HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-07-11-PC Chair
Clayton Larson 1245 W. Highway 96
Commissioners nFN HILLS Arden Hills, MN 55112
Angela Harries _ QEN
Andrew Holewa 651.792.7800
Ww`^i•ci.arden-hills.mn.us
Samuel Scott Arden Hills
Roberta Thompson
Clayton Zimmerman Planning Commission
September 7, 2011
City Vision
A strong community that values our unique environment, our fiscal soundness,
and our tradition as a desirable city in which to live, work, and play.
Agenda
Regular Planning Commission Convenes 6:30 PM
Call to Order— Role Call
1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
2. MINUTES
A. August 3, 2011, regular meeting
3. PLANNING CASES
A. Planning Case 11-019; PUD Amendment; Hood Packaging Corporation; 1887 Gateway Blvd — Public
hearing
B. Planning Case 11-020; CUP Amendment and Variance; Mounds View High School; 1900 Lake Valentine
Rd — Public Hearing
4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
REPORTS 75- S
A. Report from the City Council
B. Planning Commission Comments
6. ADJOURNMENT
A quorum of the City Council may be present at this meeting.
Planning Cases are available online at-
http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us/planninqcases
� -AVEN HILLS
Approved:
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS,MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY,AUGUST 3,2011
6:30 P.M. -ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair Clayton Larson called to order the regular
Planning Commission meeting at 6:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present were: Chair Clayton Larson, Commissioners Roberta Thompson, Andy Holewa,
Clayton Zimmerman, and Angela Hames
Absent: Commissioner Samuel Scott
• Also present were: City Planner Meagan Beekman; Councilmember Fran Holmes;
Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher; and Recording Secretary Debbie
Wolfe.
Chair Larson noted the Planning Commission is looking for one additional member and an
alternate.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA—AUGUST 3, 2011
The Agenda was approved as presented.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. July 6, 2011 —Planning Commission Regular Meeting
Commissioner Holewa moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to approve
the July 6, 2011, Planning Commission Regular Meeting as presented. The motion
carried unanimously (5-0).
PLANNING CASES
• A. Planning Case 11-016; Preliminary and Final Plat, and Final PUD Amendment;
Arden Plaza,LLC; 3585 Lexington Avenue—Public Hearing
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—August 3,2011 2
City Planner Meagan Beekman stated the applicant has requested approval of an
amendment to the Final PUD for Phase I of the Arden Plaza Master PUD, and a
Preliminary and Final Plat to subdivide the property into three parcels. City Planner
Meagan Beekman noted the Master PUD Concept Plan was approved in June 2009. She
reviewed the three phases of the project. A final PUD for Phase I was also approved in
June 2009. Since the approval, Walgreen's has removed itself from the project and it has
been replaced by a CVS pharmacy. City Planner Meagan Beekman reviewed the Phase I
Site Plan with the modifications since approval. City Planner Meagan Beekman provided
drawings of the building elevations and reviewed the landscaping plan. The driveway
details were reviewed. Of the 46 design standards for the B-2 District, 44 are met or
exceeded by Phase I of the proposal. Phases II and III will be reviewed as the
applications are received.
Staff offers the following eleven findings of fact for this proposal:
1. The applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to the Final PUD for Phase I
and a Preliminary and Final Plat for the Arden Plaza property.
2. The PUD process allows for flexibility within the City's regulations through a
negotiated process with a developer.
3. The Arden Plaza property is located in the B2 General Business District.
4. The proposed redevelopment is a permitted use in the B2 District.
5. The City has adopted the Guiding Plan for the B2 District that outlines future
development principals for the area.
6. The City has adopted design standards for the 132 district within the Zoning Code. •
7. The Master PUD and Final PUD for Phase I are in substantial conformance with the
requirements of the City's Zoning Code and design standards.
8. The Master PUD and Final PUD for Phase I are in substantial conformance with the
Guiding Plan for the B2 District.
9. The Master PUD and Final PUD for Phase I are in substantial conformance with the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
10. Where the plan is not in conformance with the City's Zoning Code, flexibility has
been requested by the applicant and/or conditions have been placed on an approval
that would mitigate the nonconformity.
11. The application is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or
the community as a whole.
Because this application would be amending the already approved Development
Agreement, only those conditions that relate to the amended items are addressed in the
conditions of approval. Staff is recommended approval based on the findings of fact
subject to the following six conditions:
1. The applicant shall continue to abide by the conditions of all previous Master PUD
and Final PUD for Phase I,permits, and reviews, except as hereinafter amended.
2. The project shall be completed in accordance with the submitted plans 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 and
City Council.
3. The applicant shall file the Final Plat with Ramsey County within 180 days of the
approval from the City.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—August 3,2011 3
4. A development agreement amendment shall be prepared by the City Attorney and
• subject to City Council approval. The agreement shall be executed prior to the
issuance of any permits or site preparation.
5. The applicant hereby agrees to waive their right to appeal any special assessments
levied against Lot 1, Lot 2, or Lot 3 for streetscape improvements, associated with the
implementation of the Guiding Plan for the B-2 District, provided that, the special
assessments do not exceed an amount equal to $350 per lineal foot of frontage on
County Road E and further provided that the properties are specially assessed in the
same manner as other similarly situated parcels.
6. The applicant shall construct parking lot and landscaping improvements previously
planned for Phase I, as well as provide a plan for updating the rest of the existing
retail center, as part of Phase 11.
Chair Larson opened the floor to Commissioner comments.
Commissioner Zimmerman questioned the gathering area that was part of the Building 1
and Building 3 plan. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated Building 2 would have a
gathering area as part of the standards. With the exclusion of Building 3 there is no need
for outdoor seating or outdoor gathering area. Bike racks will be part of Phase I along
with a park bench. The pedestrian connection is part of Phase I.
Chair Larson questioned the difference between the CVS plan and the previously
approved Phase I plan. City Planner Meagan Beekman explained that with the
• elimination of Building 3, the pedestrian connection could be re-oriented and the stairs
could be eliminated. An ADA ramp will be constructed in place of the stairs.
Commissioner Holewa asked if a restaurant or coffee shop was included in Phase 1. City
Planner Meagan Beekman stated it is not part of Phase 1.
Chair Larson noted the drawings appear sparse on the interior and asked if all three rain
gardens would be constructed with this phase. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated the
three rain gardens were part of Rice Creek Watershed District's requirements.
Mr. Steve Wellington, President Wellington Management stated all three rain gardens
will be part of Phase I. Chair Larson asked if some planters could be added that could be
moved as necessary. Chair Larson asked if the retaining wall would be part of the new
pedestrian ramp. Mr. Wellington stated the retaining wall will be reconfigured off
Lexington.
Mr. Jon Lennander, Velmeir Companies showed brick samples and indicated he is
familiar with the CVS building plan.
Chair Larson asked what would be included in the graphics on the windows. Mr.
Lennander stated they are related to the CVS brand, graphic representation of what CVS
sells. The graphics have not yet been designed for this site. Chair Larson asked when the
• graphics would be reviewed. Mr. Lennander stated he will forward to Ms. Beekman the
standard graphic package.
Commissioner Hames asked if there could be Arden Hills' specific type of graphics.
t
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—August 3,2011 4
Chair Larson asked what form the graphic takes. Mr. Lennander stated either an adhesive
film that attaches to the window or a foam core. •
Commissioner Zimmerman stated he would also like to see some City specific type
graphics.
Chair Larson asked how commercial advertising signs are handled in the sign code. City
Planner Meagan Beekman stated the graphics they are referring to would not qualify as
advertising signs. The City would have final determination over what graphics are being
used on the Arden Hills CVS.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if the graphics are season specific. Mr. Lennander
stated he believes the graphics are changed but he is not as close to the building after it is
constructed.
Commissioner Hames asked which windows would be the non-transparent. Mr.
Lennander stated they are the darker windows in the drawings.
Mr. Lennander reviewed the modifications that have been made since the last time they
appeared before the Commission. Commissioner Holewa asked why there would be
windows if you could not see through them.
Chair Larson stated it would be better than a brick wall, noting the windows are more to
break up the brick wall rather than illuminate the inside of the store. •
Commissioner Hames stated she appreciates the fact they have increased the amount of
glass from the last plan. She is not bothered by the non-transparent glass.
Chair Larson opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
Chair Larson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make
comment.
Mr. Joe Commers stated he is the owner of the TCF and American Red Cross building
just to the West. He stated they were very impressed when they heard the plan for CVS.
Mr. Commerce indicated they are in full support of the plan and invited the
Commissioners to call him if they have any questions. Mr. Commers stated the entrance
was also very acceptable.
There being no other comments, Chair Larson closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.
Chair Larson suggested adding a condition for review of the graphics to the approval.
Commissioner Zimmerman suggested it be left up to Staff and Council to approve.
Chair Larson questioned Condition 6, and asked if the Commission is willing to wait for
updating the landscaping improvements and parking lot until Phase II.
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—August 3, 2011 5
Mr. Wellington stated there are plans for the existing retail center which he would be
• very willing to share with the Commission. He would like to delay the implementation of
that; however, until after the CVS is completed. Construction is planned for 4-6 months.
Commissioner Thompson stated the plans for the existing retail center need not be made
public but it should be known there are some plans for the center. City Planner Meagan
Beekman suggested that that be looked at after the CVS building is completed.
Chair Larson asked the Commission if they were comfortable with the wording of
Condition 6. City Planner Meagan Beekman stated it would depend on what the path
would be to determine the timeline. There may be some interim improvements that could
be made.
Commissioner Holewa stated he feels the parking lot update would be more near term
than the updating of the existing retail center. Mr. Wellington stated the more realistic
plan would be refacing the existing retail center. Mr. Wellington would not hesitate to
engage in conversations with Staff and the Commission about the future of the existing
retail center.
Commissioner Hames suggested Condition 6 be divided into two separate conditions as
follows:
6. The applicant shall construct parking lot and landscaping improvements previously
• planned for Phase I.
7. Provide a plan for updating the rest of the existing retail center as part of the Phase 11
plan.
I
City Planner Meagan Beekman explained the Condition and suggested the wording
remain as proposed.
Commissioner Holewa asked if the condition wording needs to be changed. Chair Larson
stated it is understandable as written.
Commissioner Zimmerman stated his position that the City is fortunate to have CVS
coming in on that corner and when the time is right and the economy has turned around
the retail center will be modified.
Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Zimmerman seconded a motion to
recommend approval of Planninp- Case 11-016, Preliminary and Final Plat, and
Final PUD Amendment; Arden Plaza, LLC; 3585 Lexin ton Avenue based on the
findings of fact, submitted plans, and the six conditions in the August 3, 2011
planning case report. The motion carried unanimously (5-0)
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
• REPORTS
A. Report from the City Council
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—August 3, 2011 6 -
Councilmember Holmes updated the Planning Commission on City Council activities
including the approval of the appointment of Angela Hames to fill Liz Modesette's •
Planning Commission seat.
Councilmember Holmes noted at the July 25, 2011 City Council Meeting the City
Council unanimously voted to approve Planning Case I1-014 for a variance request at
1145 Amble Drive.
Councilmember Holmes announced there will be a meeting August 4, 2011 from 5-8 p.m.
with an Open House relating to the Stadium at the Ramsey County Public Works.
Commissioner Zimmerman asked if there is any legislative action on the stadium.
Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher stated the Governor may call a special
session but nothing is currently happening.
Councilmember Holmes noted at the July 25, 2011 City Council Meeting the City
Council unanimously voted to approve Planning Case 11-015 for a site plan review at
3759 New Brighton Road.
Councilmember Holmes announced last night was Night to Unite. The Council visited as
many gatherings as they could.
Commissioner Zimmerman stated when the Council is considering the right-of-way
ordinance, it should consider some urban farming issues. •
Councilmember Holmes announced that on September 14, 2011 there will be a State of
the City Meeting at North Heights Church from 7:30 — 9:30 a.m. RSVP to City Hall for
planning purposes.
B. Planning Commission Comments and Requests
Chair Larson announced Celebrate Arden Hills will be September 17, 2011. More details
are on the website and it t will be held at Tony Schmidt Park on Lake Johanna.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Holewa, to adiourn
the August 3, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting at 7:45 p.m. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
•
ARZEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 7,2011 PC Agenda Item 3.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Mei-Ling Anderson, Community Development Intern
SUBJECT: Planning Case#11-019—This Request Does Require a Public Hearing
Applicant: Hood Packaging Corporation(Brian Munsterman)
Property Location: 1887 Gateway Boulevard
Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment
Requested Action
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development Amendment to install two double-
walled silos and one containment tank to the southeast side of the building at 1887 Gateway
Boulevard.
Background
1. Overview of Request
Hood Packaging Corporation is located at 1887 Gateway Boulevard. Hood Packaging is a
national company that manufactures various types of paper and plastic packaging products.
The company is a conforming use in the G-B Zone.
There are currently four storage tanks on the property that were built following the approval
of two previous planning cases. This request would add one containment tank and two silos
to the southeastern side of the property.
The containment tank would be located between the proposed silos and the building. There
would be a distance of 4 feet between the containment tank and the building, and 7 feet
between the containment tank and the concrete pad on which the silos would sit.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:IPlanningWlanning Cases12011 W-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)W-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 1 of 6
The two silos in the applicant's request would be 24 feet tall and 12 feet in diameter, and
would be placed upon a single 16 by 32 foot concrete pad. The applicant has indicated that
the silos would be painted with a high solid polyurethane enamel (semi-gloss finish)to match
the exterior of the main building on the property.
The silos are needed to store plastic resin pellets that would be used to supply their new
extrusion laminator. The pellets would reach the inside of the building through 6-inch steel
piping, which would connect the silos to the extrusion laminator. The piping would lead the
pellets directly to the hopper located above the machine. While the maximum capacity of
each silo would be 65,000 pounds (1,858 cubic feet), the silos are not expected to hold more
than 48,000 thousand pounds of material at any one time.
The applicant's request also includes a 10,000 gallon containment tank. The tank would be
approximately 13 feet tall, 12 feet in diameter, and would be made of white plastic. A new
storage room is being constructed within the building to hold multiple 55-gallon closed
drums containing ink. The room is designed to be explosion-proof since the ink has potential
to be flammable. According to the Fire Marshal, the external containment tank must be able
to hold the contents of one of the drums if there was a spill. In the event of an accident, the
ink would be pumped into the proposed containment tank on the exterior of the building.
Additionally, in the event of a spilled barrel, the containment tank would also need to be able
to hold 30 minutes worth of water runoff from the sprinkler system in order to suppress a fire
or other hazard.
The southeastern side of the building contains approximately 1.7 acres (73,000 square feet)
of paved surfaces and is used for storage and loading. As the silos and tank would be built on
top of existing impervious surface, no change in impervious coverage would occur with this
application. The addition of the three structures is not expected to impact access traffic
circulation. There would not be any reduction in parking, as all parking is on the other side of
the building.
All of the material would be contained within the silos, piping, laminator, and containment
tank. The project is designed to protect the exterior from potential nuisances. The pipes as
well as the silo tanks would be constructed with double walls.
The applicant has submitted two letters addressing the details of the application, a site plan,
and measurements of the proposed structures (Attachment A). Some of the plans for the silos
and for the containment tank are presented separately, as the applicant is working with two
different companies on these projects.
Previous Planning Cases
The property has been part of four other planning cases. In 1997, Planning Case 97-006 was
approved, which was the original PUD for this property. Planning Cases 00-017 and 00-031
were approved in 2000. These planning cases included minor changes to the exterior of the
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:IPlanninglPlanning Cases12011 U1-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)109-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 2 of 6
building and to the storage tanks on the southeast side of the building. In 2007, Planning
Case 07-013, a PUD amendment, was approved to allow the installation of two additional
storage tanks adjacent to the existing ones.
2. Site Data:
Fut�i W� - = Light Industrial and Office
:... :
Existing Land Use c Light Industrial(Office space,manufacturing, and warehousing)
Zoning: G-B:Gateway Business
Lot Size: 8.93 Acres(388,991sf)
Topography: The building and parking area is generally flat. The property slopes down steeply
towards Round Lake,and it slopes down toward Gateway Boulevard.
3. Surrounding Area:
Direction Future Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use
North Light Industrial and Office/Water G-B:Gateway Business/Water Light Industrial/Round Lake
South Mixed Business G-B:Gateway Business Vacant
East Light Industrial and Office G-B:Gateway Business Light Industrial
West Light Industrial and Office G-B:Gateway Business Light Industrial
iPlan Evaluation
1. Planned Unit Development(PUD) Process
The PUD process is a tool that provides additional flexibility for developments that an
underlying zoning district would not otherwise allow. For example, a PUD may change the
setbacks, lot coverage, lot sizes, parking requirements, signage, building height, building
materials, landscaping requirements, etc. The process is meant to create a better development
than the standard regulations may otherwise allow. The PUD process allows the City to
negotiate certain aspects of the development; however, any conditions imposed on the PUD
must have a rational basis related to the impacts of the development. While each PUD
process is unique, it is a common process used by many cities.
2. Conditional Use Permit Amendment—Section 1355.04 Subd 3
Section 1320.13 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code states that site modification proposals in the
G-B District shall be reviewed according to the criteria for evaluating Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) Amendments as listed in Section 1355.04 Subd 3. The Planning Commission
and City Council shall consider the effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety,
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:IPlanninglPlanning Cases12011111-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)109-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 3 of 6
I .
' I
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;
adjoining land values;
6. Park dedications where applicable; and the
7. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose
and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the
City.
3. Section 1325—General Regulations
Regulation: Section 1325.05 Subd 4.Q requires all above ground storage tanks, except
tanks used for liquefied petroleum, to be screened from view. Such screening shall
conform to the Uniform Fire Code and the setback requirements for screen fencing in this
Section.
Proposal: The silos would be painted to match the exterior of the main building using a
high solid polyurethane enamel paint with a semi-gloss finish. The containment tank
would be made white plastic material. The silos will be 24 feet tall and the containment .
tank will be 13 feet tall.Neither structure will exceed the maximum building height of 35
feet (Attachment A).
Regulations: Section 1325.07 Subd 5. Emission or creation of noise, odors, vibrations,
glare, dust, smoke, heat and toxic or noxious fumes shall conform to such standards as
are from time to time established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. None of
these shall be at a level that is objectionable to surrounding properties.
Proposal: The extrusion laminator silos and containment tank system are not expected to
produce any noticeable odor or noise outside of the building. If any objectionable
emission is produced, the applicant would be expected to reduce or eliminate it so as not
to be a nuisance to adjacent properties.
3. Additional Review
The Building Official and Fire Marshal have reviewed the application and neither had any
concerns with the proposal or had recommended changes. Adherence to the building and fire
codes is expected.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7,2011
P:IPlanninglPlanning Cases12011111-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)109-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 4 of 6
Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following twelve findings of fact for consideration:
General Findings:
1. Hood Packaging Corporation is a conforming use in the Gateway Business Zone.
2. The PUD process allows for flexibility within the City's regulations through a negotiated
process with a developer.
3. The applicant proposes to add two storage silos and one containment tank to the southeast
side of the building. Each silo is twenty-four feet tali, twelve feet in diameter, with a
capacity to hold sixty-five thousand pounds. The containment tank is approximately
thirteen feet tali, twelve feet in diameter, with a capacity to hold ten thousand gallons.
None of the proposed structures will exceed the height of the building.
4. This proposal will not impact lot coverage requirements, nor will it encroach on setbacks.
On the Conditional Use Plan Evaluation Criteria:
5. The proposal will not impact traffic circulation or parking.
6. The proposal is not expected to alter existing noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust,
air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste, or other nuisance characteristics. The tanks and
connecting pipes will be double-walled to contain the material.
7. The proposal will not impact drainage on the site.
8. The proposal will not impact population density on the site.
9. The proposed silos will be painted to match the color of the building while the
containment tank is composed of white plastic. All proposed structures are unlikely to
• significantly impact the subject property or surrounding properties.
10. Park dedication requirements do not apply.
11. The proposal is not anticipated to create a negative impact on the immediate area or the
community as a whole.
12. The proposal does not conflict with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval for Planning Case #11-019 for a Planned Unit Development at
1887 Gateway Boulevard based on the findings of fact, subject to the following four conditions:
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 and City Council.
2. The three tanks shall meet all applicable Building Code and Fire Code regulations. The
applicant shall obtain all required permits prior to installation.
3. The three tanks and connecting systems shall comply with the odor, noise, and other
applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regulations. Failure to comply with these
regulations may result in a revocation of a permit.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:IPlanningWIanning Cases120111I1-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)109-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 5 of 6
4. The silos shall be painted to match the color of the building.
Proposed Motion Language
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend a proval of Planning Case
1 l-019 for a Planned Unit Development Amendment at 1887 Gateway Boulevard based on
the findings of fact, submitted plans, and the four conditions in the September 7, 2011,
planning case report.
2. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 11-019 for an
amendment to the Final PUD for a Planned Unit Development Amendment at 1887 Gateway
Boulevard based on the findings of fact...
3. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 11-019 for a Planned Unit Development Amendment
at 1887 Gateway Boulevard for the following reasons...
Deadline for Agency Actions
The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on August 8, 2011.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, the City must act on this request by October 7, 2011 (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. .
Resident Comments
Notice was published in the Shoreview-Arden Hills Bulletin and mailed to properties within 500
feet of the property. At this time Staff has received no comments.
Attachments
A. Application, Letter, and Plan Set
B. Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7,2011
P:IPlanningiPlanning CasesWIII1I-019-Hood Packaging PUD Amendment(Pending)W-07-11-PC Report.docx
Page 6 of 6
Attachment
Application, Letter, and Plan Set
•
-AR�EN_HILLS
September 7, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting
e
lFor Office.Use Pilly.-
-AVEN Planning Case No.
IMLS Submittal Date C
1246 West Highway 96 Application Completed Date
Arden Hills,Minnesota 55112 Accepted by
Telephone (651)792-7600 Recelpt Number
Fax(651)634-5137 Council Decision
www.ci.arden-htiis,rmn.us Council Decision Date
2011 LAND USE APPLICATION f
Applicant:information
Applican t: t0d �Ar c all) -ddress 7 t ivdkv MISW 551 i Telephone No.: (PSI-(R "2 2.314 Other:
Fax No.: '
Email Address: L2 wt �t.�.)"t OV A ---
Property Informa tion V�
Property Owner:
Owner Address l Sb ` X10 CkeX \kr � ,� C�ir� !9 7 t UJI I
C
owner Teiephone No.� (�J 1,000. Other.
Address ofPro a Involved: VG
Legal Description:
Property ID No.: ��o?��i E3.
Type of.Use: _
Zone: Property Acreage:
Tvpe,of Request'
LJ Comprehensive Plan Amendment($600+$1,000 ❑ Site Plan Review($250+$600 escrow)
escrow) ❑Vacation of Easement or Right-of-Way($400+
❑ Conditlonalftnterim Use Permit or Amendment $600 escrow)
($300+$600 escrow) ❑ Variance(Zoning Code)($300+$600 escrow) ;
❑ Preliminary Plat($600+$25 per lot+$1,600 escrow) ❑Appeal of Administrative Decision($100) i
❑ Final Plat($400+$25 per lot) ❑Apportionment of Assessments($30)
❑ Rezoning($600+$1,000 escrow) ❑ Land Use Requests—Not Already Specified($200)
❑ Concept Planned Unit Development($300) f
❑ Master Planned Unit Development($6Q0+$2,000 escrow)
❑Final Planned Unit Development($200.00+$600 escrow)
Planned Unit Development Amendment($350+$2,000 escrow)
❑ Zoning or City Code Amendment($600+$1,000 escrow)
❑ Minor Subdlvlslon(lot spliticonsolidatlon)($450+$1,000 escrow)
Revised;12-06-10 i
Pagel of 3
j
Brief Description of Request tease also include a ed detailed fetter ex I rfl eot
"Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District, Contact
RCWD directly at 763-388-3070 foradditional Information.
"The land use application fees do not cover building, sign,or other permit fees that may be required i
upon approval of a land use application.
"Ail applications will be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with
filing,reviewing,and processing of application In the form of an escrow to the City,
IFiiing&Information RegUlr e_me 'ts
The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application
process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified
survey of the property Is required for all applications. The Planning Commission and/or City Council may still I
require a certified survey. A checklist for other required Information Is also avellabie.
Cornplete/lncpmplete Applications •
An incomplete application will delay the processing of land use requests. The application approval time
commences and an application is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and examined
the application and determined that the appileation Is complete. A decision on whether the application is
complete or Incomplete shall be made within fifteen(16)working days following the submittal of the application,
When the application Is deemed to be"complete"It shall be placed on the agenda of the first possible Planning
Commission meeting provided that all required public notices have been sent and published.
Payment of Fees
The undersigned acknowledges that shethe understands that before a land use application can be deemed
complete,all required Information and fees(including all deposits)must be paid to the City. if additional fees
are required to cover costs Incurred by the City,the City Planner has the right to require additional payment from
one or more of the undersigned,who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses may Include(but are
not limited to)direct city payroll and overhead costs,fees paid to consultants and other professionals, and the
cost of printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may withhold final action on a land use application,withhold I I
building permits,and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised
that an escrow deposit Is required at the time of the submittal of the land use application to offset costs
associated with the proposed project, Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon
successful implementation of an approved plan,
Notice of Meeting Attendance
i
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting, If not,the matter may be tabled until the
next available agenda.
RevIstd:12-06-10
Page 2 of 3
i
Anenda Deadline and Meeting Schedule
The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below.There
are no exceptions. Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday after the first
Monday of each month at 6:30 PM,though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City
Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the some month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held In the
Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 98,Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless
otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings andlor workshops are scheduled when
necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission.
2011 SCHEDULE(*subject to change)
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE
PLANNING {
APPLICATION COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1
DEADLINE MEETING RATE"
DATE" (Generally held on the (Genera ly hard on the
first Wednesday after the first fast Monday at held o the
Monde at 6:30 .m
• '....-_'s.:'':'l';Y_•�,)'_''�ui�c`'.r°f''!7y:/`{.••k:�F�:i'i„-S-7-J,-C D.'y a Mna.•jj{ii.;•�}3 N,,2.iff q.i r:=t,;i-,':r i}:.�i•;fi.,::.;;.:,.:'�.+'":.r 4:�-+c+.�'•i'.••_"a:.l•,-�A.ij_-i ;;-brf.;:�t-,'}4:?7:k�',y•:'sn:.��.Y�t..-}4';._"X,f:9;f:«r'";S�.t;'i n-F•`i Ti�ie';$i'A°bg.r-u`4'a j-.Q 2y-.�fi-;0'1•.:}7:..".''-"1•+1�.:-c' . d °t.+L'zr t crt`....�..:y-;:.:.C:;;A:F tB�.e'b
r�u a.1.p. -2.
.8
March 7 Aril 6 ARM 5
June g June 27
Ju 6 Av ust3 August 29
September 6 Octobers Octoser24
i c
r°+[
.o
,i.1i.:.,',:.ii:.::'•_�
.p-k.
..�.h'.
November T December 7 December 26
1'6ii •
i
AcknowledRgMnt and Siringture
I acknowledge that I have read all of the information fated in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application and
fully understand that I am esponsible for all costs incurred by the 04 related to the processing of this
applicatio
° I
Property f Lure(Required) Date
LZL4� -7)
Applicant Signature(if different than the property owner) Date
Please contact the City Planner at(651)792-7800
If you have any questions regarding this application.
i
i
Addittonal copies of this sppllcetlon form are available on the Clty's websltec hitn;!/tivww,ci.arden-hiRa mn us f
Rovised:12-06.10
Page 3 of 3
i
I
:i
a
Y
Meagan Beekman
City Planner
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills,MN 55112-5743
July 25, 2011
Meagan,
Hood Packaging Corporation is currently in the process of purchasing an extrusion
laminator for our Arden Hills,MN location. With this new machine,we will need to
install two silos on the outside of our building. These silos will contain plastic resin
pellets that are used in the extrusion process and are needed to feed the extrusion
laminator for our production.
We are requesting a Planned Unit Development Amendment so that we may install the
two silos in the back of our building. These silos will be below the building height and
will be painted the color of the building to blend in. A concrete pad will be added per
specs for the silos to sit on.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at 651-636-2500 x 234 or
at bmunsterman @hoodpkg.com.
Regards,
Brian Munsterman
Process Engineer
Hood Packaging Corporation
1887 Gateway BIvd
Arden Hills,MN 55112
Meagan Beekman
City Planner
City of Arden Hills
1245 West Highway 96
Arden Hills, MN 55112-5743
August 19,2011
Meagan,
In addition to the extruded laminator project, we will be adding a storage room for our
current 55 gallon closed drums. This will be in an explosion proof room. Per the Fire
Marshall, he requires us to have a containment tank with pump to cover the amount of
ink storage in the room plus the amount of water from the sprinkler system for 30
minutes if everything spilled. This requirement is a 10,000 gallon tank. The location of
the 10,000 gallon white plastic containment tank would be between the building and the
proposed silos for the extruded laminator.
We are requesting that this update be included on our current Planned Unit Development
Amendment to install the two silos in the back of our building. Please let me know if you
have any questions. I can be reached at 651-636-2500 x 234 or at
S bmunsterman @hoodpkg.com.
Regards,
cge—�
Brian Munsterman
Process Engineer
Hood Packaging Corporation
1887 Gateway Blvd
Arden Hills, MN 55112
s
n'_o.
IN �x
a Mvmm
F�'
'
A ;nN In
�gu.q
?g Zzl-
RE5 ai
t
t4
yo
t�'o
tt
:55
Hh
<
j L1
'i
{ L
a
F.
t
i
f i
t
i
O
f
ul
i
C -
f ij.
,
--r
i
!E!
b F
i
i
r
C
r
I
t
f
o
r
r �
r
r � q
0
I
r
I
I
r .
I
r ,
I
I
t
r
I
0
Y
Z �
� QJ
��ww E3
m z o
�Z
C8
3 0° "
w
= o� o tam
0
N
W
N_
O Q
® ® I C
O
9 N l4 0 u CY f a
a
m
M z
vi
Q
O
m
m
o
U-
N
N
a
m
a
UP
q(w
•
Attachment
Air Photo and Photographs of the Site
•
"" HILLS
September 7, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting
s
F All,
m
•a o
c �
� U
� G W
,Q o
p O
_ O N
C�
e
V� R
yti'T A y—
o
C Q
W
O L
r �
w
b r O t:
A�U
o
0� N
N
E .
E >.a
SNTE SThTE� - Sg�.�'s .0 b H
¢vim
U
0
w�; r
� � R
a \w u
3 �
� � o
�a.
¢ i
t z b
NO
. .� E
m C14
�3
s
0
to
'mo. ,imam
i
v o a
y � �ta ' C:• _ P
O tV N
R Vl
w`E to2 v g`�`#
MA
U
a
i
z
°0 9
3so�
a
.O
rrII �
p O
\ �7Ea
0 r4
Cq
n \
'.
°aw
e0 tC N
U
r y� INA
p c
ow
Vl
T� E O
,b
•z&x, v ztn7t �V- O m O
� 0o
\,
m O .O.
�- rod" u• �..�; �� �, , �
n 7 a
it
9
U
R
\ C4
a w -
Ea
o-.
W �
�d
Q a \ 4-J
L
r O
L
a g -0
hA
4-J �r
M' k
g
•
a-J
�u
CB
' a U a-;
CU
Q�
L
b _
2
4-J
a ^,
�y \~
4-J
E
4-J
\ 4—
O
O
Ai �"3L
v
aJ m N
a J
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 7, 2011 PC Agenda Item 3.B
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner
SUBJECT: Planning Case#11-020—This Request Does Require a Public Hearing
Applicant: Mounds View High School (Robert Madison)
Property Location: 1900 Lake Valentine Road
Request: Conditional Use Permit and Variance
Requested Action
The applicant has requested a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Variance to construct a
scoreboard on the north side of their baseball field.
Background
1. Overview of Request:
Mounds View High School received a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment to
construct a baseball field in the southwest corner of the school property in 2008. In 2009,
Mounds View High School added bleachers, and a foul ball netting system to the baseball
field.
At this time Mounds View High School is proposing to construct a 192 square foot digital
score board. The scoreboard would be 24 feet in width, eight feet in height, and mounted on
ten foot high poles, making it eighteen feet in height. The scoreboard would be located
facing the field on the north side of the existing ball field. The scoreboard would be located
approximately 460 feet from the nearest property line, and approximately 540 feet from the
nearest home.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7,2011
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\201 1\1 1-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 1 of 6
The applicant has submitted a proposal describing their request (Attachment A).
Additionally they have submitted a site plan indicating the location of the scoreboard
(Attachment B).
2. Site Data:
Future Land Use Plan: Public and Institutional
Existing Land Use: Institutional
Zoning: R-1 Single Family Residential
Size: 56.34 acres;2,454,170.4 Square Feet
Topography: The elevation is generally flat and decreases toward the west.
3. Surrounding Area:
Direction Future Land Use Plan Zoning Existing Land Use:
North Low Density Residential/Public R-1 Single Family Residential Light Industrial/Institutional
and Institutional
South Low Density Residential/Park R-1 Single Family Residential Single Family Residential/Passive
Open Space
East Low Density Residential R-1 Single Family Residential Single Family Residential
West Park R-1:Single Family Residential Passive Open Space
Plan Evaluation
1. Zoning Code Regulations
A. Lot Coverage—Meets Requirements
This project would not result in an increase of impervious coverage
B. Setbacks—Meets Requirements
The proposed scoreboard would be located approximately 460 feet from the rear property
line.
C. Height— Variance Required
Accessory structures are permitted up to fifteen feet in height. The proposed scoreboard
would be eighteen feet in height, which is a standard height for scoreboards; however, a
variance would be required to allow the additional three feet of height. The posts would
need to by custom made to accommodate a height of fifteen feet, and given the location
of the scoreboard in relation to the field and bleachers it would not be as visible at a
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2011\11-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 2 of 6
reduced height. The applicant is requesting a variance to construct the scoreboard at
eighteen feet rather than fifteen feet.
D. Landscaping—Meets Requirements
The applicant is not proposing to remove any vegetation on the site.
2. Sign Code Regulations
The Sign Code allows permanent signage to be located on scoreboards, provided that it does
not exceed 30 percent of the total scoreboard area if it is visible from adjacent property. The
scoreboard is proposed to have approximately 48 square feet of permanent signage on it,
approximately 25 percent of the scoreboard face.
3. Conditional Use Permit Amendment Criteria—Section 1355.04 Subd 3
Section 1355.04 Subd 3 of the Arden Hills Zoning Code lists the criteria for evaluating a
Conditional Use Permit Amendments.
When evaluating conditional use permits, 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;
adjoining land values;
6. Park dedications where applicable; and the
7. Orderly development of the neighborhood and the City within the general purpose
and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan for the
City.
4. Variance Evaluation Criteria
On May 5, 2011, the Governor signed into law new variance legislation that changed the
review criteria City's must use when evaluating variance requests. The new law renames the
municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise
retains the familiar three-factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential
character. Also included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the
county statutes: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7,2011
PAPIanning0anning Cases\201 1\1 1-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 3 of 6
general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are
consistent with the comprehensive plan."
Therefore, in evaluating variance requests under the new law, in order to find a practical
difficulty, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions:
Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance?
Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
As was the case before the new legislation took effect, economic considerations alone cannot
constitute a practical difficulty. Furthermore, the new law clarifies that conditions may be
imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough
proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
5. Additional Review
The Building Official reviewed this project. He does not have any concerns with the
proposed plans.
Findings of Fact
Staff offers the following seventeen findings of fact for the Planning Commission's •
consideration:
General Findings:
1. The applicant is proposing to construct a 192 square foot digital scoreboard.
2. Mounds View High School operates under a Conditional Use Permit in the R-I Zoning
District.
3. Athletic fields and accessory equipment are permitted under the original CUP for
Mounds View High School.
4. The scoreboard would be located approximately 460 feet from the rear property line.
5. The proposed application will not exceed the lot coverage limits for the property.
6. The proposed application meets all setback requirements.
7. The applicant is not proposing to remove any vegetation from the site.
On the Conditional Use Permit Amendment:
8. The proposed project is not expected to have any significant impact on traffic or parking
conditions since no change in the school population is expected.
9. The proposed project will not produce any permanent noise, glare, odors, vibration,
smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid,or solid waste.
City ofArden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
PA'lanning\Planning Cases\201 1\1 1-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 4 of 6
10. The proposed project will not impact storm water runoff since impervious surface is not
significantly increased and no grading is taking place.
N 11. The proposed project is not expected to have any impacts on school population or
density.
12. The proposed project will not impact visual and land use compatibility with surrounding
land because of the great distance between the location of the scoreboard and the nearest
property.
13. The park dedication fee is not applicable to this application.
14. The proposed project does not conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan or the intent
of the Zoning Code.
On the Variance Request:
15. The proposed project is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance
because scoreboards are permitted accessory uses with athletic fields.
16. The proposed project is consistent with Comprehensive Plan because the property in
questions is guided for its current and proposed use as a high school.
17. The proposed project is reasonable because scoreboards are addressed in the Code as
reasonable uses with educational athletic facilities.
18. The property is unique because of its size,the considerable setback from adjacent
properties, and its use as a high school in a residential district.
19. The proposed project will not alter the essential character of the locality because the
scoreboard will be located 460 feet from the nearest adjacent property.
• Notice
Notice was published in the Arden Hills/Shoreview Bulletin and notice was prepared by the City
and mailed to residents within three-hundred fifty (350) feet of the subject property.
Resident Comments
Staff has not received any comments from residents regarding this project. The school has
indicated that they met with neighbors to discuss the proposed plans.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, Staff recommends approval of Planning Case
#11-020 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to construct a scoreboard on the north side of
the existing baseball field at Mounds View High School. The recommendation for approval is
subject to the following four conditions:
1. The applicant shall continue to abide by the conditions of all previous permits and
reviews.
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
P:\Planning\Planning Cases\201 1\1 1-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 5 of 6
2. 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.
3. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the City.
4. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Rice Creek Watershed
District, MPCA, and other governmental entities and provide the City with copies of
such permits prior to the City issuing any building permits.
Options & Proposed Motion Language
1. Recommend Approval with Conditions: Motion to recommend aP roval of Planning Case
11-020 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Variance at 1900 Lake Valentine Road
based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans as amended by the four conditions in
the September 7, 2011,planning case report.
2. Recommend Denial: Motion to recommend denial of Planning Case 11-020 for a
Conditional Use Permit Amendment and variance at 1900 Lake Valentine Road based on the
following findings: findings to deny should specifically reference the reasons for denial and
why those reasons cannot be mitigated.
3. Table: Motion to table Planning Case 11-020 for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and
Variance at 1900 Lake Valentine Road: a specific reason and 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 August 18, 2011.
Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes, the City has until October 17, 2011, (60 days)to provide
the applicant with a final decision, unless the City extends the review deadline in writing.
Attachments
A—Application and Supporting Materials
B—Site Plan
City of Arden Hills
Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
PVlanning\Planning Cases\201 1\1 1-020-MVHS-CUP Amendment(Pending)\09-07-11-PC Report-MVHS CUP Amendment.doc
Page 6 of 6
Attachment
Application and Supporting Materials
•
—AVEN HILLS
September 7, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting
For Office Use Only
�- IZEEN HILLS Planning Case No. 11-
Submittal Date
1245 West Highway 96 Application Completed Date
Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 Accepted by
Telephone (651) 792-7800 Receipt Number
Fax (651) 634-5137 Council Decision
www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us Council Decision Date
2011 LAND USE APPLICATION
Applicant Information t
Applicant: ----
Address: _tl �.. _,�s1,✓L—�� --
Telephone No.: Other:
Fax No.:
Email Address: 1- rn c� r � �,a1_� Y�,ate•► l_�.31��, s U-4- ,ate
Property Information
-Prppert� Owner_
Owner Address:
• Owner Telephone No. Other:
Address of Propeq Involved. ------- ----------Legal Description
Property-ID No__--------- ---- -- --
Type of Use_ ------ (.�_v VA-)-cl _✓�__ _a^-�- 1°CSC i_
Zone: Property Acreage:-- -
Type of Request*
Comprehensive Plan Amendment ($600+$1,000 ❑ Site Plan Review($250+ $600 escrow)
escrow)
❑
Conditional/Interim Use Permit or Amendment Vacation of Easement or Right-of-Way($400+
$600 escrow)
($300+$600 escrow)
❑ Variance(Zoning Code)($300+$600 escrow)
❑ Preliminary Plat($600 + $25 per lot+$1,500 escrow)
❑ Final Plat($400 + $25 per lot) ❑ Appeal of Administrative Decision ($100)
❑ Apportionment of Assessments($30)
❑ Rezoning ($600 + $1,000 escrow)
❑ Concept Planned Unit Development($300) Q Land Use Requests-Not Already Specified ($200)
❑ Master Planned Unit Development($600+ $2,000 escrow)
❑ Final Planned Unit Development($200.00+ $600 escrow)
❑ Planned Unit Development Amendment($350+ $2,000 escrow)
❑ Zoning or City Code Amendment($600+ $1,000 escrow)
❑ Minor Subdivision (lot split/consolidation) ($450 + $1,000 escrow)
•
Revised: 12-06-10
Page I of 3
I
Brief Description of Request(please also include a typed detailed letter explaining the project)
TM
i
Certain applications are subject to review and approval by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Contact
RCWD directly at 763-398-3070 for additional information.
'The land use application fees do not cover building, sign, or other permit fees that may be required
upon approval of a land use application.
'All applications will be subject to additional fees for reimbursement of consultant costs associated with
filing, reviewing, and processing of application in the form of an escrow to the City.
4e.1' .....,,s..et' . 3. ., f`s�`zs ...-...
Filing & Information Requirements
The City requests that you make a pre-application meeting with the City Planner to discuss the application
process, requirements, and deadlines. Unless waived by the City Planner or Planning Commission, a certified
survey of the property is required for all applications. The Planning Commission and/or City Council may still
require a certified survey. A checklist for other required information is also available.
Complete/Incomplete Applications
An incomplete application will delay the processing of land use requests. The application approval time •
commences and an application is considered officially filed when the City Planner has received and examined
the application and determined that the application is complete. A decision on whether the application is
complete or incomplete shall be made within fifteen (15)working days following the submittal of the application.
When the application is deemed to be "complete" it shall be placed on the agenda of the first possible Planning
Commission meeting provided that all required public notices have been sent and published.
Payment of Fees
The undersigned acknowledges that she/he understands that before a land use application can be deemed
complete, all required information and fees (including all deposits) must be paid to the City. If additional fees
are required to cover costs incurred by the City, the City Planner has the right to require additional payment from
one or more of the undersigned, who shall be jointly liable for such fees. Such expenses may include (but are
not limited to) direct city payroll and overhead costs, fees paid to consultants and other professionals, and the
cost of printing, mailing, and supplies. The City may withhold final action on a land use application, withhold
building permits, and/or rescind prior action until all miscellaneous fees have been paid. Applicants are advised
that an escrow deposit is required at the time of the submittal of the land use application to offset costs
associated with the proposed project. Unused portions of an escrow are returned to the applicant upon
successful implementation of an approved plan.
Notice of Meeting Attendance
In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider any application, the applicant or a
designated representative must be present at the scheduled meeting. If not, the matter may be tabled until the
next available agenda.
Revised: 12-06-10
Page 2 of 3
i
Agenda Deadline and Meeting Schedule
The deadline for submittal of land use applications is required according to the schedule outlined below. There
are no exceptions. Planning Commission meetings are typically held on the first Wednesday after the first
Monday of each month at 6:30 PM, though please contact City Hall to verify the meeting date and time. City
Council meetings are held typically the last Monday of the same month at 7:00 PM. Meetings are held in the
Council Chambers at the City of Arden Hills, 1245 West Highway 96, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112, unless
otherwise stated. Applicants are advised that additional meetings and/or workshops are scheduled when
necessary upon approval of the Planning Commission.
2011 SCHEDULE (*subject to change)
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE
PLANNING CITY COUNCIL
APPLICATION COMMISSION MEETING
DEADLINE MEETING DATE* DATE*
DATE' (Generally held on the
first Wednesday after the first (Generally held the
Monday at 6:30 p.m.) last Monday at 7:00 0 p.m.)
December 6 2010 January 5 January 24
January 3 February 9 February 28
February 7 March 9 March 28
March 7 Aril 6 Aril 25
April 4 Ma 4 May 31
May 2 June 8 June 27
June 6 July 6 July 25
July 5 August 3 August 29
_ August 1 September 7 September 26
September 6 October 5 October 24
October 3 November 9 November 28
November 7 December 7 December 26
December 5 January 4 (2012) January 30 2012
Acknowledgement and Signature
I acknowledge that 1 have read all of the information listed in the City of Arden Hills Land Use Application and
fully understand that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this
application.
Property Owner Signature(Required) Date
Applicant Signature(If different than the property owner) Date
Please contact the City Planner at(651)792-7800
if you have any questions regarding this application.
Additional copies of this application form are available on the City's website:http://www.ci.arden-hills.mn.us
•
Revised: 12-06-10
Page 3 of 3
PROPOSAL FOR:
MOUNDS V
•
PROPOSED BY:
NORTHSTAR SCOREBOARDS, INC.
•
SCOT'T'Y WILD,NORTHSTAR SCOREBOARDS,INC.
952-746-5055 651-335-9119 CELL OR N0RTHS"l':1R 105(a]AOI..00ti1
---- ----- ----
1 T
-- N
Q O
— U O
. ro
: L
L ;
4—
O 0 .
v
HC\I ion ;
CL
.a a
L N N Q7 rz
® _ �
r
a,
v ; -
O (Y)
_ Jim
Lo
C)
Ej Q X .
O : •-
> 0
��
..
z
Q o
• d O F�
® n ca
0 z 2-
fz
o
CD N
W
F—
z
�-r
� � O
m�
O
P'i q � uop ° °' to
co
0
-a 'o a IU 0 U >
b v
u"�
d .�G
Ed
O yy m 0 O
o"� 0 . a m 0 OQ
b o
b � W". gg 8
0 0
z c$N
'
°��•
.�
m� AN rd
u oo 00.
w 'd mu- o >p o > p�$ �. uCmLo � Q ul
th u C. I, O O 3 >cd
O C OO O y� E-. U'O " "G dCl. y w'0. tZ
m A. `� m m o b
o m m C v °1 tD � t�oi o a m ti Amp u y1 O m N
°N � uid� �c�j D mu � 0 >'� ,�,� um ��t` Qua.[
-0 bDl��.Co� mo-y� v 41 It uEbo >,
.V
N
p
a a u o
U ZW�J- oVi°co �. ❑
�I O
w I > goo �J7 ?
C4
U V
to N
Lt
T � j
Lt
ca
3
� 3
5 P.O V
o v m U u
� 3
v .o C c4 .x
yu o+'
u U x
ho
G
m
A
q U W
A U Gq
d
� O>
�b ko %o %° %o �o %o a N in `O o M tJ [ e O
N- N N N N M M M M N N N M M M 7 d' u- 3 d ,a U W o - ~
c%1 0 O ac U g
u v y"a �3 x CV
o O U mm ° u u0 �'U°. q �
C. N N N d• V' N 10 tO M O
N N N N N co M N N N N M M M 'd' •O > u y 0 '�°-a7 O Z
LL C O O 00 00 O_ O ti p .�i X X K K K K K K is N� N to
CO cn Oy0 .N- M �O o
X3333333333 3 3 8 3 3 3 3 3 �3 u 3- •� A
® 0 4 7.� m m
2 - bD'd m ¢ U O w
a - to io ko tO ca a'�,W m u -.
a0 ao Ci "'' .N•� .M-�
m
i0
o -a>,'- 0 O
N cq
ip ci l� O M u m C '
N N N M O v m m u y m bO � . :N cq � :I d
O N o1 co M M
Q. U' w ♦ • y w u p U m y 7J �i I•�
M _ O O �p O �t O .t O •u �, .-. iE ctl
G N N N N N N M co M N M M .} N @ m Cl m
x x x x x � x x x x x x x x o° c°.,
..s 3 3 O O ao ~ ~ ~ •Na N .�-� .�-� :° N _ >' G o w m -G C U N
U 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0
o
n v
_ o r+ N co io aui m O o �m o
O m ao ao „ M y N >
[d
° 0"
G
�..` y U b � U•O y�
W, W ouU � O � u
000000000b � boob0000 �5 ° _ > mo
w a° � o �°
mo uo-0 pmp
0 0 Zo Zo 10 ID O 'o 10 %o 0 10 �o 10 0 �v d a p � m y C° �
� ; b b b o b b b b b E o b b b b b b b °J c
0 3 r^yN 9 E
OD 00
OD 00
11.0 it a0i r +
U Q O m u u
0 "C'
W
t y tll. O O In In �-+ n 1` M T U O O t0 O Op M M O o G u d w m u u Cl)
to C4 °0;
"m
up � mU3 o+' oyp be
cu
OD
J "m ..-/.. .~•a ,,.•, a• `t (v
. v ct % ao o o N cv : •�= ami °o u o...:
v
A ubi ew i
o°�y p, o o r.
J u CV N C4 N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M O W w{� c, w O
9 U u
> qS
>>,83
a a n a s m m m m m O v m3 m °U u m i
7 a a o a a a �+ u= n > m w
�o O N N _m m m m .O O O m m m m m m y�� _ >, a~i c°i �u!
tp C M O N Q Q Q Q Q N N Q Q Q Q Q Q +}-^ m-^-- G'a,0-g C1.-y b a'7 p
o to In In M
Q7 s-+.
cd
m u
- O �p d0 N � � 060 0
- - — u d X >�u.
"a d-
a .
-01a` -m moos U ei m .- m 'o �
P oq •o;a`pleogaloos
sla;uaa a2Essaul Sla;uaa a2essaul
su2Ts Suipnl°uF su$ls Suipnjoui
; tau nelanp ;l{�caq nelanp
Q U [n d
•
Attachment BI
Site Plan
•
'p HILLS
September 7, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting
t � f
� k
1� r
�g
k e �
L .a
< yA
n
x.
4
F
JA
ILYF
tv
,!Tt
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 7, 2011 PC Agenda Item 5.A
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Beekman, City Planner
SUBJECT: Report from the City Council
August 4,2011,Vikings Stadium Open House
The City, together with the County, hosted an open house for residents to learn more about the
stadium proposal in Arden Hills. Representatives of the Vikings were also there to present their
stadium plan. Several County Commissioners attended as well. Approximately 100 residents
attended the event, though many were from surrounding communities, in addition to Arden Hills.
• August 29,2011, City Council Meeting
The City Council unanimously to approve Planning Case 11-016 for the Arden Plaza
Redevelopment. The Planning Commission recommended approval for this item at their August
3, 2011, meeting. Staff is now working on the development agreements, which will go back to
the Council for approval in the next few weeks.
Updates
The McDonald's redevelopment is nearly complete. A mid-September opening is planning.
The City will be hosting a State of the City Address on Wednesday, September 10 from 7:30 to
9:30 am at the North Heights Lutheran Church on Highway 96. The event is geared towards the
business community, but all residents are also welcome to attend.
The Celebrate Arden Hills Fall Festival is scheduled for Saturday, September 17th from 3:00 pm
to dusk at Tony Schmidt Regional Park. All residents are welcome to attend.
City of Arden Hills
• Planning Commission Meeting for September 7, 2011
PAPlanningTianning Commission\CC Reports\09-07-11-PC report-CC report.doe
Page 1 of 1