy the building and parking areas after normal business hours which will allow shared parking with weekday office users. 2.The proposal will have minimal impacts on noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid and solid waste. 3.The proposal will not affect drainage on the property. 4.The proposal will not affect the population density on the property. 5.The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on neighboring properties. 6.The park dedication requirement does not apply in this application. Notice Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin and notice was prepared by the City and mailed to residents within five hundred (500) feet of the subject property. Resident Comments Staff has not received any letters, e-mails, or telephone calls from property owners or occupants in regard to this planning case. Staff Recommendation Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case #13-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drive. Staff recommends the following three conditions be included with the approval: 1.The project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2.The applicant will apply for City approval for any changes to exterior signage. 3.The applicant will request an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit for any increase in square footage or in intensity of the higher education use. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 5 of 6 Options 1.Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case #13-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drive based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the three conditions in the June 5, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. 2.Recommend Approval as Submitted: Motion to recommend approval of Planning Case #13- 008 for a Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit at2 Pine Tree Drive based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans in the June 5, 2013, report to the Planning Commission. 3.Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case #13-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drive based on the following findings of fact: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and why those reasons cannot be mitigated. 4.Table: Motion to table Planning Case #13-008 for a Zoning Code Amendment and Conditional Use Permit at 2 Pine Tree Drive in order to gather the following information: a specific reason and/or information request should be included with a motion to table. Deadline for Agency Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on May 6, 2013. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by July 4, 2013 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60-day review period. The City may, with the consent of the applicant, extend the review period beyond the initial 120 days. Attachments A Application Materials B Site Map C City Council meeting minutes, May 22, 2006 D Amended Section 1320.05 of the City Code, Draft City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2013\PC 13-008 - Country Financial Zoning Amendment and CUP Page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENTA 2 Pine Tree Drive Legend City Halls Schools Hospitals Fire Stations Police Stations Recreational Centers Parcel Points Parcel Boundaries Streets (8K-16K) Interstate US Higway; MN Highway Ramp County Road Municipal Street Service Road Private Road Restricted Access Route A99 Notes Enter Map Description 960.201,920.4 0Feet 1,920.4 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be NAD_1983_HARN_Adj_MN_Ramsey_Feetaccurate, current, or otherwise reliable. © Ramsey County Enterprise GIS DivisionTHIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION ATTACHMENTC ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – May 22, 2006 9 still have the option to deny the preliminary plat at a later meeting. A tabled application, whether in full or in part, would be remanded back to the Planning Commission for further review. If the full application was denied, the findings from the Planning Commission should be cited as the reason for the denial unless other findings are developed. Once denied, Section 8.E.4 of the Zoning Ordinance states that an application cannot be resubmitted for the subject properties within six months of the date of denial. It may be possible to grant a waiver to this provision if the City Council so desired. He noted the City received the completed application for this request on April 10, 2006. Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by June 10, 2006 (within 60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 6-day review period. The City may, with the petitioner’s consent, extend the review period beyond the 120 days. Councilmember Larson stated given the recommendation of staff, the Planning Commission, and applicant’s request, he believed they should table this. Tim Horita , property owner of 3685 and 3695 New Brighton Road, requested this be tabled to redesign the proposal. He believed they would be able to address all of the concerns of the Planning Commission and hoped to be able to reconfigure this so they would not need to request a variance. He indicated he would be working with the adjacent property owners regarding this. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to table both the plat and the variance to give the applicant an opportunity to revise the plan and remand this back to the Planning Commission for review. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). D. Planning Case 06-15: Zoning Ordinance Addition for the B-4 Zone Mr. Lehnhoff stated applicant is requesting a Zoning Ordinance addition to allow “higher education” and “special education” as a permitted use in the B-4 Zone. The B-4 Zone encompasses those properties immediately adjacent to Dunlap Street North between Red Fox Road and Grey Fox Road. He indicated although Planning Case 06-016 (Special Use Permit for Higher and Special Education) was dependent upon this planning case, the details of Planning Case 06-015 should not be considered when evaluating the request in this planning case. When reviewing a zoning ordinance amendment or addition, it was important to consider how the change would affect the entire zone instead of one specific property. If approved as requested, higher or special education could be a permitted use on any property in the B-4 Zone. He stated the Planning Commission recommended approval (4-2) of the Zoning Ordinance request to allow higher and special education as a special use in the B-4 Zone. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – May 22, 2006 10 Councilmember Grant stated he did not have a problem with this request and it seemed reasonable to allow higher education and special education as a special use. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to approve the Ordinance Addition to allow higher education and special education as special uses in the B-4 Zone. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). E. Planning Case 06-16: Special Use Permit for Higher Education Mr. Lehnhoff stated the applicant had requested a Special Use Permit for Higher Education and Special Education in the B-4 Zone. If approved, the applicant had indicated an accredited higher educational institution would occupy the space. According to the applicant, the educational space would be used for continuing education and other similar types of educational uses. Due to ongoing negotiations, the applicant had requested that the potential tenant remain anonymous. This application was contingent upon approval of Planning Case 06-015, which was a request to allow higher education and special education as a permitted use in the B-4 Zone. He indicated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Special Use Permit for Higher Education and Special Education in the B-4 Zone, subject to the following seven conditions: 1.The proposed use may increase traffic during certain times of the day when classes are ending or beginning. The applicant is not proposing to increase the number of parking spaces. Overall, the use is unlikely to significantly increase congestion or parking needs. 2.The proposed use will not produce any additional noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, or any other nuisance characteristics. 3.The proposed use will not affect drainage. 4.The proposed use will not affect the permanent population density of the neighborhood. 5.While the exterior will be upgraded, the changes will be compatible with existing uses and structures in the surrounding properties. 6.The park dedication fee does not apply. 7.If higher education is approved as a special use in Planning Case 06-015, then this use will be in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed use does not conflict with the Comprehensive Development Plan. He stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend that the approval be subject to the following five conditions: 1.The building shall not exceed its maximum occupancy at any time. 2.Construction shall not begin without the appropriate permits. 3.Any outdoor signage shall require an approved sign permit. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – May 22, 2006 11 4.If the parking lot is unable to accommodate the parking needs of the building, the applicant shall increase the number of parking stalls to meet the City’s parking requirement through the site plan review process. 5.If the educational use exceeds 80 students, the applicant shall provide proof of parking for the additional students at a rate of one parking space per student. The proof of parking shall include a signed agreement between the property owner and the parking provider, the length of the agreement, and the number of parking spaces provided. The proof of parking and parking agreement and student expansion shall be subject to the approval by the City Planner. He indicated staff has not received any public comments regarding this application. Councilmember Holden asked where they would be able to acquire additional parking spaces. Mr. Lehnhoff responded they could expand some on their property, but the City also allowed shared parking with surrounding properties. He indicated they would need to get a proof of parking for shared parking with other properties. Councilmember Larson asked why they were being asked to give a special use permit for both Mr. special education and higher education. He believed they addressed different things. Lehnhoff stated this would provide additional flexibility. Rob Davidson, 3900 Northwoods Drive #125, stated he was the owner of the 1212 building. He stated they wanted both uses to meet needs of flexibility for market share. He noted this would be a significant investment in improvements so if there was a change in the character of the education, they wanted the flexibility to use either special or higher education. He did not believe parking would be an issue because the school would be in operation after normal business hours. Councilmember Grant stated Mr. Davidson was also responsible for the renovation of Anchor Bank, which was a nice upgrade to that building and he believed this building would be of the Mr. Davidson same caliber. stated the 1212 building was a 1970’s building that needed a lot of renovation. He noted they would renovate the east and north face of the building, which was the only public use of the building. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Pellegrin seconded a motion to approve the Special Use Permit for higher and special education subject to the five recommended conditions as noted in staff’s May 15, 2006 report. Mr. Filla noted the approval of the Special Use Permit has to be effective following the date of publication of the text amendment Ordinance. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ATTACHMENT D City of Arden Hills Chapter 13 Zoning Code Section 1320 District Provisions 1320.05Land Use Chart. œš“z“m 5z­·©z-·­t …­;­t w w w w b. . . . . // D. L L LC[9– aw a. {-wššŒr wzmw;© / / / / / t ;7Ò-·zš“ Section 1320 District Provisions MEMORANDUM 4.A DATE: June 5, 2013 PC Agenda Item TO: Planning Commission FROM: Matthew Bachler, Community Development Intern SUBJECT: Report from the City Council May 13, 2013, City Council Meeting The City Council voted to approve Planning Case 13-005 for a sign standard adjustment at 1195 County Road E and Planning Case 13-006 for a sign standard adjustment at the Ramsey County TCAAP property. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of these two items at their May 8, 2013, regular meeting. May 13, 2013, City Council Work Session The City Attorney ordinance and code enforcement practices. Following the presentation, there was a discussion regarding what additional measures the City should take to better address code enforcement issues. May 28, 2013, City Council Meeting Staff presented a concept plan for the triangle parcel located at 3151 Lake Johanna Boulevard. Included in the plan are a gateway sign, tree plantings, seating areas, and general landscaping. The City Council approved the concept plan and directed staff to move forward with implementing the plan. May 28, 2013, City Council Work Session Kimley Horn presented a draft version of the Public Involvement Plan (PIP) for the TCAAP master planning process. The PIP identifies the goals and expected outcomes of the public involvement process, project stakeholders, public involvement tools, and project schedule. The City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 1 of 2 Joint Development Authority will review the PIP at its June 5, 2013 meeting before it goes back to the City Council for formal approval. Staff presented draft versions of the Parks and Open Space Ordinance and Park Preserve Ordinance. These drafts incorporated the comments staff received from the Planning Commission at their April 3, 2013 meeting regarding the two ordinances. Staff received feedback on the drafts and will make additional revisions before bringing the ordinances back to the Planning Commission for a formal hearing. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for June 5, 2013 Page 2 of 2